Exploring the impact of functional, symbolic, and experiential image on approach behaviors among state-park tourists from India, Korea, and the USA

The study addresses how dimensions of state park brand image (functional, symbolic, experiential) shape visitors’ emotions (pleasure and arousal), how these emotions relate to place attachment (operationalized as place identity), and how place identity drives revisit intentions. It further investigates whether national culture moderates these relationships. Motivated by the substantial economic and social roles of state/national parks and a relative paucity of marketing-focused research in this context, the study aims to inform destination branding and visitor retention strategies. The three objectives are: (1) examine effects of functional, symbolic, and experiential images on pleasure and arousal; (2) assess effects of pleasure and arousal on place identity; (3) test the moderating effects of national culture (India, Korea, USA) on the relationships among brand image, emotions, place identity, and revisit intention.

Brand image is conceptualized following Brand Concept Management as comprising functional, symbolic, and experiential dimensions that map to consumer needs. In tourism, destination image includes cognitive, affective, and conative elements; however, affective aspects are underexplored, particularly for state parks. Functional image addresses utilitarian problem-solving and value-in-use activities; symbolic image fulfills ego/self-identity; experiential image delivers sensory stimulation, rejuvenation, and variety. Emotions are framed by the Mehrabian–Russell model with two primary dimensions—pleasure and arousal—that mediate environmental stimuli and approach/avoidance behavior. Place attachment is treated here as place identity (symbolic/emotional bond integrating place into self-concept), excluding place dependence due to the study’s focus. The study posits nine hypotheses: H1–H3 (functional, symbolic, experiential images → pleasure), H4–H6 (functional, symbolic, experiential images → arousal), H7–H8 (pleasure, arousal → place identity), H9 (place identity → revisit intention). National culture, defined by Hofstede’s six dimensions (power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, long-term orientation, indulgence), is proposed to moderate these links (H10a–i). India, Korea, and the USA were selected for contrasting cultural profiles (Table 1 in paper).

Design and measures: A cross-sectional online survey using validated multi-item scales from consumer behavior, hospitality, tourism, and marketing literature. Constructs and items (5-point Likert, 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree): brand image with three dimensions—functional image (5 items), symbolic image (3), experiential image (4); emotions with two dimensions—pleasure and arousal (6 items total); place attachment assessed as place identity (2 items); revisit intention (3 items). The instrument was expert-reviewed and pre-tested; minor wording refinements were made, demographics added, and the survey was translated into Korean via expert translation. Sampling and data collection: Purposeful sampling in India, Korea, and the USA via social media (LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram) and email networks. Inclusion criteria: age ≥18 and at least one visit to a state park or similar outdoor location within the past three years. Data were collected over ~10 months (2020–2021). From 1,400 responses, 812 were usable: India n=191/550; USA n=404/550; Korea n=217/290. Respondents were broadly distributed across gender, age (median 20–49), education, and income levels. Data quality and analysis: Confirmatory factor analysis (maximum likelihood) indicated acceptable fit: χ2=1013.050, df=246, p<0.001; χ2/df=4.118; CFI=0.925; TLI=0.908; NFI=0.904; RMSEA=0.062. Convergent validity and reliability were supported (CR=0.782–0.939; AVE=0.547–0.838). Discriminant validity was evidenced as AVE exceeded squared inter-construct correlations. Hypotheses H1–H9 were tested via multiple regression (SPSS 22). Moderation by national culture (H10a–i) was examined using hierarchical moderated regression following Baron and Kenny procedures, comparing effects across the USA, India, and Korea.

