PAGE
52
What is Action Research?
Via
A review of the Literature
A Dissertation Extract
By
Dr. George Slentz
If you choose to use this document as part of your research, use the following reference notation:
Slentz, G.M. (2003). A collaborative action research approach to developing statewide information standards supporting the Delaware education network.
CHAPTER II
Literature Review
Inclusion Criteria
After determining the focus of this dissertation, several Wilmington College faculty members including academic advisors offered suggestions of relevant literature references. In addition to those recommendations, two annotated AR bibliographies by Dick (2002a & 2002b) provided a wealth of relevant material to review.
The Internet served as both an independent resource as well as a method to access EBSCOhost an electronic search engine which accesses numerous academic databases, such as Academic Search Premier, Masterfile, and Business Source Elite. Only articles that offered text availability through EBSCOhost were reviewed. Most Internet searches were conducted using www.Google.com an excellent, in depth publicly available search engine. In utilizing either EBSCOhost or Google, various combinations of search words were used. For example, one search would consist of “research and action” and the second “action research.” Since most search engines used, search, based on word sequence, interchanging the searching sequence of the words was essential. The searches centered in two specific topic areas: action research methodologies and information technology standards.
The Wilmington College Library provided some additional resources dealing with “research” and “researching techniques,” as well completed Wilmington College dissertations.
Overview of Action Research Literature
Action research literature was reviewed first, including definitions, methodologies, origins, and evolution. An in depth examination of AR literature revealed there was no universal AR methodology, but rather a confusing conglomeration of methodologies all alleged to be AR. In some instances, the differences were subtle, such as who identified the research setting, the researcher, or the client (Schein, 2001). In other more diverse examples, conflicting paradigms, epistemologies, and methodologies emerged (Heron & Reason, 1997). Swepson (1998) said, “I found some of the literature on the practice of action research to be contradictory and this left me confused about how to practice it” (p.2). Comments such as this one helped this researcher appreciate that other researchers were equally confused. The context of an AR study may appear disparate to different researchers. This lack of clarity and definition was quite common in AR literature, and these discrepancies often hindered understanding and comprehension of AR processes.
A variety of reasons for the shortcomings in AR discipline were identified: a lack of integration in the literature, decentralization in practice, nomenclature differences, and conflicting opinions. An inadequacy of the literature was acknowledged by Greenwood and Levin (1998) as they pointed out that; “existing works are compendia, focus on a particular variety of AR to the exclusion of others, or do not link the history, philosophy, and practice of AR to a sufficiently broad set philosophical and political issues” (p.5). Decentralization alludes to the proliferation of methodologies across a variety of concepts and disciplines. Greenwood and Levin further pointed out that action researchers were found in social service agencies, nongovernmental organizations, international development agencies, planning departments and industry. In academic institutions, action researchers were found in disciplines such as education, planning, communications, social services, program evaluation, sociology, anthropology, and organizational behavior. As a result, AR practitioners do not share common knowledge; they read different journals and books, and “often write in ignorance of relevant contributions of others in AR from other fields” (p. 5). Nomenclature refers to misunderstandings that stem from the use of different terminologies to explain similar concepts as pointed out by O’Brien (2001) and McTaggart (1997) and reflected in the number of names used to describe action research including: participatory research, collaborative inquiry, emancipatory research, action learning, and contextual research. O’Brien stated further that they were all just variations on the AR theme, although the approaches and methodologies were somewhat different. McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead (1996) highlighted conflicting opinions on the basic purpose of AR. Kemmis and McTaggart from their text, An Action Research Planner, (as cited in McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 1996, p. 10) stated “The linking of the terms action and research highlights the essential feature of the method: trying out ideas in practice as a means of increasing knowledge.” Elliott, from his text on Action Research for Educational Change (as cited in McNiff, Lomax, & Whitehead, 1996, p. 9) argues, “Action research is about improving practice rather than producing knowledge.” The two quotes seem to be at odds; the first one emphasized increasing knowledge, while the second one emphasized, improving practice rather than producing knowledge.
Contradictions in the literature make it difficult to provide a direct, focused, and definitive overview of AR. In this review, some of the more common “AR contradictions” were addressed by describing the similarities and differences between AR epistemologies, methodologies, and associated processes.
The review additionally considered a variety of theories, methodologies, frameworks, and examples involving AR usage in the IT industry, and standardization of IT.
Action Research: Definitions, History, and Paradigms
What is and is not considered AR
In one respect, AR was effortlessly defined; because, imbedded in the first or second paragraph of virtually all AR literature reviewed was a working definition. However, these definitions vary significantly in both context and content (McTaggart, 1997; O’Brien, 2001; Stringer, 1999). Some of the leading AR researchers and practitioners’ definitions of action research are presented first, followed by the definition of AR used in this study. In general, the definitions reflected AR schools of thought, methodologies, forms of praxis, and/or associated paradigms.
1. Action research is simply a form of self-reflective enquiry undertaken by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own practices, their understanding of these practices, and the situations in which the practices are carried out (Carr & Kemmis, 1986, p. 162).
2. Action research can be described as a family of research methodologies, which pursue action (or change) or research (or understanding) at the same time. In most of its forms it does this by: using a cyclic or spiral process which alternates between action and critical reflection and in the later cycles, continuously refining methods, data, and interpretation in the light of the understanding developed in the earlier cycles (Dick, 1999, p. 1).
3. AR is social research carried out by a team encompassing a professional action researcher and members of an organization or community seeking to improve their situation. AR promotes broad participation in the research process and supports action leading to a more just or satisfying situation for the stakeholders (Greenwood and Levin, 1998, p. 4).
4. Action research is any systematic inquiry conducted by teacher researchers, principals, school counselors, or other stakeholders in the teaching/learning environment, to gather information about the ways that their particular schools operate, how they teach, and how well their students learn (Mills, 2000, p. 6).
5. Social psychologist Kurt Lewin, inventor of the term “action research” in English language, describes action research as proceeding in a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of planning, acting, observing, and evaluating the result of the action. In practice, the process begins with a general idea that some kind of improvement or change is desirable (McTaggart, 1997, p. 27).
6. Action research…aims to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and to further the goals of social science simultaneously. Thus, there is a dual commitment in action research to study a system and concurrently to collaborate with members of the system in changing it in what is together regarded as a desirable direction. Accomplishing this twin goal requires the active collaboration of researcher and client, and thus stresses the importance of co-learning as a primary aspect of the research process (O’Brien, 2001, p. 2).
7. Action research is a participatory, democratic process concerned with developing practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes, grounded in a participatory worldview which we believe is emerging at this historical moment. It seeks to bring together action and reflection, theory and practice, in participation with others, in the pursuit of practical solutions to issues of pressing concern to people, and more generally the flourishing of individual persons and their communities (Reason & Bradbury, 2001, p. 1).
After interpreting a variety of researchers’ perspectives relating to the genesis and definitions of AR, Stringer (1999) identified some common themes that emerged across different schools of thought. He noted that they all acknowledged fundamental investment in processes that:
· Are rigorously empirical and reflective (or interpretive)
· Engage people who have traditionally been called subjects as active participants in the research process
· Result in some practical outcome related to the lives or work of the participants (p. XVIII).
The definitions vary significantly in that some reflected theoretical foundations including epistemologies and related paradigms, some praxis and methodologies, whereas others reflected results. The diversity in definitions attributed to the wide variety of approaches in AR process and praxis. At minimum, it establishes the chicken or egg question of which came first. Unless researchers and practitioners establish a universal description of AR, AR processes, methodologies, and praxis will most likely continue to diversify.
Stringer’s interpretation and summations of AR, fit well with the process strategies this researcher developed and practiced during years in IT management. So rather than attempting to adapt to unfamiliar practices, the AR definition used for this study is:
AR is a systematic inquiry process that results in some practical outcome as perceived by the participants involved in the process. AR is cyclical, involving a series of spiral steps or activities such as planning, action, and fact-finding (Lewin, 1997) or look, think, and act (Stringer, 1999); reflection occurs throughout each of the steps. The process engages people who traditionally have been called subjects as active participants; and is rigorously empirical and/or interpretive (McTaggart, 1997; Stringer, 1999; Mills, 2000).
Greenwood and Levin (1998) pointed out that AR was not applied research. “AR explicitly rejects the separation between thought and action that underlies the pure-applied distinction that has characterized social research for a number of generations” (p. 6). They believe that valid social knowledge was derived from practical reasoning engaged in through action. Wadsworth (1998) further characterized AR by affirming it was “not research which sees involvement as a ‘contaminating’ process which bias the scientific effort, nor does it have a problem with ‘researchers’ identifying with the ‘researched’, and ‘researched for’, seeing this rather essential to the gaining of engaged understanding” (p. 17). McTaggart (1997) also has her list of what participator AR was not. She prefers using the prefix participatory when referring to AR, to clarify the intention of its originators, for whom ‘participation’ action research implied …people doing research for themselves. A summation of McTaggart’s clarification is provided below:
1. Participatory AR is not the usual thing social practitioners ordinarily do when they think about their work. It is more systematic and collaborative in collecting evidence on which to base rigorous group reflection, and in planning change.
2. Participatory AR is not simply problem solving. It involves problem posing, not just problem solving.
3. Participatory AR is not research done on other people. It is research done by particular people on their own work, to help them improve what they do, including how they work with and for others.
4. Participatory AR is not a “method” or “technique” for policy implementation. It does not accept truths created outside the community or truths created by researchers working inside the community who treat the community as an object for research.
5. Participatory AR is not “the scientific method” applied to social (educational, agricultural) work. There is not just one view of the scientific method, there are many. Participatory AR is not is not just about testing hypotheses or using data to come to conclusions.
(p. 39)
Most of the issues identified under “what AR is not” were basically the same issues addressed under “what is AR,” although with a reversed context. In some instances, the “what is not” approach provided a distinct clarity that was not always captured in a “what is” definition, as evidenced in the “not” statement “AR is not applied research.” As a result, the definitions provided a slightly different perspective for comparing and contrasting established research methodologies and epistemologies.
Focusing on what AR was not, brought to light several ideological issues. For example, Wadsworth (1998) explained AR was not a ‘contaminating’ process, which biases scientific approach. This helped clarify a personal ideology that researchers had to remain detached, unbiased, and serve essentially as an observer, to do effective research. Additionally, McTaggart (1997) further underscored that AR was not research done on other people; rather AR research was done by a particular group of people on there own work, in order to improve what they do. This further helped this researcher to understand that AR was a valid grounded research approach.
AR Genesis and Early Evolution
Although AR had emerged with great diversity and diffusion, its origin was generally agreed on by researchers and was attributed to Kurt Lewin, who was often referred to as the father of AR (Greenwood & Levin, 1998; Mills, 2000; O’Brien, 2001; Reason & Bradbury, 2001;). Kurt Lewin was born in Prussia (now part of Poland) in 1890; he studied in Germany earning his PhD in 1916 from the University of Berlin. During this period, he experienced anti-Semitism first hand. In 1933, he chose to leave Germany to seek academic and personal freedoms. He and his family moved to the United States, where he first worked at the Cornell School of Economics, then at the University of Iowa, and finally in 1944 he established the Research Center for Group Dynamics at MIT (Smith, 2001).
On his way to the United States, he stopped by Cambridge University (UK), and was given a tour of the University by Eric Trist an aspiring literature student. Trist was so moved by Lewin’s ideas that he changed his major to psychology, and began a lifetime association with the Polish born social psychologist. Trist began his career as an applied psychologist, building upon and extending Lewin’s work and theories in collaboration with his colleagues at the Travistock Institution in London. Travistock became dedicated to resolving practical problems by using AR. This AR approach later became a core methodology in the socio-technical school (Pasmore, 2001) and the emergence of the industrial tradition or movement (Greenwood & Levin, 1998).
