INTERNATIONAL TOURISTS’ ATTITUDES AND SATISFACTION TOWARD AIRPORT F&B, AND DUTY-FREE CONCESSIONS

Karam Ghazi

The High Institute of Tourism & Hotels in Alexandria (Egoth), Egypt

Salama Ammar
The High Institute of Tourism & Hotels in Luxor (Egoth), Egypt

ABSTRACT
Today, airport proﬁtability and passenger satisfaction largely relies on airport concessions. This study investigates the attitude and satisfaction of international tourists toward the airport F&B and duty-free concessions. The attitude formation theory (cognitive-affective-conative model) is used to measure the attitude factors influencing tourists’ satisfaction and their behavioral intentions. The area sampling method and the judgmental sampling method were used. The target respondents were the international tourists who had experienced services offered in F&B and duty-free concessions in the Cairo, Luxor, and Borg-El-Arab airports in Egypt. 320 self-administrated questionnaires were distributed. The data were analyzed with confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling techniques. The results concluded that cognitive and affective evaluations are two interdependent psychological dimensions of F&B and duty-free experience. These two-dimensions together play a critical role in generating a positive satisfaction, which in turn lead to positive behavioral intentions, such as recommending the store to others and revisiting the store. The study has key theoretical and managerial implications.
KEY WORDS: Concessions, Duty-free, Attitude, Cognitive, Affective, Conative.

1. INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH GAP
            Concessions refers to the non-aircraft commercial activities to sell goods and services in terminals and on airport land, including retailing activities such as running or leasing out shopping concessions of various kinds, catering, car parking and rental, banking and so on. The most lucrative type of airport concessions is usually food and beverage (F&B), and duty-free (DF) services (Kim and Shin, 2001; Fu and Zhang, 2010; Seaman, 2011).
             Airports worldwide have increased their dependency on concessions—the retail aspects of airports—to increase their profitability. The main source of airport profit comes from non-aeronautic (non-aviation) revenue rather than aeronautic (aviation) revenue. Due to high competition and pressure of airlines to minimize aeronautical fees, airports are more focused on profit maximization through retail services (Graham, 2009; Fu & Zhang, 2010; Fuerst et al., 2011; Lin, & Chen, 2013; Park, et al., 2013; Chiappa et al., 2016). Statistics indicated that 73% of passengers make purchases at concessions (of these, 68% make a F&B purchase, 25% make a newsstand purchase, 11% make a specialty retail purchase, and some passengers make purchases in multiple categories) (ACRP et al., 2011). According to ACINA (2013), retail sales from airport gift shops, eating (F&B) establishments, newsstands, and parking garages generates between 40% and 50% of the total revenue received by many U.S. commercial airports. ATRS (2006) reported that the major airports worldwide generate between 45 % and 80 % of their total revenues from non-aviation services, a major part of which is revenue from ‘concession services’. Such non-aviation revenues come not only from air passengers, but also from airport employees and visitors. Thus, airports are under increased pressure to increase their commercial profit by expanding their retail operations to attract more passengers and manage the loss coming from partnerships with airlines.
               Moreover, airports have increased their dependency on concessions to increase their passengers’ satisfaction and create a competitive advantage. As a result of enhanced security at worldwide airports, the average waiting time spent by air travelers within the confines of airport terminals has more than doubled in recent years. The increasing ‘waiting time’ creates many needs for people with a desire to fulfill in the form of restaurants, cafes, book and gift stores & other services offered by airport concessions. Some passengers feel more relaxed and ready to have a meal or buy a book to pass the time. Hence, concession activities becomes a likely shopping alternative for these passengers (Kim & Shin, 2001; Torres, et al., 2005; Graham, 2009; Seaman, 2011; Fuerst et al., 2011, Lin, and Chen, 2013; Zuo, 2015). Due to increasing waiting time pressure, airports are forced to understand and meet passengers’ needs through developing and managing concession or retail services.
               Despite the importance of concessions for both airport proﬁtability and passenger satisfaction, the literature on airport concessions is still limited and there is a lack of research on airport F&B and DF concessions from tourists’ viewpoint (Geuens et al., 2004; Correia & Wirashinge, 2004; Fodness & Murray, 2007; Han et al. 2012; Rossi, & Tasca, 2012; Pinna and Chiappa, 2013; Kim et al., 2015; Chiappa, et al. 2016; Mederiros et al., 2016). In particular, there are some evident research gaps:
1.   There is a lack of conceptual and empirical research that examines the attitude and satisfaction of international tourists toward F&B, and DF in the airport industry in general and in the Egyptian context in particular. There are a number of challenges to measure the service quality at airport terminals with a focus on operations and retail management. Moreover, a few studies have been written in developing nations like Egypt, most of research has occurred mostly in developed nations.
2.   There is a lack of studies that applying well-known methodology that is based on the attribute formation theory and its cognitive-affective-behavioral model to analyse the airport F&B and DF offering. To the best knowledge of the researcher, this theory has rarely been used to analyse perceptions of tourists’ experience on the airport concessions, and particularly on the airport F&B and DF concessions. However, it is widely accepted that the assessment of both the cognitive and the affective components of attitude can be used as a predictor of tourists’ satisfaction and behavioral intentions, such as intention to revisit, recommend, and spread positive word of mouth (Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Tian-Cole, et al., 2002; Back & Parks, 2003; Beerli & Martín, 2004; Pike, & Ryan, 2004; Sanchez, et al., 2006; Tasci et al., 2007; Lin, et al., 2007; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Lehto, et al., 2007; San, & Rodriguez, 2008; Chi, & Qu, 2008; Jang & Namkung, 2009; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Han et al., 2012; Kim & Perdue, 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Song, et al., 2013; Kim et al, 2015; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017). This relationship wasn’t tested in airport concessions in general and in F&B and DF concessions in particular.
3.   Most of airport research focuses on companies’ perspectives rather than consumers’ perspectives. There is a lack of systematic understanding of airport travelers’ perceptions and expectations. Airport literature focusing on quality at the attribute level and discussing with stakeholders such as airport and airline operators, consultants, regulators and travel industry managers rather than discussing with passengers. Current airport research has focused more on convenience and popular attitudes than on consumer perceptions of individual airport functions and services. However, some studies has analyzed consumers' evaluations of their experience and perceptions of the service provided in airline lounges (e.g., Han et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2015) and in airport concessions (Kim and Shin, 2001) using a small group survey of 12 experts. Overall, it can be argued that the literature on service quality in DF and F&B retailers is still scarce.
4.   There is a continuous need to understand the consumers’ behavior and attitude as well as the factors that influence these thoughts, feelings and actions from time to time. Consumer‘s behavior, attitude, and satisfaction in airport retails are change constantly due to dynamics of the industry and behavior of customers (Mason et al., 1988).
              Thus, this study ﬁlls this evident research gaps by examining the international tourists’ attitudes toward airport F&B and DF concessions by measuring their perception of cognitive and affective experience and its relationship with their satisfaction and behavioral intentions. The study employed a method based on the attitude formation theory and its cognitive-affective-conative model. It examines the role of cognitive and affective dimensions of F&B and DF experience in the formation of satisfaction and the role of satisfaction on behavioral intentions. Critical evaluation of consumers’ behavior and attitude plays a great impact on understanding of consumers’ needs. The more retailers know about consumer behavior, the better they responses consumer needs, and consequently, numerous effective marketing strategies can be developed to fulfill those needs (Peter, and Olson, 2008). The research outcome is expected to contribute to airport management literature and managerial decisions to improve their service and increase sales and revenues to consumers.

