750 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Desire to visit again cultural tourism: Role of destination attractiveness, perceived risk, cultural contact in encouraging tourist satisfaction Susi Evanita1 Zul Fahmi2+ 1,2Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia. 1Email: susievanita@gmail.com 2Email: 18zulfahmi@gmail.com (+ Corresponding author) ABSTRACT Article History Received: 19 February 2025 Revised: 16 June 2025 Accepted: 1 July 2025 Published: 17 July 2025 Keywords Cultural contact Destination attractiveness Perceived risk Revisit intention Satisfaction. Silokek Geopark’s tourism is a natural site that attracts visitors due to its diverse historical relics and its geological, biological, and cultural variety. This study aims to identify the factors influencing tourist satisfaction with attractions in the Silokek Geopark and to explore how satisfaction with perceived risks and cultural contact affects their intention to revisit. The research involved 250 respondents who had previously visited the area conducted in 2021. A purposive sampling method was employed with a survey-based approach. Data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) through Smart PLS 3. The findings reveal that facilities, services, and interpersonal interactions are key elements that enhance visitor satisfaction. A higher level of satisfaction is positively correlated with a stronger intention to return. Conversely, perceived risks related to time, cost, performance, physical, and socio- psychological factors can negatively impact revisit intentions. Cultural contact also emerged as an important variable although further refinement through more specific indicators is necessary for accurate measurement. The study concludes that positive tourist experiences significantly increase satisfaction and diminish negative perceptions of travel-related sacrifices. Therefore, policymakers and destination managers should strategically manage and promote the destination’s unique values while effectively mitigating perceived risks to sustain and enhance tourism attractiveness. Contribution/Originality: This study reveals that cultural contact does not significantly influence tourist satisfaction or revisit intention in Silokek Geopark unlike previous findings. This is due to poorly organized cultural elements, highlighting the need for better integration of local culture to enhance the destination’s cultural tourism appeal. 1. INTRODUCTION Tourism is one of the largest industrial sectors today (Mohammed Abubakar, 2016). Recently, it has been considered a commercial sector with significant impact and potential in many developing countries and needs to be taken into account as a sector of the economy (Nguyen Viet, Dang, & Nguyen, 2020) through the development of related employment, improving the standard of living of local communities, including supporting the growth of other industries (Brătucu et al., 2017) including being able to increase the additional economic benefits felt by tourists who consumed tourism products (Mai, Nguyen, & Nguyen, 2019). This provides an excellent opportunity Humanities and Social Sciences Letters 2025 Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 750-766 ISSN(e): 2312-4318 ISSN(p): 2312-5659 DOI: 10.18488/73.v13i2.4299 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3167-0827 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0460-1271 mailto:susievanita@gmail.com mailto:18zulfahmi@gmail.com https://www.doi.org/10.18488/73.v13i2.4299 Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 751 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. for Indonesia, considering that the tourism sector in Indonesia has also become one of the priority development programs by the local and central governments. For example, West Sumatra is one of Indonesia's provinces with a beautiful geographical area, natural tourism potential, and various existing tourist attractions. The tourism potential is like that of Sijunjung Regency. Geographically, the astronomical position of Sijunjung Regency is at 0°18'- 43" South latitude (LS) to 1o 41'- 46" South latitude and from 100 ° 37'- 40 East longitude (BT) to 101 ° 30'- 52 East longitude, with the position of Sijunjung Regency in the eastern part of West Sumatra Province, on the main route connecting Riau Province and Jambi Province (Public Info, 2019). Sijunjung Regency has a tourist attraction area consisting of a variety of natural attractions, cultural attractions, and sports attractions scattered in various sub-districts. One of the tourist attractions of this area is Silokek village. The tourism potential in the Silokek area is in the form of natural attractions with diversity and historical relics and natural panoramic beauty, such as the beautiful white sand atmosphere on the banks of the Kuantan River, cave tourism (Ngalau), Ngalau Basurek, Ngalau Talago, Ngalau Cigak, Andam Dewi Island as well as special interest tourism, namely, rafting, rock climbing and historical relics, namely, Japanese relics of steam locomotives (Central Bureau of Statistics of Sijunjung Regency, 2022). The high potential of existing tourism does not show a positive direction towards the level of visits. According to the Central Bureau of Statistics, the percentage of tourist visits in 2019 was only 0.1522%. In 2020, it was 1.864%, and in 2021, it was 1.265%. This proves that the number of tourist visits to Sijunjung Regency is still low. When compared to the number of tourist visits in 19 regencies/cities in West Sumatra Province, the number of tourist visits to Sijunjung Regency in 2019 was 17th; in 2020, it was 10th, and in 2021, it was 15th (Badan Pusat Statistik Kabupaten Sijunjung, 2022). Based on this sequence, Sijunjung Regency is still not one of the favorite tourist attractions in West Sumatra Province with few destination visits. The level of tourism visits is an important thing to consider as well as the factors of tourist satisfaction and return visit intentions are considered essential elements to ensure the success of a tourist destination (Mai et al., 2019; Nguyen Viet et al., 2020) including the friendliness of residents towards tourists that can increase overall tourist satisfaction (Raimkulov, Juraturgunov, & Ahn, 2021) as well as the number of previous visits is also considered one of the factors that influence revisit intentions (Court & Lupton, 1997; Mazursky, 1989; Petrick, Morais, & Norman, 2001; Sampol, 1996; Um, Chon, & Ro, 2006). Previous tourism research has identified various important antecedents, including the number of destinations visited, satisfaction, maturity of destinations, familiarity with the destination, novelty seeking, and aspects that indicate the value derived from the destinations. (Li, Cai, Lehto, & Huang, 2010). This research analyzes related to revisiting intention which refers to tourist self-evaluation based on tourist perceptions, including images and attitudes which are reviewed by referring to the consumer behavior model (Assael, 1998). This is based on destination attractiveness influencing visiting intentions (Yacob, Johannes, & Qomariyah, 2019). Destination attractiveness is essential for visitors because it can assess tangible things, such as diversity (natural and cultural wealth) which has unique and distinctive values (Li et al., 2010). In addition, perceived risk can encourage tourists' desire to revisit a destination (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020) which refers to consumers' perceptions of possible risks. Perceived risk has been said to be multi-dimensional. Many researchers have previously classified risk in various ways. Nonetheless, everyone is aware that engaging in tourism brings risks to one's physical and mental health, which can be caused by various things, such as personal experiences (illness or injury) and external circumstances (war, weather, etc.), including social interactions (culture shock and cultural differences) (Sohn, Lee, & Yoon, 2016). Destination attractiveness and perceived risk will also have a direct impact on the level of tourist satisfaction. Satisfaction is the feeling tourists have after comparing the experience they felt while visiting with their expectations (Chotimah & Wahyudi, 2019). When a tourist feels satisfied with a destination, they can make a return visit (Chin, Law, Lo, & Ramayah, 2018). However, satisfaction alone may not be enough to make tourists revisit a Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 752 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. destination. Memories and remembered experiences must be studied to understand tourists' behavioral intentions (Chen & Rahman, 2018). This is the reason for the importance of memorable tourism experiences and their influence on tourist retention. In addition, depth of knowledge and visitor engagement are essential to cultural tourism (McKercher, 2002). It is necessary to analyze the cultural contact in tourists' satisfaction and desire to visit again. Many studies have focused on cultural relations. However, not many studies analyze tourist behavior from the perspective of the culture in tourist destinations (Lai, Zhang, Zhang, Tseng, & Shiau, 2021). Cultural tourism experiences involve close contact between tourists and the local culture and participation in local cultural activities. These may influence tourists' desire to engage in local cultural activities in tourist attractions (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). Therefore, studying how cultural contact plays an essential role in creating tourists' emotional bonds is interesting. Existing cultures can influence the way people perceive, value, and interpret the society and tourist environment visited. According to Al-Goaib (2003) cultural contact is vital in attracting and satisfying tourists, which can impact their satisfaction and desire to return. In cultural tourism, aspects like cultural contact and visitor engagement have not been thoroughly explored (Chen & Rahman, 2018) and intensively. This shows the importance of the fantastic tourism experience and how it affects traveler retention. Visitor engagement and the perceived depth of expertise which may take the form of a sense of satisfaction are essential components of cultural tourism (McKercher, 2002). This study investigates the factors influencing tourist revisit intentions, focusing on satisfaction, culture, perceived risk, and destination attractiveness. It aims to contribute to existing literature by addressing inconsistencies in research findings regarding how culture, perceived risk, and various aspects of destination image specifically destination attractiveness affect tourist satisfaction and the likelihood of revisiting. This research provides a comprehensive overview of previous tourism marketing literature related to potential research topics. The iconic cultural elements of West Sumatra, particularly the Minangkabau culture with the province's significant tourism sector, especially in the Silokek Geopark area make this an intriguing focus for study. This research also emphasizes practical applications within tourism studies. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Revisit Intention Interest is a psychological activity that arises because of feelings and thoughts about a desired good or service, either consciously or unconsciously (Ranjbarian & Pool, 2015) which causes some determined future behavior so that a sense of wanting to own, feel, or visit (Zhang, Wu, & Buhalis, 2018). A form of behavioral intention or customer desire to return has a positive impact, stays longer than expected, and spends more than anticipated (Farrukh, Shahzad, Sajid, Sheikh, & Alam, 2022). The destination's performance can influence forms of interest, such as the intention to revisit a particular destination, such as promotional efforts and news spread about new attractions (Zhang et al., 2018). It can be described as a strong possibility to revisit a place with or without a positive attitude towards the service provider (Mahdzar, Shuib, Ramachandran, & Afandi, 2015) which can be determined by what makes them interested compared to their satisfaction with a tourism object (Um et al., 2006). 2.2. Destination Attractiveness Destination attractiveness is a key motivating factor that drives individuals to visit a particular tourist destination, primarily due to the distinct values the destination offers (Basiya & Rozak, 2012). According to Smith and Warburton (2012) tourists' thoughts and emotional responses toward a destination’s ability to fulfill their needs are reflected in its perceived attractiveness. This concept relates to how well the destination’s resources align with tourist expectations in terms of availability, affordability, and time efficiency (Thio, Jokom, & Widjaja, 2024). These resources encompass natural, cultural, and anthropogenic (man-made) features (Nasir, Mohamad, Ghani, & Afthanorhan, 2020) which are crucial considerations for tourists when planning a visit (Pompurová, Šimočková, & Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 753 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Rialti, 2024). The attractiveness of a destination can be further influenced by infrastructure and environmental factors, including weather conditions, temperature, rainfall, sunshine duration, beach characteristics, water quality, rural landscapes, nature reserves, lakes, mountains, deserts, and the uniqueness of local flora and fauna (Moularde & Weaver, 2016; Beerli & Martin, 2004). According to Formica and Uysal (2006) destination attractiveness is shaped by the quality of tourism resources and the demand from interested visitors. Thus, the perceived attractiveness is closely linked to tourists' perceived benefits (Mayo & Jarvis, 1981) and is considered a key predictor of revisit intention as a sub dimension of performance quality (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Um & Crompton, 1990; Woodside & Lysonski, 1989). Moreover, appealing tourist attractions significantly contribute to visitor satisfaction (Ćulić et al., 2021; Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). H1: Destination attractiveness has a positive and significant effect on revisit intention. H2: Destination attractiveness has a positive and significant effect on satisfaction. 2.3. Cultural Contact Cultural contact denotes complex interactions between disparate cultural groups, spanning short-term exchanges to centuries-long engagements and encompassing diverse forms of social, economic, and political relationships (Silliman, 2005). Meanwhile, cultural contact is not an isolated cultural event. Cultural contact stems from archaeology and involves a cultural value experienced through a particular group at a specific time (Lai et al., 2021). Cultural contact is a human trait not an isolated phenomenon (Rehman et al., 2022). Cultural contact is a direct exchange over a long period among different social unit members who do not share a common identity (Schortman & Urban, 1998). In addition to habits, behaviors, rites, and customs, cultural relations include cultural celebrations and how people use natural and economic resources (Steiner & Reisinger, 2004). Zeng (2017) found that the culture of a destination appears more alluring and fascinating to long- distance travelers. Therefore, they will feel happy as they gain new experiences and excitement, increasing their satisfaction. Cultural exchange through tourist-local interactions facilitates increased cultural competency and contextual understanding (Chen & Rahman, 2018). Therefore, the cultural contact of a tourist destination has a meaningful impact on tourist satisfaction (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). H3: Cultural contact has a positive and significant effect on tourist satisfaction. Travelers are expected to gain better knowledge and a deeper understanding of the culture of the tourist destination through interaction with the culture and local people (Chen & Rahman, 2018). As a result, there may be a relationship between higher levels of cultural contact and the desire to visit again (Romão, Neuts, Nijkamp, & Van Leeuwen, 2015). The cultural contact received will have an impact on the emotions of tourists causing the desire to visit again (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). H4: Cultural contact has a positive and significant effect on revisit intention. 