Although Mills (2000) suggested Lewin originally coined the term ‘action research’ in 1934, O’Brien (2001) maintained that Lewin first coined ‘action research’ in his 1946 paper “Action Research and Minority Problems.” His paper characterized AR as comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action. He used a process of iterative steps also referred to as a spiral of steps; each of which is composed of a cycle of planning, action, and fact-finding about the result of the action.
Action research grew and expanded in Western Europe largely through the efforts of Travistock. This new methodology was referred to as Industrial Democracy, a systematic and large scale AR effort in Western industrialized countries. Industrial Democracy followed the tradition of democratic processes, collaboration and participation of ordinary people, and the importance of reflective thought in resolving practical problems. Industrial democracy later expanded to the East, finding fertile ground in Japan, where their culture readily accepted collective work and the idea of groups taking on problem solving and operational responsibilities (Greenwood and Levin, 1998).
AR Paradigms and Theoretical Foundations
The notion of a paradigm or worldview as a strategic perspective that organized our approach to being in the world had become commonplace since Kuhn published, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Heron & Reason, 1997). Kuhn (1996) pointed out that ”accepted examples of actual scientific practice – examples which include law, theory, application, and instrumentation together – provide models from which spring particular coherent traditions of scientific research” (p. 10). The traditions inherent in paradigms, however, were not necessarily scientifically supported, that was to say, they represented a distillation of what we think about the world but cannot prove (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In basic terms, Barker (1992) defined a paradigm as “a set of rules and regulation (written or unwritten) that does two things: it establishes or defines boundaries; and it tells you how to behave inside the boundaries to be successful” (p. 32).
Heron and Reason (1997) presented arguments for a participatory worldview of inquiry paradigm while critiquing and deconstructing competing research paradigms of positivism, postpositivism, critical thinking, and constructivism. Lincoln and Guba (1985), stressed postpositivism and a naturalistic paradigm as they emphasized that it was “imperative that inquiry itself be shifted from a positive to a postpositivist stance. For, if a new paradigm of thought and belief is emerging, it is necessary to construct a parallel new paradigm of inquiry” (p. 15). O’Brien (2001) situates AR into three varying research paradigms: positivist, interpretive, and praxis. His interpretative paradigm had many of the same characteristics that distinguished a postpositivist paradigm. His praxis paradigm shared many of the perspectives of both the positivist and interpretive paradigms, emphasizing that knowledge was derived from practice.
This project was initially planed to employ a positivist research paradigm; however, in reviewing different philosophical perspectives and associated paradigms, a more middle-of-the-road approach was employed that identified closely with O’Brien’s (2001) praxis paradigm. The integration of both positivist and interpretive paradigms greatly increased the flexibility to the project by linking qualitative and quantitative methodologies for collecting and analyzing data.
Mills (2000) provided a basic theoretical foundation that was helpful in understanding some of the underpinnings in AR; he classified AR into two main theories: “critical (or theory based) action research and practical action research” (p. 7). Critical AR derived its name from the body of critical theory on which it was based (not because this type of AR is critical although it may very well be used in a critical situation). Practical AR emphasized the ‘how to approach’ and was less philosophical. His description offered a level of clarity through simplification. After gaining a basic understanding however, the distinctive differences in AR processes became apparent. Further research and understanding of the conceptional framework was needed in order to identify a more sophisticated distinction among AR processes. Through further research, a slightly more elaborate framework was discovered that was usually attributed to Habermas (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Myers, 1997; Wortley, 1996; Masters, 1995). Carr and Kemmis (1986) describe Habermas’ proposal that “knowledge is the outcome of human activity that is motivated by natural needs and interests” (p. 134). They further point out, “Habermas contends that human knowledge is constituted by virtue of three knowledge-constitutive interests which he labels the ‘technical’, the ‘practical’, and the ‘emancipatory’” (p. 134); each interest furthermore related to a corresponding approach of science. Habermas contends, “ the approach of the empirical-analytic sciences incorporates a technical cognitive interest; that of the historical-hermeneutic sciences incorporates a practical one; and the approach of critical oriented sciences incorporates the emancipatory cognitive interest” (Habermas, 1968/1972, p. 308). Based on Habermas’ analysis, Kemmis (2001) and his group constructed a three-tiered model that related the interests of empirical -analytic (technical), hermeneutics (practical), and critical (emancipatory) to AR. Empirical-analytic or natural science relates to technical interest usually affiliated with ‘work’; its main focus was a ‘means to an end’, and a means to getting things accomplished effectively by following a positivist paradigm. Hermeneutics or interpretative science related to a practical interest and involved wise and prudent decision-making in practical situations. Critical science related to emancipatory interests and involved emancipating people from determination of habit, custom, illusion, and coercion (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Kemmis, 2001). Using Habermas’ framework, examples of AR processes that coincide with his theoretical foundations are provided below. As mentioned previously, theoretical frameworks were not usually included in the literature describing AR processes or methodology. Therefore, the placing of an AR process into one of Kemmis’ three tiers was based on this researcher’s interpretations of the most prominent characteristics of each particular AR process. The examples selected have relatively straightforward or clear cut characteristics and require minimal interpretation to classify them into Habermas’ three-tier model.
Empirical-analytic. According to Kemmis (2001), this was a ‘Means to an end’ form of AR problem solving; and regarded as successful when the outcome matched the aspirations, or when the goal of the project had been attained. Empirical-analytic was oriented towards functional improvement measured in terms of its success in changing particular outcomes of practice. Most examples aimed to increase or decrease the incidence of a particular outcome, such as increasing the rate of production in a factory. This form of AR was a form of ‘problem-solving’, and was regarded as successful when outcomes matched aspirations. Researchers do not normally question the goals or how the situation is conducted or constructed. “It takes a narrow, generally ‘pragmatic’ (in the ordinary-language use of the term) view of its purpose” (p. 92).
O’Brien (2001) provided a similar theoretical framework, but he referred to empirical-analytic as traditional AR that stemmed from Lewin’s work within organizations and encompassed the concepts and practices of field theory, group dynamics, T-groups, and the clinical model. He pointed out, this approach was relatively conservative, generally maintaining the status quo of the power structure of the organization.
Technical AR as described by Carr and Kemmis (1986) occurred when facilitators persuade practitioners to test the findings of external research in their own practices, and where the outcome of the tests feed new findings in external literature. The emphasis was on developing and extending the research literature base not on improving practice through collaborative or self-reflective control.
In general, AR under this framework was accomplished within the parameters of a positivistic paradigm. Although not a necessity, technical AR most likely employed a quantitative methodology for data collection and focused on progressive achievement towards a particular goal or outcome. Early methodologies did not involve changing social structure or consider the affects of learning or knowledge growth that may occur during the process. Two AR processes that follow this framework were Industrial Democracy and Sociotechnical.
The Industrial Democracy tradition was born when Travistock researchers lead by Eric Trist, assisted a Norwegian coal mining company with improving democracy at the shop-floor level. Trist employment of Kurt Lewin’s change model in the study resulted in the development of the first generation of action research processes and methodologies. Lewin’s’ model simplified the ‘change process’ into three basic steps of unfreezing, moving, and freezing (Lewin, 2000). Greenwood & Levin (1998) further pointed out that both experimental design and change processes were prominent in the early development of the Industrial Democracy tradition in AR. These early methodologies required researchers to complete research analysis, recommend a new design approach, and then structure the processes by which the changes were implemented. Changes were implemented and then the organization was permitted to develop a stable state incorporating the changes. Greenwood and Levin also stated, “Consultation with the participants was not to be found” (p. 29).
Industrial Democracy focused on ways research results improved participants’ abilities to control their own situations as a result of a redesigned organization. Further, it began the first reflections about designing research processes that redefined the relationship between researchers and participants (Greenwood & Levin, 1998). Researchers working within this tradition played a clear-cut expert role; they collected data, analyzed it, and developed recommendations for a new design. Researchers involved the workers who were directly affected by the change only during the implementation stage in the change process. Although the seminal studies on the Norwegian coal mining company had great bearing on AR development, Pasmore (2001) pointed out that the studies were not true examples of AR since the researchers served as observers of the naturally occurring experiments rather than collaborators in the planning and evaluation of the experiments.
The single major significant outcome that sprouted from the Industrial Democracy tradition was the development of sociotechnical thinking (Greenwood & Levin, 1998). This also represented a major shift from the prevalent ‘Tayloristic-Scientific Management’ thinking, where technology and management control were dominant. In the new paradigm of sociotechnical design (as cited by Greenwood and Levin, 1998), Trist differentiated between the old and new management paradigms. Trish pointed out in the old Scientific Management (associated with Taylor) paradigm, that man was an extension of the machine and an expendable spare part; the organization chart defined a hierarchy, and operation was through competition and gamesmanship. In the new (sociotechnical) paradigm, Trist offered a fresh perspective in that he viewed man as complementary to the machine and as a resource to be developed; the organization (chart) was designed flat and operation was through collaboration and collegiality.
Sociotechnical thinking evolved, integrating other theories and models into the developing process. One other significant new perspective was the addition of Von Bertalanffy’s theory of open systems, better known as general systems theory (GST). Systems thinking observed organizations as complex systems made up of interrelated parts most usefully studied as an emergent whole (Flood, 2001). As sociotechnical systems theory evolved, it included the technical system as well as the material being worked on, the level of mechanization or automation, operations including centrality, and a variety of other impacting functions. In general, sociotechnical systems theory viewed the technical system as an integral part of the larger ‘work’ system as a whole. According to Greenwood and Levin (1998), the systems approach underlies AR in all of its manifestations. Both AR and GST rely heavily on a holistic view of the world and on relative efforts to transform society into more open systems.
Hermeneutics. According to Greenwood and Levin (1998), “Hermeneutics is based on the ontological position that the world is subjective and the epistemological project is to make interpretations of the subjective world” (p. 68). This interpretative view had a long history beginning as a science for interpreting biblical texts (Carr & Kemmis, 1986). By the eighteenth century, it was also used for interpreting literature, works of art, and music. By the late nineteenth century, the social sciences expanded their epistemological basis by embracing hermeneutics. Denzin (2001) reflected on its use in the social sciences by recognizing that properly conceptualized interpretative research became a civic, participatory, or collaborative project that joins the researcher with the researched in an ongoing moral dialogue.
O’Brien (2001) provided a similar theoretical framework, referring to practical AR as contextural AR or action learning. AR was contextural, insofar as it involved reconstituting the structural relations among actors in a social environment; it was co-generative, in that it attempted to involve all affected stakeholders; holistic, as each participant understood the entirety of the project; and collaborative, by stressing that participants acted as project designers and co-researchers. Within this framework, social transformation occurred by consensus and normative incrementalism. This approach closely aligned with the CAR process used to develop IT standards in this study.
In practical AR, external facilitators form cooperative relationships with practitioners, helping them to articulate their concerns (Carr & Kemmis, 1986). In collaboration, they planed the strategic actions necessary for change, monitor the problems and effects of changes, and reflected on the value of the changes. Through this process, the stakeholders were responsible for monitoring their own educational practices with an immediate aim of expanding their personal knowledge of the project. McNiff (2000) further described collaboration as a caring praxis. While we aim to develop and maintain our own and others’ autonomy, this was always done with respect for others. McNiff stated, “In this sense, collaboration becomes an effort to develop mutually respectful autonomy, a practice in which people work together as equals, engage in the give and take of negotiating positions, and agree settlements which are then subjected to critical processes of evaluation and modification” (p. 217). Collaboration is an attitude, requiring a willingness to listen and communicate as well as move in the direction of commonly agreed practice.
