This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University *Corresponding author. E-mail: shamimru@gmail.com Business, Management and Economics Engineering ISSN: 2669-2481 / eISSN: 2669-249X 2022 Volume 20 Issue 2: 286–311 https://doi.org/10.3846/bmee.2022.16754 AN INTEGRATED MODEL OF DESTINATION ADVOCACY AND ITS DIRECT AND MEDIATING EFFECTS ON DESTINATION REVISIT INTENTION Md. Alamgir HOSSAIN 1*, Abul KALAM 2, Md. Shakhawat HOSSAIN 3, Mst Nilima SARMIN 4, Md. NURUZZAMAN 5 1Department of Management, Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University, Dinajpur, Bangladesh 2Department of Marketing, Hajee Mohammad Danesh Science and Technology University, Dinajpur, Bangladesh 3Department of Management Studies, Barishal University, Bangladesh 4Department of The Wang Yanan Institute for Studies in Economics, School of Economics, Xiamen University, Fujian, China 5Department of Marketing, Rajshahi University, Bangladesh Received 25 March 2022; accepted 25 October 2022 Abstract. Purpose  – Purpose of the study is to build an integrated model of tourist destination advocacy explaining how tourists’ revisit intention is affected by its direct and mediating effects, integrated with destination experience, tourist satisfaction, and destination image. Design/methodology/approach – Data is collected online using a self-administered structured ques- tionnaire tool, and the survey is hosted in a Google Doc. SPSS and SEM-Amos are used to analyze the data (443 samples) after successful data cleaning and outlier elimination. Findings – All of the hypotheses were shown to be true in this investigation, with the exception of two. The findings confirmed that tourists’ destination experiences improve tourists’ satisfaction, destination advocacy and destination image but not destination revisit intention. The likelihood of revisit intention is significantly influenced by destination satisfaction and image. Furthermore, destination satisfaction, destination advocacy and destination image significantly mediate the link between destination experience and revisit intention. Originality/value – This study contributes to the existing literature on consumer behavior in tourist destinations, and would guide practitioners towards effective destination management. Research limitations  – Due to the lack of control factors on the relationship between all predeces- sors, destination revisit intentions, and all of the data gathered from domestic visitors, the current study may have limited the applicability of its findings. Therefore, additional research is necessary to validate these results across a variety of samples in order to draw generalizations. Keywords: destination experience, destination satisfaction, destination advocacy, destination im- age and destination revisit intention. JEL Classification: M370, M10, M3. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.3846/bmee.2022.16754 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8217-6610 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6045-6734 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6627-4635 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4996-8077 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9666-3391 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 287 Introduction Tourism is one of the significant contributors and foremost cornerstones in the formation of wealth, livelihoods, and income of the country (Abbasi et al., 2021). Despite the foundation of the country’s economy, the tourism industry fears competition to attract global tourists and retain domestic visitors (Afshardoost & Eshaghi, 2020). To cope with those fears of com- petition, the creation of tourist revisit intention through satisfaction of tourist, destination image, and tourist destination advocacy is the immense dominating strategy (Afshardoost & Eshaghi, 2020; Chen et  al., 2020; Elahi et  al., 2020). Because tourist satisfaction can be worked as a destination’s success indicator and is measured by comparing expected perfor- mance to perceived performance which has the motivating power to make a tourist’s revisit decision (Jumanazarov et  al., 2020); the sum of a person’s ideas, thoughts, and perceptions of a location is referred to as the destination image. Destination image (Lee & Xue, 2020) is seen to be an efficient way to increase visitor loyalty, which also influences the likelihood of a revisit intention (Lv & McCabe, 2020). Tourist destination advocacy is the positive tongue of tourists about their experience destinations visited (Nomm et al., 2020) and would recom- mend the goal to others, as like a ambassador of brand, and usually these are repeat visitors for high engagement with the destination (Kumar & Kaushik, 2020). Fostering the tourist revisit intention through the ways mentioned above is currently the pathway to profitability of tourist destinations in Bangladesh; hence it can reduce marketing and promotion costs (Abbasi et al., 2021). Even though Bangladesh is a queen of beauty with full of sea beaches and river coasts, religious places, archaeological sites, waterfalls,hills, for- ests, tea gardens, etc. still failed to gain familiarity as a tourist destination, lower number of foreign tourists visited the country compares to neighboring countries, and has unexplored destinations due to negligent government and private initiatives (Kumar, 2020; Hasan, 2014). Furthermore, due to the issues of security, infrastructure, cuisine, natural calamities, and cul- ture, foreign visitors are likely to ignore visiting Bangladesh (Karim et al., 2018). Moreover, because of the affordability, only a particular group of people are expected to do the tour for recreational purposes, the lower-income group is struggling only to meet their basic needs, which they could not think of traveling for pleasure. As a result, creating repeat or revisiting the intentions of experienced tourists should be one of the prime strategies for the growth of tourism in Bangladesh. Therefore, research on approaching the tourists’ revisit intention is a timely issue for academics. On the other hand, in the heart of researches, the psychological factors (Chen et al., 2020), destination image (Elahi et  al., 2020), a desire for variety, the environment, infrastructure, recreation and entertainment, local food, mobility, and price value, and atmosphere (Giao et al., 2020), destination attributes including cognitive and affective evaluation (Jumanazarov et al., 2020), destination brand engagement factors (Kumar & Kaushik, 2020), sustainability and environmental awareness (Kusumawati et al., 2020), quality of service, corporate image, and customer satisfaction (Khoo, 2022), etc. have explored to create the revisit intention in the different destinations rather than Bangladesh. The above-mentioned studies have discov- ered that destination image, customer satisfaction, tourist’s recommendation regarding the revised benefits in the same destination can influence the revisit intention. 288 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. In addition, in light of study in the context of Bangladesh, Polas et  al. (2020) estab- lished a favorable and substantial association between quality of service, environment, and pricing and intention to revisit, as well as customer satisfaction’s mediating effects between the environment and price insight and customer return intention. Additionally, Hasan et al. (2020) based on the theory of planned behavior, conducted a study to investigate tourists’ revisit intentions to seaside tourism destinations in Bangladesh and discovered that perceived value significantly affects both tourists’ attitudes and intention to revisit, however service quality only affects tourists’ attitudes. Moreover, Karim et  al. (2018) investigated six push elements (escape, self-respect, relaxation, relationship, knowledge, and novelty) as well as six pull factors (culture and history, safety, sightseeing, service quality, lodging, and natural at- tractions). They demonstrated that travel behavior, including internal reasons (push factors) and external motives of destination qualities (pull factors), influenced their future return to that location. Furthermore, Haider et  al. (2018) attempted to assess the recreational ser- vices of four tourist spots: Mozaffar Garden, Shat Gombuj mosque, Chandramahal Eco-park and Niribili tourist point in the southwest part of Bangladesh, using the travel cost method (TCM) to estimate recreational values and then the contingent valuation method (CVM) to value willingness to pay (WTP) for the development these sites. Their results revealed that these place make a consumer surplus worth 1.24–3.64 USD per tourist in a year and, thus yield a gross recreational value 0.06–0.84 million USD per year in this region. The scholars, Rahman et al. (2021), examined the destination’s brand equity and tourists’ revisit intention toward health tourism. Their analysis indicated that destination brand equity affects a trav- eler’s revisit intention for medical tourists through destination brand association, and that a traveler’s perceived trust, reliability, and soft concerns moderate the link between destination brand equity and destination brand association, as well as a significant moderation impact on the link between destination brand association and intention to revisitof a traveler to a health tourism destination. Therefore, even though some studies in the context of Bangladesh have been conducted ondivergent issues, there is a shortage of studies on the strategy of re- visiting intention through the destination image, tourist satisfaction, and tourist destination advocacy. Thus, research on the comprehensive model consisted of destination experience, destination image, tourist satisfaction, tourist destination advocacy, and tourist revisit inten- tion is very crucial, which was not examined yet (Hasan et al., 2020). As a result, considering the practical and theatrical aspects ofmaking the bridge in the gaps of prior literatures, this study attempts to develop an integrated model using the con- structs of destination experience, destination image, tourist satisfaction, tourist destina- tion advocacy, and tourist revisit intention for further study purposes. Doing those, this research searches the answer of the questions;  RQ1:  Does tourist destination experience improve tourist satisfaction, tourist destination advocacy, destination image, and tourist revisit intention?  