2. PUROPSE AND OBJECTIVES
           The overall objective is to investigate international tourists’ attitudes and its relationship with their satisfaction toward the services offered by the airport F&B and DF retailers. The research examines whether dimensions of cognitive and affective evaluations influence tourists’ assessment of satisfaction and whether satisfaction influences the conative (behavioral) evaluations toward airport F&B and DF retailers. More speciﬁcally, the study focuses on measuring the effects of cognitive and affective dimensions of F&B and DF experience on international tourists’ satisfaction and behavioral intentions. The study specific objectives are to:
1.   Measure the impact of cognitive evaluation of F&B and DF experience on tourists’ satisfaction.
2.   Measure the impact of affective evaluation of F&B and DF experience on tourists’ satisfaction.
3.   Measure the impact of tourists’ satisfaction with F&B and DF experience on their conative evaluation (intention to recommend and intention to revisit).
4.   Measure the impact of cognitive evaluation of F&B and DF experience on tourists’ conative evaluation (intention to recommend and intention to revisit), and
5.   Measure the impact of affective evaluation of F&B and DF experience on tourists’ conative evaluation (intention to recommend and intention to revisit).

3. PROBLEM AND QUESTIONS
            The research problem is formulated in the following question: What is the attitude factors influencing tourists’ satisfaction and behavioral intentions in airport F&B and DF concessions? The five sub-questions are
1.   What is the impact of cognitive evaluation of F&B and DF experience on tourists’ satisfaction?
2.   What is the impact of affective evaluation of F&B and DF experience on tourists’ satisfaction?
3.   What is the impact of tourists’ satisfaction on their conative evaluation (intention to recommend and intention to revisit)?
4.   What is the impact of cognitive evaluation on tourists’ conative evaluation (intention to recommend and intention to revisit)?, and
5.   What is the impact of affective evaluation on tourists’ conative evaluation (intention to recommend and intention to revisit)?

4. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

4.1. Airport Concession: Definition & Components
Concession services refer to the non-aircraft related operations in terminals and on airport land, including activities such as running or leasing out shopping concessions of various kinds, catering, car parking and rental, banking and so on (Fu and Zhang, 2010). Concession is the payment that the airport authority charges the owner or manager of an operation to conduct commercial activities in the airport. It is a payment that airports charge the operation sector for any retailing activities within the airport (Kim & Shin, 2001; Seaman, 2011). Concession describes the right or privilege for a particular use granted by an airport sponsor (usually the municipal owner of the airport) (ACINA, 2013). Meanwhile, rent or lease refers to the right to occupy certain defined premises or a specific area of realty. In general, however, concessions confer all commercial activities to sell goods and services in the airport, and sometimes the meaning of concession, rent and lease is used indiscriminately. Concessionaires are airport retail companies that compete for leased space at airports and specialize in the sale of a variety of goods and services to airline passengers, airport employees, and the public. These companies "concessionaires" must pay a "concession fee" to the airport in the form of rent for the privilege of occupying valuable commercial airport space (Kwan, 2008; ACINA, 2013).
The airport concession industry recognized three general types of retail concessions and three distinct types of F&B concessions, as identified in Table 1 (Seaman, 2011). The typical airport concession activities includes: food and beverage services, convenience stores, duty-free stores, pharmacy stores, news-stands, bookstores, souvenir stores, banks, foreign exchange moneychangers, fashion apparel stores, sports stores, electronics stores, rent-a-car services, airport advertising services, telephone services and other types of specialty stores. Other concession activities which are associated with services aimed to meet passengers’ needs include business facilities, leisure facilities and lounge facilities and so on. Generally, concession shopping areas are divided into two categories: the first category is the land-side area, which is normally open to all passengers, airport employees, visitors, and greeters; and the second category is the air-side area, which has departure gates attached to it and is only accessible by ticketed passengers and airport employees (Kim & Shin, 2001; Fu and Zhang, 2010; ACINA, 2013). In this study, concession is defined as an airport commercial facility belonging to one of two categories; duty-free, and F&B services.

Table 1: Types of Concession Businesses (Seaman, 2011).

Type of Retail	Examples	Type of Food & Beverage	Examples
Convenience	Toiletries; reading material; film	Fast Food/Quick Services	Branded or non-branded
Specialty	Souvenirs; clothing; electronics	Sit Down /Casual Bar	Chiles, TGI Fridays, Outback, Carrabbas, Max and Emma
Duty Free	International departures only; especially outside the United States	Specialty Coffee	Starbucks, Peet’s Coffee, Seattle’s Best Coffee, or local versions

There are a number of management styles of airport concessions. Table 2 identifies the four general types of concession contracts. Most airports have used either the multiple prime concessionaire or the standard/direct leasing approaches (Kim & Shin, 2001; Seaman, 2011). Furthermore, five general types of potential concession customers were identified based on their primary reason for being in an airport: (1) domestic; (2) international; (3) “meeters and greeters” focused on arriving passengers; (4) “well-wishers” focused on departing passengers; and (5) airport and airline employees (Seaman, 2011).

Table 2: Types of Concession Contracts (Seaman, 2011)

Type of Contract	Basic Description
Prime or Multiple Prime Operators; Master Concessionaire if 1 only	Single firm or > 1 firm is granted the right to operate all of a certain type of concession. Many airports have a prime operator for food service and a different prime operator for retail
Developer Model	The developer concessionaire makes big investments in infrastructure and then acts as a manager, leasing out all concession spaces to independent businesses. Developers do not operate any concession space.
Standard or Direct Leasing	Airports lease out each concession space individually to separate vendors.
Fee or Leased Manager	Airports pay a fee to a third party who manages the facility, while making no investment in the infrastructure (In contrast to developers).

4.2. Duty-free
Duty-free (DF) shops are those retail outlets of different brands which can sell products to different tourists or customers without paying for the taxes or duties when those customers or tourists go out of the country, and this motivate tourists’ shopping at DF shops because it not only provides lower price and high quality products, but also, it offers the special characteristics of products to satisfy tourists’ needs and want, such as limited edition for travelers and souvenir gifts (Zuo, 2015). DF stores are actually tax-free because they have not paid duty on the merchandise they sell. In essence, companies import goods and sell them to consumers who are leaving the country, who are not charged a tax on these items (Park, et al., 2013). DF stores are exclusively available to international passengers who are departing a country. In these stores, items are identified with tickets which have a green box on them with the wording ‘Only available to passengers flying OUTSIDE the country’ (World Duty Free, 2018).
Although the DF shops tend to be located at international airports, they also are located at ports, cruise ships, ferries, airplanes, border towns, and some downtown stores as well. DF shops offer a great range of products: liquor and alcoholic beverages, tobacco, jewelry, cosmetics, crystal, fragrances and luxury goods, chocolates and sweets, and a range of selected spirits. However, DF shops are expanding and moving beyond these products to include everything. According to duty-free officials, the savings at duty free shops can range from 10% to 50% (Kwan, 2008; Rossi, & Tasca, 2012; Park, et al., 2013).

