Notes on Muslim Tourist Perceived Value (MTPV) in Hospitality and Tourism

Muslim Tourist Perceived Value (MTPV) in the Hospitality and Tourism Industry — Study Notes

• Overall topic: Perceived value in hospitality and tourism, with a focus on Muslim tourists (MTPV) and a proposed multidimensional scale capturing functional, emotional, and Islamic (Shari’ah-related) attributes.
• Core premise: Value is a subjective, dynamic construct that varies by customer and culture; for Muslims, value includes traditional (cognitive, affective) components plus Shari’ah-compliant (Islamic) attributes.
• Key theoretical frames:
  • Value-in-use vs value-in-context: value is determined by the beneficiary in a given context (Lusch & Vargo, 2011; Vargo, 2009).
  • Service-Dominant Logic perspective: value emerges from networks and exchange relationships (Vargo, 2009).
  • Glocalization: Islamic value must be understood locally within Islamic norms when traveling (Robertson, 1994; Salazar, 2005).
• Practical motivation: Muslim populations are large and growing; marketing scholars stress perceived value as a determinant of decision making; Islamic tourism requires Shari’ah-compliant offerings (Halal food, prayer facilities, gender-segregated facilities, etc.).
• Research gap addressed: Prior perceived value studies in hospitality/tourism did not explicitly measure MTPV from the Muslim consumer’s viewpoint; this study develops and validates a 24-item MTPV scale across six dimensions.

Research Objectives

• Identify MTPV dimensions.
• Develop items to measure these dimensions.
• Empirically validate the scales.
• Investigate relationships among MTPV dimensions (initial test of inter-dimension relationships).
• Provide managerial implications for Shari’ah-compliant hospitality and tourism offerings.

Literature Review

Islamic Tourism

• Islam has deep historical travel roots; modern Islamic tourism blends religious pilgrimage with leisure travel (Jafari & Scott, 2013; Zamani-Farahani & Henderson, 2010).
• Two main travel types for Muslims:
  • Hajj: The obligatory pilgrimage to Mecca, performed within a specific period (8th–13th of Dhul-Hijja) in Saudi Arabia; requires conduct in line with religious guidelines (e.g., no obscenity) (Qur’an references cited: Surat Al-Baqarah 197; Surat Al-Ankabut 20).
  • Umrah: The non-obligatory pilgrimage to Mecca.
• Islamic tourism emphasizes Shari’ah-compliant needs: Halal food, prayer facilities, modest dress, gender-appropriate facilities, and religiously appropriate environments (Henderson 2010; Jafari & Scott 2013; Ozdemir & Met 2012).
• Distinctive considerations for Muslims in travel: dietary rules (Halal), cleanliness rituals, prayer routines, modesty, etc. These affect destination choice, product preferences, and facilities (Zamani-Farahani & Henderson, 2010; Jafari & Scott, 2013).
• The broader concept: Islamic tourism is a form of pilgrimage-inspired travel that integrates religious values with contemporary leisure, contrasting with hedonic mass tourism (Sonmez, 2001).

Customer Perceived Value

• Perceived value is the outcome of marketing activity and a determinant in relationship marketing; traditionally conceptualized as a trade-off between benefits and sacrifices (price, time, effort, risk) (Oh, 2003; Ravald & Gronroos, 1996; Sanchez et al., 2006).
• Multiple conceptualizations exist; value can be cognitive/functional (quality, price) and affective (emotional, social) or a broader multidimensional construct (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001; Petrick, 2002; Prebensen et al., 2013).
• A cognitive (functional) dimension often includes quality and price; an affective (emotional) dimension includes emotional response and social value.
• For Islam, value must also reflect Shari’ah-compliant attributes; thus, the concept of MTPV requires additional Islamic attributes (physical and nonphysical) to represent value-in-context.
• Prior studies demonstrate a multidimensional approach (e.g., five dimensions by Sweeney, Soutar, and Johnson; six by others), but none specifically capture MTPV in Islamic tourism.

Conceptualizing MTPV (Islamic Value Components)

• MTPV must incorporate:
  • Cognitive value (functional): quality of the tourism package; price/value for money.
  • Affective value (emotional): emotional response, social value, pleasure, and personal satisfaction.
  • Islamic value dimensions: two sub-dimensions reflecting Shari’ah compliance: Islamic physical attributes (tangible, on-site features) and Islamic nonphysical attributes (intangible, policy/ethics-related features).
• Shari’ah compliance involves Halal food, prayer facilities, modesty, segregated facilities, and other Islamic norms (e.g., avoidance of haram items; prayer times and cleanliness). These attributes add value to Muslim consumers beyond traditional cognitive/affective dimensions.
• Theoretical synthesis: a holistic MTPV model with six constructs—Quality (cognitive), Price (cognitive), Emotional (affective), Social (affective), Islamic Physical Attributes (Islamic value), Islamic Nonphysical Attributes (Islamic value).