And  RQ2:  How does tourist destination advocacy, satisfaction and des- tination image endorse direct and mediating effects on the tourist revisit? To address these research questions, this study proposes a comprehensive model of tourist destination advo- cacy and its direct and serial mediating effects on tourist revisit intention, integrated with destination experience, tourist satisfaction, and destination image. To establish and test the model for creating tourist revisit intentions, 395 respondents were interviewed through the Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 289 self-administered questionnaire, who had visited the sea beaches of Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin at least twice each. Cox’s Bazar sea beach is the world’s extended beach, located in the south portion of Ban- gladesh, also known as the tourism hub of Bangladesh, with 125 kilometers of longstraight, uninterrupted beach of white sand, where around 5 million tourists  – local and foreign  – visit each year (Hasan et  al., 2020). Another one is Saint Martin, also known as “Narikel Jinjira” Bengali, which means “Coconut Island”, the only coral reef island in Bangladesh. A convenience sampling technique has been used to collect the data; as it has a scarcity of lists of tourists (population) for this study. The structural equation modeling (SEM) approach is used in the analysis. This study, therefore, subsidizes in two ways: theoretically to the existing literature on tourism management and practices for managing tourist destinations. Additionally, the es- tablished and tested comprehensive model would guide scholars to fill the research gaps in tourist destination management (TDM). Eventually, this study will be a cornerstone in bridging the research gap in the context of TDM in Bangladesh. In practice, evaluating a complete model as a maiden study will help TDM managers and decision-makers to have clear understandings into creating tourist revisit intention effectively through tourist satisfac- tion, destination image, and tourist destination advocacy. Moreover, by assessing the mediat- ing properties in the model, it will be evidenced that only confirming the desired services as enjoyable experiences in the tourist destination solely is challenging to fostering tourist revisit intention. Finally, this study can be substantial to other similar tourist destinations, suggesting the managers create revisit intentions for their tourists. The next section provides an explanation of the theoretical underpinnings of previous research reviews, conceptualizes hypothesized directions, and creates the research model. The data collection method, measurement information for each variable, and data analysis process will all be noted as part of the methodology. Following that, empirical findings are discussed together with data appropriateness and hypothesis outcomes. After evidence of results, the conclusions, limits, and future directions of studies are described. 1. Literature review 1.1. Destination experience The sector “tourism” acts as a commendable instance of sagacity in the economy (Dann, 1977) and experience is real feelings or behavior that comes from actual activities. Accord- ing to Addis and Holbrook (2001), a company’s service offerings and the user’s encounters with them create the customer’s experience. Tourists travel to a location to satisfy their need for new experiences (Prebensen et al., 2013). In tourism, tourists go to a favorable destina- tion for time passing, relaxation, enjoyment, refreshment, etc., and they get emotions, per- ceptions, and ideas that constitute destination experiences that are distinctive, emotionally resonant, and have a high  level of self-value (Ekinci et  al., 2013; McIntosh & Siggs, 2005). Recently, consumer experience has been characterized as a multifaceted assessment, accord- ing to a consensus (Hsu et  al., 2009). So, much research has been done regarding tourist 290 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. experiences at various destinations from various perspectives (Li, 2000), namely experiences in nature, heritage (Schänzel & Mclntosh, 2000), risky adventures, and leisure (Hsu et  al., 2009). Tourists’ first experiences lead them to further activities such as referring the des- tination to others, returning intentions, loyalty, etc. So, tourist experiences are becoming a basic concern for marketers who need to understand what makes them unique globally, and they try to provide customer services with unique, satisfying, even remarkable experiences (Nikolova & Hassan, 2013; Perdue, 2002). Therefore, researchers find experience influences ability on various post-travel performance, particularly satisfaction, image, advocacy, and return intention (Rosid et al., 2020; Mittal et al., 1999; Chi & Qu, 2008; Severt et al., 2007). 1.2. Destination advocacy One of the most efficient as well as reliable promotion method is word of mouth (WOM) that automatically comes from consumer satisfaction or dissatisfaction. The research of word-of- mouth pre destination commenced in the early 1960s. While Arndt (1967) defines WOM as a non commercial oral conversation between people, the other side (receiver) believesthe giver about that specific product or service. George Silverman was the leader of WOM marketing in the pre-1970s. When people promote a brand, goods, services, or event without earning a profit, it is called “WOM”. Since it is personal compared to other promotions, there is no profit, so people think it is more trustworthy (Brysha, 2013). Simpson and Siguaw (2008) also define WOM as a highly powerful means of communication that has a great effect on the brands of tourist destinations, where it urges people to describe them positively. Besides, Akhtar et al. (2019) segment WOM into two groups: positive and negative. When a tourist has a positive or negative experience with a destination, he or she will share and recommend it to others. However, Liu and Lee (2016) delve into their study and find WOM works as a medial variable that affects revisit intention. But, before it works as intervening, it is influ- enced by other variables to illustrate the quality of the service, monetary cost, and behavioral cost. According to Rosid et  al. (2020), visitors’ perceived value is influenced by WOM, and perceived value has a big impact on tourists’ desire to return. Hence, WOM influences tourist revisit intention significantly. Generally, the WOM tool for any tourist destination may be considered as destination advocacy because when someone advocates or supports others on behalf of a destination that he/she has experienced, which is congruent with WOM. Destination advocacy has an important impact on tourist behavior, because it sways consumer or tourist attitude also revisit intention. Tanford and Jung (2017) describe revisit intention as a result of promotion, whereas, Brodie et al. (2013) discover a positive influence of destination brand engagement on destination brand advocacy and revisit intention. In this case, frequent tourists positively advocate more than others about a destination (Bilro et  al., 2019). Relatively, Kumar and Kaushik (2020) uncover from their empirical investigation that destination brand engage- ment is affected by sensory, affective, intellectual, as well as behavioral dimensions of brand experience, and it plays aquite important role in increasing tourist brand advocacy and in- clination to return. It is quite important. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 291 1.3. Destination satisfaction As a consequence of cognitive reactions to an event, satisfaction results in an emotional reaction (Smith, 2020). Oliver (1980) states the topicality of satisfaction through the confir- mation and disconfirmation examples, where satisfaction levels are measured by comparing the real experience with past and expected experience. In the tourism sector, destination satisfaction plays a crucial role in exploring widely about destination information, and Jarvis et  al., (2016) say customer satisfaction affects customer loyalty. Over the past few decades, though satisfaction has been more significant in the tourism and hospitality industry since peak tiers  of satisfaction may steer  to a variety of good behaviors, which in turn can affect the profits of a destination (Shavanddasht & Schänzel, 2019). WOM is influenced by destina- tion satisfaction; however, Chen et al. (2014) show indirect impacts of satisfaction on WOM rather than direct effects. Moreover, effective destination branding relies heavily on customer satisfaction since it impacts the choice of location as well as the desire to come back (Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Aliman et al., 2016). Demonstrate from tourism-related study where satisfaction has a major impact on tourists’ favorable return intentions (Hasan et al., 2019; Breiby & Slåtten, 2018). Therefore, An et al. (2019) explore the positive stimulation of tourist satisfaction on revisit intention. 1.4. Destination image Image comprises aggregate cognition in some impulsive situations (Oxenfeldt, 1974). From the conclusion (Dobni & Zinkhan, 1990), image is a perceptible thing which is shaped by the consumer’s emotional explanation with cognitive as well as affective elements. In 1970s, re- searcher Hunt raises that perceived image from tourist aspects (Hunt, 1975). Then, Crompton (1979) defines perceived image as tourist’s thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and affections (Lai & Li, 2016; Marine-Roig, 2015). Other researchers (Jenkins, 1999; Min et  al., 2013; Zeugner- Roth & Žabkar, 2015) state that a destination image anticipates a person’s or group’s impres- sion of a specific place or destination, and it is considered as an interactive way of thinking, views, ideas, visions, impressions as well as intentions toward a certain destination or place (Költringer & Dickinger, 2015; Tasci & Gartner, 2007). Scholars further mention the multidi- mensional subsection for deep research (Marine-Roig & Ferrer-Rosell, 2018; Martín-Santana et  al., 2017; Michaelidou et  al., 2013), those dimensions are considered asa cognitive and emotional image (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999). Multifaceted (Zeugner-Roth & Žabkar, 2015) and intangible (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991) features of tourism product or service, make the measurement complicated to construct destination image. However, the perceived image or destination image mitigates the perceived risk and it tries to keep the trust of tourists, which stimulates tourist intention, behavior as well. If a customer gains a better image, they easily recommend it to others (Shankar et  al., 2003), which is similar to the research of Abbas et  al. (2018), that suggests a perceived image is effective for WOM (Ifie et  al., 2018). Hosany and Prayag (2013) delve into how the tourist place selection process and revisit intention affect by destination image in the near future. Correspondingly, from the findings (Wu, 2016) image of a destination influences destination loyalty positively and consumer satisfaction, which insists tourists return. 292 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. 1.5. Destination revisit intention In general, revisit intention comes from satisfaction. Um et al. (2006) consider revisit inten- tion as an expansion of satisfaction rather than the pioneering of the revisit idea generation process. Tourists assess various risk factors before making decisions owing to the distinc- tion of geographic, demographic, cultural, psychological, and travel experiences (Aqueveque, 2006; Reisinger & Mayondo, 2005; Kozak et al., 2007) that may stimulate tourist behavioral tendencies in different ways (Quintal & Polczynski, 2010). In fact, sustainable tourism indus- tries depend on the repetition of tourist that past literature establishes (Kozak, 2001; Hung et al., 2016; Quintal & Polczynski, 2010; Stylos et al., 2017) which demonstrates that repeat tourism is less expensive than the first time visiting, so the enhancement of the tourism sec- tor highly depends on tourist (Um et al., 2006). There are some factors that greatly influence destination revisit intention for instance destination experience (Zhang et al., 2018) satisfac- tion (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020) image (Abbasi et al., 2021; Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Hussein, 2016) perceived risk (Hasan et  al., 2017) and WOM (Kusumawati et  al., 2020) respectively. That’s why, tourist behavioral intention or revisit intention negatively influenced by perceived risk, in contrast, positively influenced by destination image (Nazir et al., 2021). Additionally, revisit intention is significantly affected by destination image and satisfaction (Abbasi et al., 2021) and extremely satisfied tourists have more eagerness to come back (Seetanah et  al., 2020). Through structural equation modeling Song et  al. (2021) unearth the effectiveness of destination attractiveness, which may enrich the identity of the place and increase travel revisit intention as well as WOM recommendation. Even, increasing WOM may improve revisiting (Liu & Lee, 2016). 