4.3. Consumer Attitude
                 Attitude is gaining importance because its influence on an individual’s behavior and marketers use it to understand consumers. Attitude predicts and explains consumer behavior (Jain, 2014). “Consumer behavior involves the thoughts and feelings people experience and the actions they perform in consumption processes” (Peter & Olson 2008).
Attitude is ‘‘a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor’’ (Eagly, & Chaiken, 1993). It is "a relatively enduring organization of beliefs, feelings, and behavioral tendencies towards socially significant objects, groups, events or symbols" (Hogg, & Vaughan 2005). Thus, Petty et al (1997) conclude that an attitude is the way we think, feel, and act toward some aspect of our environment such as a retail store, television program, or product. Many authors described attitudes as a person's general evaluations, whether favourable or unfavourable towards an object, person, thought, or issues (Malhotra, 2005; Jain, 2014).
            However, there are many models of attitude, the three-components model (Fig 1) is one of the most cited to predict consumer behavior. The three-component of attitude has been proposed in numerous discussions of attitudes, particularly in the area of marketing (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993 ; Oliver, 1997; Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Back, & Parks, 2003; Lin, et al., 2007; Kwon, and Vogt, 2008; San, & Rodriguez, 2008; Bigné, et al., 2008; Kim, & Perdue, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Jian, 2014; Pike, & Ryan 2014; Yuksel et al., 2016; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, and Martin, 2017). According to this model, attitude is a construct consisting of three main components:
1.   Cognitive (knowledge/beliefs). Cognitive refers to thoughts, beliefs, or perceptions formed through direct interaction with product or service offerings, or through processing secondary sources of information, such as word-of-mouth and advertisements. It is an opinion evaluation of the entity that is based on a combination of the knowledge, experience and perceptions about an attitude object. This component is both the starting point as well as the strongest base for information of a perception and later an attitude.
2.   Affective (feelings/emotions). Affective is the consumer’s feeling, mood, and emotional reactions (liking/disliking) towards an attitude object. Sometimes feelings can precede and influence beliefs. In some instances people like or dislike a product without any cognitive basis for the feeling.
3.   Conative/behavioral (Response/ Action). Conative is the individual’s intention, likelihood or tendency to respond in a certain manner (favorable/unfavorable) towards an attitude object. Conative component is the action step based on cognitive and affective evaluation: how one acts on the information and how they feel about a destination. The actions comprise individual’s actual conduct or intention to revisit, recommend to others or spread positive word of mouth. It is a strong component that actually dictates the behavior. This component is a result of the other two components.
              From consumers’ perspective, their wants in three basic psychological domains: cognitive, conative and affective must be fulfilled, and the features of fulfillment can be viewed as quality As Figure 2 shows, customers’ enjoyment is based on the continuous improvement of these three dimensions. When retailers try to fulfill consumers’ wants, they will enhance consumers’ enjoyment and provide high-quality service at the same time (Kwan, 2008). Numerous hospitality scholars have agreed that the three-component of attitude is helpful in explaining consumers’ experiences in service settings (Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Back & Parks, 2003; Beerli & Martín, 2004; Pike, & Ryan, 2004; Sanchez, et al., 2006; Tasci et al., 2007; Lin, et al., 2007; San, et al., 2008; Chi, & Qu, 2008; Jang & Namkung, 2009; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Han et al., 2012; Kim & Perdue, 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Song, et al., 2013; Kim et al, 2015; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017).
                In summary, after reviewing various definitions and models, it is generally accepted that nearly all definitions and models of attitude have one thing in common: they all refer to a person’s overall evaluation (positive or negative) toward a concept which is formed primarily or exclusively on the basis of any one of three types of components: cognitive, affective, and conative. Hence, this study applied the concept of attitude formation theory and its three-component model.

Figure 1: The three-component model of attitude (the researcher based on: Eagly & Chaiken 1993; Jain, 2014; Back, & Parks, 2003; Agapito, et al., 2013; Pike, & Ryan 2014; Yuksel et al., 2016; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, and Martin, 2017).

Continuous Improvement in the Three Basic Psychological Domains.

Domain	Deals with	Relevant Dimension	Relevant Consequences
Cognitive	Perceptual aspects	Time	Works faster
Conativeا	Behavioral aspects	Work	Works better
Affective	Feeling aspects	Delight	Exceeds expecta

Figure 2: Continuous Improvement in the 3 Basic Psychological Domains (Kwan, 2008).

5. CONCEPTUAL RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES
The research model and hypotheses is based on the “attitude formation theory” (the cognitive-affective-conative model). According to the theory, the formation of attitude relies on affective and cognitive domains which influence each other and consequently produce different images of goods, services, places and even intangible products that lead to intention to return or revisit. Moreover, it is widely accepted that the assessment of both the cognitive and the affective components of attitude can be used as a predictor of tourists’ satisfaction and behavioral intentions, such as intention to revisit, recommend, and spread positive word of mouth (Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Tian-Cole, et al., 2002; Back & Parks, 2003; Beerli & Martín, 2004; Pike, & Ryan, 2004; Sanchez, et al., 2006; Tasci et al., 2007; Lin, et al., 2007; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Lehto, et al., 2007; San, & Rodriguez, 2008; Chi, & Qu, 2008; Jang & Namkung, 2009; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Han et al., 2012; Kim & Perdue, 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Song, et al., 2013; Kim et al, 2015; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017). Following this attitude formation theory, this study proposed that the overall tourists’ perception (attitude, image, satisfaction) toward F&B and DF concessions is predicted or measured by cognitive evaluations (e.g., quality of facilities/reasons) as well as affective evaluations (e.g., feeling relaxed and refreshed) that leads to their conative evaluations (e.g., intention to recommend, return or revisit) (Fig. 3). This model examines whether dimensions of cognitive and affective evaluations influence tourists’ assessment of satisfaction and whether satisfaction influences the conative/behavioral evaluations (intention to recommend and intention to revisit). The two independent variables are cognitive and affective evaluations. The two dependent variables are intention to revisit and intention to recommend. The satisfaction is the mediator. A research model was proposed in which eight hypotheses were developed (Fig. 3).