Research Methodology

Data Collection

• Population: Muslim tourists.
• Sampling frame: Database of Muslim tourists accessed through three tourism organizations in the UK, Egypt, and UAE; initial database size: 6,454.
• Sampling method: Systematic random sampling to select 1,000 tourists.
• Data collection: Questionnaires emailed with an online survey link; anonymity ensured.
• Response: 571 questionnaires returned; 34 unusable due to missing data; final usable N = 537; response rate = 55.59%.
• Demographics of sample:
  • Gender: 65.2% male.
  • Age: 75.4% under 45; ~9.5% over 55.
  • Education: 73.2% had some college; 35.6% held postgraduate degrees.
  • Income: Approx. 21.0% ($1,000–$1,999) per month; 24.6% ($2,000–$3,999); 17.3% ($4,000–$5,999); 17.5% (> $6,000).
  • Countries: Respondents from 30 countries (e.g., UAE 9.2%; Egypt 12.1%; United Kingdom 6.7%; others listed).

Research Instrument Development—Measures

• Six constructs measured on a 5-point Likert scale:
  • Functional value (Quality): derived from Sweeney & Soutar (2001). Two sub-dimensions: Quality and Price (4 items each).
  • Affective value: drawn from Sanchez et al. (2006); two sub-dimensions: Emotional value and Social value (4 items each).
  • Islamic value: newly developed constructs based on Qur’an, Sunnah, and related literature; divided into two sub-dimensions: Islamic Physical Attributes and Islamic Nonphysical Attributes (4 items each).
• Item sources and rationale:
  • Cognitive value (Quality, Price): Sweeney & Soutar (2001).
  • Affective value (Emotional, Social): Gallarza & Saura (2006); Sanchez et al. (2006); Sweeney & Soutar (2001).
  • Islamic value (Physical/Nonphysical): informed by Qur’an, Sunnah, Battour et al. (2011), Ozdemir & Met (2012), and related Islamic-tourism literature; designed to capture Halal compliance, religious facilities, Shari’ah compatibility, dress codes, etc.
• Instrument development process:
  • Two rounds of pretesting: review by five experienced questionnaire-design academics; piloting with four tourism experts.
  • Adjustments made to ensure scales fit the MTPV context.
• Reliability planning: use of Cronbach’s alpha and item-total correlations; aim for alpha > 0.60 for basic research, with higher targets in practice.

Analysis Plan

• Following Churchill (1979) for scale development; calculate reliability; conduct Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) with principal components and varimax rotation; followed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).
• Model testing sequence:
  • Null model (no latent factors).
  • One-factor model (all items load on a single factor).
  • Three-factor model (functional and affective combined as two factors; Islamic attributes as a single Islamic factor).
  • Six-factor model (six proposed dimensions: Quality, Price, Emotional, Social, Islamic Physical Attributes, Islamic Nonphysical Attributes).
• Validation steps:
  • Evaluate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha; item-total correlations).
  • Test convergent validity: factor loadings ≥ 0.7, composite reliability (CR) ≥ 0.7, AVE ≥ 0.5.
  • Test discriminant validity: Fornell-Larcker criterion (AVE diagonal greater than squared inter-construct correlations).
  • Assess model fit with CFA indices: χ2, degrees of freedom (DF), AGFI, CFI, RMSEA; compare across models.

Results

Reliability and Descriptive Findings

• Table 2: Construct reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) for six constructs:
  • Quality: $ext{Alpha} = 0.901$
  • Price: $ext{Alpha} = 0.868$
  • Emotional: $ext{Alpha} = 0.934$
  • Social: $ext{Alpha} = 0.899$
  • Islamic physical attributes: $ext{Alpha} = 0.919$
  • Islamic nonphysical attributes: $ext{Alpha} = 0.955$
• All alpha values exceed 0.60, indicating acceptable reliability (Nunnally, 1978).
• Item-total correlations support reliability; items load clearly on their intended constructs.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

• EFA using principal components with varimax rotation yielded six distinct factors:
  • Six-factor solution explained 80.974 ext{%} of the variance.
  • Each item loaded highly on its intended construct (Table 3).
  • Initial eigenvalues: 10.262, 3.572, 1.935, 1.490, 1.169, 1.006.
• Cumulative variance explained by the six factors: 80.974 ext{%}.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Model Comparison

• CFA approach included both a full measurement model (six constructs) and a structural model (all constructs together).
• Model comparison (Table 4): several models tested against the data:
  • Null model: χ2 = 6544.75, DF = 252, AGFI = 0.323, CFI = 0.462, RMSEA = 0.216
  • Three-factor model: χ2 = 4157.80, DF = 249, AGFI = 0.549, CFI = 0.666, RMSEA = 0.171
  • Six-factor model: χ2 = 1344.53, DF = 237, AGFI = 0.831, CFI = 0.905, RMSEA = 0.093
• Conclusion: six-factor model provided the best fit among the tested models (lowest χ2, highest CFI, lowest RMSEA).