1.6. Destination experience, satisfaction, advocacy, revisit intention, and image In case of relationship between destination experience and satisfaction, satisfaction is used to assess previous customer experiences, goods and service quality, the impressions of the physical surroundings, including community or tourist attraction (Ekinci et al., 2013). Mittal et al. (1999) they get past experience of a destination influence tourist satisfaction also loyalty. Wu (2016) also finds the same as Mittal et  al. (1999) that previous experience of tourists has a positive sway on satisfaction. On the other hand, better experience has high advocacy tendencies, Hudson and Ritchie (2008), say tourist’s branding that is kind of WOM of des- tination come from experience; destination brand engagement is affected by some factors of brand experience which in turn increases destination brand advocacy (Kumar & Kaushik, 2020). Besides, revisit intention is the tourist behavioral action when the gain positive ex- perience. Sirakaya-Turk et al. (2015) and Kim et al. (2012a) reveal the relationship of travel experience with future visitation. Thus, tourist’s experience amplifies of tourist intention for revisiting the location. Lastly, Zeugner-Roth and Žabkar (2015) state that a destination im- age anticipates a person’s or group’s perception of a particular destination, that means tourist thinking, views, intentions etc. are created after getting experience. Studies illustrate that satisfied tourists who get charming experience are interested to come more often with the intention of referring the destination to other people since they have a positive image of that Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 293 (Chi & Qu, 2008). According to Della Corte et  al. (2015), tourist experiences may produce return intention, advocacy, and satisfaction that take part in loyalty of a products or services. After summarizing past literature, this study gets to know that (Rosid et  al., 2020) destina- tion experience directly affects revisit intention, satisfaction (Mittal et  al., 1999), advocacy and image (Chi & Qu, 2008; Severt et al., 2007). The following are the offered hypotheses: Hypothesis 1: Destination experience has a significant positive influence on destination satisfaction (H1a), destination advocacy (H1b), destination revisit intention (H1c) and des- tination image (H1d). 1.7. Destination advocacy, satisfaction, and image Tourist destination advocacy is the positive voice about the location tourist visited (Nomm et al., 2020), and they would recommend to others like a brand ambassador, and they con- sider frequent visitors for brand engagement (Kumar & Kaushik, 2020). Mujihestia (2018) investigate how city branding influence visitors and they find the positive influence which this study consider advocacy. In addition, playing two roles, a promotion mechanism and a repression mechanism, destination branding differentiates the location from any other that attract the people who have intention to visit and it influence the satisfaction also destina- tion image. The tourism industry is highly related to tourist or consumer attitude toward their inten- tion, for example, consumer eagerness to recommend other visitors (Chen et al., 2019) where behavioral tongue, or WOM, or destination advocacy influences destination satisfaction and image positively as well (Siang et al., 2020; Prayogo et al., 2017). Jalilvand et al. (2012) find the positive influence of WOM on destination image in Teheran, whereas the effect of des- tination advocacy toward destination satisfaction, Yoo et  al. (2015) find positive influence and it’s because of positive advocacy disclose the facilities, beauty, nature etc. to others that make strong their thinking of tourist and also their satisfaction. Therefore, the proposed hypotheses are: Hypothesis 2: Destination advocacy has a significant positive influence on destination satisfaction (H2a) and destination image (H2b). 1.8. Destination satisfaction, advocacy, image, and revisit intention Satisfaction refers a feeling that arise from happiness or joy of someone coming from com- paring the estimated worth of a service or product against the expectations (Kotler & Keller, 2009), and then when tourist’s expectation meets their expectation is destination satisfaction, it can measure the destination’s success and it has the power to motivate tourist’s return deci- sion (Jumanazarov et al., 2020); destination advocacy is positive tongue about the destination tourist has experienced (Nomm et  al., 2020) which has the ability to transfer information to the actual person; destination image is the views, ideas, visions, impressions, and desire to a certain place or destination (Költringer & Dickinger, 2015); revisit intention is tourist’s judgment of likeness and eagerness referring the place to others (Khasawneh & Alfandi, 2019). Normally, satisfied tourist who has good image regarding destination then they try 294 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. to recommend it to others, because they have positive views, they may return the same destination. Several researchers find the effect of some variables like satisfaction, advocacy, image on tourist revisit intention (An et al., 2019; Song et al., 2021; Elahi et al., 2020; Abbasi et  al., 2021; Nguyen Viet, 2020; Prayogo et  al., 2016; Atmari & Putri, 2021). The following are the offered hypotheses: Hypothesis 3: Destination satisfaction (H3a), destination advocacy (H3b) and destination image (H3c) have a significant positive influence on destination revisit intention. 1.9. Mediating effects of destination satisfaction, destination advocacy and destination image Tourist decision-making is significantly influenced by destination experience. Kim et  al. (2012b) say experience is a main and valuable thing for the tourism industry. Some scholars study the relationship between destination experience and revisit intention via the role of many mediating variables. Experience is usually accompanied by satisfaction, so tourists will be more likely to revisit a location after having a positive experience, due to a greater degree of satisfaction (Kim, 2018). Studies unveil that tourism or destination experience influences revisit behavior through the mediation of destination satisfaction (Sharma & Nayak, 2019) in which revisit or return intention affect by perceived value through destination satisfaction (Khuong & Duyen, 2017). Along with, Battour et al. (2012) explore in their empirical study about the satisfaction’s mediating role and Atmari and Putri (2021) say there is an impact of experience on destination revisit intention through satisfaction. So that, destination satisfac- tion works as a mediating variable between destination experience and the tourist’s revisit intention. WOM plays an important mediating role between travel experience or perceived value or information on tourist revisit behavior (Xu et al., 2020; Trung & Khalifa, 2019). In accor- dance, some researchers demonstrate the significant mediating role of WOM between qual- ity of service and revisit behavior (Gholipour Soleimani & Einolahzadeh, 2018; Laksana & Ekawati, 2020) and they suggest enlarging service quality for magnify the positive influence of WOM on tourists return intention. However, this study considers WOM as destination advocacy. So that, WOM works as a mediator then destination advocacy also could mediate the relationship between experience and revisit of tourist. Furthermore, experiences are the memories of the person’s subjective judgment of the entire events that construct the desti- nation vision that are stored when they have pleasant impressions (Dagustani et  al., 2018) which indicate that image has a connection with experiences. Destination image is another mediating variable (Loi et  al., 2017; Nazir et  al., 2021) that mediates revisit intention. Ac- cording to Kim (2018) experience affect revisit intention via the mediator destination image. Atmari and Putri (2021) also show mediating effect of destination image between experience and return intention. The following are the offered hypotheses: Hypothesis (H4a): Destination satisfaction (H4a), destination advocacy (H4b) and des- tination image (H4c) significantly mediate the relationship between destination experience and revisit intention. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 295 Figure 1. Authors conceptual research model 2. Research methodology 2.1. Sample and data Basically, this study emerges on conclusive research where we show the relationship between variables using various hypotheses. We gathered information from Saint Martin, the sole island in this nation, and Cox’s Bazar, one of the world’s largest sea beaches. Every year in November to February many tourists from inside or outside come to visit those places. In this study, using structured questionnaire, we collect data via online survey with- in two weeks in the month of April, 2021. Here 25 respondents take part for pilot study due to ensure the relevancy, consistency as well as order of the designed questionnaire and 25 measurements are items finally placed after modification and changes. A seven-point Likert scale which started from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7) are used in this re- search, and there two parts in the questionnaire one is respondent demographic history and other one is their opinion. Initial sample size was 462, where 19 is incomplete. So, the utmost sample size was 443 for analysis. Questionnaire link with detail instructions randomly send to the respondents through online, and there is attached acknowledgement that respondents provided information would be kept secret. According to the demographic characteristics, male respondents are 62.3% and female respondents are 37.6% approximately. More than 69% respondents are between 18–28 years old. The respondents of bachelor degree are higher 53% where the lower degree is below SSC 2%. For occupation, 58.8% respondents are students, private employees, govt. em- ployees are 9.3%, 8.6% respectively. Most of the respondents nearly 62% stay 3 nights or less than 3 nights. 296 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. Table 1. Demographic characteristics (n = 443) (source: survey data) Variable Items Percentage Variable Items Percentage Gender Male 62.3% Occupation Govt. employed 8.6% Female 37.6% Private employed 9.3% Age range 18–28 years 69.3% Self-employed 5.8% 29–39 years 11.7% Student 58.8% 40–50 years 5.3% Others 5.9% 51–60 years 5.5% Length of stay 3 nights or less 62.1% More 8.2% 4–6 nights 22.6% Educational qualification Below SSC 2% 7–10 nights 8.4% SSC or equivalent 4.5% More 6.1% HSC or equivalent 10.8% Bachelor 53.3% More 29.3% 2.2. Measures A quantitative survey is completed among tourists who have visited Cox’s Bazar sea beach and Saint Martin in Bangladesh. The uses of all the measurement instruments are adopted from previous literatures. Destination experience with five items is adapted from the research of Meng and Cui (2020), Kumar and Kaushik (2020), Kusumawati et  al. (2020). Similarly, destination image with six items is based on the research of Abbasi et  al. (2021). Items for destination advocacy are taken from the study of Kusumawati et  al. (2020), Kumar and Kaushik (2020). Destination satisfaction with four items are taken from Abbasi et al. (2021) research. In addition, measures of tourists’ destination revisit intention are adopted from the research of Abbasi et  al. (2021), Meng and Cui (2020), Song et  al. (2020). We show all the variables with respective items in the Appendix. 