Practical AR gets its title because it developed the practical reasoning of practitioners. Carr and Kemmis further stated that, “It is to be distinguished from technical AR because it treats the criteria by which practices are to be judged as problematic and open to development through self-reflection, rather than treating them as given” (p. 203). Kemmis (2001) further distinguished that, unlike technical AR, practical action researchers aim just as much at understanding themselves and changing themselves as the subjects of a practice, as changing the outcomes of the practice.
There are many AR processes that follow the hermeneutic approach. In fact, the majority of AR processes and derivatives of those processes employ an interpretative strategy. However, rather than discussing multiple process and variations, two AR processes that provided a level of diversity and interest are community-based AR and action science.
Community–based AR seeks to change the social and personal dynamics of the research situation, providing a noncompetitive and nonexploitative as well as enhancing the lives of all those who participate (Stringer, 1999). By employing a collaborative approach to inquiry, community–based AR seeks to build positive working relationships, productive interactions, and communicative styles among participants.
Community–based AR further draws on an explicit set of social values and was seen as an inquiry process that employed the following characteristics: democratic – encouraging participation from all; equitable – acknowledging peoples worth; liberating – providing freedom from oppression; and life enhancing – encouraging peoples full potential. According to Stringer (1999), all stakeholders whose lives are affected by the problem should be engaged in the investigation process. Stakeholders participate in a process of rigorous inquiry; collecting information and reflecting on that information, hoping to transform their understanding about the nature of the problem under investigated. The new set of understandings is applied to an implementation plan for resolution of the problem that in turn can be re-evaluated.
There were a few key features to community–based AR worth noting for their relevance to this study. First, community–based AR follows a hermeneutic approach to evaluation, which implies a more democratic, empowering, and humanizing approach to inquiry. Second, community–based AR very closely parallels Participatory AR, which is discussed in the critical AR section of this review. Emancipation appears to be the only difference between the two processes. While both process involve all stakeholders, participatory AR aims to liberate stakeholders from a social injustice by changing individual actions or thinking on one hand, while simultaneously changing the culture of the groups, institutions, societies to which they belong (McTaggart, 1997). Within the framework of critical AR, emancipation was a significant factor in the inquiry and expectations. Within the framework of community-based AR, Stringer acknowledged the necessity for confrontational action in some situations, however, “it is fundamentally a consensual approach to inquiry and works from the assumption that cooperation and consensus making should be the primary orientation of research activity” (p. 21).
Action science grew out of the work competed by John Dewey and Kurt Lewin (Argyris, Putnam, & Smith, 1985; Schön, 1983). A variety of definitions written by either Chris Argyris or Donald Schön are available describing action science. In fact, Friedman (2001) compiled four of their definitions into a composite definition. Action science is “a form of social practice which integrates both the production and use of knowledge for the purpose of promoting learning with and among individuals and systems whose work is characterized by uniqueness, uncertainty, and instability” (p. 159).
Action science according to Argyris and Schön (1996) focused on the problem of creating conditions for collaborative inquiry in which people in organizations function as co-researchers rather than merely as subjects. They further conveyed that people were more willing to share information about their own intentions and reasons for actions when they share ownership of the process generating, interpreting, testing, and using the information.
According to Ellis and Kiely (2000), action science was an inquiry approach suited to an organization culture, which appreciates double-loop learning and was committed to interpreting knowledge in a way that revealed organizational patterns, process, and defensive routines. Action science intervention was psychological since it explored innermost feelings and emotional reactions, some of which were protected by personal defense mechanisms. As these defense mechanisms breakdown, individuals may feel vulnerable and exposed. Risks to self and others involved were reduced if the group themselves were sensitive to others feelings and ensured participants finish sessions on a positive note.
Critical AR. Critical AR owes its origins to theories that intended to enlighten, empower, and emancipate people from oppression (Brown and Jones, 2001). This branch of AR includes participatory, southern participatory, contemporary feminist analysis, (Greenwood & Levin, 1998) as well as some educational initiatives (Mills, 2000) and was drawn from the critical theory of Habermas, neo-Marxism, and liberationist philosophies. Kemmis (2001) believed, this form of AR aimed at improving outcomes and the understanding of practitioners, assisting practitioners in work critiques, as well as intervening in the cultural, social, and historical process of everyday lives and activities.
O’Brien (2001) outlined a similar theoretical framework, referring to critical AR as radical AR and described its roots as Marxian - ‘dialectical materialism’. Additionally critical AR had a strong focus on overcoming of power imbalances and emancipating those with little power. Participatory AR often found in liberationist movements and feminist analysis both strived for social transformation via an advocacy process to strengthen peripheral groups in society.
The common descriptor in each of the provided perspectives of critical AR was the term emancipatory. The goal of critical AR was liberation through knowledge gathering (Mills, 2000).
Critical AR had its roots in the critical theory of the social sciences and humanities, and draws heavily from postmodern theory, challenging the notion of truth and objectivity that traditional scientific theory relies upon. According to Mills (2000), “postmodernists argue that truth is relative, conditional, and situational, and that knowledge is always an outgrowth of prior experience” (p. 8). Further, critical AR pulls apart and examines the mechanisms of knowledge production while questioning many of the basic assumptions on which modern life is based.
Numerous AR approaches and processes were included under the umbrella of critical AR. There was little standardization of nomenclature and what one researcher referred to as participatory AR another researcher referred to as participator research or emancipatory AR. Action research terminology was always complex, and nowhere more than when describing participatory action research (PAR). For some, PAR and AR indicated the same process, for others the process was very different (Greenwood & Levin, 1998).
According to McTaggart (1997), PAR described a convergence of traditions in certain kinds of action research and participatory research. The term participatory was a necessity that distinguished ‘authentic’ action research from the miscellaneous array of research types that fall under the descriptor ‘action research’, when requesting information from databases. The term action research was used to describe almost every effort and method under the sun that attempted to inform action in some way. When contemplating work or trying to distinguish work that claims to be participatory action research, McTaggart suggests three general questions be asked.
How is this example participatory research? What does this example tell us about the criteria we might use to judge claims that an endeavor is participatory action research (to test our theory of what participatory action research is)? And most important of all, what contributions has this example made to the improvement of the understanding, practice, and social situation of participants and others in the context described? (p. 26)
The process of PAR was inadequately described in terms of mechanical steps or sequence, because it is not a self-contained process (Kemmis & Wilkinson, 1998). PAR does involve a spiral of self-reflective cycles of: planning a change, acting and observing the process, reflecting on the process, and finally re-planning based on the outcome of the action initiated and resulting change. In reality, these stages or steps overlapped, and initial plans quickly became obsolete in the light of learning from experience. The process was fluid, open, and responsive. The steps were not as important as the participants’ involvement, and knowledge gained as well as the evolution of their practice.
The future of PAR looks promising, as it continues to grow in popularity and evolve contextually. As a result of the 1997 World Congress (on AR), Fals Borda (2001) identified seven emergent tasks that would lead to further growth of this field of inquiry. Additionally, he emphasized that the merging ways in which participation, action, and research were articulated would determine the success and survival of different PAR schools. He argued the positive effects that PAR has on communities, cities, families, churches, enterprises, and business must be considered, as well as the fact that PAR can contribute to advances in science and technology, as well as changing social patterns and enrichment of human culture.
References
Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. (1985). Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, methods and practice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Baker, C. R. (2000, December). Towards the increase use of action research in accounting information systems. Accounting Forum 24, 366-379. Retrieved November 24, 2002 from the Masterfile database.
Barker, J.A. (1992). Paradigms: The business of discovering the future. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Brown, T., & Jones, L. (2001). Action research and postmodernism: Congruence and critique. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge, and action research. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.
Denzin, N. K. (2001). Interpretive interactionism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dick, B. (1997). A beginner’s guide to action research. Action Research International. Retrieved June 8, 2001 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site:
http://www. scu.edu.au/schools/sawd/ari/arr/guide.html
Dick, B. (1999). What is action research? . Retrieved October 4, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site:
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/whatisar.html
Dick, B. (2002a). An action research bibliography. Retrieved
October 6, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/biblio.html
Dick, B. (2002b). Recent books on action research and related topics. Retrieved October 30, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/books.html
Ellis, J. H. M., & Kiely, J. A. (2000). The promise of action inquiry in tackling organizational problems in real time. Action Research International, Paper 5. Retrieved March 7, 2001 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/p-jellis00.html
Fals Borda, O. (2001). Participatory (action) research in social theory: Origins and challenges. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 27-37). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Flood, R. L. (2001). The relationship of ‘systems thinking’ to action research. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 133-144). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Friedman, V. J. (2001). Action science: Creating communities of inquiry in communities of practice. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 159-170). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Greenwood, D. J., & Levin, D. (1998). Introduction to action research: Social research for social change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests (Shapiro, J. J., Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1968)
Heron, J., & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3). Retrieved October 7, 2002 from the Masterfile database.
Kemmis, S. (2001). Exploring the relevance of critical theory for action research: Emancipatory action research in the footsteps of Jürgen Habermas. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 91-102). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kemmis, S., & Wilkinson, M. (1998). Participatory action research and the study of practice. In Atweh, B., Kemmis, S. & Weeks, P. (Eds.) Action research in practice: Partnership for social justice in education (pp. 21-36). New York, NY: Rutledge.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Levin, M., & Greenwood, D. (2001). Pragmatic action research and the struggle to transform universities into learning centers. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 103-113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lewin, K. (1997). Resolving social conflicts & field training in social science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Masters, J. (1995). The history of action research. Action Research Electronic Reader. Retrieved November 24, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site:
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arr/arow/masters.html
McNiff, J. (with Whitehead, J.) (2000). Action research in organizations. New York, NY: Routledge.
McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (1996). You and your action research project. New York, NY: Routledge.
McTaggart, R. (Ed.). (1997). Participatory action research: International contexts and consequences. Albany, NY: SUNY.
McTaggart, R. (1998). Is validity really an issue for participatory action research? Studies in Culture, Organizations, and Societies 4(2). Retrieved July 8, 2001 from the Masterfile database.
Mills, G.E. (2000). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
O’Brien, R. (2001). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. Retrieved July 3, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.web.net/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001) Introduction: Inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 1-14). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schein, E. (2001). Clinical inquiry/research. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 228-237). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Stringer, E. T. (1999). Action research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Swepson, P. (1998). Separating the Ideals of research from the methodology of research, either action research or science, can lead to better research. Action Research International, Paper 2. Retrieved
March 7, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/sawd/ari/ari-swepson.html
Wadsworth, Y. (1998). What is participatory action research? Action Research International. Retrieved March 7, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/sawd/ari/ari-wadworth.html
Wortley, S. (1996). Business as usual or action research in practice? Action Research Electronic Reader. Retrieved November 24, 2002 from Southern Cross University, Action Research Resources web site:
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arr/arow/rwortley.html
PAGE
http://jtr.sagepub.com/ Journal of Travel Research
http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/05/04/0047287514532367 The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/0047287514532367
published online 5 May 2014Journal of Travel Research Riyad Eid and Hatem El-Gohary
Muslim Tourist Perceived Value in the Hospitality and Tourism Industry
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Travel and Tourism Research Association
can be found at:Journal of Travel ResearchAdditional services and information for
http://jtr.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://jtr.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/05/04/0047287514532367.refs.htmlCitations:
What is This?