2.4. Perceived Risk According to Khan, Chelliah, and Ahmed (2017) risk is the possibility of unwanted events that harm consumer actions. Various disciplines, including business management, sociology, and psychology have discussed the concept of risk perception. Many studies focus on this concept (Chaudhary & Islam, 2021). The impact can be loss of money, time costs, psychological suffering or other problems caused by unpleasant events (Tian, Zhang, Jiang, & Yang, 2022). These risks can be seen in physical, financial, performance, socio-psychological, and time (Khan, Chelliah, Khan, & Amin, 2019). Therefore, the perceived risks associated with tourism services are higher than the consumption of other commodity goods (Sánchez-Cañizares, Cabeza-Ramírez, Muñoz-Fernández, & Fuentes- García, 2021) leading to tourist dissatisfaction (Sohn et al., 2016). Tsaur, Tzeng, and Wang (1997) described tourism risk as the possibility of an accident happening to a group of visitors during the trip or at the destination. They divided physical risks into two categories which are as follows: equipment-related and physical risks. Adverse Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 754 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. impacts as a form of risk will discourage tourists from visiting a tourist destination (Sohn et al., 2016). All risks can be defined in different ways. Risks are referred to as shocks, threats, and disasters that can jeopardize the resilience and stability of the tourism industry (Çetinsöz & Ege, 2013). This will have an impact on the safety and security of visitors so that it can have a significant effect on the low desire to visit again by tourists (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). Risks arising from a travel activity will cause various responses of disappointment by visitors (Nasir et al., 2020) and discourage repeat visits (Rini, Absah, Sembiring, & Nasution, 2021). H5: Perceived risk has a negative and significant effect on revisit intention. H6: Perceived risk has a negative and significant effect on satisfaction. 2.5. Tourist Satisfaction Satisfaction is a fundamental construct in marketing and consumer behavior literature. It is commonly defined as a consumer’s response to the fulfillment of their expectations (Oliver, 1997) or as an evaluation of how well a product or service meets their needs (Bitner & Zeithaml, 2003). According to Spreng, MacKenzie, and Olshavsky (1996) overall satisfaction arises from two key antecedents: satisfaction with specific attributes (based on performance evaluations) and satisfaction with information received. In the context of tourism, satisfaction occurs when the travel experience aligns with or exceeds tourists’ needs, expectations, and desires (Ćulić et al., 2021). Tourists are likely to feel satisfied when the actual experience surpasses their expectations, and conversely, dissatisfied when it falls short (Chen & Chen, 2010). Tourist satisfaction can be assessed by analyzing emotional and cognitive reactions to the travel experience (Vu et al., 2020). Satisfaction results from comparing prior expectations with the outcomes of the trip. If the experience is perceived as pleasant, satisfaction follows, whereas an unpleasant outcome leads to dissatisfaction (Chen & Chen, 2010; Le Chi Cong, 2016). Satisfaction from a tourist visit will impact the desire to return to visit (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). This shows that satisfaction is a factor that will influence the willingness to see again by tourists (Abbasi, Kumaravelu, Goh, & Dara Singh, 2021; An, Suh, & Eck, 2019; Chaudhary & Islam, 2021; Le Chi Cong, 2016). Tourist satisfaction also provides a mediating impact for perceived risk (Hasan, Ismail, & Islam, 2017) cultural contact (Nguyen Huu et al., 2024) and destination attractiveness (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020) on revisit intention (Rehman et al., 2022). H7: Tourist satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on revisit intention. H8: Satisfaction mediates cultural Contact on revisit intention. H9: Satisfaction mediates destination attractiveness on revisit intention. H10: Satisfaction mediates perceived risk on revisit intention. The research hypothesis model of destination attractiveness, cultural contact, perceived risk, satisfaction on revisit intention is depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1. Research framework model. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 755 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. The research hypothesis model shows that the correlation of destination attractiveness, cultural contact, perceived risk, and satisfaction with revisit intention is depicted in Figure 1. 3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.1. Data Collection 3.1.1. Research Model This research is a type of quantitative survey research based on close-ended questions. This research was conducted on tourists who visited Silokek Geoprak. The population of this research is tourist visitors to the Silokek geopark, Sijunjung Regency, Indonesia whose exact number cannot be identified. The research sample consists of individuals who have visited the Silokek geopark area, which was determined by non-probability sampling techniques because no visit data clearly describes the tourists' background. The respondent is willing to be used as a research sample which is indicated by the willingness of the individual concerned to be used as a respondent by filling out the research questionnaire until completion. This research design identifies the variable of cultural contact, intended as a pivotal variable in this study in an area rich in culture, namely the Minangkabau customs in West Sumatra Province, particularly in Sijunjung Regency with its values and uniqueness. Therefore, it is expected that the results of this research can reveal the importance of distinctive cultural values in a tourist area. 3.1.2. Participants and Data Collection Each enumerator was given a basic understanding of the questionnaire, including instructions for completing and interpreting each measurement item. Although enumerators were provided with clear guidelines, there was still a possibility that the data obtained was not completely accurate. As a validation measure, reverse questions were used to ensure consistency of answers. Prior to the main research, a preliminary study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of the instruments and the effectiveness of the data collection techniques. The results of this study were used to make the necessary adjustments before the data acquisition process continued. The sample was determined by purposive sampling using the criteria that tourists had visited the Silokek Geopark tourist area in the last 6 months. This study has submitted 264 questionnaires to visit tourists, 14 were ineligible questionnaires, and 250 were eligible questionnaires. The sample size has met the statistical sample requirements. According to Hair, Hult, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2014) the sample should have a minimum size of five to twenty observations per item and have a power of 0.8 with alpha 0.05. This study evaluates the conceptual framework and hypotheses using the partial least square-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) method. Since this study assessed the mediation hypothesis, the PLS-SEM approach was considered relevant to identify the relationships of the research framework. Microsoft Excel 2016 software was used to analyze the respondents' demographic data, including calculating the Respondent Achievement Rate (TAR) and the percentage of answers. The research questionnaire distributed consisted of 57 questions adopted from previous research. Before getting into the main research questions, the questionnaire asked tracer questions in the last section as well as by the last section to ensure that the research sample can truly represent the population of the research objectives. The questions are as follows: Have you visited Silokek Geopark within 6 months? How many times have you visited Silokek Geopark? Furthermore, on what day did you come to Silokek Geopark? Moreover, questions related to the identity of respondents include demographics: gender, age, marital status, education level, and monthly income. 