American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking ISSN (E): 2832-8078 Volume 5, | Oct., 2022 P a g e | 66 www.americanjournal.org CORRELATE OF DESTINATION ACCESSIBILITY, LEISURE TOURISTS’ SATISFACTION AND REVISIT INTENTION IN AKWA-IBOM STATE, SOUTH-SOUTH NIGERIA *ETUK, Joseph Sunday1 ANOSIKE, Ugochukwu Miracle2 1 Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Faculty of Management Sciences, Universityof Port Harcourt, Choba, Rivers State, Nigeria. 2 Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Federal University, Oye-Ekiti, Ekiti State, Nigeria. *Author for correspondence Email: joseph.etuk@uniport.edu.ng A B S T R A C T K E Y W O R D S It has been argued that travelling in Nigeria is travail, and poor access to tourist sites accounts significantly for the dismal tourism performance in some states and regions in Nigeria. Therefore, this study was carried out to empirically ascertain destination accessibility and tourists’ satisfaction in Akwa-Ibom State, South-South Nigeria. To carry out the study, a survey method was adopted whereby primary data were obtained from 306 respondents through the questionnaire method. Descriptive and univariate analysis was done using simple percentages, mean score, standard deviation while the Pearson Product Moment Correlation technique was deployed for hypotheses testing. The analyzed data revealed that destination accessibility was strongly positively correlated with tourists’ satisfaction and revisit intention, but the correlation was insignificant. This implies that tourists were impressed by the accessibility system of Akwa-Ibom, even to the tourists’ sites, however, their total experience at the tourist sites was not satisfactory due to unavailability of adequate modern facilities. The recommended the provision of adequate facilities by the tourist sites’ management for visitors’ fun and relaxation and revisit intention. Destination accessibility, tourists’ satisfaction, revisit intention Introduction In the traditional marketing literature, production is incomplete until the products/services are accessible to the consumer at the right time, at the right place and in the right quantity, thereby creating marketing utility (Ekeke, 2021). In the same vein, tourism marketing literature recognizes that a memorable tourism experience would be impossible without an effective and efficient American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 67 www.americanjournal.org destination accessibility system that delivers tourist satisfaction at the right time and in safety, too (Marinao, 2017). Accordingly, the concept of time and place utilities which confer value to products and services in the traditional marketing domain, has been broadened and entrenched in the tourism marketing literature, though with different semantics and nomenclatures such as accessibility, distribution, transportation and connectivity. Viewed from the tourism marketing context, accessibility refers to the ease with which tourists or visitors move from one destination to another destination, usually through the means of transportation and other supporting or related infrastructural facilities (Unanam, 2021). Specifically, accessibility of a destination refers to infrastructural facilities such as roads, airports and railways as well as transportation systems and modes that ease traveller’s movement to a destination (Chahal & Devi, 2015). Consequently, the role of accessibility in tourism development cannot be over-emphasized. This is because the concept of tourism implies activities that involve the movement of people from one destination to another. The purpose of such movement may be leisure/relaxation, medical, educational, religious pilgrimages, business or sport activities (Page & Connel, 2006). The touring business or activity, therefore, implies the availability or existence of good road network, road-worthy vehicles, rail transport and terminals, air transport with good airport facilities and services and favourable visa regime (Chao et al, 2013). Therefore, an effective and efficient destination accessibility system can contribute to tourists’ satisfaction with attendant positive outcomes such as repeat visits and referrals and related socio-economic benefits through increased tourist arrivals, tourist spending. Optimizing tourist satisfaction for repeat visits and referrals, therefore, becomes a task for destination recreational organizations since business success depends not just on customers’ acquisition but also on customers’ retention. In this regard, tourism marketers contend that the quality of accessibility can make or mar a destination with attendant negative consequences. It is for this purpose that forward-thinking governments place high premium on the development of transportation infrastructure and system to support tourism development. Destination marketers recognize that tourism growth and indeed economic development would be freely limited in a country that is characterized by accessibility deficits whether by air, sea or land (Akubo,2016). In cognizance of its importance, tourism destination accessibility has stimulated empirical and conceptual interest among, scholars in many developed and developing economies (Buhalis, 2000; Bello & Bello, 2017,). In the same vein, many extant studies show a correlation between accessibility and positive outcomes in customer satisfaction, repeat business, increased revenue, increased profit in other