- May 5, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record >>
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Journal of Travel Research 1 –14 © 2014 SAGE Publications Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0047287514532367 jtr.sagepub.com
Article
Introduction Delivering value for customers in hospitality and tourism industry is heralded by some as the next source of competi- tive advantage (see, e.g., Al-Sabbahy, Ekinci, and Riley 2004; Prebensen et al. 2013; Woodruff 1997; Zamani- Farahani and Henderson 2010). The recent development of publications in the area may give rise to the impression that customer value has become an area of increasing interest to marketers as it has emerged as a key determinant of con- sumer decision making. According to Choi and Chu (2001), to be successful in the hospitality and tourism industry, com- panies must provide superior customer value and this must be done in a continuous and efficient way. Furthermore, tourism companies should improve the quality of their ser- vices offerings and ensure that the needs and expectations of their customers are being met (Haywood 1983).
In responding to these developments, tourism industry is progressively moving away from mass marketing and is instead pursuing more sophisticated approaches to segment- ing tourist markets to address the distinct consumer psychol- ogy of a particular target market. As a result, a religious perspective on travel and other purchase decisions is prefer- able to other segmentation variables such as demographic characteristics of age and life stage, which have traditionally been used to identify market segments (Gardiner, King, and Grace 2013). However, value creation especially in the tour- ism industry is always a collaborative and interactive process that takes place in the context of a unique set of multiple exchange relationships provided through services (Vargo
2009). This actually calls for a move from thinking of cus- tomers as isolated entities to understanding them in the con- text of their own networks, backgrounds, and religions.
Meanwhile, there are new trends and developments such as the investment and adoption of business practices based on the Islamic principles of Shari’ah “Islamic law” (Essoo and Dibb 2004; Laderlah et al. 2011; Meng, Tepanon, and Uysal 2008; Stephenson, Russell, and Edgar 2010; Weidenfeld and Ron 2008; Zamani-Farahani and Henderson 2010; Zamani-Farahani and Musa 2012). For example, Essoo and Dibb (2004) found that religion influences tour- ism behavior among Hindus, Muslims, and Catholics. Weidenfeld and Ron (2008) also found that religion influ- ences the destination choice, tourist product favorites, and selection of religious opportunities and facilities offered. Laderlah et al. (2011) reported the various features and pop- ular destinations of Islamic tourism as practiced in Malaysia. Finally, Meng, Tepanon, and Uysal (2008) found that
532367 JTRXXX10.1177/0047287514532367Journal of Travel ResearchEid and El-Gohary research-article2014
1College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates 2Faculty of Commerce, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt 3Birmingham City University Business School, Birmingham, United Kingdom 4Cairo University Business School, Cairo, Egypt
Corresponding Author: Riyad Eid, United Arab Emirates University, Collage of Business and Economics, Al-Ain, POB; 15551, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates. Email: [email protected]
Muslim Tourist Perceived Value in the Hospitality and Tourism Industry
Riyad Eid1,2 and Hatem El-Gohary3,4
Abstract Perceived value is a subjective and dynamic construct that varies among different customers and cultures. Although perceived customer value has been studied by many researchers, no research has been done into the measurement of Muslim Tourist Perceived Value (MTPV) where Muslim tourist evaluates both traditional and religious aspects of value. By means of a multidimensional procedure, the authors developed a scale of measurement of MTPV through 24 items grouped into six dimensions: quality, price, emotional, social, Islamic physical attributes, and Islamic nonphysical attributes. The importance of the proposed constructs was theoretically justified. Using a sample of 537 Muslim tourists, the constructs were tested and validated. The results supply tourism companies with a number of operative factors that may be essential if they are to remain competitive in the dynamic marketplace. This study is probably the first to provide an integrative perspective of MTPV constructs in the hospitality and tourism industry.
Keywords customer value, Muslim, tourism and hospitality and scale development
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
2 Journal of Travel Research
tourists select destinations that are supposed to best fulfil their internal desires or preferred destination attributes.
However, although Muslims make up one of the largest tourist markets in the world as Muslim population consti- tutes an international market of 2.1 billion possible custom- ers (Muslim Population Worldwide 2013), the world’s Muslim population is projected to grow by about 35% between 2010 and 2030 (Jafari and Scott 2013), and market- ing scholars have long studied “perceived value” and pro- posed various conceptualizations of the term (Benkenstein, Yavas, and Forberger 2003; Dumand and Mattila 2005; Dumond 2000; Gallarza and Saura 2006; Holbrook 1994; Nasution and Mavondo 2008; Oh 2003; Peterson 1995; Petrick 2002; Ravald and Gronroos 1996; Sanchez et al. 2006; Roig et al. 2009), perceived value of tourism offering oriented toward this market has not been clearly defined (Laderlah et al. 2011; Stephenson, Russell, and Edgar 2010; Zamani-Farahani and Henderson 2010; Zamani-Farahani and Musa 2012).
Undoubtedly, although academics have built considerable theoretical knowledge on the conceptualization of perceived value, research about its true meaning that applies to different customer groups is still few. Very little is known about what makes up value for different customer groups that come from various cultural backgrounds (e.g., Muslims). Understanding Islamic values must be seen in local contexts as type of “Glocalization” (Robertson 1994; Salazar 2005) and call for a dramatic change that moves the concept of value-in-use to a more descriptive “value-in-context” concept (Vargo 2009). This actually supports Lusch and Vargo’s (2011) view that “value is always uniquely and phenomenologically deter- mined by the beneficiary” and is also idiosyncratic, experien- tial, contextual, and meaning laden. Certainly this embraces a multiple-perspective (Lusch and Vargo 2011, p. 1303).
Therefore, further explorations are needed to broaden the concept as they should fit to the needs and expectations of Muslim consumers. Islamic tourism also is still in its infancy and yet not well established for many researchers as there is a great need for having more well-established studies that can be considered as a step toward a theory building in the field of Islamic tourism (Al-Hamarneh and Steiner 2004; Scott and Jafari 2010; Zamani-Farahani and Henderson 2010; Henderson 2008, 2011).
To bridge this gap various conceptual and empirical stud- ies investigating the concepts of Tourist value, and MTPV were studied. Their findings highlight the fact that on top of the traditional dimensions that help in creating value for tourists, there are more factors that have a direct impact on successful creation of MTPV. Model, definitions, tech- niques, and discussion of these factors and how could they affect MTPV are described in the following sections.
Research Objectives The purposes of this research are to identify MTPV dimen- sions and develop items of measuring these dimensions,
empirically validate the scales, and carry out an initial inves- tigation of the relationship, if any, among the MTPV dimen- sions. The reminder of this paper is organized as follows. First, a review of relevant MTPV literature is presented. This is followed by identification of MTPV dimensions and development of related scales. Empirical validation of the dimensions is presented next. On the basis of an exploratory analysis of the statistical relationships among various MTPV dimensions, managerial implications are offered. The paper concludes with recommendations for future extension of this research.
Literature Review
Islamic Tourism Islamic tourism seems to be a new concept for most of the researchers and practitioners in the field of tourism, which is not true as the concept is very old and can be traced to the early days of the Islamic civilization and the Abbasid times. In the early days of Islamic history, where the Islamic empire covered vast geographical areas of Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe, Muslims got the chance of travel across the three continents safely and without any constraints such as pass- ports, borders, or even security investigations. After the death of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), the Islamic empire expanded north into Syria (636 CE), east to Persia and beyond (636 CE), west into Egypt (640 CE), and then to Spain and Portugal (711 CE) (Donner 2004). Islam arrived in the area known today as Pakistan in 711 CE. The Ottoman Empire (the Turkish dynasty that ruled the Ottoman Empire from the 13th century to its dissolution after World War I) expanded into the Balkan area, taking present-day Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, Serbia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia, and Hungary. The Ottomans laid siege to Vienna in 1683 CE but were defeated; from 1699 to 1913 CE, wars and insurrections pushed the Ottoman Empire back until it reached the current European border of present-day Turkey (Jafari and Scott 2013).
Islamic tourism is deeply rooted with the Islamic Shari’ah where every Muslim is demanded to visit the holy city of Makah (in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) to conduct Hajj (the fifth pillar of Islam) if he/she can afford to do that finan- cially and physically. Accordingly, any Muslim that does not actually live in that holy city needs to conduct tourism activi- ties to fulfill his/her Shari’ah requirements. Furthermore, millions of Muslims travel to the holy city of Makah every year to perform Umrah (Jafari and Scott 2013). Furthermore, Quranic evidence (Islam’s holy book) has been presented regarding the vital importance of travel. The Holy Quran explains in Surat Al-Ankabout (literally, The Spider): “Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things” (Surat Al-Ankabout, verse number 20).” Therefore, based on this quote from Qur’an, Muslims are encouraged to do so for historical, social, and cultural
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Eid and El-Gohary 3
encounters, to gain knowledge, to associate with others, to spread God’s word, and to enjoy and appreciate God’s cre- ations (Timothy and Olsen 2006 ).
However, Muslims practice two different types of tourism activities. First, pilgrimage-tourism activities or what is called Hajj: Hajj in Islam is performed in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia within a specific geographical territory (Almasha’er Almoukadasa) include the holy mosque in Makkah, Arafat, Muzdalifah, and Mina. It is performed in specific period, from the 8th to the 13th of the 12th month (Dhul-Hijja) according to the Hegira calendar. Allah (SWT) says in the holy Quran, (Surat Albakara), verse number 197: “Al-Hajj Ashoron Maalomat,” which means that Hajj is per- formed only at a particular time of the year (Eid 2012). Muslims who are taking part in this great event should act in a good manner. Allah says in the holy Quran, chapter 2 (Surat Albakara), verse number 197: “If any one undertakes that duty therein, Let there be no obscenity, nor wickedness, nor wrangling in the Hajj.” It means that whoever decides to go for Hajj should have good manners, so, there shouldn’t be any immortality, sensuality, or arguments in Hajj.
Undoubtedly, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as the Hajj destination, all management organizations and hotel proper- ties have the relevant requirements that are needed by Muslim tourists, such as prayer times and locations where mosques can be found. Tourism operators have also pro- vided their staff with training about cross-cultural communi- cation and informed them how to accommodate or treat Muslim tourists with respect. As Muslims typically observe a dress code, avoid free mixing, and eat Halal food, all hotels in KSA offer separate recreational facilities for men and women and serve Halal food (Eid 2012).
The second type of tourism activities that could be prac- ticed by Muslims is called Islamic tourism and this is the core theme of this article. According to Jafari and Scott (2013), Islamic tourism is essentially a new “touristic” inter- pretation of pilgrimage that merges religious and leisure tourism. Thus, it is “unlike mass tourism which for Muslims is ‘characterized by hedonism, permissiveness, lavishness’” (Sonmez 2001, p. 127). Islamic travel instead is proposed as an alternative to this hedonic conceptualization of tourism. Undoubtedly, religious beliefs influence and direct Muslim adherents to travel to particular sites and influence their atti- tudes and behavior, perceptions, and perhaps emotions at those sites (Jafari and Scott 2013). Therefore, trends in forms of religious tourism may vary between adherents of different faiths.
Distinctive requirements of Muslims in terms of food, daily prayers, and travel patterns (Timothy and Olsen 2006) call for certain adjustments in the tourism offering of most destinations. For example, Islam necessitates certain prac- tices regarding health and hygiene, such as washing before performing the daily prayers, identifies what food is permis- sible to be consumed; for example, pork and alcohol are pro- scribed, and how some food should be prepared; Muslims are to eat Halal meat, which requires Zabh (Slaughter) of an
animal according to Islamic specifications (Hodge 2002). As these practices remain important when traveling, a number of authors have discussed how hotels can become Shari’a compliant to help create Muslim Tourist Value (Henderson 2010; Jafari and Scott 2013; Ozdemir and Met 2012).