3.2. Measurement The measurement of this study uses a Likert scale with a range of 1-5 which states strongly disagree (1) and strongly agree (5). This scale is intended to make it easier for respondents to respond to the questionnaire statement items submitted so that it takes less time to complete than open-ended questions (Churchill Jr, 1979). All Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 756 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. statement items in this study were adopted from the same relevant research as previous studies that have been tested in various countries to ensure the validity and reliability of the instrument. Revisit intention, cultural contact and destination attractiveness are adopted (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). Perceived risk from research (Khan et al., 2019) and tourist satisfaction (Lu & Weng, 2020). 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION This research instrument was first tested on 30 tourists to test readability, sentence structure, language, and words before being distributed as a research instrument. According to Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) and Hertzog (2007) the minimum number of respondents for a pilot study is 30 people, so the number of respondents in this pilot study was sufficient. Table 1 in this study illustrates explicitly the demographic data of the respondents. Based on gender, 59.2% of respondents were male while the rest were female. In this study, respondents were dominated by individuals aged 15-25 years with a percentage of 65.2%. More than half of the respondents' education was at the senior high school level. 42% of respondents' jobs were students, 32% were university students, private employees were 7.6%, housewives were 19.2%, civil servants were 7.2% and self-employees were 16.8%. Based on income, 53.2% of respondents are individuals with 53.2% income. The most frequent number of visits by respondents is 1-2 visits with a proportion of 58.8%. Respondents' visiting days were 21.2% on weekdays while holidays were 53.6% and on national holidays 25.2%. Of the origin of respondents, 45 % are native people of Sijunjung, 46 % are tourists domiciled in West Sumatra, and 9% are tourists outside the province. Table 1. Respondent overview. Characteristics Frequency % Characteristics Frequency % Gender Revenue Male 148 59.2 Female 102 40.8 < Rp.2,000,000 133 53.2 Age > Rp. 2,000,000 - Rp. 4,000,000 86 34.4 15-25 163 65.2 < Rp. 4,000,000 - Rp. 6,000,000 22 8.8 26-35 69 27.6 < Rp. 6,000,000 - Rp. 8,000,000 6 2.4 36-45 14 5.6 > Rp. 8,000,000 - Rp.10.000.000 1 0.4 >45 4 1.6 > Rp.10,000,000 2 0.8 Education Number of visits Senior high school 158 63.2 1- 2 times 147 58.8 Associate degree. 23 9.2 3- 5 times 64 25.6 Bachelor 67 0.8 3 > 5 times 0 0 Master degree 2 0.8 Day of visit Jobs Monday - Friday 53 21.2 Students 42 16.8 Saturday - Sunday 134 53.6 University student 81 32.4 National holiday 63 25.2 Private employee 19 7.6 Home region Housewife 48 19.2 Sijunjung regency 112 45 Civil servant 18 7.2 In West Sumatra 116 46 Self-employed 42 16.8 Outside Sumatra 22 9 The study made some basic measurements or assumptions in model assessment. Table 2 shows the item factor loadings, composite reliabilities (CR), AVE values, Cronbach alpha values, and suggested R2 values. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 757 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Table 2. Outer loading value. No. of item Measurement items No. of item Measurement of items No. of item Measurement of items CC1 0.079 DA8 0.817 PR5 0.705 CC10 0.726 DA9 0.875 PR6 0.733 CC11 0.638 INT1 0.777 PR7 0.787 CC2 0.447 INT2 0.852 PR8 0.726 CC3 0.604 INT3 0.848 PR9 0.696 CC4 0.635 INT4 0.846 SAT1 0.821 CC5 0.500 INT5 0.814 SAT10 0.809 CC6 0.730 PR1 0.668 SAT11 0.768 CC7 0.660 PR10 0.817 SAT12 0.824 CC8 0.719 PR11 0.733 SAT13 0.802 CC9 0.723 PR12 0.681 SAT14 0.785 DA1 0.814 PR13 0.655 SAT2 0.816 DA10 0.771 PR14 0.679 SAT3 0.850 DA2 0.821 PR15 0.749 SAT4 0.777 DA3 0.867 PR16 0.723 SAT5 0.817 DA4 0.861 PR17 0.746 SAT6 0.732 DA5 0.891 PR2 0.736 SAT7 0.716 DA6 0.845 PR3 0.705 SAT8 0.679 DA7 0.844 PR4 0.733 SAT9 0.736 Note: CC = Cultural contact, DA = Destination attractiveness, INT = Revisit intention, PR = Perceived risk, SAT = Satisfaction. Table 2 shows the outer loading value with the factor loading value criteria above 0.60. Table 1 shows three invalid questionnaire items with a value smaller than 0.60, namely items CC1, CC2, and CC5. Hence, the item can be removed for the next stage of analysis. Table 3. Measurement of model assessment. Construct Cronbach's alpha Composite reliability Average variance extracted (AVE) R2 Cultural contact 0.934 0.859 0.779 - Destination attractiveness 0.954 0.960 0.708 Perceived risk 0.943 0.949 0.523 Revisit intention 0.885 0.916 0.686 0.682 Satisfaction 0.951 0.957 0.612 0.863 Table 3 shows the variance value of the endogenous variables is indicated by R2, which means a minor influence (R2 = 2%), a medium influence (R2 = 13%) or a significant impact (R2 = 26%). Customer revisit intention increases (0.682 or 68.2%), and customer satisfaction increases (0.863 or 86.3%) with the independent variables. In addition, Table 2 shows that the AVE value of each variable is more than 0.50, the CR value and Cronbach's alpha value are more than 0.70 and all of them are within the acceptable or standard range. 4.1. Measurement Validation: The Fornell-Larcker Criterion The results from the analysis of determinants test (see Table 4) show that the square root of the mean value of the extracted variance (AVE) meets the requirements. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 758 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Table 4. Discriminant validity: The Fornell-Larcker criterion. Constructs Cultural contact Destination attractiveness Perceived risk Revisit intention Satisfaction Cultural contact 0.615 Destination attractiveness -0.121 0.841 Perceived risk 0.134 -0.540 0.723 Revisit intention -0.072 0.770 -0.62 0.828 Satisfaction -0.136 0.925 -0.571 0.795 0.782 The correlation values between the AVE values on the main diagonal of the SEM and the lower values are shown in Table 3. The Fornell and Larcker (1981) shown in Table 4 indicates model criteria were used to evaluate discriminant validity. In addition, the square roots of the AVE (bolded) of all variables were at the highest level between 0.615 and 0.828. Therefore, the discriminant validity among the variables can be maintained, and the validity of this model can be used. Figure 2. Structural model assessment. Note: *** : Key constructs. The bootstrapping process used 250 resamples with Figure 2 showing SEM performance with Smart PLS 3.0 with items sorted by item and coefficients between variables. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 759 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Table 4. Results of direct and indirect relationships. Hypothesis constructs Original sample (O) Sample mean (M) Standard deviation (STDEV) T- statistics (|O/STDEV|) P- values Note Cultural contact -> Revisit intention 0.049 0.047 0.042 1.18 0.238 ns Rejected Cultural contact -> Satisfaction 0.007 0.006 .029 .257 0.797 ns Rejected Destination attractiveness -> Revisit intention 0.221 0.195 0.107 2.068 0.039 Supported Destination attractiveness -> Satisfaction 0.871 0.870 0.025 34.343 0.000 ***: Supported Perceived risk -> Revisit intention -0.248 -0.247 0.055 4.517 0.000 ***: Supported Perceived risk -> Satisfaction -0.101 -0.101 0.024 4.215 0.000 ***: Supported Satisfaction -> Revisit intention 0.453 0.476 0.113 4.018 0.000***: Supported Cultural contact -> Satisfaction -> Revisit intention 0.003 0.002 0.014 .249 0.803 ns Rejected Destination attractiveness -> Satisfaction -> Revisit intention 0.394 0.415 0.102 3.871 0.000 ***: Supported Perceived risk -> Satisfaction -> Revisit intention -0.046 -0.048 0.018 2.566 0.011 Supported Note: ***: p < 0.001; ns: not significant. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 760 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. This study outlines the relationships between research constructs designed to generate analytical results as presented in Table 4. The findings indicate that hypothesis 1 (H1)— destination attractiveness has a positive and significant effect on revisit intention is supported, with a p-value of 0.039 (P < 0.05) and a t-statistic of 2.068 (> 1.96 and the standard t-table value). This suggests that the attractiveness of tourist destinations can significantly increase tourists’ intention to revisit, reflecting loyalty to the destination (Nasir et al., 2020). In the case of Silokek Geopark, when visitors perceive the site as attractive, they are more likely to return. Similarly, hypothesis 2 (H2) destination attractiveness has a positive and significant effect on satisfaction is also supported. The analysis shows a p-value of 0.000 (< 0.05) and a t-statistic of 34.343 (> 1.96). This indicates that tourists feel satisfied when the destination has appealing features, both in terms of physical and non-physical tourism infrastructure (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). However, hypothesis 3 (H3) cultural contact has a positive effect on satisfaction is rejected. The p- value of 0.797 (> 0.05) and t-statistic of 0.257 (< 1.96) suggest that cultural contact does not significantly influence tourist satisfaction. This may be due to insufficient cultural infrastructure in the Silokek Geopark area to meet tourist expectations. The hypothesis on the relationship between cultural contact at Silokek Geopark and revisit intention is also rejected (H4). Existing culture cannot shape and bind tourists' desire to visit. This is stated based on the results of the analysis of p-value > 0.05 (0.238) and the value of t-statistic < t-table (1.18 < 1.96). Existing cultural contact that has been felt is likely to encourage tourists to visit (Elfiondri, Zaitul, & Rina, 2021). In the study of cultural contact, tourists stay in specific cultural tourist sites to make cultural contact for several days or more and interact with the local culture there (Chen & Rahman, 2018). In this location, they also communicate and interact with people from various places (Chen & Rahman, 2018; Ćulić et al., 2021). This difference in results is suspected because most respondents do not live in and stay in tourist areas, and the study results do not align with previous research. In hypothesis five (H5), with a p- value <0.05 (000) and a t-statistic value> t-table (4.517>1.96), the perceived risk relationship has a negative and significant effect on revisit intention; this indicates that this hypothesis is accepted. Risk is translated as a lousy impact that might occur. The higher the risk, the more the intention of tourists to visit a tourist spot will be discouraged (Çetinsöz & Ege, 2013; Hasan et al., 2017). This relationship is characterized by the original sample value with a negative value (-0.248) showing a negative direction. The lower the perceived risk, the higher the revisit intention and vice versa (Chaudhary & Islam, 2021). This shows the same condition in hypothesis six (H6), a negative perceived risk relationship to tourist satisfaction. This condition can be seen based on the p-value <0.05 (0.000), the t-statistic value> t-table (4.215>1.96), and the original sample value (- 0.101). Perceived risk in tourists will reduce their sense of satisfaction (Chaudhary & Islam, 2021). Various risks considered to threaten themselves are certainly not desirable (Hasan et al., 2017) resulting in low or decreased satisfaction for tourists. This research also identifies the effect of satisfaction on tourist revisit intention in the Silokek Geopark tourist area. This hypothesis (H7) in this study is accepted based on the results of the analysis, which shows a p-value <0.05 (0.000) and the value of t-statistics> t-table (4.018>1.96). Tourists who feel satisfied with their tourist visits are likely to increase their desire to visit again (Kozak, 2001). In other words, it can be assessed as tourist loyalty (Chiu, Zeng, & Cheng, 2016; Yuksel & Yuksel, 2008). Satisfaction in this study is used as a mediating variable that allows it to have an essential impact on exogenous and endogenous variables. The results of this analysis show that satisfaction does not significantly mediate cultural contact on revisit intention with a p-value> 0.005 (0.803), so (H8) is rejected. Furthermore, satisfaction can significantly mediate destination attractiveness on revisit intention (H9) is accepted based on the p-value <0.05 (0.000). This allows the satisfaction created by the tourist attraction in the Silokek Geopark tourist area to increase tourists' desire to visit again. Likewise, on the contrary, the poor satisfaction tourists feel as a result of the tourist attractions will also impact the receding desire to visit again. Finally, the satisfaction tourists feel from the perceived risk in a tourist area will increase the desire to visit again. In this case, satisfaction mediates the relationship between perceived risk and revisit intention with p-value <0.05 Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 761 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. (0.11). This hypothesis (H10) is accepted so that an increase in satisfaction from a tourist area with minimal risk will also increase the desire of tourists to visit the Silokek Geopark tourism. In H9 and H10, satisfaction can strengthen the influence relationship between destination attractiveness and perceived risk (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). This research has revealed the importance of tourist attractions, attention to risk, and satisfaction for tourists. This aspect will encourage the desire to act again and make the same decision if this variable is used as a focus that is considered in building impressions for tourists. Recommendations that need to be rearranged by the tourism manager, namely the existing cultural aspects, so that cultural contact is well developed; this allows it to give its impression to tourists. Local culture appeals to some tourists who can influence their desires, allowing them to engage with local cultural activities at the tourist attractions they visit (Nguyen Viet et al., 2020). 5. CONCLUSION This study re-evaluates the intricate relationship among destination attractiveness, perceived risk, contractual contact, and tourist satisfaction while also examining their combined influence on tourists' intentions to revisit a destination. The mediating role of tourist satisfaction is analyzed in depth providing comprehensive insights into these dynamics. The primary findings are as follows: 1. Destination attractiveness, perceived risk, and tourist satisfaction exhibit positive and significant influences on the intention to revisit a destination. 