2.3. Common method bias or variance We applied procedural approaches and statistical techniques to remedy common method bias (CMB). As procedural approaches, (1) we used set questions from authentic sources, (2) pre-test and pilot-test were applied using directed samples, (3) to encourage objective reflection of the respondents before responding, thereby generating a psychological separa- tion in response, we randomized the questionnaire and used two types of scales. As a sta- tistical measures, we used (1) Harman’s single-factor test, (2) common latent factor test and (3) correlation method. The results of the Harman’s single-factor test shows that first factor explained 37.14% of the variance, which is below of its critical value of 50% (Podsakoff et al., 2012; Hair et al., 1998). Common latent factor test results shows that there is no path differ- ence >0.20 between the standardized factor loads with latent factor and without latent factor (Archimi et al., 2018). Furthermore, the highest correlation value is 0.75, which is less than 0.90. Overall, our perceived statistical measures support procedural approaches to establish that CMB is not a serious issue in this study. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 297 3. Empirical results 3.1. Reliability and validity analysis For testing convergent validity, it requires to measure composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE) (Hair et  al., 1998). So, this study test convergent validity by investigating CR and AVE. In accordance to Fornell and Larcker (1981), acceptable CR is 0.7 or above and AVE is about 0.5. From the table 2, CR ranges from 0.836 to 0.929 and AVE ranges from 0.564 to 0.699 which meet the standard value refer by Fornell and Larcker (1981). In case of reliability analysis, this study selects Cronbach’s (Lee et al., 2017). Results revel that Cronbach’s values range from 0.843 to 0.928 that means all the values are greater than 0.7 (Table  2). Fornell and Larcker (1981) also state that square root of the AVE value of each variable need to be greater than the correlation between those variables and all the other variables then it would be considered good discriminant validity. From the Table 3, the discriminant validity meets the criterion of the dimension. Table 2. Reliability and validity statistics Variables Estimate S.E. t-value C.R AVE Cronbach’s Destination experience 0.855 0.929 0.629 0.928 0.856 .040 23.445 0.840 .041 22.684 0.839 .040 22.645 0.860 .039 23.682 Destination image 0.796 0.920 0.659 0.923 0.756 .054 17.469 0.795 .053 18.683 0.878 .050 21.424 0.829 .051 19.753 0.811 .050 19.160 Destination advocacy 0.870 0.921 0.699 0.920 0.853 .041 23.883 0.831 .041 22.774 0.803 .047 21.428 0.823 .042 22.372 Destination satisfaction 0.857 0.871 0.629 0.871 0.756 .047 18.621 0.757 .050 18.660 0.799 .044 20.259 Destination revisit 0.782 0.836 0.564 0.843 0.806 .060 18.269 0.786 .062 17.860 0.613 .064 13.194 298 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. Table 3. Discriminant validity Variables Mean Std. deviation 1 2 3 4 5 VIF 1. Destination experience 5.52 1.34 0.79 3.11 2. Destination image 5.30 1.31 0.74 0.81 3.65 3. Destination advocacy 5.22 1.32 0.77 0.74 0.83 2.84 4. Destination satisfaction 5.46 1.34 0.77 0.77 0.67 0.79 2.25 5. Destination revisit intention 5.49 1.28 0.63 0.63 0.73 n/a 0.75 X2/df. = 2.643, AGFI = 0.87, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.061. 3.2. Hypothesis testing Table 4 shows the essence findings of hypotheses testing. Here seven hypotheses are accepted (p < 0.001) among nine hypotheses. Destination experience highly influence destination sat- isfaction (β = 0.678, p < 0.001), destination advocacy (β = 0.788, p < 0.001) and destination image (β  = 0.474, p < 0.001). Similarly, tourist satisfaction (β  = 0.147, p < 0.05) and image (β = 0.476, p < 0.001) regarding destination are positively influence by destination advocacy, therefore hypotheses H1a, H1b, H1d, H2a, H2b are accepted. Moreover, destination revisit intention is significantly predicted by destination satisfaction and destination image. Thus, hypotheses H3a (β = 0.655, p < 0.001) and H3c (β = 0.282, p < 0.001) are accepted. On the other hand, there is no significant impact in this study of destination experience and advo- cacy on destination revisit intention. Consequently, hypotheses H1c and H3b are rejected. Table 4. Hypothesis results Hypothetical paths Estimate S.E. t-value p-value Decision Destination experience ---> Destination satisfaction 0.678 .069 9.665 *** Accept Destination experience ---> Destination advocacy 0.788 .043 17.232 *** Accept Destination experience ---> Destination revisit intention 0.110 .066 1.380 .168 Reject Destination experience ---> Destination image 0.474 .050 8.645 *** Accept Destination advocacy ---> Destination satisfaction 0.147 .069 2.231 ** Accept Destination advocacy ---> Destination image 0.476 .053 8.678 *** Accept Destination satisfaction ---> Destination revisit intention 0.655 .054 10.102 *** Accept Destination advocacy ---> Destination revisit intention –0.029 .058 –.429 .668 Reject Destination image ---> Destination revisit intention 0.282 .074 3.454 *** Accept Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 299 Hypothetical paths Estimate S.E. t-value p-value Decision Variance explained: Destination advocacy: 61% Destination satisfaction: 63% Destination image: 70% Destination revisit intention: 60% X2/df. = 2.701, AGFI = 0.86, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.062 Note: *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.05. 3.3. Mediation testing For testing mediation effect of destination satisfaction, destination advocacy and destina- tion image, the method of the product of coefficient and bootstrapping use in this study (Hayes, 2009). The absolute value of Z needs to compare with value of 1.96 for measuring significant effect of mediating variables by product coefficients. To ascertain the mediating significant effect, it requires determining if the confidence interval for the mediating impact contains zero using bootstrapping method. According to Table 5, the absolute value of des- tination satisfaction of mediating effect is higher than the value of 1.96 and the confidence interval of destination satisfaction also does not contain zero. It means that tourist’s destina- tion satisfaction (from Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin) mediate the relationship between the destination experience and revisit intention significantly. Thus, the result exists hypothesis H4a. Additionally, the absolute value for destination advocacy of mediating effect is higher than value of 1.96 and the confidence interval of destination advocacy also does not contain zero. It illustrates that tourist’s destination advocacy of Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin mediate the relationship between the destination experience and destination revisit intention signifi- cantly. Thus, the result accepts H4b. Furthermore, the absolute value for destination image of mediating effect is higher than 1.96 and the confidence interval of destination image also does not contain zero. This indicate that tourist’s destination image of Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin mediate the relationship between the destination experience and destination revisit intention significantly. Thus, the result accepts H4c. Table 5. Mediation results Variables Estimate SE Z Bootstrapping Bias-corrected Percentile 95% CI 95% CI Indirect effect Lower Upper Lower Upper Destination satisfaction 0.560*** 0.058 9.65 0.452 0.681 0.451 0.678 Destination advocacy 0.138** 0.059 2.33 0.029 0.262 0.027 0.260 Destination image 0.405*** 0.103 3.93 0.220 0.626 0.224 0.629 Note: *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.05, process is repeated at 5000 times. End of Table 4 300 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. 5. Discussion Despite the fact that tourism research recognizes the importance of researching destination experience (Kim, 2018; Prentice et  al., 2021; Yang et  al., 2021; Li et  al., 2021; Zhang et  al., 2019), previous research does not adequately illuminate the direct effects of destination ex- perience on tourists’ revisit intention. As a result, the present study is driven by a need for research to create an integrated destination experience model that connects destination ex- perience, destination satisfaction, destination advocacy, destination image, and tourist intents to return to a destination as well as the mediating roles of destination satisfaction, destination advocacy, and destination image in the proposed model. Figure 2. Structural model The empirical results suggest that destination experience has a substantial impact on des- tination satisfaction (H1a), destination advocacy (H1b), and destination image (H1d), with the exception of destination revisit intention (H1c). It is most likely to be found that those tourism destinations which are given good experiences by tourists enhance their destination satisfaction and create a good image of the destination in the tourism world. This boosts the destination’s advocacy, but experience may not directly augment the return intention of tourists. This is in tune with earlier research on the beneficial impact of tourists’ destination experiences on satisfaction (Sangpikul, 2018; Stavrianea & Kamenidou, 2021), on destination advocacy (Hossain et  al., 2021), on destination image (Kim, 2018). On the other hand, the findings of (H1c) contradict the findings of Kim (2018), who found that a memorable travel experience in the destination directly influences the revisit intentions of the tourist. In accordance with prior findings (Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Prayogo et al., 2017), the findings of the current study revealed that destination advocacy has a vital role in enhanc- ing tourists’  destination satisfaction (H2a) as well as the image of the destination (H2b). The connection between destination advocacy and destination image, as well as destination advocacy and destination pleasure, may, however, be generalized across a variety of sectors. Destination satisfaction is derived from the destination’s advocacy, and tourists are satis- fied because they have more information about the destination from diverse sources. This is explained by destination advocacy in the tourism industry, which has a direct impact on destination satisfaction and image. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 301 Furthermore, the outcome demonstrate that destination satisfaction considerably in- creased the formation of tourists’ destination revisit intentions (H3a), and destination image enhanced tourists’ destination revisit intentions (H3c), supporting the current conceptual framework and earlier research findings (e.g., Hossain et al., 2021; Kim, 2018; Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). For example, Hossain et al. (2021) revealed that in the nature-based destination of Bangladesh, tourists’ satisfaction positively affects tourists’ destination revisit intentions. Remarkably, Table 5 shows that destination satisfaction, advocacy and image have note- worthy mediation effects on the link between destination experience and destination revisit intentions (H4a-c). Previous study has shown that destination satisfaction, advocacy, and im- age all play important mediating roles in the connection between experience and behavioral intentions such as revisiting (Moon et al., 2013; Kim, 2018; Kanwel et al., 2019). For example, Sangpikul (2018) discovered that in the perspective of island sites, tourist satisfaction appears to be an imperative variable mediating the effects of site seeing experiences on site loyalty, inferring that the relationship between tourism experiences and tourism site loyalty is me- diated by tourist satisfaction. As a consequence of these findings, it is likely to identify the indirect impacts of destination experience on destination revisit intentions via the mediating effects of satisfaction with the destination, destination advocacy, and destination image. To summarize, it is possible to construct the following relationships: destination experience → destination satisfaction → destination revisit intentions; destination experience → destination advocacy → destination revisit intentions; and destination experience → destination image → destination revisit intentions. As a result, the present research offers a complete perspective on the connections between destination experience, destination image, destination advocacy, and destination satisfaction, as well as their relative impacts on visitors’ inclinations to return and find multiple mediating roles in the proposed model. Conclusions, implication, limitations and future research scope The current study was one of the first to conceptualize a comprehensive model that com- bined tourist satisfaction, advocacy, and image with destination experience, advocacy, and image in a single model. It also developed hypotheses about the mediating roles of tourist satisfaction, advocacy, and image in the relationship between destination experiences and intentions to revisit. This study might add to the current body of literature in tourism in two ways: theoretical implications and practical consequences. The findings confirmed that tour- ists’ destination experiences improve tourists’ satisfaction, destination advocacy, destination image and there is an exception in the link between destination experience and intention to return. Tourists’ satisfaction, advocacy and image are compatible factors that play a key mediating role on links between destination experience and destination revisit intentions. Implications of the study The theoretical, methodological, and empirical contributions of research in an area can be used to assess its relevance (Summers, 2001). This study’s theoretical contribution is that it presents empirical evidence about the relationship between destination experience, 302 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. destination advocacy, destination satisfaction, and destination image on a visitor’s intention to return to a tourist site in the setting of emerging economies. Destination satisfaction and image have a direct and mediating effect on the rapport between destination experience and destination revisit intentions, and destination advocacy has a mediating effect on the aforementioned link but no direct effect was found, refereeing to the fact that destination satisfaction and image are inevitable concerns for enhancing revisit intentions in today’s tourism destinations. On the other hand, destination advocacy is not a precursor of revisiting intention but plays a mediating role. The research as well extends the body of knowledge on the mediation of destination satisfaction, advocacy, and image on the connection between destination experience and intentions to return to the tourism site. Ultimately, in the tour- ism sector, the interaction between destination experience and destination revisit intentions is neither simple nor linear, although destination satisfaction, advocacy, and image have a significant impact on this relationship. In addition, this study provides service providers, destination marketing organizations, and practicing destination managers with useful practical insights into managing tourists’ experiences, destination image, satisfaction, and advocacy in tourist destinations in order to increase revisiting intentions. For example, managers may utilize the information gained from this study to gain competitive advantages over competitors in strategy formulation for destination management. As previously said, one of the major competitive advantages of a destination is its travel experience, and the quality of a tourist’s travel experience is an essential element in attracting visitors to that location (Sangpikul, 2018). Managers should focus on the advancement of the location attributes in order to increase visitor satisfaction, advocacy, and improve the destination’s image, all of which contribute to repeat visits. Limitations and future research Despite the fact that this research bestow on the tourism field, it has certain shortcomings that need to be addressed for succeeding research possibilities. First, the research did not look at the moderating effects of gender, age, visit purpose, visit time and season on the link between all the predecessors and destination revisit intentions. Second, the cross-sectional method used in this research, as well as all of the data collected from domestic visitors, re- strict knowledge and limit the universalizability of the findings. To address the study’s flaws, future research should incorporate longitudinal studies of domestic and international visitors. Additionally, further research is needed to identify and evaluate the moderating factors that may affect the connection between the constructs studied in order to get useful insights. References Abbas, M., Gao, Y., & Shah, S. S. H. (2018). CSR and customer outcomes: The mediating role of cus- tomer engagement. Sustainability, 10(11), 4243. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114243 Abbasi,  G.  A., Kumaravelu, J., Goh, Y.-N., & Dara Singh,  K.  S. (2021). Understanding the intention to revisit a destination by expanding the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). Spanish Journal of Marketing – ESIC, 25(2), 282–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-12-2019-0109 https://doi.org/10.3390/su10114243 https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Ghazanfar Ali Abbasi https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Janani Kumaravelu https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Yen-Nee Goh https://www.emerald.com/insight/search?q=Karpal Singh Dara Singh https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/2444-9709 https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/2444-9709 https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-12-2019-0109 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 303 Addis, M., & Holbrook, M. B. (2001). On the conceptual link between mass customisation and experi- ential consumption: An explosion of subjectivity. Journal of Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review, 1(1), 50–66. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.53 Afshardoost, M., & Eshaghi, M. S. (2020). Destination image and tourist behavioural intentions: A me- ta-analysis. Tourism Management, 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104154 Akhtar, N., Sun, J., Ahmad, W., & Akhtar, M. N. (2019). The effect of non-verbal messages on Muslim tourists’ interaction adaptation: A case study of Halal restaurants in China. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 11, 10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2018.10.001 Aliman,  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, 8(3), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v8n3p173 An, S., Suh, J., & Eck, T. (2019). Examining structural relationships among service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and revisit intention for airbnb guests. International Journal of Tourism Sciences, 19(3), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/15980634.2019.1663980 Aqueveque, C. (2006). Extrinsic cues and perceived risk: The influence of consumption situation. Jour- nal of Consumer Marketing, 23(5), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610681646 Archimi,  C.  S., Reynaud, E., Yasin,  H.  M., & Bhatti,  Z.  A. (2018). How perceived corporate social re- sponsibility affects employee cynicism: The mediating role of organizational trust. Journal of Busi- ness Ethics, 151(4), 907–921. Arndt, J. (1967). Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product.  Journal of Marketing Research, 4(3), 291–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224376700400308 Atmari,  N.  V., & Putri,  V.  W. (2021). The effect of tourism experience on revisit intention through destination image and satisfaction. Management Analysis Journal, 10(1), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.15294/maj.v10i1.45503 Baloglu, S., & McCleary,  K.  W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00030-4 Battour, M. M., Battor, M. M., & Ismail, M. (2012). The mediating role of tourist satisfaction: A study of Muslim tourists in Malaysia. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(3), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2012.666174 Bilro,  R.  G., Loureiro, S.  M.  C., & Guerreiro, J. (2019). Exploring online customer engagement with hospitality products and its relationship with involvement, emotional states, experience and brand advocacy. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 28(2), 147–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2018.1506375 Breiby, M. A., & Slåtten, T. (2018). The role of aesthetic experiential qualities for tourist satisfaction and loyalty. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 12(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2017-0082 Brodie, R. J., Ilic, A., Juric, B., & Hollebeek, L. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand com- munity: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.029 Brysha, B. (2013). A-to-Z WOM, part 1: A brief history of word of mouth marketing. The Word of Mouth Marketing Association. Chen, H., Bernard, S., & Rahman, I. (2019). Greenwashing in hotels: A structural model of trust and behavioral intentions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 206, 326–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.168 Chen, N. C., Dwyer, L., & Firth, T. (2018). Residents’ place attachment and word-of-mouth behaviours: A tale of two cities. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 36, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.05.001 https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.53 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104154 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2018.10.001 https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v8n3p173 https://doi.org/10.1080/15980634.2019.1663980 https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610681646 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224376700400308 https://doi.org/10.15294/maj.v10i1.45503 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00030-4 https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2012.666174 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2017-0082 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.029 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.168 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2018.05.001 304 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. Chen, N., Dwyer, L., & Firth, T. (2014). Effect of dimensions of place attachment on residents’ word- of-mouth behavior. Tourism Geographies, 16(5), 826–843. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2014.915877 Chen, X., Cheng, Z., & Kim, G.