Customer Perceived Value Customer perceived value is the ultimate result of market- ing activities and is a first-order element in relationship marketing (Oh 2003; Dumond 2000; Peterson 1995; Prebensen et al. 2013; Ravald and Gronroos 1996; Sanchez et al. 2006). It is defined as a trade-off between total per- ceived benefits and total perceived sacrifices and is con- sidered as an abstract concept (Weinstein and Johnson 1999); hence, its interpretation varies according to the con- text (Sweeney and Soutar 2001). The term perceived is suggested to reflect the experiential view, in which it is believed that value judgment is dependent upon the con- sumers’ experience. Some studies have treated value as a dependent measure rather than a driver of purchase behav- ior (Heeler, Nguyen, and Buff 2007). Others (Prebensen et al. 2013; Tanford, Baloglu, and Erdem 2012) looked at it as a predictor variable.
Conceptualizations of Customer Perceived Value In recent years, customer perceived value has been the object of interest of many researchers in the hospitality and tourism industry. Some studies treated perceived value as two crucial dimensions of consumer behavior (the functional value): one of benefits received (economic, social, and relationship) and another of sacrifices made (price, time, effort, risk, and con- venience) by the customer (see, e.g., Bigne et al. 2005; Oh 2003; Sanchez et al. 2006).
Undoubtedly, hospitality and tourism activities need to resort to fantasies, feelings, and emotions to explain the tour- ist purchasing decision. Many products have symbolic mean- ings, beyond tangible attributes, perceived quality, or price (Havlena and Holbrook 1986). Furthermore, as perceived value is a subjective and dynamic construct that varies among different tourists and cultures at different times, it is neces- sary to include subjective or emotional reactions that are generated in the consumer’s mind (Havlena and Holbrook 1986; Bolton and Drew 1991; Prebensen et al. 2013; Sweeney and Soutar 2001). Havlena and Holbrook have demonstrated the importance of the affective component in the experiences of buying and consuming in leisure, aesthetic, creative, and religious activities (Havlena and Holbrook 1986). Dumand and Mattila (2005) also found that affective factors, espe- cially hedonic and pleasure, are related to a cruise vacation- ers’ value perception. Recently, Lee, Lee, and Choi (2011) highlighted the importance of emotional value in addition to functional value for festival goers. They suggested that future research should examine other potential factors that might influence perceived value.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
4 Journal of Travel Research
Therefore, many studies adopt a wider view that treats the concept of customer perceived value as a multidimensional construct (see, e.g., De Ruyter et al. 1997; Prebensen et al. 2013; Rust, Zeithaml, and Lemmon 2000; Sweeney, Soutar, and Johnson 1999; Sweeney and Soutar 2001; Woodruff 1997). For example, Sweeney, Soutar, and Johnson (1999) identify five dimensions: social value (acceptability), emo- tional value, and three functional values of price/value for money, performance/quality, and versatility; Benkenstein, Yavas, and Forberger (2003) conclude that satisfaction with leisure services is a function of cognitive and emotional (psychological) factors; and Petrick’s (2002) scale consists of five components: behavioral price, monetary price, emo- tional response, quality, and reputation. Finally, to measure the onsite perceived value, Prebensen et al. (2013) suggested four distinct dimensions: emotional, social, quality/perfor- mance, and price/value for money.
Table 1 shows studies that have adopted the multidimen- sional approach in the hospitality and tourism industry and the proposed dimensions of the construct. All the authors uti- lized the two underlying dimensions of perceived value: cog- nitive (functional) and affective (emotional) (Al-Sabbahy, Ekinci, and Riley 2004); Benkenstein, Yavas, and Forberger 2003; Bradley and Sparks 2012; Duman and Mattila 2005; Gallarza and Saura 2006; Lee, Lee, and Choi 2011; Nasution and Mavondo 2008; Petrick 2002; Sanchez et al. 2006; Prebensen et al. 2013). In this sense, the cognitive dimension refers to the rational and economic valuations made by indi- viduals. The quality of the product and of the service would form part of this dimension. The affective or emotional dimension is less developed, but captures the feelings or emotions generated by the products or services.
However, although these studies provide empirical evidence of the existence of the cognitive and affective dimensions of perceived value, none of them studies the overall perceived value of a purchase from an Islamic perspective. The study of value from an Islamic perspective in particular is important, as in the Islamic faith, the boundaries of the spiritual and secular are transcended. The holy book Qur’an provides guidance in all aspects of human activity, so religion influences the direction of tourism choices that individuals are making about alternative forms of its development and practice (Jafari and Scott 2013). Therefore, evaluation of the value of tourism products in the case of Islamic tourism participation entails a completely dif- ferent process because of the requirements of the Islamic Shari’ah. Participation of Muslims in tourism activities requires acceptable goods, services, and environments. Therefore, any attempt to design a scale of measurement of the overall MTPV of a purchase, or to identify its dimensions, must not only reflect a structure that identifies functional and affective dimensions but also the Shari’ah-compliant attributes.
Additional Dimensions for MTPV Undoubtedly, religious identity appears to play an impor- tant role in shaping consumption experiences, including
hospitality and tourism choices among Muslim customers. This is because some religions teach their followers codes of behavior that may encourage or discourage them from being customers to the tourist industry. For example, some people, because of their religious beliefs, find public alco- hol consumption to be very offensive (Battour, Ismail, and Battor 2011; Jafari and Scott 2013). It is a religious com- pulsion for all Muslims to consume products that are per- mitted by Allah (God) and falls under the jurisdiction of Shari’ah. In Islam, Shari’ah-compliant tourism products generally refer to all such products that are in accordance with the instructions of Almighty Allah (God) and Prophet Mohammad (may peace be upon him). Shari’ah designates the term “Halal” specifically to the products that are per- missible, lawful, and are unobjectionable to consume. Shari’ah-compliant tourism products may therefore add value to Muslim consumers’ shopping experiences through
Table 1. Dimensions of Perceived Customer Value.
Author Dimensions
Article I. Petrick (2002) x Behavioral price x Monetary price x Emotional response x Quality, and reputation
Benkenstein, Yavas, and Forberger (2003)
x Cognitive factors x Emotional (psychological) factors
Al-Sabbahy, Ekinci, and Riley (2004)
x Acquisition value x Transaction value
Dumand and Mattila (2005)
x Novelty x Control x Hedonics
Gallarza and Saur (2006)
x Efficiency x Service quality x Social value x Play x Aesthetics
Sanchez et al. (2006) x Functional value of the travel agency x Functional value of the contact
personnel x Functional value (quality) x Functional value price x Emotional value x Social value
Nasution and Mavondo (2008)
x Reputation for quality x Value for money x Prestige
Lee, Lee, and Choi (2011)
x Emotional values x Functional values
Bradley and Sparks (2012)
x Consumer experience x Product experience x Consumption experience x Learning experience
Prebensen et al. (2013) x Emotional x Social x Quality/performance x Price/value for money
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Eid and El-Gohary 5
Islamic benefits that contribute to the value of the shopping experience.
Shari’ah principles are requirements for every Muslim, and sensitivity toward application of these principles is important because religious deeds are not acceptable if they are not conducted appropriately. A typical Muslim is expected to do regular prayers in clean environments and fast in Ramadan. In Islamic teachings, Muslims are also expected to abstain from profligate consumption and indulgence (Hashim, Murphy, and Hashim 2007). In addition, Shari’ah principles prohibit adultery, gambling, consumption of pork and other haram (forbidden) foods, selling or drinking liquor, and dressing inappropriately (Zamani-Farahani and Henderson 2010). Actually in the Islamic faith, the boundar- ies of the spiritual and secular are transcended. The holy book Qur’an provides guidance in all aspects of human activity, so religion influences the direction of tourism choices that individuals are making about alternative tourism packages and destinations. This unifying tendency is also found in the concept of Ummah (the Muslim world commu- nity) regardless of country of origin. Therefore, Shari’ah compliance should be a prerequisite for high-value tourism experiences for Muslims.
Based on the above discussions, two conclusions can be introduced to help in building an effective scale to measure MTPV. First, the view of perceived value as a cognitive vari- able is not enough, because it is necessary to incorporate the affective component. Second, Muslim tourist evaluates not only the traditional aspects of value (cognitive and affective components) but also the religious identity–related aspects that contribute to the value creation. This overall vision underlies the multidimensional approach to MTPV.
Research Methodology
Data Collection The generalizability of the study relied on the representative- ness of the respondents. Therefore, a representative selection of Muslim tourists was made from a database of Muslim tourists. Several International tourism organizations that are located in the United Kingdom, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates were contacted to give us access to their tourist database, of which three prominent ones accepted to give us such access. The three organizations have been reassured that only members of the research team will have access to the data they give and the completed questionnaire will not be made available to anyone other than the research team. A database of Muslim tourists has been made for data collec- tion purposes.
The criteria for selecting tourists to participate were sim- ple. First, the tourists had to be Muslims. Second, the tourists should have bought a tourism package during the last two years. Finally, the tourists had to come from different coun- tries. This technique resulted in a database of 6,454 Muslim tourists. A systematic random sampling method was used to
draw a sample of 1,000 tourists. A research packet contain- ing a covering letter and an anonymous (self-administering) questionnaire was e-mailed to the tourists; a web link of the online survey was also been given in the e-mail. Some respondents refused to participate in the study, in that we did not get any reply from them. Unfortunately, no information was available about the nonrespondents and so this source of nonsampling error cannot be controlled. A total of 571 respondents returned questionnaires, but 34 were omitted from analyses because of missing data, leaving a total of 537 useful responses, or a 55.59% overall response rate. This high response rate may be explained by two factors: first, the questionnaire was designed in such a way that it took only 15 minutes to be completed; second, attempts were made to contact each respondent up to five times via e-mails and phone calls before the person was dropped from the sample.
The sample was dominated by male respondents (65.2%), and this is normal because there are some restrictions in Islam that prevent women from traveling on her own. Furthermore, Islamic men are allowed to travel alone, they also make all of the travel decisions, and according to the Islamic culture it is not acceptable for a woman to give her e-mail address to a stranger. This might explain this result. In terms of age, most (75.4%) were younger than 45 years, and a few respondents (approximately 9.5%) were more than 55 years old. Approximately 73.2% of the respondents had at least some college education, with 35.6% having earned a postgraduate degree. With respect to the income level, 21.0% of the respondents reported a household income between $1,000 and $1,999 per month; 24.6% reported a household income between $2,000 and $3,999 per month, 17.3% reported a household income between $4,000 and $5,999 per month, and 17.5% reported a household income more than $6,000 per month. Finally, we have respondents from 30 dif- ferent countries, which include Algeria (1.8%), Bangladesh (3%), Egypt (12.1%), France (3%), India (2.4%), Indonesia (3.1%), Iran (1.4%), Iraq (3.2%), Ireland (2.3%), Jordan (4.0%), KSA (2.6%), Kuwait (3.1%), Lebanon, Libya (2.2%), Malaysia (3.2%), Morocco (3.1%), Oman (2.5%), Pakistan (2.3%), Palestine (2.4%), Qatar (3.1%), Singapore (2.6%), Spain (2.5%), Sudan (2.1%), Syria (2.5%), Tunisia (3%), Turkey (3.1%), United Arab Emirates (9.2%), United Kingdom (6.7%), United States (2.6%), and Yemen (2.4%).
Research Instrument Development—Measures We measured the six constructs (functional value [quality], functional value [price], emotional value, social value, Islamic physical attributes value, and Islamic nonphysical attributes value) by multiple-item scales adapted from previ- ous studies. All items were operationalized using a 5-point Likert-type scale.