Inﬂuence of Cognitive Evaluation on Satisfaction and Conative/behavioral Evaluations
              However, previous hospitality studies indicated that cognitive evaluation of quality plays an important role in customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions (intention to recommend and intention to revisit) (Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Back & Parks, 2003; Beerli & Martín, 2004; Pike, & Ryan, 2004; Sanchez, et al., 2006; Tasci et al., 2007; Lin, et al., 2007; San, & Rodriguez, 2008; Chi, & Qu, 2008; Jang & Namkung, 2009; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Han et al., 2012; Kim & Perdue, 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Song, et al., 2013; Kim et al, 2015; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017), this relationship wasn’t tested in airport F&B and DF concessions. Thus, it could be conjectured that, a higher level of cognitive evaluation leads to more positive outcomes (i.e. satisfaction, intention to recommend, intention to revisit). Based on this theoretical and empirical evidence, the following hypotheses are suggested:
H1: Cognitive evaluation of airport F&B and DF experience statistically and positively inﬂuences airport international tourists’ satisfaction.
H5: Cognitive evaluation of airport F&B and DF experience statistically and positively inﬂuences international tourists’ intention to recommend these concessions.
H6: Cognitive evaluation of airport F&B and DF experience statistically and positively inﬂuences inﬂuence international tourists’ intention to revisit these concessions.
Inﬂuence of Affective Evaluation on Satisfaction and Conative/behavioral Evaluations
               However, previous studies suggested that customers’ emotions/feelings is directly linked to their subsequent behavior, such as satisfaction and behavioral intentions (Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Lehto, et al., 2007; Pike, & Ryan, 2004; Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Back & Parks, 2003; Beerli & Martín, 2004; Sanchez, et al., 2006; Tasci et al., 2007; Lin, et al., 2007; San, & Rodriguez, 2008; Chi, & Qu, 2008; Jang & Namkung, 2009; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Han et al., 2012; Kim & Perdue, 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Song, et al., 2013; Kim et al, 2015; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017), this relationship wasn’t tested in airport F&B and DF concessions. Based on the above arguments, the following hypotheses are developed:
H2: Affective evaluation of airport F&B and DF experience statistically and positively inﬂuences airport international tourists’ satisfaction.
H7: Affective evaluation of airport F&B and DF experience statistically and positively inﬂuences international tourists’ intention to recommend these concessions.
H8: Affective evaluation of airport F&B and DF experience statistically and positively inﬂuences international tourists’ intention to revisit these concessions.
Inﬂuence of Satisfaction on Conative/behavioral Evaluations
                Satisfaction is defined as the consumer’s fulfillment response based upon a judgment that a product or service feature has provided a pleasurable level of consumption (Oliver 1997). However, the positive relationship between tourist satisfaction and behavioral intentions has been well established in various hospitality settings (Chen and Tsai, 2007; Bigne, et al., 2001:2008; Tian-Cole, et al., 2002; Back & Parks, 2003; Chi & Qu, 2008; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Song et al., 2013), this relationship wasn’t tested in airport F&B and DF concessions. Integrating with this background, the following hypotheses are developed:
H3: International tourists’ satisfaction with F&B and DF concessions statistically and positively inﬂuence their intention to recommend these concessions.
H4: International tourists’ satisfaction with F&B and DF concessions statistically and positively inﬂuence their intention to revisit these concessions.

6. METHODOLOGY

6.1 Research Type and Approach
In this descriptive analytical research study, a quantitative approach has been utilized for examining the attitude and satisfaction of the international tourists’ toward both airport F&B, and DF concessions. The “attitude formation theory” (the cognitive-affective-conative model) is used in this research to measure the attitude factors influencing consumers’ satisfaction and their behavioral intentions. To the best knowledge of the researcher, this theory has rarely been used to measure perceptions of tourists toward airport concessions, especially F&B, and duty free concessions. According to the theory, the overall tourists’ perception (attitude, satisfaction) toward F&B and DF concessions is influenced or measured by cognitive evaluations (e.g. quality of facilities/reasons) as well as affective evaluations (e.g. feeling relaxed and refreshed) that leads to their conative/behavioral evaluations (e.g., intention to recommend, return or revisit) (Fig. 3). The assessment of both the cognitive and the affective components of attitude is used as a predictor of tourists’ satisfaction and behavioral intentions, such as intention to revisit, recommend, and spread positive word of mouth (Baloglu, & McCleary, 1999; Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Tian-Cole, et al., 2002; Back & Parks, 2003; Beerli & Martín, 2004; Pike, & Ryan, 2004; Sanchez, et al., 2006; Tasci et al., 2007; Lin, et al., 2007; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Lehto, et al., 2007; San, & Rodriguez, 2008; Chi, & Qu, 2008; Jang & Namkung, 2009; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Han et al., 2012; Kim & Perdue, 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Agapito, et al., 2013; Song, et al., 2013; Kim et al, 2015; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017). This study is categorized as deductive research since deductions would be made from the data collected to test hypotheses set and relating findings to the sample or population.

6.2 Data Collection Instrument
            A self-administered questionnaire was chosen to collect the primary data, as survey deemed the best approach answer the research question, as well as supports the selection of research design and philosophical assumptions (Saunders et al., 2009). A self-administrated questionnaire was developed by the in-depth review of related attitude literature as well as the stated hypotheses of the study. The multi-item constructs validated in previous studies were modified to fit the study context. The final questionnaire consisted of two parts. Part I of the questionnaire gathered descriptive information about each participant. Part II gathered information about international tourists’ attitude and satisfaction regarding airport duty-free and F&B concessions. This section asked the respondents about their perceived cognitive evaluation, affective evaluation, satisfaction and conative/behavioral evaluation (recommend intention, and revisit intention). All the following constructs were measured with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree):
•   “Cognitive/perceptual (knowledge/beliefs) evaluation” was measured with ten items adapted from several studies (e.g., Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Sweeney & Soutar, 2001; Sanchez, et al., 2004; Beerli & Martin, 2004; Lin, et al., 2007; San et al., 2008; Chi & Qu, 2008; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Agapito et al., 2013; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Song et al., 2013; Chiappa, et al. 2016; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, & Martin, 2017). Respondents were asked to indicate their perception of the facilities and services provided in the airport F&B and DF stores.
•   “Affective (feelings/emotion) evaluation” was measured with six items adapted from several studies (e.g., Baloglu & McCleary 1999; Beerli & Martin, 2004; Lin, et al., 2007; San et al., 2008; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Lehto, et al., 2014; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, and Martin, 2017). Respondents were asked to rate their feelings during their stay at the F&B and DF stores.
•   “Conative (behavioral) evaluations” (intention to recommend and intention to revisit) were measured with ﬁve items developed from previous studies (e.g., Zeithaml, et al., 1996; Bigne et al., 2001:2008; Tian-Cole et al., 2002; Nadeau, et al., 2007; Chi & Qu, 2008; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Agapito et al., 2013; Song et al., 2013; Zhang, et al., 2014; Basaran, 2016; Slabbert, and Martin, 2017). Respondents were asked to indicate the degree to which they would share the positive things with other people and the likelihood of re-patronizing in the future the F&B and DF stores.
•   “Satisfaction” was measured with three items adapted from several studies (e.g., Oliver, 1997; Back & Parks, 2003; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Tian-Cole, et al., 2002; Chi & Qu, 2008; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Song et al., 2013). Respondents were asked to rate the degree to which they think the F&B and DF offering has enhanced their experience.
               To verify its reliability and validity, the questionnaire survey was later modified and finalized based on feedback from ﬁve university researchers as well as pilot tested with a sample of 15 tourists in Borg-El-Arab Airport in Alexandria. Many valuble information is provided to improve the content validity of the survey (e.g., language, length and complete time, clearness and misinterpretations). For instancce, the survey was written in the Arabic and English languages. For convergent validity, the composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE) were calculated in order to determine whether the measurement variable was representative of the related construct. All AVEs exceed the cutoff value of 0.50, and all CRs exceed the cutoff value of 0.70. These results provided evidence for convergent validity of each of the constructs involved in the research model of the study. The reliability or internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) for each measure was above the recommend value of 0.70 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 1998).