organizational context (Bagil, 2014). Furthermore, current destination marketing studies show a correlation between accessibility and tourist experience and behavior (Ekeke & Ndu). However, knowledge is lacking in the literature regarding the role of accessibility in domestic tourism development through tourist satisfaction and revisit intention in Nigeria. In fact, it has been argued that poor access to tourist destinations accounts significantly for the dismal tourism performance in some states and regions in Nigeria. However, the extent to which this postulation pertains to the Akwa-Ibom State needs to be empirically verified. In the light of the above, this study was carried out to investigate destination accessibility and its correlation with tourism destination performance in Nigeria through tourist satisfaction and revisit American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 68 www.americanjournal.org intention, focusing our empirically searchlight on some tourist sites in Akwa Ibom State, South- South, Nigeria. 2. Literature Review 2.1 Theoretical Foundation This paper draws on the disconfirmation of expectations theory to understand the mechanics of accessibility and leisure tourists’ satisfaction in a destination performance context. The Disconfirmation of Expectations Theory The theory which was propounded by Oliver (1980), states that consumers purchase goods and services with pre-purchase expectations about the anticipated performance. The expectation level then becomes a standard for judging the product. That is, once the product or service is used, outcomes are compared against expectations. If the outcome matches the expectation, confirmation occurs. Disconfirmation occurs where there is a difference between expectations and outcomes. A customer is either satisfied or dissatisfied as a result of positive or negative difference between expectations and perceptions. Thus, when service performance is better than what the customer had initially expected, there is a positive disconfirmation between expectations and performance resulting from satisfaction (Aliman et al 2016). Therefore, it could be argued that in the tourism context, tourist satisfaction or dissatisfaction requires experience with the destination attributes, influenced by the perceived quality and the value of the tourism services at the destination (Puh, 2014). It is the primary determinant of tourist behavior in the industry. The relevance of this theory to the present study is its appropriateness for the review of the dependent variable measures of tourism marketing performance of the study (tourist satisfaction and revisit intention). The disconfirmation of expectation theory helps destination marketing managers in serving their target markets and in making informed decisions. This theory is very useful to this study because previous research on customer satisfaction had also adopted it, as shown in Marinao (2017; Zenel, 2016; Chen, Khamwon & Rachbuakoat, 2016; Assaker & Hallak, 2012). What this suggests is that the results of continuous customer satisfaction monitoring can serve as an input for trend analysis and strategic discussions regarding the development of a tourist destination. 2.2 Conceptual Clarification The Concept of Destination Accessibility Hanley and Merkworky (2008) assert that accessibility is a crucial dimension of destination marketing capability in facilitating the movement of tourists from one destination to another. Chahal and Devi (2015) view accessibility of the destination as the infrastructure facilities such as roads, airports, and railways that facilitate tourists’ movement to the destination and other places of interests to the tourists. In this regard, accessibility capability is the ability of the entire transportation system comprising of routes, terminals and vehicles for easy movement of visitors to and around the destination (Buhalis, 2000). It is an important destination marketing capability which creates place utility that explains the ease of getting to the destination or attraction site (Uwemedimo, 2015). American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 69 www.americanjournal.org Researchers affirm that accessibility motivates tourists to embark on a trip to a particular developed attraction (Bagil 2014; Okoli, 2001), hence, the need for infrastructure that supports the means of transportation - air, land or sea transportation to the site. Bello and Bello (2017) affirmed that accessibility infrastructure explains those facilities that facilitate easy flow of people, goods and services from a place to another. It includes road and highway network, including structures (bridges, tunnels, culverts, retaining walls), electrical system (street lighting and traffic lights), mass transit system (commuter rail systems, subways, and bus transportation), railways, including structures terminal facilities (rail yards train stations), seaports and lighthouses, Airports including air navigational systems, bicycle paths and pedestrian walkway. The authors assert that in some countries, it is the responsibility of government to provide a transportation system. In their view, the government performs this role because it is an important tourism stakeholder in any destination. Denielson (2015) recognized the role of transport sector in the accessibility of tourist destination in the sense that it facilitates the movement of tourists from home to the destination and back home