Firstly, in conceptualizing the cognitive value (functional value), the original Sweeney and Soutar (2001) scale of cog- nitive value is used in this study. According to Sweeney and Soutar (2001), cognitive value is a dimension that consists
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
6 Journal of Travel Research
Table 2. Measure of Construct Reliability.
Constructs Number of Items Alpha
Qualitya 4 .901 Pricea 4 .868 Emotionalb 4 .934 Socialb 4 .899 Islamic physical
attributesc 4 .919
Islamic nonphysical attributesc
4 .955
a. Cognitive value. b. Affective value. c. Islamic value.
of two constructs—quality and price. Four 5-point Likert- type questions have been used to measure each one of the two. Second, in conceptualizing the affective value (Emotional), we follow Sanchez et al. (2006), defining it as a dimension that consists of two constructs—emotional value and social value—measured by four 5-point Likert- type questions. We borrowed or adapted these items from Gallarza and Saura (2006), Sanchez et al. (2006), and Sweeney and Soutar (2001).
Finally, in conceptualizing the Islamic value, the develop- ment of the research instrument was based mainly on new scales, because we could not identify any past studies directly addressing this construct. However, three main sources have been used for this purpose: the Qur’an (Islam’s holy book), Sunnah (teachings, guidance, and practices of Prophet Mohammad), and a thorough review of the literature in which the variable is used theoretically or empirically (Battour, Ismail, and Battor 2011; Eid 2007; Hashim, Murphy, and Hashim 2007; Laderlah et al. 2011; Stephenson, Russell, and Edgar 2010; Zamani-Farahani and Henderson 2010; Zamani-Farahani and Musa 2012). For example, stud- ies conducted by Battour, Ismail, and Battor (2011) identi- fied Islamic attributes of destinations that may attract Muslim tourists such as the inclusion of prayer facilities, Halal food, Islamic entertainment, Islamic dress codes, general Islamic morality, and the Islamic call to prayer. This study recom- mended that Islamic attributes of destination should be developed for the purpose of empirical research. Ozdemir and Met (2012) also argued that as Muslims typically observe a dress code and avoid free mixing, some hotels in Turkey offer separate swimming pool and recreational facilities for men and women. However, the three sources lead us to divide this dimension into two basic constructs—Islamic physical attribute value and Islamic nonphysical attribute value, which have been measured by four 5-point Likert-type questions.
Two consecutive rounds of pretesting were conducted in order to ensure that respondents could understand the mea- surement scales used in the study: first, the questionnaire was reviewed by five academic researchers experienced in questionnaire design and next, the questionnaire was piloted with four tourism experts known to the researchers. The pilot took the form of an interview where the participants were first handed a copy of the questionnaire and asked to com- plete it and then discuss any comments or questions they had. The outcome of the pretesting process was a slight modifica- tion and alteration of the existing scales, in light of the scales context under investigation.
Analysis and Results The evidence generated from the literature suggests that there are distinct aspects of value. This section discusses the process used to establish the content for these dimensions and to validate the scale psychometrically and theoretically. The process follows Churchill’s (1979) approach for
developing measures of multiple-item marketing constructs. After the development of an initial set of items, a scale puri- fication stage was undertaken.
Reliability Analysis First, the psychometric properties of the constructs were assessed by calculating the Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient and the items-to-total correlation (Nunnally and Bernstein 1994). These coefficients are represented for each of the constructs in Table 2. All scales have reliability coefficients ranging from 0.868 to 0.955, which exceed the cut-off level of 0.60 set for basic research (Nunnally 1978) and used by Eid and El-Gohary (2013) and El-Gohary (2012, 2010).
Exploratory Factor Analysis Next, it is also necessary to indicate that as recommended by Anderson and Gerbing (1988), prior to testing the full latent model, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using principal components analysis with varimax rotation. EFA yielded six distinct factors that accounted for 80.974% of the variance extracted (Table 3). All items loaded highly on their intended constructs.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Next, before building a model that will consider all the dimen- sions of value together, it is also important to highlight, from a methodological point of view, that individualized analyses of each of those dimensions will be made (the measurement model), in order to carry out a prior refinement of the items used in their measurement. Having established the six dimen- sions of the scale, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). For this research, we chose to use both the structural model (includes all the constructs in one model) and the mea- surement model (separate model for each construct).
First, as suggested by Bollen (1989), a null model—in which no factors were considered to underlie the observed variables, correlations between observed indicators were
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Eid and El-Gohary 7
zero, and the variances of the observed variables were not restricted—was tested against a series of models, namely, a one-factor model (suggesting that the observed variables represent a single value dimension), a three-factor model (in which price and quality are suggested to represent a single functional dimension rather than two dimensions, emotional and social values are suggested to represent a single emotional dimension rather than two dimensions, and Islamic physical attributes and Islamic nonphysical attributes are suggested to represent a single Islamic dimension rather than two dimensions), and a six-factor model (in which the dimensions are as proposed in the ear- lier discussion).
The results, shown in Table 4, support the proposed six- factor solution, comprising the quality, price, emotional, social, Islamic physical attribute, and Islamic nonphysical attribute value dimensions. Not only did this model have the lowest chi-square and highest adjusted goodness-of-fit index, but also the highest comparative fit index (CFI) and the low- est root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA).
Second, we used the measurement model (separate model for each construct) to assess the different proposed value dimensions. Thus, two dimensions have been
considered for cognitive value: the first referring to the quality of the tourism package and the second to the price of the tourism package. Similarly, two dimensions have been considered for formative value: the first referring to the emotional value of the tourism package and the second to the social value of the tourism package. Finally, two dimensions have been considered for Islamic value: the
Table 3. Results of Factor Analysis for Value Dimensions.
Value Dimensions
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6
The tourism package purchased was well organized .712 The quality of the tourism was maintained throughout. .737 The tourism package had an acceptable level of quality. .847 The tourism package purchased was well made .673 The tourism package was a good purchase for the price. .741 The tourism package purchased was reasonably priced. .745 The price was the main criterion for my decision. .769 The tourism package purchased was economical. .740 I am comfortable with the tourism package purchased. .751 I felt relaxed about the tourism package purchased. .810 The tourism package purchased gave me a positive feeling. .851 The tourism package purchased gave me pleasure. .826 The tourism package has helped me to feel acceptable. .737 The tourism package improved the way people perceive me. .832 The tourism package purchased gave me social approval. .809 Many people that I know purchased the tourism package. .733 Availability of prayer facilities. .826 Availability of halal food. .869 Availability of a copy of the Holy Qur’an in hotel room. .792 Availability of Shari’ah-compatible toilets. .849 Availability of segregated services. .901 Availability of Shari’ah-compatible television channels. .915 Availability of Shari’ah-compatible entertainment tools . .919 Availability of art that does not depict the human forms. .883 Initial eigenvalues 10.262 3.572 1.935 1.490 1.169 1.006 % of variance 42.758 14.882 8.061 6.210 4.869 4.192 Cumulative % 42.758 57.741 65.702 71.912 76.781 80.974
Table 4. Comparative Analysis of Models of Various Dimensionalities.
Model F2 DF AGFI CFI RMSEA
Null 6544.75 252 0.323 0.462 0.216 Three factors 4157.80 249 0.549 0.666 0.171 Six factors 1344.53 237 0.831 0.905 0.093
Statistic Suggested
AGFI t0.80 CFI t0.90 RMSEA d0.10
Note: DF = degree of freedom; AGFI = adjusted goodness-of-fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
8 Journal of Travel Research
first referring to the Islamic physical attributes of the tour- ism package and the second to the Islamic nonphysical attributes of the tourism package.
Cognitive Value of the Tourism Package: Quality With respect to the cognitive value of the tourism package, fundamentally it is the quality level of the different aspects of the tourism package that is measured (Table 5). Initially four items were considered. As a result of the CFA, it was found that the four items form a single factor, and furthermore the resulting model is adequate because the probability associ- ated with chi-square is greater than 0.05 (0.061), and the t value of the parameters obtained is always greater than 1.96. The scale is also reliable, the statistic of composite reliability that determines it taking the value 0.90 (Hair et al. 1998).
Cognitive Value of the Tourism Package: Price The second dimension relating to cognitive value is the price of the tourism package purchased. To measure it, four items were used (Table 5). The CFA determined that the four items were grouped into a single factor. The model grouping these items is adequate, the probability associated with chi-squared being greater than 0.01 (0.0311), and all the t values associ- ated with the parameters obtained in the model are greater than 1.96. Together with these results, the composite reli- ability of the factor cognitive value price of the tourism package is also ratified, attaining the value 0.867 (Hair et al. 1998).
Affective Value of the Tourism Package: Emotional With respect to the emotional value of the purchase, four items were used (Table 5) to measure it. The CFA deter- mined that the four items were grouped into a single factor. The resulting model is adequate, the probability associated with chi-square being greater than 0.01 (0.0316), and all the t values associated with the parameters obtained in the model are greater than 1.96. It is also necessary to indicate that the emotional value has composite reliability, which was deter- mined to be 0.935 (Hair et al. 1998).
Affective Value of the Tourism Package: Social The second dimension relating to affective value is the social value of the tourism package purchased. To measure, it four items were used (Table 5). The CFA determined that the four items were grouped into a single factor. The resulting model is adequate, the probability associated with chi-square being greater than 0.01 (0.020), and all the t values associated with the parameters obtained in the model are greater than 1.96. It is also necessary to indicate that the social value has compos- ite reliability, determined to be 0.899 (Hair et al. 1998).
Islamic Value of the Tourism Package: Physical Attributes With respect to the Islamic physical attribute value of the tourism package purchased, fundamentally it is the tangible attributes that make Shari’ah-compliant tourism products that is measured (Table 5). Initially, four items were consid- ered. As a result of the CFA, it was found that the four items form a single factor, and furthermore the resulting model was adequate because the probability associated with chi- square is greater than 0.01 (0.016), and the t value of the parameters obtained is always greater than 1.96. The scale is also reliable, the statistic of composite reliability that deter- mines it taking the value 0.919 (Hair et al. 1998).
Islamic Value of the Tourism Package: Nonphysical Attributes The last of the dimensions considered refers to the Islamic nonphysical attributes value. Similarly, it is the intangible attributes that make Shari’ah-compliant tourism products. To measure it, four items were used (Table 5). As a result of the CFA, it was found that the four items form a single fac- tor, and furthermore the resulting model is adequate because the probability associated with chi-square is greater than 0.01 (0.110), and the t value of the parameters obtained is always greater than 1.96. The scale is also reliable, the statis- tic of composite reliability that determines it taking the value 0.955 (Hair et al. 1998).
Convergent Validity Analysis Convergent validity describes the extent to which indicators of a specific construct converge or share a high proportion of variance (Hair et al. 2006). Convergent validity can be assessed by three criteria (Fornell and Larcker 1981; Hair et al. 2006; Čater and Čater 2010). First, factor loading for a item is at least 0.7 and significant. Second, construct reliabil- ity is a minimum of 0.7 (see Table 2). Finally, the average variance extracted (AVE) for a construct is larger than 0.5. Table 6 summarizes the results of the convergent validity analysis. Note that all of the scales had an acceptable conver- gent validity.
Discriminant Validity Analysis: Correlation matrix and square root of AVE were used to assess the discriminant validity of constructs. To meet the requirements for satisfactory discriminant validity, the square root of AVE of each construct should be higher than the correlations between any combinations among any two pairs of constructs in the model as recommended by Fornell and Larcker (1981). This indicates that each construct should share more variance with its items than it shares with other constructs. Table 7 shows that the variances extracted by the
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Eid and El-Gohary 9
Table 5. Cognitive Value of the Different Attributes.