-B. (2020). Make it memorable: Tourism experience, fun, recommenda- tion and revisit intentions of chinese outbound tourists. Sustainability, 12(5), 1904. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051904 Chi, C.  G.  Q., & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism Management, 29(4), 624–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.06.007 Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 408–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(79)90004-5 Dagustani, D., Kartini, D., Oesman, Y. M., & Kaltum, U. (2018). Destination image of tourist: Effect of travel motivation and memorable tourism experience. Etikonomi, 17(2), 307–318. https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v17i2.7211 Dann, G. M. (1977). Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism.  Annals of Tourism Research, 4(4), 184– 194. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(77)90037-8 Della Corte, V., Sciarelli, M., Cascella, C., & Del Gaudio, G. (2015). Customer satisfaction in tourist destination: The case of tourism offer in the city of Naples.  Journal of Investment and Manage- ment, 4(1–1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jim.s.2015040101.16 Dobni, D., &Zinkhan,  G.  M. (1990). In search of brand image: A foundation analysis.  ACR North American Advances, 17, 110–119. Ekinci, Y., Sirakaya-Turk, E., & Preciado, S. (2013). Symbolic consumption of tourism destination brands. Journal of Business Research, 66(6), 711–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.008 Elahi, A., Moradi, E., & Saffari, M. (2020). Antecedents and consequences of tourists’ satisfaction in sport event: Mediating role of destination image. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 21(2), 123–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1731726 Fakeye, P. C., & Crompton, J. L. (1991). Image differences between prospective, first-time, and repeat visitors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research, 30(2), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759103000202 Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 Gholipour Soleimani, A., & Einolahzadeh, H. (2018). The influence of service quality on revisit inten- tion: The mediating role of WOM and satisfaction (Case study: Guilan travel agencies).  Cogent Social Sciences, 4(1), 1560651. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2018.1560651 Giao, H. N. K., Ngan, N. T. K., Phuc, N. P. H., Tuan, H. Q., Hong, H. K., Anh, H. D. T., Nhu, D. T. H., & Lan, N. T. (2020). How destination image factors affect domestic tourists revisit intention to Ba Ria-Vung Tau Province, Vietnam. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(6), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no6.209 Haider, M. Z., Hossain, T., Siddiqui, O. I., & Islam, M. S. (2018). Economic valuation of the tourist spots in Bangladesh. International Journal. of Tourism Policy, 8(1), 42–64. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTP.2018.090320 Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. (5 ed.). Prentice Hall. Hasan, K., Abdullah, S. K., Islam, F., & Neela, N. M. (2020). An integrated model for examining tour- ists’ revisit intention to beach tourism destinations. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 21(6), 716–737. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2020.1740134 https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2014.915877 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051904 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.06.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(79)90004-5 https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v17i2.7211 https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(77)90037-8 https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jim.s.2015040101.16 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.008 https://doi.org/10.1080/15470148.2020.1731726 https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759103000202 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2018.1560651 https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no6.209 https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTP.2018.090320 https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2020.1740134 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 305 Hasan,  M.  K., Abdullah,  S.  K., Lew,  T.  Y., & Islam,  M.  F. (2019). The antecedents of tourist attitudes to revisit and revisit intentions for coastal tourism.  International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 13(2), 218–234. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-11-2018-0151 Hasan, M. K., Ismail, A. R., & Islam, M. F. (2017). Tourist risk perceptions and revisit intention: A criti- cal review of literature. Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), 1412874. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2017.1412874 Hasan, S. (2014). Tourism in Bangladesh: Problems and prospects. https://www.academia.edu/9111015/ Tourism_in_Bangladesh_Problems_and_Prospects Hayes,  A.  F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360 Hosany, S., & Prayag, G. (2013). Patterns of tourists’ emotional responses, satisfaction, and intention to recommend. Journal of Business Research, 66(6), 730–737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.011 Hossain, M. S., Mostafa, M. G., & Hossain, M. A. (2021). Modeling tourists’ satisfaction in the nature- based tourist destination using structural equation modeling technique. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 37(3), 814–822. https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.37311-713 Hsu, S. Y., Dehuang, N., & Woodside, A. G. (2009). Storytelling research of consumers’ self-reports of urban tourism experiences in China. Journal of Business Research, 62(12), 1223–1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.11.006 Hudson, S., & Ritchie, J. B. (2009). Branding a memorable destination experience. The case of ‘Brand Canada’. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11(2), 217–228. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.720 Hung, W. L., Lee, Y. J., & Huang, P. H. (2016). Creative experiences, memorability and revisit intention in creative tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 19(8), 763–770. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.877422 Hunt,  J.  D. (1975). Image as a factor in tourism development.  Journal of Travel Research,  13(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728757501300301 Hussein, A. S. (2016). How event awareness, event quality and event image creates visitor revisit inten- tion?: A lesson from car free day event. Procedia Economics and Finance, 35, 396–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)00049-6 Ifie, K., Simintiras, A. C., Dwivedi, Y., & Mavridou, V. (2018). How service quality and outcome confi- dence drive pre-outcome word-of-mouth. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 44, 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.07.002 Jalilvand, M. R., Samiei, N., Dini, B., & Manzari, P. Y. (2012). Examining the structural relationships of electronic word of mouth, destination image, tourist attitude toward destination and travel inten- tion: An integrated approach.  Journal of Destination Marketing & Management,  1(1–2), 134–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2012.10.001 Jarvis, D., Stoeckl, N., & Liu, H. B. (2016). The impact of economic, social and environmental factors on trip satisfaction and the likelihood of visitors returning. Tourism Management, 52, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.06.003 Jenkins, O. H. (1999). Understanding and measuring tourist destination images. International Journal of Tourism Research,  1(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-1970(199901/02)1:1<1::AID- JTR143>3.0.CO;2-L Jumanazarov, S., Kamilov, A., & Kiatkawsin, K. (2020). Impact of Samarkand’s destination attributes on international tourists’ revisit and word-of-mouth intention. Sustainability, 12(12), 5154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125154 Kanwel, S., Lingqiang, Z., Asif, M., Hwang, J., Hussain, A., & Jameel, A. (2019). The influence of des- tination image on tourist loyalty and intention to visit: Testing a multiple mediation approach. Sustainability, 11(22), 6401. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226401 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-11-2018-0151 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2017.1412874 https://www.academia.edu/9111015/Tourism_in_Bangladesh_Problems_and_Prospects https://www.academia.edu/9111015/Tourism_in_Bangladesh_Problems_and_Prospects https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.011 https://doi.org/10.30892/gtg.37311-713 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.11.006 https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.720 https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.877422 https://doi.org/10.1177/004728757501300301 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)00049-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.07.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2012.10.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2015.06.003 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-1970(199901/02)1:1%3C1::AID-JTR143%3E3.0.CO;2-L https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-1970(199901/02)1:1%3C1::AID-JTR143%3E3.0.CO;2-L https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125154 https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226401 306 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. Karim, K., Setarnawat, S., & Viriyasuebphong, P. (2018). A Study on motivational factors of travellers to revisit Kuakata Sea Beach, Patuakhali, Bangladesh. Burapha Journal of Business Management, 8(1), 117–133. Khasawneh, M. S., & Alfandi, A. M. (2019). Determining behaviour intentions from the overall destina- tion image and risk perception. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 25(2), 355–375. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.25.2.6 Khoo, K. L. (2022). A study of service quality, corporate image, customer satisfaction, revisit intention and word-of-mouth: Evidence from the KTV industry. PSU Research Review, 6(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-08-2019-0029 Khuong, M. N., & Duyen, H. T. M. (2017). The effects of destination image, perceived value and service quality on tourist return intention through destination satisfaction – A study in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 8(5), 401–408. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijimt.2017.8.5.761 Kim, J. H. (2018). The impact of memorable tourism experiences on loyalty behaviors: The mediating effects of destination image and satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 57(7), 856–870. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517721369 Kim, J. H., Ritchie, J. B., & McCormick, B. (2012a). Development of a scale to measure memorable tour- ism experiences. Journal of Travel Research, 51(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287510385467 Kim, K., Hallab, Z., & Kim,  J.  N. (2012b). The moderating effect of travel experience in a destination on the relationship between the destination image and the intention to revisit. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 21(5), 486–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2012.626745 Költringer, C., & Dickinger, A. (2015). Analyzing destination branding and image from online sources: A web content mining approach. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1836–1843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.011 Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2009). Manajemen Pemasaran, edisiketigabelas. Erlangga. Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters’ behavior at two distinct destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(3), 784–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(00)00078-5 Kozak, M., Crotts, J. C., & Law, R. (2007). The impact of the perception of risk on international travel- lers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 9(4), 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.607 Kumar, D. (2020). Tourism in Bangladesh: Problems and prospects and its economic impact. In UGC Sponsored International Conference on Changing Scenario of Tourism in the Era of Globalisation: Issues and Concerns. Department of Commerce and Business Administration, L.  N.  Mithila Uni- versity, Dardhanga, Bihar, India. Kumar, V., & Kaushik,  A.  K. (2020). Does experience affect engagement? Role of destination brand engagement in developing brand advocacy and revisit intentions. Journal of Travel & Tourism Mar- keting, 37(3), 332–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2020.1757562 Kusumawati, A., Utomo,  H.  S., Suharyono, S., & Sunarti, S. (2020). Effects of sustainability on WoM intention and revisit intention, with environmental awareness as a moderator. Management of En- vironmental Quality: An International Journal, 31(1), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2019-0064 Lai, K., & Li, X. (2016). Tourism destination image: Conceptual problems and definitional solu- tions. Journal of Travel Research, 55(8), 1065–1080. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287515619693 Laksana, I.  P.  G. J., & Ekawati, N. W (2020). Word of mouth and customer satisfaction in mediating the relationship between service quality and revisit intention. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (AJHSSR), 4(9), 19–28. Lee,  C.  H., Hung,  C.  C., Chien,  C.  S., Zhuang,  W.  L., & Hsu, C.  Y.  Y. (2017). Regulatory foci and ex- patriate adjustment. Personnel Review, 46(3), 512–525. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2015-0077 https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.25.2.6 https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-08-2019-0029 https://doi.org/10.18178/ijimt.2017.8.5.761 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517721369 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287510385467 https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2012.626745 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.011 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(00)00078-5 https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.607 https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2020.1757562 https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-03-2019-0064 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287515619693 https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-03-2015-0077 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 307 Lee, S. W., & Xue, K. (2020). A model of destination loyalty: Integrating destination image and sustain- able tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1713185 Li,  T.  T., Liu, F., & Soutar,  G.  N. (2021). Experiences, post-trip destination image, satisfaction and loyalty: A study in an ecotourism context. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 19, 100547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100547 Li, Y. (2000). Geographical consciousness and tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4), 863–883. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00112-7 Liu, C.  H.  S., & Lee, T. (2016). Service quality and price perception of service: Influence on word-of- mouth and revisit intention. Journal of Air Transport Management, 52, 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.12.007 Loi, L. T. I., So, A. S. I., Lo, I. S., & Fong, L. H. N. (2017). Does the quality of tourist shuttles influence revisit intention through destination image and satisfaction? The case of Macao. Journal of Hospital- ity and Tourism Management, 32, 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2017.06.002 Lv, X., & McCabe, S. (2020). Expanding theory of tourists’ destination loyalty: The role of sensory im- pressions. Tourism Management, 77, 104026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104026 Marine-Roig, E. (2015). Identity and authenticity in destination image construction.  Anatolia,  26(4), 574–587. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2015.1040814 Marine-Roig, E., & Ferrer-Rosell, B. (2018). Measuring the gap between projected and perceived des- tination images of Catalonia using compositional analysis.  Tourism Management,  68, 236–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.03.020 Martín-Santana, J. D., Beerli-Palacio, A., & Nazzareno, P. A. (2017). Antecedents and consequences of destination image gap. Annals of Tourism Research, 62, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.11.001 Michaelidou, N., Siamagka,  N.  T., Moraes, C., & Micevski, M. (2013). Do marketers use visual rep- resentations of destinations that tourists value? Comparing visitors’ image of a destination with marketer-controlled images online. Journal of Travel Research, 52(6), 789–804. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513481272 Mcintosh, A. J., & Siggs, A. (2005). An exploration of the experiential nature of boutique accommoda- tion. Journal of Travel Research, 44(1), 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287505276593 Meng, B., & Cui, M. (2020). The role of co-creation experience in forming tourists’ revisit intention to home-based accommodation: Extending the theory of planned behavior. Tourism Management Perspectives, 33, 100581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100581 Min,  K.  S., Martin, D., & Jung,  J.  M. (2013). Designing advertising campaigns for destinations with mixed images: Using visitor campaign goal messages to motivate visitors.  Journal of Business Re- search, 66(6), 759–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.015 Mittal, V., Kumar, P., & Tsiros, M. (1999). Attribute-level performance, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions over time: a consumption-system approach. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299906300206 Moon, K.-S., Ko, Y. J., Connaughton, D. P., & Lee, J.-H. (2013). A mediating role of destination image in the relationship between event quality, perceived value, and behavioral intention. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 18(1), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2013.799960 Mujihestia,  T.  I. (2018). The role of city branding on visitors’revisit intention: A study in Malang, In- donesia. Kinerja, 22(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.24002/kinerja.v22i1.1239 Nazir, M. U., Yasin, I., & Tat, H. H. (2021). Destination image’s mediating role between perceived risks, perceived constraints, and behavioral intention. Heliyon, 7(7), e07613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07613 https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1713185 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100547 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00112-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.12.007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2017.06.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104026 https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2015.1040814 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.03.020 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.11.001 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513481272 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287505276593 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100581 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.015 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299906300206 https://doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2013.799960 https://doi.org/10.24002/kinerja.v22i1.1239 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07613 308 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. Nguyen Viet, B., Dang,  H.  P., & Nguyen,  H.  H. (2020). Revisit intention and satisfaction: The role of destination image, perceived risk, and cultural contact. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1796249 Nikolova,  M.  S., & Hassan,  S.  S. (2013). Nation branding effects on retrospective global evaluation of past travel experiences. Journal of Business Research, 66(6), 752–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.014 Nomm, A. H. L., Albrecht, J. N., & Lovelock, B. (2020). Advocacy and community leadership as func- tions in national and regional level destination management. Tourism Management Perspectives, 35, 100682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100682 Oliver,  R.  L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction deci- sions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405 Oxenfeldt, A. R. (1974). Developing a favorable price-quality image. Journal of Retailing, 50(4), 8–14. Perdue,  R.  R. (2002). Perishability, yield management, and cross-product elasticity: A case study of deep discount season passes in the Colorado ski industry. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287502041001003 Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 Polas, M. R. H., Raju, V., Hossen, S. M., Karim, A. M., & Tabash, M. I. (2020). Customer’s revisit inten- tion: Empirical evidence on Gen‐Z from Bangladesh towards halal restaurants. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(3), e2572. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2572 Prayogo,  R.  R., Ketaren, F.  L.  S., & Hati,  R.  M. (2017). Electronic word of mouth, destination image, and satisfaction toward visit intention: an empirical study in Malioboro Street, Yogyakarta. In Pro- ceedings of the 1st International Conference on Social and Political Development (ICOSOP 2016). https://doi.org/10.2991/icosop-16.2017.31 Prebensen, N. K., Woo, E., Chen, J. S., & Uysal, M. (2013). Motivation and involvement as antecedents of the perceived value of the destination experience.  Journal of Travel Research,  52(2), 253–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287512461181 Prentice, C., Wang, X., & Manhas,  P.  S. (2021). The spillover effect of airport service experience on destination revisit intention. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 48, 119–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.06.001 Quintal,  V.  A., & Polczynski, A. (2010). Factors influencing tourists’ revisit intentions.  Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 22(4), 554–578. https://doi.org/10.1108/13555851011090565 Rahman,  M.  S., Bag, S., Hassan, H., Hossain,  M.  A., & Singh,  R.  K. (2021). Destination brand equity and tourist’s revisit intention towards health tourism: An empirical study. Benchmarking: An Inter- national Journal, 29(4), 1306–1331. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-03-2021-0173 Reisinger, Y., & Mavondo, F. (2005). Travel anxiety and intentions to travel internationally: Implications of travel risk perception. Journal of Travel Research, 43(3), 212–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287504272017 Rosid, M., Pratikto, H. H., & Syihabudhin, S. E. (2020). Word of mouth (WOM), visitor experience, and destination attributes on revisit intention through perceived value a case of Penangguaganmoun- tain, East Java, Indonesia. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 21(5), 90–101. Sangpikul, A. (2018). The effects of travel experience dimensions on tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: The case of an island destination. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 12(1), 106–123. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-06-2017-0067 Schänzel, H. A., & McIntosh, A. J. (2000). An insight into the personal and emotive context of wildlife viewing at the Penguin Place, Otago Peninsula, New Zealand. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580008667348 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1796249 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.014 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100682 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287502041001003 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452 https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2572 https://doi.org/10.2991/icosop-16.2017.31 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287512461181 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.06.001 https://doi.org/10.1108/13555851011090565 https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-03-2021-0173 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287504272017 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-06-2017-0067 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580008667348 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 309 Seetanah, B., Teeroovengadum, V., & Nunkoo, R. (2020). Destination satisfaction and revisit inten- tion of tourists: does the quality of airport services matter?.  Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Re- search, 44(1), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348018798446 Severt, D., Wang, Y., Chen, P. J., & Breiter, D. (2007). Examining the motivation, perceived performance, and behavioral intentions of convention attendees: Evidence from a regional conference.  Tourism Management, 28(2), 399–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2006.04.003 Shankar, V., Smith,  A.  K., & Rangaswamy, A. (2003). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in online and offline environments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20(2), 153–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(03)00016-8 Sharma, P., & Nayak, J. K. (2019). Understanding memorable tourism experiences as the determinants of tourists’ behaviour. International Journal of Tourism Research, 21(4), 504–518. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2278 Shavanddasht, M., & Schänzel, H. (2019). Measuring adolescents’ tourism satisfaction: The role of mood and perceived parental style. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 19(3), 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358417751024 Siang, J. H., Yang, W. G., & Liu, L. W. (2020). Impact of WOM and online WOM on tourist destinations in Indonesia. Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana, 25(Esp. 10), 297–304. Simpson, P. M., &Siguaw, J. A. (2008). Destination word of mouth: The role of traveler type, residents, and identity salience. Journal of Travel Research, 47(2), 167–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287508321198 Sirakaya-Turk, E., Ekinci, Y., & Martin, D. (2015). The efficacy of shopping value in predicting destination loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1878–1885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.016 Smith,  T.  A. (2020). The role of customer personality in satisfaction, attitude-to-brand and loyalty in mobile services. Spanish Journal of Marketing-ESIC, 24(2), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-06-2019-0036 Song, H., Chen, J. M., & Chen, Y. (2021). Mediating and moderating effects in golf tourism: Evidence from Hainan Island. Tourism Economics, 27(3), 510–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816620902331 Stavrianea, A., & Kamenidou, I. (Eirini). (2021). Memorable tourism experiences, destination im- age, satisfaction, and loyalty: an empirical study of Santorini Island. EuroMed Journal of Business, (ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-10-2020-0106 Stylos, N., Bellou, V., Andronikidis, A., & Vassiliadis, C. A. (2017). Linking the dots among destination images, place attachment, and revisit intentions: A study among British and Russian tourists. Tour- ism Management, 60, 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.11.006 Summers, J. O. (2001). Guidelines for conducting research and publishing in marketing: From concep- tualization through the review process. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(4), 405–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/03079450094243 Tanford, S., & Jung, S. (2017). Festival attributes and perceptions: A meta-analysis of relationships with sat- isfaction and loyalty. Tourism Management, 61, 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.02.005 Tasci,  A.  D., & Gartner,  W.  C. (2007). Destination image and its functional relationships.  Journal of Travel Research, 45(4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507299569 Trung, N.  V.  H., & Khalifa,  G.  S. (2019). Impact of destination image factors on revisit intentions of hotel’s international tourists in Ba Ria-Vung Tau (Br-Vt) the mediating role of positive word of mouth. International Journal on Recent Trends in Business and Tourism (IJRTBT), 3(2), 106–115. Um, S., Chon, K., & Ro, Y. (2006). Antecedents of revisit intention. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(4), 1141–1158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2006.06.003 Wu, C. W. (2016). Destination loyalty modeling of the global tourism. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2213–2219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.032 https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348018798446 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2006.04.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(03)00016-8 https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2278 https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358417751024 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287508321198 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.016 https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-06-2019-0036 https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816620902331 https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-10-2020-0106 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.11.006 https://doi.org/10.1177/03079450094243 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.02.005 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507299569 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2006.06.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.032 310 M. A. Hossain et al. An integrated model of destination advocacy and its direct and mediating. Xu, F., Niu, W., Li, S., & Bai, Y. (2020). The mechanism of word-of-mouth for tourist destinations in crisis. SAGE Open, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020919491 Yang, Y., Ruan, Q., Huang, S. (Sam), Lan, T., & Wang, Y. (2021). Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on tourists’ real-time on-site emotional experience in reopened tourism destinations. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 48, 390–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.07.014 Yoo, C. W., Kim, Y. J., & Sanders, G. L. (2015). The impact of interactivity of electronic word of mouth systems and E-Quality on decision support in the context of the e-marketplace.  Information & Management, 52(4), 496–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.03.001 Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destina- tion loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2003.08.016 Zeugner-Roth, K. P., & Žabkar, V. (2015). Bridging the gap between country and destination image: As- sessing common facets and their predictive validity. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1844–1853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.012 Zhang, H., Wu, Y., & Buhalis, D. (2018). A model of perceived image, memorable tourism experiences and revisit intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 8, 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.06.004 Zhang, T., Wei, W., Fu, X., Hua, N., & Wang, Y. (2019). Exploring the roles of technology, people, and organization in building a tourism destination experience: Insights from the 2nd USA-China tour- ism research summit and Industry Dialogue. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 12, 130–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.03.001 APPENDIX Constructs and Items Destination experience (Meng & Cui, 2020; Kumar & Kaushik, 2020; Kusumawati et al., 2021). The basic amenities provided by Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin were sufficient. Availability of food and accommodation facilities provided as promised. I found these destination interesting in a sensory way. These destination makes a strong impression on my senses, visually and in other ways. The tourist services at the destination provide good value for money. Destination image (Abbasi et al., 2021). Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin are safe and secure. Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin offers exciting and interesting places to visit. Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin have beautiful scenery and natural attractions. Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin have a pleasant climate. The city has appropriate facilities. The behavior of the people of the host city is appropriate and friendly. Destination advocacy (Kusumawati et al., 2021; Kumar & Kaushik, 2020). I intent to talk the positive aspects on my visit and recommend to others. These destinations are likely to be my next traveling destination. I would share my experiences of this trip on social media. I often consult other tourists’ online travel reviews to help choose an attractive destination. I would tell my relatives, friends, and colleagues about the advantages of these places. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020919491 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.07.014 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.03.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2003.08.016 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.012 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.06.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.03.001 Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 2022, 20(2): 286–311 311 Destination Satisfaction (Abbasi et al., 2021). I am fully satisfied with the trip to Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin. I am satisfied with my decision to visit Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin. I was excited about having a new experience. Compared to other things I could have done, the time spent traveling was enjoyable. Destination Revisit Intention (Abbasi et al., 2021; Meng & Cui, 2020; Song et al., 2021). I predict I will visit Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin in the future. If everything goes as I think, I will plan to visit Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin in the future. I have the knowledge and the ability to look for interesting destination to visit. Taking my past experience with a good quality of service into account affects my willingness to travel again. I would more frequently visit Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin. _GoBack baut0010 baut0015