as expressed by the operations of airlines and road transport companies as well as private car owners that are involved in tourism. Page and Connell (2006) reveals that the availability of modes of transportation such as airplanes, motor cars, trains have enhanced the growth of international and domestic tourism through mass participation in tourism. Lickorish and Jenkins (2003) refer to the afore-mentioned as ‘democratization of tourism’. Research by World Travel and Tourism Council (2018) indicates that the transport sector made a significant contribution to the global GDP. Tourist Satisfaction Chen, Huang and Petrik (2016) view tourist satisfaction as the extent of the tourist’s fulfillment of pleasure which occurred from the trip experience about tourist a product or service feature at the destination that matched the tourist’s desires, expectations and wants in association with the trip. Viewed from that standpoint, satisfaction is created by the comparison of the customer’s expectation before and after consumption. In the tourism context, satisfaction is primarily considered a function of pre-travel expectations and post-travel experiences. The tourist is satisfied when experiences go beyond the expectations. However, if the tourist feels displeasure, dissatisfaction will be the expected outcome (Chen & Chen, 2010). Furthermore, Chenini and Touati (2018) state that tourist satisfaction is an overall evaluation of destination performance based on all prior experiences of the tourist with it. Thus, a tourist who receives what he or she expected in terms “of pleasurably memorable touristic experience” is most likely to be satisfied. Revisit Intention Ramukumba, (2018) conceptualized customer repurchase intention as a “deeply-held commitment to re-buy or re-patronize a preferred product/service consistently in the future’. Implicit in the above definition, is the idea that repurchase intention is an attitudinal loyalty. In the same vein, Singh, (2018) defined attitudinal loyalty as the intention of a consumer to continue his/her relationship with the organization in the future regardless of whether competitors lower their offering prices. Repurchase intention is hypothesized as the willingness to recommend friends and the intention to continue to patronize the organization. When applied in the context of tourism, revisit intention refers to the willingness or the likelihood of a tourist revisiting the same destination, the same tourist site, the same hotel or the same American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 70 www.americanjournal.org restaurant in the future (Smith & Pusko, 2010). Therefore, it has been argued that attitudinal loyalty represents a higher-order or long-term commitment of a customer to an organization or destination which results in a long, fruitful relationship between the organization and the customers over time, based on customer satisfaction (Al-Msallam, 2015). The importance of tourist revisit intention is well documented in tourism research. Fridgen (2009) reports that international tourism agencies and national tourist organizations use tourist revisit intention in tourism forecast, which is crucial in predicting or determining tourist flow and spending, especially in measuring destination competitiveness. This clearly shows that tourist revisit intention is very significant in building tourism patronage, tourist flow and expenditure. 2.3 Empirical Review and Hypotheses Development Accessibility Capability and Marketing Performance There is growing tourism literature on the influence of accessibility on tourism marketing performance. Syracus, Dieteman and Kruskal (2015) investigated the influence of touristic accessibility and destination loyalty among air passengers to tourist destinations in West Africa, surveying a sample of 683 involving domestic and international tourists. Based on the measures of airport facilities and quality of aircraft), the study revealed that there was no significant difference in the perception of domestic and international air passengers concerning accessibility challenges.. However, the finding reinforces the criticality of touristic accessibility to marketing performance in the sense that tourists are drawn to destinations that have an effective and efficient transportation system. Therefore, destinations deficient in infrastructure cannot generate tourist satisfaction. Consequently, tourist flow will be low with a negative effect on revenue generation. Research conducted by Puh (2014) sought to test the proposition that accessibility could affect destination performance. The study aimed to determine the factors that influence destination image and to explore the relationship between destination image and tourism satisfaction in Dubrovnik, Croatian context. A key finding of the study was that accessibility to tourist sites, among other factors such as natural resources, economic issues, social environment, tourist leisure, recreation, and atmosphere of the place generated a positive influence on a destination image, creating a positive effect on tourist satisfaction. Adebayo and Iweka (2014) have empirically examined touristic accessibility and tourism development in developing economies. The finding of the study revealed that lack of access roads to tourist sites, traffic jam in the city centres, poor road network, and inadequate supporting touristic facilities accounted significantly for poor leisure culture in developing nations, thus, leading to low tourism patronage. The study confirmed that well-developed transport infrastructures are preconditions for consuming other tourism services at the destination. However, the extent to which destination accessibility affects leisure tourists’ satisfaction in Akwa Ibom is unclear. Therefore, we aimed to test the underlying propositions: H1: Destination accessibility is correlated with tourists’ satisfaction at tourist sites in Akwa Ibom State. H2: Destination accessibility is correlated with tourists’ revisit intention to tourist sites in Akwa Ibom State. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 71 www.americanjournal.org Methodology Research Design and Participants The descriptive survey design was adopted for the study because it helped the researcher to find answers to the research questions of the study and to test the hypotheses. The population of this study included domestic and international visitors available at Ibeno beach, Nwaniba beach, Ibaka beach and Utaewa beaches during the Christmas (2019)and New year (January 1st Jan, 2020) holiday season in Akwa-Ibom State. Diesamm (2012) has noted that in the context of the tourism and hospitality industry, the population of research involving customers is always large, unpredictable, mobile and transient. It is often not fixed; for example, the likelihood of a researcher meeting the same beach visitor or air passenger again at the same place in the future is slim. Sampling/Sample Size Determination The purposive sampling method was adopted to select the sample based on the researcher’s judgment and on-the-spot accessibility, availability and willingness of the beach visitors to participate in the study during the researcher’s visits to the beaches. The sample size used in this study was determined by the application of Freund and Williams (1992) formula. Thus, three hundred and twenty-three (323) beach visitors constituted the sample size of the study. Our sample size is consistent with the extant suggestion of Roscue (1975 cited in Aliman et al., 2016) that a sample of more than 30 and less than 500 is sufficient for most research in the Social Sciences of which Tourism is a subset. Quota sampling was also adopted in the selection of the sample subjects because of variation in the level of beach development and the destination’s drawing power. This sampling method is evident in the number of visitors drawn from each of the four beaches surveyed in the study. As Udall & Eneyo (2015) rightly stated, “there is no best sampling method; the nature of the study should dictate the method to be used”. The implication is that both probability and non- probability sampling methods are acceptable in tourism/hospitality research. Research Instrument, Procedure and Measures Primary data were obtained from the respondents through the questionnaire, while secondary data were generated from relevant academic journals and textbooks in tourism marketing. The questionnaire was the primary data collection instrument for this study. A questionnaire is a set of specific questions that are constructed and used by the researcher in obtaining information from respondents in a survey research (Makinde 2015). The researcher and ten (10) research assistants administered copies of questionnaires on tourists/visitors visiting the four beaches for fun during the 2019 Christmas and 2020 New year holiday season in Akwa Ibom State. Visitors/tourists were briefed on the purpose of the study and the questionnaires retrieved after completion. The dependent and independent variables were measured onthe5-point Likert Scale, and the response scales for each statement in the survey questionnaire are 5-Strongly Agree, 4 –Agree Fairly Strongly, 3- Agree, 2-Disagree, 1-Strongly Disagree. The questionnaire items of the variables were modified from previous studies based on their relevance and appropriateness to the present study. Four (4) items on destination awareness strategies were modified from (Blain, et al., 2005). while tourist destination choice was treated as a one dimensional construct involving 3 items were adapted from (Gold & Whard, 2011) American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 72 www.americanjournal.org Validity, Reliability and Analytical Techniques In this study, the various types of validity adopted were: face validity, convergent validity and discriminate validity. Face validity for the research instrument used was ascertained through expert opinions and contributions. Also, it was assessed by tourism experts such as tourist managers, tour operators and marketing scholars based on their experience in the industry and academia respectively. Reliability was determined using (i) Cronbach Alpha co-efficient (0.7 and above) and (iii) factor analysis, composite reliability and average variance extract as well as correlation matrix for testing how the combination of measures constituted valid and reliable factors. The descriptive data were analyzed using frequency distributions, percentages, mean scores and other descriptive statistical measures, all in tables with the aid of the SPSS & Microsoft Excel. Pearson Product Moment analytical tool was used for the hypotheses. This analytical tool is often used to examine the strength of the relationship between an independent and dependent variable in a study(Onodugo, Ugwuonah & Ebinne,2010). 4. Analysis and Results Demographic Profile of Respondents: 4.