Behavior-Cognition-Affect-Behavioral Intention Model Questionnaire

Abstract

The Behavior-Cognition-Affect-Behavioral Intention (BCABI) Model, developed by Cao, Xie, & Qu (2023), is a 17-item psychological measurement tool designed to map the sequential relationship among past behavior, cognition, emotion (affect), and behavioral intention in the context of tourism. This model is conceptually grounded in a stage-by-stage process of tourists’ experience co-creation. It draws theoretically upon the Service-Dominant Logic of value co-creation theory (Vargo & Lusch, 2016) and the self-consistency principle inherent in attitude theory (Albarracin & Wyer, 2000).

Specifically, the BCABI model assesses how a tourist’s pre-trip behavior influences their future behavioral intention (manifested as post-trip destination loyalty). This relationship is mediated by two crucial in-trip processes: satisfaction derived from the co-creation experience and the development of place attachment (which includes place identity and place dependence). The scale items were adapted from established literature, translated into Mandarin Chinese via a rigorous translation-back translation procedure (Brislin, 1970), and validated using two distinct samples of Chinese tourists to confirm its psychometric properties.

Keywords

Affect, Behavior-Cognition-Affect-Behavioral Intention Model, Co-Creation Experience, Cognition, Destination Loyalty, Past Behavior, Place Attachment, Place Dependence, Place Identity, Pre-Trip Involvement, Satisfaction with the Co-Creation of Experience, Tourism

Authors

Cao, Limei, Xie, Dengming, Qu, Ying

Purpose

The primary purpose of the BCABI measurement model is to empirically investigate the psychological and behavioral chain linking a tourist’s initial involvement level with their subsequent commitment to a destination. It provides a structured framework for understanding how pre-trip planning behaviors translate into post-trip loyalty, grounded in the context of experience co-creation.

The model specifically investigates the mediating roles played by two constructs developed during the trip: Satisfaction with the Co-Creation Experience and the formation of Place Attachment (comprising place identity and place dependence). These factors capture the crucial cognitive and affective processes that bridge initial behavior (pre-trip involvement) and the final behavioral outcome (destination loyalty).

Construct

The BCABI Model is a multi-dimensional structure comprising five primary constructs measured by 17 items, organized to represent the sequential flow from past action to future intention, consistent with the self-consistency principle of attitude theory. The model explicitly integrates principles from the Service-Dominant Logic, emphasizing the tourist’s active role in creating value during the experience.

The core constructs measured are:

• Pre-trip involvement: Reflects the effort and energy tourists invest in planning and researching their trip before arrival (Behavior).
• Satisfaction with the Co-Creation of Experience: Measures the positive evaluation of interactions with residents and other tourists during the trip (Cognition/Affect).
• Place Attachment: A complex affective construct capturing the emotional connection to the destination, subdivided into Place Identity and Place Dependence (Affect).
• Destination Loyalty: The final outcome, representing the likelihood of future visits or positive recommendations (Behavioral Intention).

Validity

The validity of the BCABI model was rigorously assessed using established structural equation modeling criteria (Hair, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2011). Indicators such as factor loading, Composite Reliability (CR), and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) provided strong evidence for convergent validity. Factor loadings consistently exceeded the 0.70 threshold (ranging from 0.773 to 0.913), and AVE values surpassed the 0.50 threshold (ranging from 0.672 to 0.813).

Discriminant validity was confirmed through two stringent methods. Firstly, the Fornell-Larcker Criterion was satisfied, where the square root of each construct’s AVE was higher than its correlation with any other construct. Secondly, the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) values were consistently below 0.900, further supporting the distinctiveness of the latent variables as recommended for PLS-SEM assessment.

In terms of Content Validity, a pilot test involving nine subject matter experts confirmed the appropriateness of the items. For the critical pre-trip involvement variable, the item content validity index ranged from 0.889 to 1.000, confirming that the items accurately represented the construct definition.

Reliability

The internal consistency, a key measure of psychometric properties, was evaluated across two independent samples of Chinese tourists. In the first sample, Composite Reliability values spanned 0.860 to 0.946, and Cronbach’s alpha values ranged from 0.755 to 0.923, both indicating excellent reliability across all measured constructs.

For the second validation sample, Cronbach’s alpha values ranged from 0.682 to 0.882. Although some values were slightly lower in this subsequent sample, they are still considered acceptable for research purposes, particularly given the context of complex multi-item scales (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).

Factor Analysis

The psychometric structure was established through both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). An EFA conducted on the 4-item Pre-trip involvement scale during pilot testing demonstrated a strong unidimensional structure, with a single factor accounting for 82.45% of the total variance.