Quality The tourism package purchased was well organized .828 (fixed) The quality of the tourism was maintained throughout. .861 (15.22) The tourism package had an acceptable level of quality. .859 (14.61) The tourism package purchased was well made .785 (13.66) Fit of the model F2 = 18.572; d = 2; p = 0.061;
RMSEA = 0.086; GFI = 0.98; AGFI = 0.91 Composite reliability = 0.90 Price The tourism package was a good purchase for the price. .828 (fixed) The tourism package purchased was reasonably priced. .855 (22.187) The price was the main criterion for my decision. .703 (17.045) The tourism package purchased was economical. .760 (18.244) Fit of the model F2 = 45.962; d = 2; p = 0.0311;
RMSEA = 0.087; GFI = 0.962; AGFI = 0.811 Composite reliability = 0.867 Emotional value I am comfortable with the tourism package purchased. .873 (fixed) I felt relaxed about the tourism package purchased. .898(20.82) The tourism package purchased gave me a positive feeling. .901 (20.20) The tourism package purchased gave me pleasure. .868 (19.56) Fit of the model F2 = 47.577; d = 2; p = 0.0316;
RMSEA = 0.076; GFI = 0.957; AGFI = 0.818 Composite reliability = 0.935 Social value The tourism package has helped me to feel acceptable. .839 (fixed) The tourism package improved the way people perceive me. .902 (20.82) The tourism package purchased gave me social approval. .898 (20.20) Many people that I know purchased the tourism package. .747 (19.56) Fit of the model F2 = 33.341; d = 2; p = 0.0201;
RMSEA = 0.087; GFI = 0.969; AGFI = 0.845 Composite reliability = 0.899 Physical attributes Availability of prayer facilities. .837 (fixed) Availability of Halal food. .893 (18.61) Availability of a copy of the Holy Qur’an in hotel room. .848 (16.28) Availability of Shari’ah-compatible toilets. .864 (16.10) Fit of the model F2 = 31.836; d = 2; p = 0.016;
RMSEA = 0.016; GFI = 0.974; AGFI = 0.868 Composite reliability = 0.919 Nonphysical attributes Availability of segregated services. .890 (fixed) Availability of Shari’ah-compatible television channels. .925 (24.75) Availability of Shari’ah-compatible entertainment tools. .949 (27.03) Availability of art that does not depict the human forms. .907 (23.62) Fit of the model F2 = 8.957; d = 2; p = 0.11;
RMSEA = 0.081; GFI = 0.992; AGFI = 0.960 Composite reliability = 0.955
Note: The t values of each parameter are in parentheses. DF = degree of freedom; GFI = goodness-of-fit index; AGFI = adjusted goodness-of-fit index; CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
10 Journal of Travel Research
Table 6. Convergent Validity Results.
Constructs Composite Reliability
Average Variance Extracted
Quality 0.900 0.694 Price 0.867 0.620 Emotional 0.935 0.783 Social 0.899 0.719 Islamic physical attributes 0.919 0.740 Islamic nonphysical attributes 0.955 0.842
six constructs (AVEs) were greater than any squared correla- tion among constructs (the factor scores as single-item indi- cators have been used to calculate the between-constructs correlations); this implied that constructs were empirically distinct, confirming the discriminant validity of those four constructs.
Correlation among the Constructs One of the main objectives of this study is to set a valid struc- ture for the MTPV constructs and to carry out an initial investigation of the relationship, if any, among these con- structs. According to this research, there are six constructs constituting the MTPV model. First of all, it is clearly noted that all of the correlations among the constructs of the MTPV are positive and significant (see Table 7). These significant positive correlations also have major implications for mar- keting and tourism research, as they suggest that the MTPV constructs should be implemented holistically rather than piecemeal to get better MTPV.
Discussion and Implications The purpose of this article was to (1) identify MTPV con- structs and develop scales for measuring these constructs and (2) carry out an initial investigation of the relationship, if any, among the MTPV constructs.
The present research was an attempt to explore the MTPV dimensions of a tourism consumption experience, in relation to previous consumer and tourism research. This study makes a number of contributions to the study of customer value. Previous studies mostly examined absolute customer value from the customer’s perspective. There has been little empirical research that examines customer value from the perspectives of the Muslim customers. In service industries, such as tourism, the consumption experience is intangible, dynamic, and subjective (Bolton and Drew 1991; Havlena and Holbrook 1986; Jayanti and Ghosh 1996; Sweeney and Soutar 2001) and therefore it is not acceptable to assume that the dimensions of value are applicable to different customers and cultures.
The reliabilities, factor structure, and validity tests indi- cate that the 24-item MTPV scale and its six dimensions have sound and stable psychometric properties. The scale
demonstrates that Muslim consumers assess products not just in functional terms of expected quality of the tourism product, price of the tourism product, the enjoyment deliv- ered from the tourism product (emotional value), and what the tourism product communicates to others (social value) but also in terms of providing tangible attributes that result from the delivery of Shari’ah-compliant tourism products such as Halal food (Islamic physical attributes value) and the availability of Shari’ah-compatible art, fun, and entertain- ment tools (Islamic nonphysical attributes value).
A Muslim tourist’s decision should not be seen from a purely rational point of view. The experiential view pro- vides new keys to the valuation made by Muslim tourists and therefore to the most important attributes that will later affect their buying behavior. Cognitive elements (quality and price) and affective elements (emotions and social rec- ognition) play a fundamental role but it would not be pos- sible to understand the behavior of Muslim tourists without incorporating the Islamic attributes into the study. The availability of such Islamic attributes (physical and non- physical) are considered very important when a Muslim decides to buy a tourism product. Therefore, the Muslim tourists may not select a particular tourism product based on the absence of such attributes (Battour, Ismail, and Battor 2011). Islamic attributes represent the availability of Islamic norms and practices that are relevant to tourism at the destination.
From a theoretical point of view, therefore, this study supports the experiential view proposed by Holbrook and Hirschman (1982). This means that the cognitive, affective, and Islamic attribute components play a fundamental role in explaining the purchase and consumption behaviors of the Muslim tourist. In the specific case of the perceived value variable, cognitive, affective, and Islamic attribute compo- nents have been identified. The cognitive components are related to the traditional view of perceived value, as being a comparison between “getting” (through perceived quality) and “giving” (through the price). The affective components are centered on the internal feelings generated by the experi- ence of purchase and consumption and by the repercussions in the consumer’s social environment (Sanchez et al. 2006). The Islamic attribute components are related to the develop- ment of Islamic-oriented tourism products as the absence of Islamic attributes at the destination may be a source of worry to themselves and those with whom they interact (Syed 2001).
With regard to the business implications, recognition of the importance of the different dimensions of MTPV should enable tourism and hospitality companies to develop more sophisticated positioning strategies. Our results show the importance of Islamic physical attribute and Islamic non- physical attribute values on Muslim consumers’ willing- ness to buy a tourism product normally considered as functionally and affectively oriented. This has substantial implications for marketing strategies. For example, tourism and hospitality companies should develop a hospitality and
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Eid and El-Gohary 11
tourism market that represents Shari’ah-compliant tourism products. Such initiatives illustrate the potential tourism companies have in establishing and developing forms of hospitality and tourism grounded in principles and behav- ioral codes that represent national society and culture. Tourism and hospitality institutions can improve the chance of their selection by identifying and marketing their ability to meet the Muslim tourist needs.
An additional implication was related to the urgent need for tourism organizations to readdress its hospitality and tourism products in association with culturally oriented par- ticularities and distinctions. Such innovation requires invest- ment in product development, research, and marketing, which was integral to a broader trend that ought to consider Islam as a cultural philosophy. Merging elements of the con- servative Islamic lifestyle with the modern tourism industry could present new tourism options and spheres (Al-Hamarneh and Steiner 2004).
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research As with any study, there are certain limitations that should be recognized. First, we assessed MTPV using only six con- structs; quality, price, emotional, social, Islamic physical attributes, and Islamic nonphysical attributes, while there is evidence that MTPV is a much broader construct that might include reputation (Nasution and Mavondo 2008), aesthetics (Gallarza and Saura 2006), and religiosity (Zamani-Farahani and Musa 2012). Second, the data are cross-sectional in nature and hence it is not possible to determine causal rela- tionships. Finally, while the sample size and the approach to data analysis indicate that our findings are robust, there is always a lingering question as to whether these results are generalizable or are specific to the participants’ countries. We believe that although the current sample is big and diverse enough and our findings may be representative of Muslim tourists, we urge other researchers to replicate the study and get replies from different countries and especially to use the measures developed in this study to test the mea- sures’ robustness.
The direction for future research, as derived from our findings, is to improve our understanding of the MTPV in other types of business. For example, each MTPV dis- cussed in this study warrants more in-depth study in other services industries such as banking and insurance. Given the importance associated with the MTPV, a potentially fruitful area would be to develop the quantification of MTPV into an “index of practice” so that tourism compa- nies could determine the level of performance on a time- based approach. The results from an audit, with regard to the index, could pinpoint areas that need attention and improvement.
Future research may choose to focus on one or more of the Islamic attributes to generate an in-depth knowledge to inform both theoretical and practical applications. Researchers could use these factors to assess the success of tourism companies in attracting Muslim tourism. On the other hand, the MTPV measurement must be sub- jected to review, critique, and discussion for an extended period before getting general acceptance. Additional items might be tried in each category. Finally, different constructs could be tried to measure the MTPV effect. To this end, a very promising research approach is to study the sequences of MTPV for the tourists’ postpurchase behaviors. More specifically, we suggest analyzing the causal relationship between perceived value and satisfac- tion and loyalty.
Acknowledgment The authors sincerely thank the editor and the anonymous JTR reviewers for their constructive and valuable comments and suggestions.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author- ship, and/or publication of this article.
Table 7. Discriminant Validity Results.
Correlations Quality Price Emotional Social Islamic physical attribute Islamic nonphysical attributes
Quality .833 Price .585** .787 Emotional .671** .626** .884 Social .625** .535** .546** .847 Islamic physical
attributes .451** .359** .376** .447** .860
Islamic nonphysical attributes
.158* .20** .208** .333** .438** .917
Note: The diagonals represent the average variance extracted (AVE) and the lower cells represent the squared correlation among constructs.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
12 Journal of Travel Research
References
Al-Hamarneh, A., and C. Steiner. (2004). “Islamic Tourism: Rethinking the Strategies of Tourism Development in the Arab World after September 11, 2001.” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 24 (1): 173-82.
Al-Sabbahy, H., Y. Ekinci, and M. Riley. (2004). “An Investigation of Perceived Value Dimensions: Implications for Hospitality Research.” Journal of Travel Research, 42 (3): 226-34.
Anderson, J. C., and Gerbing, D. W. (1988). “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-step Approach.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(3): 411-423.
Battour, M. M., M. N. Ismail, and M. Battor. (2011). “The Impact of Destination Attributes on Muslim Tourist’s Choice.” International Journal of Tourism Research, 13 (6): 527-40.
Benkenstein, M., U. Yavas, and D. Forberger. (2003). “Emotional and Cognitive Antecedents of Customer Satisfaction in Leisure Services: The Case of Rostock Zoo.” Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 10 (3/4): 173-84.
Bigne, E., L. Andreu, I. Kuster, and A. Blesa. (2005). “Quality Market Orientation: Tourist Agencies’ Perceived Effects.” Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (4): 1022-38.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: John Wiley.
Bolton, R. N., and J. H. Drew. (1991). “A Multistage Model of Customers’ Assessments of Service Quality and Value.” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (4): 375-84.
Bradley, G. L., and B. A. Sparks. (2012). “Antecedents and Consequences of Consumer Value: A Longitudinal Study of Timeshare Owners.” Journal of Travel Research, 51 (2): 191-204.