6.3 Sampling Plan and Data Collection
              The target respondents were the international tourists who had experienced services offered in F&B and duty-free retailers in the Cairo, Luxor, and Borg-El-arab airports in Egypt. For this study, the area sampling method and the judgmental sampling method were used. Judgmental sampling was employed as only international travelers who had experienced and used facilities and services offered in airport F&B and DF were invited to participate in the study. Only international tourists were chosen due to duty-free service is accessible only to international flights passengers, they do not have any restriction accessing stores. Domestic airline passengers cannot be considered as duty-free customers due to airport regulations. Moreover, international passengers are more likely to shop in airport stores, compared to domestic travelers. Area sampling was used since the data were collected at only the Cairo, Luxor, and Borg-El-arab airports in Egypt. These three international airports were chosen as, they serve many international tourists who had visited many different F&B and DF stores from the most popular destinations. These three airport are also the busiest airports in Egypt during the research period. The busiest airports already experience a higher number of passengers who are potential customers that can generate non-aeronautic revenues. For this reasons, these particular airports were chosen as a sampling group in order to collate primary data.
               Moreover, this research employed the non-random sampling and the convenient sampling technique, due to the airport is a special place with more restrictions. This non-random sampling increases the chance of an effective result, which would contribute to practical methodology. Every international tourist who had experienced F&B and DF stores were approached. The significance of this approach is that, creating value for customers requires knowing how they use and evaluate their perceptions of the services and products immediately after the experience or purchase. The researcher believes that they would be the ones who have accurate opinions concerning the service quality.
              Fieldworkers approached the respondents from September to October, 2017, explained the goal of the survey and asked for respondents to participate willingly (on a voluntary basis). A total number of 320 questionnaires were delivered and 215 usable samples were obtained, resulting in a response rate of 67%. The respondent proﬁle is summarized in Table 3.

Table 3: Demographic profile of the respondents (N =215)

Demographics

Category

Frequency

(%)

Gender

Male

Female

109

106

51 %

49 %

Age

16-24 years

25-34 years

35-44 years

45-54 years

55-64 years

over 64

10%

13%

19%

26%

28%

Education

Below secondary school

Secondary school

High school

University degree

Postgraduate degree (Master/PhD)

118

19%

55%

16%

Occupation

Administrative worker

Executive manager

Freelance

Retired

Unemployed

Student

Other

37%

14%

33%

Travel purpose

Leisure

Work

Other

160

74%

18%

Nationality

Arabian

Asian

American

European

15%

41%

21%

23%

6.4 Statistical Data Analysis
SPSS 19.0 was the software chosen for statistical computation. Descriptive statistics, validity and reliability analysis, Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and Structural Equation Model (SEM) are used to explore the interrelationships between the study variables; cognitive evaluations, affective evaluations, satisfaction, intention to revisit, intention to recommend. Results were interpreted as significant if the associated p-value was less than .05 and highly significant if p-value was less than .01. Hypotheses Tested by Structural Equation Model (H0: p ˃ 0.05 versus H1: p ≤ 0.05).
7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
7.1 Validity and Reliability of the Measurement Model
As shown in Table 4, a conﬁrmatory factor analysis (CFA) with a maximum likelihood was used to examine the validity and reliability of the measurement model. Convergent validity was conﬁrmed in that all factor loadings of the items under each construct exceeded the recommended cut- off value of .40, and all were signiﬁcant (p < .001). In addition, the average variance extract (AVE) values for cognitive evaluation, affective evaluation, customer satisfaction, recommend intention, and revisit intention were above the minimum criterion of .50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 1998), indicating that the variance explained by the respective construct was larger than the variance explained by measurement error. All of the composite reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) of each construct ranged from .76 to .84, which was above the recommended value of .70 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 1998), indicating that the multiple measurement items were reliable for measuring each construct. The measurement model shows that good fit indices to the data: (χ2 = 587.22, df = 261, χ2/df = 2.25, p < .001, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .054). All the indication shows the measurement model ﬁts the data reasonably well. These results implied that cognitive (knowledge/beliefs) and affective (feelings) evaluations are two interdependent psychological dimensions of F&B and DF experience.

Table 4: Results of Measurement Model: Validity and Reliability Analysis

Description	Validity and Reliability Analysis
	Loading	AVE	α	Mean (St. Deviation)
Cognitive evaluation ( 7 items)	0 .68	0.785	0.84	4.12 (0.59)
	0.64
	0.67
	0.68
	0.68
	0.66
	0.65
Affective evaluation (6 items)	0.61	0.762	0.81	3.57 (0.57)
	0.58
	0.59
	0.53
	0.55
	0.57
Customer satisfaction (3items )	0.72	0.713	0.78	4.06 (0.58)
	0.70
	0.74
Intention to revisit (2 items )	0.64	0.787	0.82	4.02 (0.55)
	0.62
Intention to recommend (3 items )	0.70	0.79	0.83	4.04 (0.54)
	0.73
	0.71
Goodness-of-ﬁt statistics: χ2 = 587.22, df = 261, χ2/df = 2.25, p < .001, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .054)

7.2 Structural Equation Model Results
After confirming the measurement model, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the proposed model and hypotheses by exploring the relationships among the independent and dependent variables. The goodness- of-ﬁt indices (χ2 = 651.33, df = 276, χ2/df = 2.36, p < .001, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .058) of the proposed model revealed that the model reasonably ﬁts the data, and thus provided a good basis for testing the hypothesized relationships. Table 5 and Figure 4 present the results of the structural model and hypotheses testing.