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents Table 1 Demographic profile of respondents S/No Demographic variables Number Percentage 1 Category of Visitors Foreign 37 12 Domestic 271 88 Total 308 100 2 Type of Visitors Companies staff 36 12 Government Officials 10 3 Independent Visitors 262 85 Total 308 100 3 Length of stay 1 day 203 66 2 – 5 days 105 34 5 days and above - - Total 308 100 4 Age of Respondents 18 – 30 101 33 31 – 40 83 27 41 – 50 70 23 51 and above 54 17 Total 308 100 5 Marital status of Respondents Single 169 56 Married 101 33 Divorced 20 6 Separate 18 5 Total 308 100 American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 73 www.americanjournal.org 6 Gender of Respondents Male 172 56 Female 136 44 Total 308 100 7 Educational Background of Respondents FSLC 31 10 WASC/GCE 62 20 OND BSC/HND MBA/MSC PhD Others 48 103 6 10 15 33 2 3 Total 308 100 8 State of Origin of Visitors Akwa-Ibom 227 74 Cross River state 51 17 Rivers South East Delta Foreign 18 7 6 2 Total 308 100 9 Nationality of Respondents Nigerians 294 96 ECOWAS 0thers 10 4 3 1 Total 308 100 10 Purpose of Visit Appreciation of nature / Leisure 198 64 Educational excursion 21 7 Group meeting 89 29 Total 308 100 11 Frequency of Visit First-time Visitor 139 45 Repeat Visitor 169 55 Total 308 100 12 Travel Party Alone 62 20 Family/Partner 91 30 Friends/Relatives Organized groups 108 47 35 15 Total 308 100 13 Monthly Income of Visitors N100,000 55 18 N101,000 to N200,0001 63 53 N200,000 90 29 Total 308 100 American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 74 www.americanjournal.org Section 1 of Table 1 above shows the information on the category of visitors. The table revealed that (37) respondents (12%) were foreign while (271) respondents (88%) were domestic. Thus, implying that domestic respondents were of the majority. Section 2 of Table 1 above shows the information on the type of visitors. The table revealed that (36) respondents (12%) were companies staff, (10) respondents (3%) were Government officials, while (262) respondents (85%) were independent visitors. Thus, showing that independent visitors were of the majority. Section 3 of Table 1 above shows the information on the length of stay. The table revealed that (203) respondents (66%) stay for 1 day while (105) respondents (34%) stay for 2 – 5 days. This result points out that majority of the respondents stayed for 1 day. Section 4 of Table 1 above shows the information on age brackets of the respondents. 101 respondents (33%), were within 18-30 years, 83 respondents (27%) were within 31–40 years, 70 respondents (23%) were within 41–50 years while 54 respondents (17%) were greater than 51 years. This information shows that majority of the respondents were within the ages of 18 – 30 years. Section 5 of Table 1 shows the marital status of respondents. 169 respondents (56%) were single, 101 respondents (33%) were married, 20 respondents (6%) were divorced, while 18 respondents (5%) are separated. This information implies that majority of the respondents were single. Section 6 of Table 1 shows the gender of respondents. 172 respondents (56%) were male, while 136 respondents (44%) were female. This information implies that majority of the respondents were male. Section 7 of Table 1 shows the educational background of respondents. FSLC (31) (10%), WASC/GCE (62) (20%), OND (48) (15%), B.Sc/HND (103) (33%), M.Sc/MBA (54) (17%), Ph.D (6) (2%), Others (10) (3%). From the information it shows that respondents with B.SC/HND are of the majority. Section 8 of Table 1 shows the state of origin of visitors. 227 respondents (74%) were from Akwa- Ibom, 51 respondents (17%) were from Cross River state, 8 respondents (6%) were from Rivers, 7 respondents (2%) were from South East, while 5 respondents (1%) were from Delta. From this information, it shows that respondents from Akwa-Ibom were the majority. Section 9 of Table 2 shows the Nationality of respondents. 294 respondents (96%) were Nigerians, 10 respondents (3%) were from ECOWAS countries, while 4 respondents (1%) were Others. From the above information, it shows that respondents from Nigeria are of majority. Section 10 of Table 1 shows the purpose of the visit. 198 respondents (64%) came for Appreciation of nature/ leisure, 21 respondents (7%) came for Educational excursion, while 89 respondents (29%) came for Group meeting, thus, showing that respondents who came for Appreciation of nature/Leisure are of majority. Section 11 of Table 1 shows the frequency of visit. 139 respondents (45%) were first-time visitors, while 169 respondents (55%) were repeat-visitors. From this information, it shows that majority of the respondents were repeat visitors. Section 12 of Table 1 shows the travel party. 62 respondents (20%) travelled alone, 91 respondents (30%) travelled with family/partner, 108 respondents (35%) travelled with friends/ relatives, while 47 respondents (15%) travelled with organized groups. From this information, it shows that majority of the respondents traveled with friends/relatives. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 75 www.americanjournal.org Section 13 of Table 1 shows the Monthly Income of Visitors. 55 respondents (18%) earn less than N100,000, 163 respondents (53%) earn N101,000 – N200,000, while 90 respondents (29%) earn above N200,000. Thus, majority of respondents earn N101,000 to N200,000 monthly. Univariate Analysis The elements in the study were individually analysed using descriptive statistics, as shown below: Table 2 Summary of Descriptive statistics on items of accessibility capability Descriptive Statistics Destination Accessibility Items N Mean Std. Deviation Availability and adequacy of airport terminal facilities. 