Subsequently, a CFA was performed to rigorously validate the single-factor structure of the pre-trip involvement measure. The results indicated an excellent model fit, evidenced by favorable fit indices: 𝜒² (2) = 2.743 (p > 0.01), SRMR = 0.009, RMSEA = 0.053, CFI = 0.998, and TLI = 0.995. These statistics provide strong support for the hypothesized structure.

To address concerns regarding common method bias (CMB), Harman’s One-Factor Test (without rotation) was performed. The principal component analysis of all combined factors revealed that the largest factor accounted for 47.794% of the total variance. Since this figure falls below the conservative 50% threshold, CMB was determined not to be a significant concern for the BCABI model data.

Instrument

Test Type: Inventory/Questionnaire

Format: The instrument uses a Likert-type scale. Response options can be administered using either a 5-point or a 7-point scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”

Language Available: Chinese (Mandarin). The original items were translated into Mandarin Chinese using a standard translation-back translation procedure to ensure semantic equivalence.

Population Group: Human (Male and Female)

Age Group: The instrument is suitable for a broad age range, including Adolescence (13-17 yrs), Adulthood (18 yrs & older), Young Adulthood (18-29 yrs), Thirties (30-39 yrs), and Middle Age (40-64 yrs).

Population Details: The validation study participants were tourists located in China.

Test Methodology: The methodology employed for validating and analyzing the BCABI model included:

• Test Validity
• Discriminant Validity
• Test Reliability
• Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s alpha)
• Factor Analysis
• Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
• Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
• Principal Component Analysis (Harman’s Test)

Keywords

Affect, Behavior-Cognition-Affect-Behavioral Intention Model, Co-Creation Experience, Cognition, Destination Loyalty, Past Behavior, Place Attachment, Place Dependence, Place Identity, Pre-Trip Involvement, Satisfaction with the Co-Creation of Experience, Tourism

Authors

Cao, Limei

• Affiliation: Sun Yat-sen University, School of Business
• Email address: [email protected]

Xie, Dengming

• Author ORCID Identifier: orcid.org/0000-0003-3489-9504
• Affiliation: Macau University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism Management
• Email address: [email protected]
• Correspondence Address: Macau University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Macau, Taipa, China, 999078, [email protected]

Qu, Ying

• Affiliation: Zhejiang Gongshang University, School of Tourism and Urban-rural Planning
• Email address: [email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: The BCABI Model may be utilized for academic research and teaching purposes.

Commercial Use: No data is Available.

Fee: No fee is required for the use of this instrument.

Test Year: 2023

Reference’s

Cao, L., Xie, D., & Qu, Y. (2023). A process perspective on experience co-creation: How pre-trip involvement prompts destination loyalty. Tourism Management, 96, 1–12. doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2022.104711

Supporting theoretical references include:

• Albarracin, D., & Wyer, R. S. (2000). The structure of beliefs and the self-consistency principle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 918–931.
• Harmon-Jones, E., Armstrong, J., & Olson, J. A. (2018). The role of action-based self-consistency in cognitive dissonance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 74, 184–191.
• Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Service-dominant logic 2025. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 33(1), 5–9.

Items of the Behavior-Cognition-Affect-Behavioral Intention Model Questionnaire

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

The BCABI Model comprises 17 items distributed across five constructs. The complete list of items is available in the foundational publication: Cao, L., Xie, D., & Qu, Y. (2023). A process perspective on experience co-creation: How pre-trip involvement prompts destination loyalty. Tourism Management, 96, 1–12, specifically located in Table 2, Page 7.

Constructs: The 17 items are distributed across the following constructs and subscales:

• Pre-trip involvement
• Satisfaction with the co-creation of experience
• Place attachment
  • Place identity
  • Place dependence
• Destination loyalty

Pre-trip involvement

• INV1: I enjoy making a do-it-yourself travel planning.

• INV2: I take my time and energy to make travel planning.

• INV3: I conduct thorough research before going on a trip.

• INV4: I arrange a trip of my own like planning a gift to myself.

Satisfaction with the co-creation of experience

• SCoCE1: I felt comfortable interacting with residents during the destination.

• SCoCE2: My visit to the destination allows me to effectively interact with residents.

• SCoCE3: I felt comfortable interacting with other tourists during the destination.

• SCoCE4: My visit to the destination allows me to effectively interact with other tourists.

Place identity

• PI1: Visiting this place says a lot about who I am.

• PI2: I feel strong sense of belonging to this place.

• PI3: I can really be myself at this place.

Place dependence

• PD1: This place is the best place for what I like to do.

• PD2: When it comes to the topic of travel, I picture this place.

• PD3: No other place can compare to this place.

Destination loyalty

• DL1: I will recommend this destination to others.

• DL2: I am more likely to take another vacation to this place among these destinations of the same type.

• DL3: I will revisit this destination.

Note: Items may be rated using either a 5- or 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”