Table 5: Results of the Structural Equation Model: Testing Hypotheses (n = 215)

Hypothesized paths	Standardized path coefﬁcients	t-values	Results
H1: Cognitive evaluation→ tourist satisfaction	0.410	8.53***	Supported
H2: Affective evaluation→ tourist satisfaction	0.113	2.218*	Supported
H3: tourist satisfaction → recommend intention	0.892	18.54***	Supported
H4: tourists satisfaction → revisit intention	0.716	13.61***	Supported
H5: Cognitive evaluation → recommend intention	0.024	0.534	Not supported
H6: Cognitive evaluation → revisit intention	0.015	0.423	Not supported
H7: Affective evaluation → recommend intention	0.017	0.672	Not supported
H8: Affective evaluation → revisit intention	0.014	0.385	Not supported
R2 (customer satisfaction) = .710 R2 (recommend intention) = .845 R2 (revisit intention) = .710 Goodness-of-ﬁt statistics: χ2 = 651.33, df = 276, χ2/df = 2.36, p < .001, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .05

Notes: *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. CE: cognitive evaluation; AE: affective evaluation; TS: tourist satisfaction; RI: recommend intention; VI: revisit intention.

Figure 4:Results of Structural Equation Model
              The SEM parameters indicated that cognitive evaluation (β CE→TS = .41, t CE→ST =8.53, p < .001), and affective evaluation (β AE→ST = .11, t AE→ST = 2.21, p < .05) had positive signiﬁcant influence on satisfaction perception. Therefore, the first two hypotheses (H1 and H2) were supported. These result implied that the two dimensions (cognitive and affective) of the F&B and DF experience play an important role in generating satisfaction and are fundamental components of the consumption process. Moreover, adjusted R2 was 0.71 which indicated that approximately 71% of the total variance in the overall satisfaction was explained by these two dimensions of F&B and DF experience (cognitive evaluation and affective evaluation). The large amount of variance in satisfaction indicated that cognitive evaluation and affective evaluation were key antecedents of tourists’ satisfaction with airport F&B and DF experiences. This results emphasized that cognitive evaluation and affective evaluations was a significant predictor of tourists’ satisfaction regarding F&B and DF experience, supporting H1 and H2. The study confirms previous studies that emphasizing the importance of experiential value in enhancing customer satisfaction (e.g., Bigné, et al., 2008; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wen, & Chi, 2013; Kim, et a., 2015).
             The outcome of the SEM analysis showed that cognitive evaluation was more inﬂuential than affective evaluation in enhancing tourist satisfaction toward F&B and DF experience. This result emphasized that cognitive factors of airport stores are the most powerful driver of tourists’ satisfaction than affective factors. One possible explanation for the strong positive effect of cognitive evaluation on tourists satisfaction could be because consuming tourists are rationally driven, as they place a greater importance on functional factors/reasons (e.g., to use the facilities, amenities, benefits, ) than on emotional motivation (e.g., to seek pleasure) when visiting airport F&B and DF stores. Since cognitive factors are physical or non-physical attributes that provide functional beneﬁts (Kim & Perdue, 2013). It could thus be interpreted that the greater the perceived facilities and services in the airport concession, the greater the perceived satisfaction. This implied that concession managers need to provide more knowledge and information about physical or non-physical attributes that provide functional beneﬁts to increase consumers’ cognitive evaluation (knowledge and beliefs). On the other hand, a possible explanation for the low influence of affective evaluation on satisfaction might be because the respondents’ affective (emotional) response was measured after they had visited the airport stores. The time interval could potentially cause a memory bias in the resultant estimates. To increase the accuracy of evaluating consumers’ emotional response to a service experience, it should be measured during service consumption.
              Moreover, results revealed that satisfaction had positive signiﬁcant influence on intention to recommend (β TS→RI = .89, t TS→RI =18.54, p <.001), and on revisit intention (β TS→VI = .71, t TS→VI = 13.61, p<.001). Thus, the second two hypotheses (H3 and H4) were supported. Moreover, adjusted R2 of revisit intention was 0.71 which indicated that approximately 71% of variance in intention to revisit was explained by overall satisfaction. Also, adjusted R2 of recommend intention was 0.84, which indicated that approximately 84% of variance in willingness to recommend was explained by overall satisfaction. This result implied that satisfaction was a signiﬁcant predictor of behavioral intentions: intention to recommend and intention to revisit. Consequently, high satisfaction level was crucial in retaining customers and spreading recommendations. In line with previous studies, this result supported the positive effect of satisfaction on behavioral intentions in service experiences (e.g., Chi, & Qu, 2008; Yuksel, et al., 2010; Wang, & Hsu, 2010; Song, et al., 2013).
                  On the other hand, the results demonstrated that cognitive evaluation did not signiﬁcantly inﬂuence intention to recommend (β CE→RI = .024, t CE→RI =0.53, p ˃.05) and intention to revisit (β CE→VI = . 015, t CE→VI = 0.423, p ˃.05). Similarly, affective evaluation did not signiﬁcantly inﬂuence intention to recommend (β AE→RI =. 017, t AE→RI =0.67, p ˃.05) and intention to revisit (β AE→VI = . 014, t AE→VI = 0.38, p ˃.05). Overall, the results concluded that cognitive evaluation and affective evaluation did not signiﬁcantly inﬂuence recommend intention and revisit intention, failing to support the last four hypotheses (H5, H6, H7, H8).   This result implied that cognitive evaluations and affective evaluations was not a signiﬁcant predictor of recommend intention and revisit intention in airport F&B and DF experience.
               Overall, while satisfaction was a signiﬁcant predictor of intention to recommend and intention to revisit, cognitive evaluation and affective evaluation was not a signiﬁcant predictor of intention to recommend and intention to revisit.