2. Conversely, perceived risk demonstrates a negative and significant effect on revisit intentions. 3. Satisfaction serves as a significant mediator in the relationship between destination attractiveness, perceived risk, and the intention to revisit. 4. Cultural contact shows a positive yet statistically insignificant effect on revisit intentions. 5. The mediating role of satisfaction between cultural contact and revisit intentions is also found to be insignificant. The significance of destination attractiveness in drawing visitors to a location has been well documented in the literature (Beerli & Martin, 2004). It not only motivates tourists but also encourages them to prolong their stay and consider repeat visits. This research underscores the vital role of destination attractiveness in tourism marketing and its substantial impact on tourists' intentions to return to a destination. The findings contribute to the ongoing discourse in tourism studies, providing essential implications for stakeholders aiming to enhance visitor loyalty. This research has confirmed the important role of destination attractiveness in tourism marketing research studies and its noteworthy impact on tourists' repeat visit intentions. Tourism attractiveness is an aspect that needs to be reorganized by policymakers and managers of tourist destinations, especially in the Silokek geopark area. It can be seen specifically through the aspects that support destination attractiveness which is considered the main factor, including destination support facilities and services, and factors related to humans, which may be another factor determining tourist attractiveness (Vengesayi, Mavondo, & Reisinger, 2009). Different research studies look at it in two aspects: the attractiveness of money facilities owned and the experience of traveling or sightseeing (Ting, Liao, Law, & Zhang, 2023). Perceived risk assessment is fundamental to the decision-making process of travelers as it encapsulates a spectrum of potential threats and negative experiences. These risks encompass a variety of concerns, including security issues, criminal activity, traffic accidents, price surges during peak seasons, food safety, and other possible dangers (Ting et al., 2023). This research delineates several dimensions of perceived risk, namely time risk, financial risk, performance risk, socio-psychological risk, and physical risk that can significantly deter tourists from revisiting specific destinations. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 762 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 6. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS The findings reveal a compelling relationship between tourist satisfaction and the intention to return. When travelers enjoy a fulfilling experience, their overall contentment can effectively diminish apprehensions regarding the associated costs and time commitments, making these concerns less daunting. Consequently, satisfaction emerges as a critical driver of repeat visitation, compelling decision-makers in the tourism industry to prioritize the enhancement of visitor experiences. This insight underscores the necessity for stakeholders to not only understand and mitigate perceived risks but also to unwaveringly commit to elevating the quality of the tourist experience. This can exist sustained by existing tourist attractions, especially natural attractions and local culture such as the Minangkabau culture that inhabits the West Sumatra region and natural landscapes ranging from mountains, forests and natural heritage reserves in the Silokek geopark. They can cultivate a loyal customer base, ensuring the sustainable growth and prosperity of their destinations. 7. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH Some of the gaps in this study are due to various limitations in carrying out research. Therefore, any weaknesses in the research study should be further identified in future research. This study involved research respondents with a variety of different backgrounds in terms of gender, occupation, education, income, visit duration and even visit time and was taken randomly based on criteria. Differences in research results may occur but this is normal as this study was conducted in Indonesia by duplicating previous research models that were considered valid and feasible to identify which were carried out in more developed countries and with different respondent backgrounds so that various important issues studied previously are not important in this research. As with the cultural contact variable, which in principle can increase tourism growth (Manyara & Jones, 2007). Cultural contact can help meet the needs and desires of tourists in a tourism setting. Thus, it can be important in the identification of future research, especially tourism research such as the Silokek geopark by further identifying based on relevant indicators with a more comprehensive model to be developed. Funding: This study received no specific financial support. The APC was funded by the Institute for Research and Community Service (LP2M), Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia. Institutional Review Board Statement: The Ethical Committee of Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia, has granted approval for this study on 20 April 2021 (Ref. No. 18.01/KEPK-UNP/IV/2021). Transparency: The authors state that the manuscript is honest, truthful, and transparent, that no key aspects of the investigation have been omitted, and that any differences from the study as planned have been clarified. This study followed all writing ethics. Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors’ Contributions: Both authors contributed equally to the conception and design of the study. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. REFERENCES 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 Al-Goaib, S. (2003). Religiosity and social conformity of university students: An analytical study applied at King Saoud University. Arts Journal of King Saoud University, 16(1), 51-99. 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 Assael, H. (1998). Consumer behavior and marketing action (6th ed.). Cincinnati: South- Western Publishing. Badan Pusat Statistik Kabupaten Sijunjung. (2022). Sijunjung regency in figures 2022. Sijunjung, Indonesia: Central Bureau of Statistics of Sijunjung Regency. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-12-2019-0109 https://doi.org/10.1080/15980634.2019.1663980 Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 763 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Basiya, R., & Rozak, H. (2012). The quality of tourist attraction, satisfaction and intention of returning foreign tourists in Central Java. Jurnal Ilmiah Dinamika Kepariwisataan, 11(2). Beerli, A., & Martin, J. D. (2004). Factors influencing destination image. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 657-681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.01.010 Bitner, M. J., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2003). Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw- Hill/Irwin. Brătucu, G., Băltescu, C. A., Neacșu, N. A., Boșcor, D., Țierean, O. M., & Madar, A. (2017). Approaching the sustainable development practices in mountain tourism in the Romanian Carpathians. Sustainability, 9(11), 2051. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112051 Central Bureau of Statistics of Sijunjung Regency. (2022). Sijunjung regency in figures (Issue 1). Sijunjung, Indonesia: Central Bureau of Statistics of Sijunjung Regency. Çetinsöz, B. C., & Ege, Z. (2013). Impacts of perceived risks on tourists' revisit intentions. Anatolia, 24(2), 173-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2012.743921 Chaudhary, M., & Islam, N. U. (2021). Impact of perceived risk on tourist satisfaction and future travel intentions: A mediation– moderation analysis. Global Business Review, 09721509211036270. https://doi.org/10.1177/09721509211036270 Chen, C.