308 4.016 9 1.30246 Good road network to attraction sites 308 4.214 9 1.19779 Effective Rail transportation system 308 1.063 0 1.19676 Availability and adequacy of modern sea-going vessels to coastal sites 308 3.429 2 1.27458 Provision of adequate parking facilities at the sites 308 4.246 8 1.19751 Adequacy of good signage to the sites 308 1.776 0 1.01702 Valid N (listwise) 308 Information on Table 2 above indicates the mean scores on three items are greater than the grand mean (3.9). This result implies that respondents generally agreed on the fact that the attraction sites were accessible in terms of the good road network, functional airport terminal facilities, affordable road transport system, good road maintenance culture, and adequate local parking facilities, except the absence of good signage at the destinations, rail transportation and sea-going vessels. Table 3 Descriptive Statistics on Items of tourist satisfaction Descriptive Statistics N Mean Std. Deviation Wise decision to visit the beach 308 4.0909 .98102 Fulfillment of expectation 308 2.0487 1.16164 High satisfaction and memorable experience 308 1.8149 1.06537 Pleasurable sightseeing opportunities 308 4.1312 1.24939 Overall satisfaction 308 2.0390 1.19381 Valid N (listwise) 308 American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 76 www.americanjournal.org Information on Table 3 above indicates that the mean scores on two of the items were greater than 3.9 leaving three items with mean scores that are less than 3.9 (grand mean); indicating that the respondents did not generally agree on all the items. The implication is that respondents generally agreed on the fact that they made a wise decision to visit the beaches, which provided pleasurable sightseeing opportunities. On the other hand, the expectations were unfulfilled, while the overall satisfaction level was very low. Table 4 Descriptive Statistics on Items of Revisit Intention Items N Mean Std. Deviation Likelihood of return based on experience at the beach 308 4.0974 1.25571 Likelihood of return based on the beautiful coastline of the beach 308 4.1013 1.37037 Likelihood of revisit with family and friends 308 4.0429 1.35867 Valid N (listwise) 308 Information on Table 4 above indicates that all the mean scores on the items were greater than 3.9 (grand mean), indicating that the respondents agreed on all the items. The standard deviations were relatively low. This implies that the respondents generally agreed on prior experience and beauty of the beaches as likely reasons for a return visit. They also indicated willingness to repeat the visit with family and friends. Bivariate Analysis Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) was conducted to determine the strength of the relationship between accessibility and tourists’ satisfaction. Test of Hypothesis One Ho1:There is no significant relationship between accessibility and tourist’ satisfaction at tourist sites in Akwa-Ibom State. Table 5: Test of Correlation between accessibility and tourist satisfaction Accessibility Tourist satisfaction PPMC's rho Accessibility Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .835** Sig. (2-tailed) . .055 N 308 308 Tourist satisfaction Correlation Coefficient .835** 1.000 Sig. (2-tailed) .055 . N 308 308 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Decision: Table 5 above reveals a correlation coefficient of 0.835 and probability value of .055. This result suggests positive, strong but insignificant relationship between accessibility and tourist American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 77 www.americanjournal.org satisfaction at tourist sites in Akwa Ibom State. Therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted at 0.05 level of significance. Test of Hypothesis Two Ho2 There is no significant relationship between accessibility and tourist revisit intention to tourist sites in Akwa-Ibom State. Table 6: Test of Correlation between Accessibility and Revisit Intention Accessibility Revisit Intention PPMC's rho Accessibility Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .821** Sig. (2-tailed) . .059 N 308 308 Revisit Intention Correlation Coefficient .821** 1.000 Sig. (2-tailed) .059 . N 308 308 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Decision: Table 6 above reveals a correlation coefficient of 0.821 and probability value of .049. This result implies that accessibility correlates positively strongly with tourists’ revisit intention, but the relationship is insignificant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted at 0.05 level of significance. The result (rho = .821; P-value = .059 > 0.05)) implies that a positive and but insignificant relationship exists between accessibility and revisit intention to tourist sites in Akwa- Ibom. Discussion Destination Accessibility, Tourists’ Satisfaction and Revisit Intention The findings of this study indicated that destination accessibility correlated strongly and positively with tourist satisfaction and revisit intention, but the relationship was insignificant ((rho = .835; P- value = .055 > 0.05). The result is consistent with previous studies in non- coastal tourism and other industries in different countries across the globe such