8. CONCLUSION AND CONTRIBUTIONS
                 However its importance for airport proﬁtability and passenger satisfaction, the literature on airport concessions is still sparse. In particular, there is a lack of research on airport F&B and DF concession from tourists’ viewpoint. Thus, this research ﬁlls this research gap by investigating international tourists’ attitudes and satisfaction toward the services offered by the airport F&B and duty-free concession. It examines the role of cognitive, and affective dimensions of F&B and duty-free experience in the formation of satisfaction and the role of satisfaction on conative/behavioral dimensions (recommend intention and revisit intention). Four major ﬁndings emerged from the hypotheses testing. First, the results indicated that cognitive evaluation and affective evaluation had positive signiﬁcant influence on perception of tourists’ satisfaction. These two dimensions were positive signiﬁcant determinants of tourists’ satisfaction with airport F&B and DF experiences. This result emphasized that cognitive evaluation and affective evaluations was a significant predictor of tourists’ satisfaction regarding F&B and DF experience, supporting the first two hypotheses (H1 and H2). Second, the results showed that cognitive evaluation was more inﬂuential than affective evaluation in enhancing tourist satisfaction toward F&B and DF experience. This result implied that consuming tourists are rationally driven and they place a greater importance on functional reasons (e.g., to use the facilities, amenities, benefits) than on emotional motivation (e.g., to seek pleasure) when visiting airport F&B and DF stores. Third, the results indicated that tourists’ satisfaction had positive signiﬁcant influence on behavioral intentions (intention to recommend and intention to revisit), supporting the second two hypotheses (H3 and H4). This result supports previous studies that satisfaction was a signiﬁcant predictor of intention to recommend and intention to revisit F&B and DF concessions. Fourth, the results revealed that cognitive evaluation and affective evaluation did not signiﬁcantly inﬂuence recommend intention and revisit intention. This result implied that cognitive evaluations and affective evaluations was not a signiﬁcant predictor of intention to recommend and intention to revisit, rejecting the last four hypotheses (H5, H6, H7, and H8). In summary, the results could be interpreted in the following way: cognitive and affective dimensions of airport F&B and DF experience is critical for generating a positive satisfaction level, which in turn lead to positive behavioral intentions, such as recommending the store to others and revisiting the store.
              This study has key theoretical and managerial implications. Theoretically, this research adds to the much-needed research on airport concessions in general and on F&B and DF concessions in particular. Consumer behavior and attitude research in the airport industry still remains limited. Moreover, the originality of this study resides in the application of a well-known methodology that is based on the attribute formation theory (cognitive-affective-conative model) to analyse the tourists’ attitude and satisfaction on the airport duty-free and F&B retailers, a sector that has been scarcely studied. To the best knowledge of the researcher, this theory has rarely been used to measure perceptions of tourists towards airport concessions in general and in airport F&B and DF in particular. By bridging this gap, the study makes theoretical contributions to the existing literature. In practical terms, this study helps airport F&B and DF concessions to better understand and improve their consumers’ experience, thereby enhancing consumers’ satisfaction which, in turn, affects their behavioral intentions. The study assists in understanding how tourists perceive F&B and DF concessions or an airport as a whole. Particularly, two implications are suggested to improve concession consumers’ satisfaction through cognitive and affective experience:
First, resources should be allocated toward improving tourists’ cognitive experience by:
•   Providing and upgrading practical facilities, amenities, and services in an airport F&B and DF concession to enhance concession consumers’ satisfaction (e.g., offering various menu and shopping choices, provide frequent travelers with complementary fresh, delicious, and nutritious food offerings, Wi-Fi speed, seating arrangement, reading materials, shower room and restroom, quiet room, meeting facilities, etc.).
•   Upgrading and complementary amenity may be the indicator of an airport store’s desire to please travelers.
Second, it is important to pay attention to create positive emotions which would support affective image. Resources should be directed toward improving tourists’ affective experience by:
•   creating a participative festive atmosphere, arranging personal meetings and more personal communication with loyal visitors and allowing the posting of pictures of people enjoying themselves at the store, as this would reflect the positive emotions they have towards it and would contribute towards the evaluation of affective image and make them return to the store. Constant reminders of the enjoyable time they had at a previous store experience is needed (Slabbert, and Martin, 2017).
•   Maintaining pleasant personal interactions between employees and tourists. Store employees should attend to consumers in a courteous manner. Courteous, responsible, and competent employees are the key to making customers satisﬁed (Parasuraman, et al., 1988). The stores should apply a hospitality- focused approach to customer service.
•   Creating an inviting and comfortable environment (physical surroundings) for travelers to enjoy while they are in airport stores. Controlling lighting levels, temperature, and scent based on the travelers’ preferences to create a comfortable atmosphere.

9. LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
This study has a number of limitations that create a gap for further investigation of the topic and lead to new research topics. Firstly, this study was limited to Egypt and three international airports in Egypt. Thus, future studies should adapt the study framework to other tourism locations (countries) with more international airports. Secondly, this study was limited on only two types of airport concessions (duty-free and F&B concessions), future studies should focus on the other types of airport concessions. Thirdly, the nature of the research was quantitative studies. The absence of qualitative studies is considered a limitation of this research. Ideally, it is suggested to conduct a combination of qualitative and quantitative studies for the future research. Fourth, the questionnaires were developed in the English and Arabic language. However, there were some respondents who did not understand English and Arabic; and due to this reason; they could not participate in the survey. Thus, future studies are suggested to translate questionnaire into popular languages like Mandarin, Spanish…etc. Finally, this study was limited to international tourists who had experienced the F&B and duty free offering. The researcher believes that they would be the ones who have accurate opinions concerning the service quality. Future studies should examine cultural differences. Concerning future research, it is suggested to examine customer satisfaction as a mediating factor between cognitive-affective evaluations and behavioral intentions.