-F., & Chen, F.-S. (2010). Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tourism Management, 31(1), 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.008 Chen, H., & Rahman, I. (2018). Cultural tourism: An analysis of engagement, cultural contact, memorable tourism experience and destination loyalty. Tourism Management Perspectives, 26, 153-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.10.006 Chin, C.-H., Law, F.-Y., Lo, M.-C., & Ramayah, T. (2018). The impact of accessibility quality and accommodation quality on tourists' satisfaction and revisit intention to rural tourism destination in sarawak: Rhe moderating role of local communities' attitude. Global Business and Management Research, 10(2), 115-127. Chiu, W., Zeng, S., & Cheng, P. S.-T. (2016). The influence of destination image and tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty: A case study of Chinese tourists in Korea. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10(2), 223-234. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2015-0080 Chotimah, S., & Wahyudi, H. D. (2019). The effect of perceived value on revisit intention: Mediation of customer satisfaction in visitors to Jawa Timur Park I Batu. Business Economics, 24(1), 1-11. Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64-73. Court, B., & Lupton, R. A. (1997). Customer portfolio development: Modeling destination adopters, inactives, and rejecters. Journal of Travel Research, 36(1), 35-43. Ćulić, M., Vujičić, M. D., Kalinić, Č., Dunjić, M., Stankov, U., Kovačić, S., . . . Anđelković, Ž. (2021). Rookie tourism destinations—the effects of attractiveness factors on destination image and revisit intention with the satisfaction mediation effect. Sustainability, 13(11), 5780. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115780 Elfiondri, Zaitul, & Rina, N. (2021). Tradition, cultural contact and English for tourism: The case of Mentawai, Indonesia. Heliyon, 7(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07322 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. Farrukh, M., Shahzad, I. A., Sajid, M., Sheikh, M. F., & Alam, I. (2022). Revisiting the intention to travel framework in the perspective of medical tourism: The role of eWord-of-mouth and destination image. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 15(1), 28-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/20479700.2020.1836733 Formica, S., & Uysal, M. (2006). Destination attractiveness based on supply and demand evaluations: An analytical framework. Journal of Travel Research, 44(4), 418-430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287506286714 Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 328-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2004.01.010 https://doi.org/10.3390/su9112051 https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2012.743921 https://doi.org/10.1177/09721509211036270 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.10.006 https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-07-2015-0080 https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115780 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07322 https://doi.org/10.1080/20479700.2020.1836733 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287506286714 Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 764 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS- SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Hasan, M. K., Ismail, A. R., & Islam, M. F. (2017). Tourist risk perceptions and revisit intention: A critical review of literature. Cogent Business & Management, 4(1), 1412874. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2017.1412874 Hertzog, M. A. (2007). Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in Nursing and Health, 31(2), 180- 191. Khan, M. J., Chelliah, S., & Ahmed, S. (2017). Factors influencing destination image and visit intention among young women travellers: Role of travel motivation, perceived risks, and travel constraints. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 22(11), 1139-1155. Khan, M. J., Chelliah, S., Khan, F., & Amin, S. (2019). Perceived risks, travel constraints and visit intention of young women travelers: The moderating role of travel motivation. Tourism Review, 74(3), 721-738. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-08- 2018-0116 Kozak, M. (2001). Comparative assessment of tourist satisfaction with destinations across two nationalities. Tourism Management, 22(4), 391-401. Lai, S., Zhang, S., Zhang, L., Tseng, H.-W., & Shiau, Y.-C. (2021). Study on the influence of cultural contact and tourism memory on the intention to revisit: A case study of cultural and creative districts. Sustainability, 13(4), 2416. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042416 Le Chi Cong, L. C. C. (2016). A formative model of the relationship between destination quality, tourist satisfaction and intentional loyalty: An empirical test in Vietnam. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 26, 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2015.12.002 Li, M., Cai, L. A., Lehto, X. Y., & Huang, J. (2010). A missing link in understanding revisit intention—The role of motivation and image. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(4), 335-348. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2010.481559 Lu, C. Y., & Weng, J. H. (2020). The influence of tourist experience and destination image on satisfaction and revisit intention: A study of heritage tourists in Taiwan. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 12(3), 153–164. Mahdzar, M., Shuib, A., Ramachandran, S., & Afandi, S. H. M. (2015). The role of destination attributes and memorable tourism experience in understanding tourist revisit intentions. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences (Tourism & Environment, Social and Management Sciences), 15(1), 32-39. Mai, K. N., Nguyen, P. N. D., & Nguyen, P. T. M. (2019). International tourists’ loyalty to Ho Chi Minh City destination—a mediation analysis of perceived service quality and perceived value. Sustainability, 11(19), 5447. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195447 Manyara, G., & Jones, E. (2007). Community-based tourism enterprises development in Kenya: An exploration of their potential as avenues of poverty reduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), 628–644. Mayo, E. J., & Jarvis, L. P. (1981). Psychology of leisure travel. In (pp. 191-223). Boston, MA: CBI Publishing Co. Mazursky, D. (1989). Past experience and future tourism decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 16(3), 333-344. McKercher, B. (2002). Towards a classification of cultural tourists. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(1), 29-38. Mohammed Abubakar, A. (2016). Does eWOM influence destination trust and travel intention: A medical tourism perspective. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 29(1), 598-611. Moularde, J., & Weaver, A. (2016). Serious about leisure, serious about destinations: Mountain bikers and destination attractiveness. Journal of Sport and Tourism, 20(3- 4), 285-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2016.1164069 Nasir, M. N. M., Mohamad, M., Ghani, N., & Afthanorhan, A. (2020). Testing mediation roles of place attachment and tourist satisfaction on destination attractiveness and destination loyalty relationship using phantom approach. Management Science Letters, 10(2), 443-454. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.8.026 Nguyen Huu, T., Nguyen Ngoc, H., Nguyen Dai, L., Nguyen Thi Thu, D., Truc, L. N., & Nguyen Trong, L. (2024). Effect of tourist satisfaction on revisit intention in Can Tho City, Vietnam. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2322779. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2322779 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2017.1412874 https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-08-2018-0116 https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-08-2018-0116 https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042416 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2015.12.002 https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2010.481559 https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195447 https://doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2016.1164069 https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.8.026 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2322779 Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 765 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. 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), 1796249. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1796249 Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York: McGraw-Hill. Petrick, J. F., Morais, D. D., & Norman, W. C. (2001). An examination of the determinants of entertainment vacationers’ intentions to revisit. Journal of Travel Research, 40(1), 41-48. Pompurová, K., Šimočková, I., & Rialti, R. (2024). Defining domestic destination attractiveness: Gen-Y and Gen-Z perceptions. Current Issues in Tourism, 27(12), 2004-2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2220953 Public Info. (2019). Overview of Sijunjung. Sijunjung, Indonesia: Public Info. Raimkulov, M., Juraturgunov, H., & Ahn, Y.-j. (2021). Destination attractiveness and memorable travel experiences in silk road tourism in Uzbekistan. Sustainability, 13(4), 2252. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042252 Ranjbarian, B., & Pool, J. K. (2015). The impact of perceived quality and value on tourists’ satisfaction and intention to revisit Nowshahr city of Iran. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 16(1), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2015.966295 Rehman, A. U., Shoaib, M., Javed, M., Abbas, Z., Nawal, A., & Zámečník, R. (2022). Understanding revisit intention towards religious attraction of Kartarpur temple: Moderation analysis of religiosity. Sustainability, 14(14), 8646. Rini, E. S., Absah, Y., Sembiring, B. K. F., & Nasution, M. D. T. P. (2021). Intention to revisit tourist destinations in Indonesia. Innovative Marketing, 17(4), 37. https://doi.org/10.21511/im.17(4).2021.04 Romão, J., Neuts, B., Nijkamp, P., & Van Leeuwen, E. (2015). Culture, product differentiation and market segmentation: A structural analysis of the motivation and satisfaction of tourists in Amsterdam. Tourism Economics, 21(3), 455-474. Sampol, C. J. (1996). Estimating the probability of return visits using a survey of tourist expenditure in the Balearic Islands. Tourism Economics, 2(4), 339-351. Sánchez-Cañizares, S. M., Cabeza-Ramírez, L. J., Muñoz-Fernández, G., & Fuentes-García, F. J. (2021). Impact of the perceived risk from Covid-19 on intention to travel. Current Issues in Tourism, 24(7), 970-984. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1829571 Schortman, E. M., & Urban, P. A. (1998). Culture contact structure and process. Studies in culture contact: interaction, culture change, and archaeology, 102-125. Silliman, S. W. (2005). Culture contact or colonialism? Challenges in the archaeology of native North America. American antiquity, 70(1), 55-74. Smith, J. D., & Warburton, F. (2012). Cambridge IGCSE travel and tourism. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Sohn, H.-K., Lee, T. J., & Yoon, Y.-S. (2016). Relationship between perceived risk, evaluation, satisfaction, and behavioral intention: A case of local-festival visitors. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(1), 28-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2015.1024912 Spreng, R. A., MacKenzie, S. B., & Olshavsky, R. W. (1996). A reexamination of the determinants of consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299606000302 Steiner, C. J., & Reisinger, Y. (2004). Enriching the tourist and host intercultural experience by reconceptualising communication. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 2(2), 118-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766820408668172 Thio, S., Jokom, R., & Widjaja, D. C. (2024). The contribution of perceived food consumption value on destination attractiveness and revisit intention. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 22(4), 727-743. https://doi.org/10.1080/15428052.2022.2074331 Tian, Y., Zhang, H., Jiang, Y., & Yang, Y. (2022). Understanding trust and perceived risk in sharing accommodation: An extended elaboration likelihood model and moderated by risk attitude. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 31(3), 348-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2022.1986190 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1796249 https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2220953 https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042252 https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008X.2015.966295 https://doi.org/10.21511/im.17(4).2021.04 https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1829571 https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2015.1024912 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299606000302 https://doi.org/10.1080/14766820408668172 https://doi.org/10.1080/15428052.2022.2074331 https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2022.1986190 Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 2025, 13(2): 750-766 766 © 2025 Conscientia Beam. All Rights Reserved. Ting, L., Liao, C., Law, R., & Zhang, M. (2023). An integrated model of destination attractiveness and tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior: The mediating effect of place attachment. Behavioral Sciences, 13(3), 264. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13030264 Tsaur, S. H., Tzeng, G. H., & Wang, K. C. (1997). Evaluating tourist risks from fuzzy perspectives. Tourism Management, 18(4), 295–305. 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 Um, S., & Crompton, J. L. (1990). Attitude determinants in tourism destination choice. Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3), 432-448. Vengesayi, S., Mavondo, F. T., & Reisinger, Y. (2009). Tourism destination attractiveness: Attractions, facilities, and people as predictors. Tourism Analysis, 14(5), 621-636. https://doi.org/10.3727/108354209X12597959359211 Vu, N. T., Dung, H. T., Van Dat, N., Duc, P. M., Hung, N. T., & Phuong, N. T. T. (2020). Cultural contact and service quality components impact on tourist satisfaction. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 55(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.35741/issn.0258-2724.55.1.22 Woodside, A. G., & Lysonski, S. (1989). A general model of traveler destination choice. Journal of Travel Research, 27(4), 8-14. Yacob, S., Johannes, J., & Qomariyah, N. (2019). Visiting intention: A perspective of destination attractiveness and image in Indonesia rural tourism. Sriwijaya International Journal of Dynamic Economics and Business, 3(2), 122–133. Yuksel, A., & Yuksel, F. (2008). Tourist satisfaction: Definitional and relational issues. Tourist Satisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 1, 29-48. Zeng, B. (2017). Cultural centre, destination cultural offer and visitor satisfaction. Sustainability, 9(11), 1984. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9111984 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 Views and opinions expressed in this article are the views and opinions of the author(s), Humanities and Social Sciences Letters shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13030264 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2006.06.003 https://doi.org/10.3727/108354209X12597959359211 https://doi.org/10.35741/issn.0258-2724.55.1.22 https://doi.org/10.3390/su9111984 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.06.004