- Image → emotions: Functional image did not significantly affect pleasure (H1: β=0.048, p>0.05). Symbolic (H2: β=0.131, p<0.01) and experiential (H3: β=0.389, p<0.01) images positively affected pleasure. All three images positively affected arousal (H4: FI β=0.169, p<0.01; H5: SI β=0.082, p<0.05; H6: EI β=0.440, p<0.01). - Emotions → place identity: Pleasure (H7: β=0.289, p<0.01) and arousal (H8: β=0.308, p<0.01) positively affected place identity. - Place identity → revisit intention: H9 supported (β=0.469, p<0.01). - Variance explained: R² for pleasure=0.263; arousal=0.383; place identity=0.295; revisit intention=0.220. - CFA evidence: CR=0.782–0.939; AVE=0.547–0.838; fit indices acceptable (CFI=0.925; RMSEA=0.062). - Moderation by national culture (partial support of H10a–i): • FI→Pleasure moderated: India negative (predictor*moderator=−0.546, ΔR²=0.006, p<0.01); Korea positive (0.579, ΔR²=0.010, p<0.01); USA ns. • SI→Pleasure: Korea positive (0.259, ΔR²=0.002, p<0.01); India/USA ns. • FI→Arousal: India negative (−0.457, ΔR²=0.004, p<0.01); Korea positive (0.318, ΔR²=0.003, p<0.01); USA ns. • SI→Arousal: USA positive (0.551, ΔR²=0.007, p<0.01); India/Korea ns. • EI→Arousal: India negative (−0.505, ΔR²=0.006, p<0.01); USA/Korea ns. • Place identity→Revisit intention: Korea positive (0.331, ΔR²=0.006, p<0.01); India/USA ns. Overall, H2–H9 were accepted and H1 was rejected; H10 received partial support across relationships and countries.

Findings corroborate a sequential pathway whereby symbolic and experiential images elicit positive emotions (pleasure, arousal), which enhance place identity and subsequently drive revisit intentions. Functional image contributes to arousal but not to pleasure in this context, suggesting state park visitors’ evaluative focus on experiential and symbolic value rather than utilitarian aspects when forming hedonic appraisals. The moderating analyses show culture-contingent differences: for example, Korean cultural context strengthens links from functional and symbolic images to emotions and from place identity to revisit intention; US culture strengthens the symbolic image–arousal link; Indian culture weakens certain image–emotion links, particularly experiential image–arousal. These patterns align with Hofstede profiles (e.g., collectivism and long-term orientation in Korea; high individualism and indulgence in the USA; lower uncertainty avoidance and moderate masculinity/individualism in India). Practically, state park managers should tailor branding: emphasize peacefulness, social bonding, sustainability, and heritage for Korean visitors; highlight uniqueness, adventure, challenge, and achievement for US visitors; and stress usefulness or tangible benefits for Indian visitors, while enhancing experiential and symbolic cues to build emotional responses and attachment.

The study advances state park marketing by integrating brand image dimensions, emotional responses, place identity, and revisit intention within a cross-cultural framework. It demonstrates that symbolic and experiential images are pivotal in eliciting emotions that foster attachment and revisitation, and that national culture differentially moderates key relationships. This first-of-its-kind cross-national analysis in the state park context provides actionable guidance for culturally attuned branding and visitor retention strategies. Future research should broaden country coverage, measure cultural orientations directly (e.g., Schwartz, GLOBE), incorporate multidimensional place attachment (including place dependence), and use probability sampling to enhance generalizability.

- Sample representativeness: Convenience/purposeful sampling via social media and email across three countries limits generalizability; the sample is delimited and not representative of all tourists in India, Korea, and the USA. - Cultural measurement: National culture was inferred from Hofstede indices; no direct cultural measures were collected, making interpretations partly inferential. Alternative frameworks (Schwartz’s values, GLOBE) could be included in future work. - Construct scope: Place attachment was operationalized only as place identity, excluding place dependence. - Context and design: Post-visit, cross-sectional self-reports during 2020–2021 (pandemic period) may affect intentions; scenario assumptions relied on at-least-one recent visit. - Sampling frame/platforms: Reliance on specific social media channels; probability sampling is recommended in future studies; expansion to additional countries/parks is suggested.