REFERENCES
ACINA (Airports Council International North America) (2013), 2012 ACINA concessions benchmarking survey: Summary results. Retrieved August 18, 2014, from http://www.aci-na.org/sites/default/files/2012_concessions_benchmarking_survey_results_0.pdf
ACRP (Airport Cooperative Research Program), U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, LeighFisher Firm, & Exstare Federal Services Group) (2011), Resource manual for airport in- terminal concessions (Vol. 54). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Agapito, D., Valle, P., & Mendes, J. (2013), The cognitive-affective-conative model of destination image: A confirmatory analysis. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(5), 471-481.
ATRS (Air Transport Research Society) (2006): The ATRS Airport Performance Benchmarking Report: Global Standards for Airport Excellence, 3-volume report, published by the Centre for Transportation Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia. Available on-line at www.atrsworld.org
Back, K. & Parks, S. (2003), A brand loyalty model involving cognitive, affective and conative brand loyalty and customer satisfaction. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 27(4), 419–435.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), 868-897.
Basaran, U. (2016), Examining the relationships of cognitive, affective, and conative destination image: a research on Safranbolu, Turkey. International Business Research, 9 (5), 165-179.
Beeri, A., & Martin, J. D. (2004), Tourists’ characteristics and the perceived image of tourist destinations: A quantitative analysis – a case study of Lanzarote, Spain. Journal of Tourism Management, 25(5), 623–636.
Bigné, J., Mattila, A., & Andreu, L. (2008), The impact of experiential consumption cognitions and emotions on behavioral intentions. Journal of Services Marketing, 22 (4), 303–315.
Bigne, J., Sanchez, M., & Sanchez, J. (2001), Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behavior: Inter-relationships. Tourism Management, 22(6), 607–616.
Chen, C. and Tsai, D. (2007), How destination image and evaluative factors affect behavioural intentions. Tourism Management. 28(4), 1115-1122.
Chi, C., & Qu, H. (2008), Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: an integrated approach. Tourism Management, 29(4), 624–636.
Chiappa, G., Martin, J. & Roman, C. (2016), Service quality of airports' food and beverage retailers: a fuzzy Approach. Journal of Air Transport Management, 53, 105-113.
Correia, A., & Wirasinghe, S. C. (2004), Evaluating level of service at airport passenger terminal – Review of approaches. Journal of Transportation Research Board, 1888, 1-6.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Fodness, D. & Murray, B. (2007), Passengers’ expectations of airport service quality. Journal of Services Marketing, 21/7, 492-506.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Fu, X., & Zhang, A. (2010), Eﬀects of airport concession revenue sharing on airline competition and social welfare, Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 44 (2), 119-138.
Fuerst, F., Gross, S., & Klose, U. (2011), The sky is the limit? the determinants and constraints of European airports commercial revenues. Journal of Air Transport Management. 17(5), 278-283.
Geuens, M., Vantomme, D., Brengman, M., (2004), Developing a typology of airport shoppers. Tourism Management, 25 (5), 615-622.
Graham, A. (2009), How important are commercial revenues to today's airports? Journal of Air Transport Management 15 (3), 106-111.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998), Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey, NJ:Prentice-Hall Inc.
Han, S., Ham, S., Yang, I., Baek, S. (2012), Passengers' perceptions of airline lounges: importance of attributes that determine usage and service quality measurement. Tourism Management, 33 (5), 1103-1111.
Hogg, M., & Vaughan, G. (2005), Social Psychology (4th edition). London: Prentice-Hall.
Jang, S., & Namkung, Y. (2009). Perceived quality, emotions, and behavioral intentions: Application of an extended Mehrabian-Russell model to restaurants. Journal of Business Research, 62(4), 451–460.
Jian, V. (2014), 3D Model of Attitude. International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences, 3 (4), 1-12.
Kim, D., & Perdue, R. R. (2013), The effects of cognitive, affective, and sensory attributes on hotel choice. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35(December), 246–257.
Kim, H. and Shin, J. (2001), A contextual investigation of the operation and management of airport concessions. Tourism Management, 22, 149-155.
Kim, H., Chua, B., Lee, S., Boo, H., & Han, H. (2015), Understanding Airline Travelers’ Perceptions of Well-Being: The Role of Cognition, Emotion, and Sensory Experiences in Airline Lounges, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33 (9), 1213-1234.
Kwan, S. L. (2008), A customer survey of Chinese travelers in airport duty-free shops case: Finnair and Finavia. Degree Programme in Business Management, International Business-to-Business Marketing, Laurea University of Applied Sciences, Laurea Leppävaara.
Kwon, J., and Vogt, C. (2008), Identifying The Effects Of Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Components On Residents’ Attitudes Toward Place Marketing. Proceedings of the 2008 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium (GTR-NRS-P-42), pp. 298-305
Lehto, X. Y., Lee, G., & Ismail, J. (2014), Measuring congruence of affective images of destinations and their slogans. International Journal of Tourism Research, 16(3), 250-260.
Lin, C., Morais, D., Kerstetter, D., & Hou, J. (2007), Examining the role of cognitive and affective image in predicting choice across natural, developed, and theme-park destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 183-194.
Lin, Y., and Chen, C. (2013), Passengers’ shopping motivations and commercial activities at airports: The moderating effects of time pressure and impulse buying tendency. Tourism Management 36, 426-434.
Malhotra, N.K., (2005), Attitude and affect: new frontiers of research in the 21st century. Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 477–482.
Mason, J. B. & Mayer, M.L. & Ezell, H.F. (1988), Retailing – third edition. USA: Business Publications, Inc
Medeiros, P., Pinheiro A., Barbosa G. & Gomes H. (2016), Analysis of the operational performance of Brazilian airport terminals: A multicriteria approach with De Borda-AHP integration. Journal of Air Transport Management, 51, 19–26.
Nadeau, J., & Heslop, L., & O’Reilly, N., & Luk, P. (2007), Destination in a country image context. Annals of tourism Research, 35(1), 84-106.
Oliver, R. (1997), Satisfaction: a behavioral perspective on the consumer. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Park, J.W., Choi, Y.J. & Moon, W.C. (2013). Investigating the Effects of Sales Promotion on Customer Behavioral Intentions at Duty Free Shops: An Incheon International Airport Case Study. Journal of Airline and Airport Management,3(1), 18-30.
Peter, P. J., and Olson, J. C., (2008), Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Strategy. Eighth Edition, The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., International Edition, Singapore,
Petty, R., Wegener, D., and Fabrigar, L. (1997), Attitudes and Attitude Change. Annual Review of Psychology, 48:609–647.
Pike, S., & Ryan, C. (2004), Destination positioning analysis through a comparison of cognitive, affective, and conative perceptions. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 333-342.
Pinna M, and Del Chiappa G (2013), Consuming food and beverage at the airport: analogies and differences among business and leisure tourists. In: Andreani J C, Collesei U. Proceedings of the XII International Conference Marketing Trends. Paris, 17-19 January 2013.
Rossi, S. & Tasca, C. (2012), Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategies in the Duty Free Market: An Explorative Study on Offer, Customer Service and Atmosphere. Master Thesis, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University.
San, M., & Rodriguez, D. (2008), Exploring the cognitive-affective nature of destination image and the role of psychological factors in its formation. Tourism Management,29(2):263-277.
Sanchez, J., Callarisa, L., Rodriguez, R.M. & Moliner, M.A. (2006), Perceived Value of the Purchase of a Tourism Product. Tourism Management, Vol.27 , pp. 394-409.
Saunders, M, Lewis P, Thornhill, A, (2009), Research Methods for Business Students. Fifth Edition. Financial Times, Prentice Hall.
Seaman, B.A. (2011), The Airport Concession Industry: important issues and trends. final version, Working Paper 11-31, July 2011. Georgia State University, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Research Paper Series. http://aysps.gsu.edu/working-papers.html
Slabbert, E., and Martin, M. (2017), Aspects influencing the cognitive, affective and conative images of an arts festival. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 6 (2),1-16.
Song, Z., Su, X., & Li, L. (2013), The indirect effects of destination image on destination loyalty intention through tourist satisfaction and perceived value: The bootstrap approach. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(4), 386-409.
Sweeney, J.C. & Soutar, G.N. (2001), Consumer Perceived Value: The Development of a Multiple Item Scale. Journal of Retailing, 77 (2), 203-220.
Tasci, A., Gartner, W., & Cavusgil, S. (2007), Conceptualization and operationalization of destination image. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 31(2), 194-223.
Tian-Cole, S., Crompton, J., & Willson, V. (2002), An empirical investigation of the relationships between service quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions among visitors to a wildlife refuge. Journal of Leisure Research, 34(1), 1–24.
Torres, E., Domı´ nguez, J., Valde´ s, L. & Aza, R. (2005), Passenger waiting time in an airport and expenditure carried out in the commercial area. Journal of Air Transport Management, 11, 363–367.
Wang, C., & Hsu, M. (2010), The relationships of destination image, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: An integrated model. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 27(8), 829-843.
Wen, B., & Chi, C. G. (2013), Examine the cognitive and affective antecedents to service recovery satisfaction: A ﬁeld study of delayed airline passengers. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(3), 306–327.
World Duty Free. (2018), Tax and Duty Free Shopping. Access on 19 March 2018 at: http://www.worlddutyfree.com/information/tax-and-duty-free-shopping.html
Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010), Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Journal of Tourism Management, 31(2), 274–284.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996), The behavioral consequences of service quality. The Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31–46.
Zhang, H., Fu, X., Cai, L.A. & Lu, L. (2014), Destination image and tourist loyalty: A meta- analysis. Tourism Management, 40, 213-223.
Zuo, R. (2015), A Study on International Tourists’ Satisfaction with ABC Duty Free Shops in Bangkok. International Conference on Business, Economics and Management (ICBEM'15) April 9-10, 2015 Phuket (Thailand).