as Syracus et al. (2015); Adebayo and Iweka (2014), Ndanusa, et al. (2014), Gearing, (2004), Pascumek (2012), Boland (2012) which established a strong positive nexus between accessibility and tourists’ satisfaction. This result in our context implies that tourist sites were accessible to the visitors, due to the fact that Akwa Ibom has good road network, functional air transport system operationalized by Ibom Air, modern airport with functional facilities and efficient intra and interstate road transport services with road worthy- vehicles as epitomized by Akwa Ibom State Transport Company (AKTC). However, the insignificant relationship between the two variables suggests that tourists’ satisfaction with destination accessibility components in Akwa-Ibom State does not necessarily translate into positive memorable experience for the tourists if the tourist sites lack appropriate facilities as was the case in our own context. Interestingly surprising is the implication of the insignificant relationship between accessibility and revisit intention, meaning that overall low tourists’ American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 78 www.americanjournal.org satisfaction will not affect their revisit intention. In other words, despite their low total satisfaction, visitors, however, indicated an intention to revisit the tourist sites in the future. We can only suspect that, this, perhaps is due to the fact that we focused only on tourist beach sites, especially Ibeno beach that draws thousands of visitors for the annual Ibeno beach Christmas party, excursions, etc. Many tourists are also likely to revisit the beach for ocean viewing/ strolling along the beach coast even when basic facilities are unavailable or are willing to return based on their expectations for improvement of the tourist sites. Conclusion, Implications and Recommendations The result of our empirical analysis has shown that accessibility is an important factor in predicting tourist satisfaction and intention to revisit the tourist sites in the future. Accordingly, the study concludes that although the tourists/visitors were impressed with the destination accessibility system of Akwa- Ibom state, the overall low tourist satisfaction experienced by the tourists/visitors was largely a function of inadequate facilities at the tourist sites. Nevertheless, that experience did not affect revisit intention. Therefore, the study concluded that effective and efficient destination accessibility correlated with tourist satisfaction and revisit intention, but the relationship was insignificant in own context as actual tourist site experience and tourist expectation of future improvement may vary. However, our research holds certain implications for tourism service providers, Akwa-Ibom State Ministry of culture and tourism and tourism promotion agencies as it provides a better understanding of tourists’ behavioural intention towards the development of tourists attraction sites’ marketing strategies towards the achievement of destination marketing objectives besides the provision effective and efficient transportation system. Furthermore, the empirical evidence of this study offers actionable information to all tourism destination stakeholders based on the fact that the tourism product is an amalgam of several individual products which contribute to the total memorable tourism experience. Consequently, the study recommends that the primary beach products (ocean and beach sand) should be harnessed to deliver value addition through the provision of adequate high-quality facilities such as: resorts, hotels, restaurants, event centres, parasols, changing rooms, seafront native seafood kitchens, bathing rooms, sun-bathing amenities to appeal to visitors and that sea-going vessels be introduced through public, private partnership arrangement for the exploration of coastal tourist sites in Akwa-Ibom State. References 1. Adebayo, K.A., & Iweka, C.O (2014). Optimizing the sustainability of tourism infrastructure in Nigeria through design for deconstruction framework, American Journal of Tourism Management, 18(6), 87-95 2. Akubo, A. I. (2016). Customer perception of air safety and airline brand choice in Nigeria, Contemporary research Journal of Travel and Leisure, 14(3), 101-114. 3. Alimam, N.K., Hashim, S. M., Wahid, S.D. M. & Harudin, S. (2016). Tourists’ satisfaction with a destination: An investigation on visitors to Langkawi Island. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 14 (3), 135-144 4. Al-Msallam, S. (2015). The relationship between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty in the banking sector in Syria. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, 17(27), 34. American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 79 www.americanjournal.org 5. Assaker, G., & Hallak, R. (2012). European travelers’ return likelihood and satisfaction with Mediterranean sun-and-sand destinations: A chi-square automatic identification Detector−based segmentation approach. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 18(2), 105-120. 6. Bagil, W. (2014). The role of transportation in tourism development in Nigeria. Journal of Tourism and Leisure. 11(2). 212-221. 7. Bello Y. O. & Bello, M. B. (2017). Tourism planning and development in an Emerging Economy, Ondo: Excellent Grace Publishers. 