Čater, T., and B. Čater. (2010). “Product and Relationship Quality Influence on Customer Commitment and Loyalty in B2B Manufacturing Relationships.” Industrial Marketing Management, 39 (8): 1321-33.
Choi, T. Y., and R. Chu. (2001). “Determinants of Hotel Guests’ Satisfaction and Repeat Patronage in the Hong Kong Hotel Industry.” International Journal of Hospitality Management, 20 (3): 277-97.
Churchill, G. A. Jr. (1979). “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs.” Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (1): 64–73.
De Ruyter, J. K., M. Wetzels, J. Lemmink, and J. Mattson. (1997). “The Dynamics of the Service Delivery Process: A Value- Based Approach.” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14 (3): 231-43.
Donner, F. M. (2004). “Expansion.” In Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World (Vol. 1), edited by R. C. Martin. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, pp. 239-45.
Dumond, E. J. (2000). “Value Management: And Underlying Framework.” International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 20 (9): 1062-77.
Dumand, T., and A. S. Mattila. (2005). “The Role of Affective Factors on Perceived Cruise Vacation Value.” Tourism Management, 26 (3): 311-23.
Eid, R. (2007). “Toward a Successful CRM Implementation in banks: An Integrated Model.” The Service Industries Journal, 27 (8): 1021-39.
Eid, R. (2012). “Towards a High-Quality Religious Tourism Marketing: The Case of Hajj Service in Saudi Arabia.” Tourism Analysis, 17 (4): 509-22.
Eid, R., and H. El-Gohary. (2013). “The Impact of E-marketing Use on Small Business Enterprises’ Marketing Success: The Case of UK Companies.” Service Industries Journal, 33 (1): 31-50.
El-Gohary, H. (2010). “Expanding TAM and IDT to Understand the Adoption of E-marketing by Small Business Enterprises.” International Journal of Customer Relationship Marketing and Management, 1 (3): 56-75.
El-Gohary, H. (2012). “Factors Affecting E-marketing Adoption and Implementation in Tourism Firms: An Empirical Investigation of Egyptian Small Tourism Organizations.” Tourism Management, 33 (5): 1256-69.
Essoo, N., and S. Dibb. (2004). “Religious Influences on Shopping Behaviour: An Exploratory Study.” Journal of Marketing Management, 20 (7): 683-712.
Fornell, C., and D. Larcker. (1981). “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.” Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1): 39-50.
Gallarza, M., and I. Saura. (2006). “Value Dimensions, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Loyalty: An Investigation of University Students’ Travel Behavior.” Tourism Management, 27 (3): 437-52.
Gardiner, S., C. King, and D. Grace. (2013). “Travel Decision Making: An Empirical Examination of Generational Values, Attitudes, and Intentions.” Journal of Travel Research, 52 (3): 310-24.
Hair, J. F. Jr., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham, and W. C. Black. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hair, J., B. Black, B. Babin, A. Ralph, and T. Ronald. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th edition. London: Prentice Hall.
Hashim, N. H., J. Murphy, and N. M. Hashim. (2007). “Islam and Online Imagery on Malaysian Tourist Destination Websites.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12 (3): 1082-102.
Havlena, W. J., and M. B. Holbrook. (1986). “The Varieties of Consumption Experience: Comparing Two Typologies of Emotion in Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (3): 394-404.
Haywood, K. M. (1983). “Assessing the Quality of Hospitality Services.” International Journal Hospitality Management, 2 (4): 165-77.
Heeler, R. M., A. Nguyen, and C. Buff. (2007). “Bundles = Discount? Revisiting Complex Theories of Bundle Effects.” Journal of Product & Brand Management, 16 (7): 492-500.
Henderson, J. C. (2008). “Representations of Islam in Official Tourism Promotion.” Tourism Culture and Communication, 8 (3): 135-45.
Henderson, J. C. (2010). “Sharia-Compliant Hotels.” Tourism & Hospitality Research, 10 (3): 246-54.
Henderson, J. C. (2011). “Religious Tourism and Its Management: The Hajj in Saudi Arabia.” International Journal of Tourism Research, 13 (6): 541-52.
Hodge, D. R. (2002). “Working with Muslim Youths: Understanding the Values and Beliefs of Islamic Discourse.” Children & Schools, 24 (1): 6-20.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Eid and El-Gohary 13
Holbrook, M. B., and E. Hirschman. (1982). “The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun.” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (2): 132-40.
Holbrook, M. B. (1994). “The Nature of Consumer Value.” In Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice, edited by R. T. Rust and R. L. Oliver. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Jafari, J., and N. Scott. (2013). “Muslim World and Its Tourisms.” Annals of Tourism Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. annals.2013.08.011
Jayanti, R. K., and A. K. Ghosh. (1996). “Service Value Determination: An Integrative Perspective.” Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 34 (4): 5-25.
Laderlah, S., S. Ab Rahman, K. Awang, and Y. Man. (2011). “A Study on Islamic Tourism: A Malaysian Experience.” In 2nd International Conference on Humanities, Historical and Social Sciences IPEDR, vol. 17. Singapore: IACSIT Press.
Lee, J. S., C. K. Lee, and Y. Choi. (2011). “Examining the Role of Emotional and Functional Values in Festival Evaluation.” Journal of Travel Research, 50 (6): 685-96.
Lusch, R., and S. Vargo. (2011). “Viewpoint Service-Dominant Logic: A Necessary Step.” European Journal of Marketing, 45 (7/8): 1298-309.
Meng, F., Y. Tepanon, and M. Uysal. (2008). “Measuring Tourist Satisfaction by Attribute and Motivation: The Case of a Nature- Based Resort.” Journal of Vacation Marketing, 14 (1): 41-56.
Muslim population worldwide. (2013). “Muslim Population in the World.” http://www.islamicpopulation.com/ (accessed January 23, 2013).
Nasution, H., and F. Mavondo. (2008). “Customer Value in the Hotel Industry: What Managers Believe They Deliver and What Customer Experience.” International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27 (2): 204-13.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw- Hill.
Nunnally, J., and I. H. Bernstein. (1994). Psychometric Theory, 3rd edition. London: McGraw-Hill.
Oh, H. (2003). “Price Fairness and Its Asymmetric Effects on Overall Price, Quality, and Value Judgments: The Case of an Upscale Hotel.” Tourism Management, 24 (4): 241-49.
Ozdemir, I., and O. Met. (2012). “The Expectations of Muslim Religious Customers in the Lodging Industry: The Case of Turkey.” In Current Issues in Hospitality and Tourism Research and Innovation, edited by A. Zainal, S. Radzi, R. Hashim, C. Chik, and R. Abu. London: Taylor & Francis, pp. 323-28.
Peterson, R. A. (1995). “Relationship Marketing and the Consumer.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23 (4): 278-81.
Petrick, J. F. (2002). “Experience Use History as a Segmentation Tool to Examine Golf Travelers’ Satisfaction, Perceived Value and Repurchase Intentions.” Journal of Vacation Marketing, 8 (4): 332-42.
Prebensen, N., E. Woo, J. Chen, and M. Uysal. (2013). “Motivation and Involvement as Antecedents of the Perceived Value of the Destination Experience.” Journal of Travel Research, 52 (2): 253-64.
Ravald, A., and C. Gronroos. (1996). “The Value Concept and Relationship Marketing.” European Journal of Marketing, 30 (2): 19-30.
Robertson, R. (1994). “Globalization or Glocalization?” Journal of International Communication, 1:33-52.
Roig, F., J. Carlos, J. Sanchez, M. Tena, and M. Angel. (2009). “Perceived Value and Customer Loyalty in Financial Services.” Service Industries Journal, 29 (6): 775-89.
Rust, T., V. Zeithaml, and K. Lemmon. (2000). Driving Customer Equity. New York: Free Press.
Salazar, N. (2005). “Tourism and Glocalization: ‘Local’ Tour Guiding.” Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (3): 628-46.
Sanchez, J., J. Callarisa, M. Rodriguez, and A. Moliner. (2006). “Perceived Value of the Purchase of a Tourism Product.” Tourism Management, 27 (4): 394-409.
Scott, N., and J. Jafari. (2010). Bridging Tourism Theory and Practice: Tourism in the Muslim World, Vol 2. Bradford, UK: Emerald.
Sonmez, S. (2001). “Tourism behind the Veil of Tourism: Women and Development in the Middle East.” In Women as Producers and Consumers of Tourism in Developing Regions, edited by Y. Apostolopoulos, S. Sonmez, and D. J. Timothy. Westport: Praeger, pp. 113-42.
Stephenson, L., K. Russell, and D. Edgar. (2010). “Islamic Hospitality in the UAE: Indigenization of Products and Human Capital.” Journal of Islamic Marketing, 1 (1): 9-24.
Sweeney, J. C., and G. Soutar. (2001). “Consumer Perceived Value: The Development of Multiple Item Scale.” Journal of Retailing, 77 (2): 203-20.
Sweeney, J. C., G. N. Soutar, and L. W. Johnson. (1999). “The Role of Perceived Risk in the Quality–Value Relationship: A Study in a Retail Environment.” Journal of Retailing, 75 (1): 77-105.
Syed, O. A. (2001). “Catering to the Needs of Muslim Travelers.” Paper presented at the Second Conference of Ministers from Muslim Countries, “Tourism: Challenges and Opportunities,” Kuala Lumpur, October 10–13.
Tanford, S., S. Baloglu, and M. Erdem. (2012). “Travel Packaging on the Internet: The Impact of Pricing Information and Perceived Value on Consumer Choice.” Journal of Travel Research, 51 (1): 68-80.
Timothy, D., and D. H. Olsen. (2006). Tourism, Religion and Spiritual Journeys. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Vargo, S. (2009). “Toward a Transcending Conceptualization of Relationship: A Service-Dominant Logic Perspective.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 24 (5/6): 373-79.
Weidenfeld, A., and A. Ron. (2008). “Religious Needs in the Tourism Industry.”Anatolia, 19 (2): 18-22.
Weinstein, A., and W. C. Johnson. (1999). Designing and Delivering Superior Customer Value: Concepts, Cases, and Applications. Boca Raton, FL: St. Lucie Press.
Woodruff, B. R. (1997). “Customer Value: The Next Source for Competitive Advantage.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25 (2): 139-53.
Zamani-Farahani, H., and J. C. Henderson. (2010). “Islamic Tourism and Managing Tourism Development in Islamic Societies: The Cases of Iran and Saudi Arabia.” International Journal of Tourism Research, 12 (1): 79-89.
Zamani-Farahani, H., and G. Musa. (2012). “The Relationship between Islamic Religiosity and Residents’ Perceptions of Socio-cultural Impacts of Tourism in Iran: Case Studies of Sare’in and Masooleh.” Journal of Tourism Management, 33 (4): 802-14.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
14 Journal of Travel Research
Author Biographies Riyad Eid is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the United Arab Emirates University, UAE and Tanta University, Faculty of Commerce, Tanta, Egypt. His research Interests include Internet mar- keting, Customer Relationship Marketing (CRM), service quality, cus- tomer value within the services industry and Islamic Tourism Marketing.
Hatem El-Gohary is a reader in marketing, Birmingham City University Business School, UK and Cairo University, Faculty of Commerce, Cairo, Egypt. His research interest include: Electronic Marketing, Electronic Business, Electronic Commerce, Internet Marketing and Small Business Enterprises and Islamic tourism Marketing.
at U.A.E University on May 5, 2014jtr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Get help from top-rated tutors in any subject.
Efficiently complete your homework and academic assignments by getting help from the experts at homeworkarchive.com