8. Bello, Y. O.; Bello, M. B. & Ifegbu, L.I. (2017). Mediating effect of service quality on the relationship between employee empowerment and customer satisfaction in hotel industry in Edo state, Nigeria. Journal of Business and Management, 9 (7), 77-87. 9. Blain, C., Levy, S. E., & Ritche, J. R. (2005). Destination branding: Insights and Practices from destination management organizations. Journal of Travel Research, 43(4), 328-338. 10. Boland, A. F. (2012). Effect of infrastructural development on recreational behavior in Nigeria: Leisure and culture, any mix?, Journal of Leisure Development, 21, 18-27. 11. Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing competitive destinations of the future. Tourism Management, 21(1), 97 116. 12. Chahal, H. & Devi, A. (2015). Destination attributes and destination image relationship in volatile tourist destination: role of perceived risk. Metamorphosis, 14 (2).1-19. 13. Chen, C. C., Huang, W. J. & Petrick, J. F. (2016). Holiday recovery experiences, tourism satisfaction and life satisfaction–Is there a relationship? Tourism Management, 53, 140-147. 14. Chen, C., & Chen, F. (2010). Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tourism Management, 31, 29-35. 15. Chenini, A. & Touuti, M. (2018). Building destination using tourist satisfaction and destination image: A holistic conceptual framework. Journal of Tourism heritage and services marketing. 16. Chao, C. C., Lin, H. C., & Chen, C. Y. (2013). Enhancing airport service quality: A case study of Kaohsiung International Airport. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies. 10, 235-254. 17. Denielson, Y.I. 2015). Tourism development and hospitality industry growth in Nigeria. Academic Journal of Business Research. 44-51 18. Dieseman, J.E. (2012). Research methods in social service: problems and prospects. Lagos: Lighthouse Published Ltd. 19. Ekeke, J. N. (2021). Tourism and hospitality marketing. Nimo, Njikoka: Paper World St. Patrick Ltd. 20. Ekeke, J. N. & Ndu, E.C. (2021). Tourism and hospitality management. Nimo, Njikoka: Paper World St. Patrick Ltd. 21. Fridgen, J. D. (2009). Dimensions of tourism, 4th ed, Michigan: Educational Institute of American Hotels and Motels Association 22. Gold, Q. & Whard, M. H. (2011). Effect of Destination branding on destination choice. Travel Review. 32 (5). 165-177. 23. Hanley, O.T. & Merkworky, Y. (2008). Enhancing tourism participation through accessibility capacity in Mediterranean destinations. Travel and Tourism Review, 24 (5), 135-149 American Journal of Business Management, Economics and Banking Volume 5, Oct., 2022 P a g e | 80 www.americanjournal.org 24. Khamwon, A. & Rachbuakoat, W. (2016). Destination brand experience, satisfaction, and word- of-mouth: Evidence from Chang Khan, Loei-Province, Conference of the International Journal of Arts & Sciences,9(01):269–274 25. Lickorish, L. J. & Jenkins, C.L. (2003). Tourism: An introduction, Oxford: Butterworth- Heinemann. 26. Makinde, p. (2015). Research method in educational psychology, Ibadan: Oyewale Press Ltd. 27. Marinao, E. (2017). Determinants of Satisfaction with the Chilean Tourist Destination. Journal of Tourism Research, 6 (8), 102-110 28. Ndanusa, M, .N., & Yoshifumi, H. (2014). Challenges to growth in tourism industry of developing countries: The case of Nigeria. Asian Journal of Social Science: 10(9); 111-121. 29. Okoli, C. (2001). Tourism development and management in Nigeria. Enugu: Jee Communications. 30. Oliver, R.L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research. 17, 460-469. 31. Onodugo, V. A, Ugwonah, G. E. & Ebinne, E. S. (2010). Social science research: Principles, methods and applications Enugu: E. Denmark publishers. 32. Page, S. J. & Connell, J. (2006). Tourism: A modern synthesis 2nd ed, London: Thomson Learning. 33. Pascuumek, A . (2012). Correlate of Tourism architecture and tourism performance: A strategic framework for tourism destination development, Journal of Tourism Research, 49 ( 4). 127-136. 34. Puh, B. (2014). Destination image and tourist satisfaction: The case of Mediterranean Destination. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5 (13).538-544. 35. Ramukumba, T. (2018). Tourists revisit intentions based on purpose of visit and preference of the destination. A case study of Tsitsikamma National Park. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 7 (1), 231-236 36. Roscoe, J T (1975), Fundamental research statistics for behavioral sciences, Second edition, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston Publishers. 37. Singh, R. (2018). Destination brand experience and its relationship with tourists satisfaction and intention to recommend: A conceptual model. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 7 (1), 224-321 38. Smith, M. & Puzko, L. (2010). Health and wellness tourism, Oxford: Butherworth-Heinemann. 39. Syracus, J. G., Dieteman, Z. & Kuskal, R. D. (2015). Destination Attributes: The roles of tourist attractions and accessibility in creating and sustaining patronage. Travel Review. 18(2), 34-50 40. Udall, B. & Eneyo, W.C. (2015). Relationship management: scale development for tourism and hospitality management. Tourism Review. 14(3) 51-55 41. Unannam, W. T. (2021). The role of transportation in tourism development in Nigeria. International Journal of Economic Development, 12 (4), 112-126 42. Uwemedimo, E.O., (2015). Tourism development. Architecture: policy implementation challenges; Journal of Economic Development. 6(12) 69-74 43. World Travel and Tourism Council Report (2018). Travel and tourism economic impact, Nigeria.