Detailed CFA results by Dimension (Table 5)

• Quality (Cognitive Value – Quality): 4 items; one-factor CFA result:
  • Fit: χ2 = 18.572; DF = 2; p = 0.061; RMSEA = 0.086; GFI = 0.98; AGFI = 0.91; CR = 0.90
  • Loadings (illustrative): 0.828 (fixed), 0.861, 0.859, 0.785
• Price (Cognitive Value – Price): 4 items; one-factor CFA:
  • Fit: χ2 = 45.962; DF = 2; p = 0.0311; RMSEA = 0.087; GFI = 0.962; AGFI = 0.811; CR = 0.867
  • Loadings: 0.828 (fixed), 0.855, 0.703, 0.760
• Emotional (Affective Value – Emotional): 4 items; one-factor CFA:
  • Fit: χ2 = 47.577; DF = 2; p = 0.0316; RMSEA = 0.076; GFI = 0.957; AGFI = 0.818; CR = 0.935
  • Loadings: 0.873 (fixed), 0.898, 0.901, 0.868
• Social (Affective Value – Social): 4 items; one-factor CFA:
  • Fit: χ2 = 33.341; DF = 2; p = 0.0201; RMSEA = 0.087; GFI = 0.969; AGFI = 0.845; CR = 0.899
  • Loadings: 0.839 (fixed), 0.902, 0.898, 0.747
• Islamic Physical Attributes (Islamic Value – Physical): 4 items; one-factor CFA:
  • Fit: χ2 = 31.836; DF = 2; p = 0.016; RMSEA = 0.016; GFI = 0.974; AGFI = 0.868; CR = 0.919
  • Loadings: 0.837 (fixed), 0.893, 0.848, 0.864
• Islamic Nonphysical Attributes (Islamic Value – Nonphysical): 4 items; one-factor CFA:
  • Fit: χ2 = 8.957; DF = 2; p = 0.11; RMSEA = 0.081; GFI = 0.992; AGFI = 0.960; CR = 0.955
  • Loadings: 0.890 (fixed), 0.925, 0.949, 0.907
• Overall CFA fit for the six-factor model is strong, indicating each dimension is well-defined and measures a distinct construct.

Convergent Validity (Table 6)

• Composite Reliability (CR) and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for each construct:
  • Quality: CR = 0.900; AVE = 0.694
  • Price: CR = 0.867; AVE = 0.620
  • Emotional: CR = 0.935; AVE = 0.783
  • Social: CR = 0.899; AVE = 0.719
  • Islamic Physical Attributes: CR = 0.919; AVE = 0.740
  • Islamic Nonphysical Attributes: CR = 0.955; AVE = 0.842
• All AVEs exceed 0.5 and CRs exceed 0.7, indicating adequate convergent validity.

Discriminant Validity (Table 7)

• Inter-construct correlations (squared correlations shown in lower triangle; AVE diagonals in bold):
  • Quality-Price: r = 0.585; r^2 = 0.342
  • Quality-Emotional: r = 0.671; r^2 = 0.450
  • Quality-Social: r = 0.625; r^2 = 0.391
  • Quality-Islamic Physical: r = 0.451; r^2 = 0.203
  • Quality-Islamic Nonphysical: r = 0.158; r^2 = 0.025
  • Price-Emotional: r = 0.626; r^2 = 0.392
  • Price-Social: r = 0.535; r^2 = 0.286
  • Price-Islamic Physical: r = 0.359; r^2 = 0.129
  • Price-Islamic Nonphysical: r = 0.205; r^2 = 0.042
  • Emotional-Social: r = 0.884; r^2 = 0.781
  • Emotional-Islamic Physical: r = 0.376; r^2 = 0.142
  • Emotional-Islamic Nonphysical: r = 0.208; r^2 = 0.043
  • Social-Islamic Physical: r = 0.447; r^2 = 0.200
  • Social-Islamic Nonphysical: r = 0.333; r^2 = 0.111
  • Islamic Physical-Islamic Nonphysical: r = 0.860; r^2 = 0.740
• Diagonal AVE values (sqrt of AVE) exceed off-diagonal correlations, supporting discriminant validity for all constructs (For­nell-Larcker criterion).

Correlations Among the MTPV Constructs (Table 7 discussion)

• All six MTPV constructs are positively and significantly correlated with one another, indicating holistic MTPV relationships rather than isolated dimensions.
• The strongest positive association tends to appear between Emotional and Social values (as reflected by a high correlation in the table).
• Inter-dimension correlations support the argument that Muslim tourists evaluate values across cognitive, affective, and Islamic attributes in an integrated manner when assessing destination experiences and tourism products.

Discussion and Implications

• Contributions:
  • First comprehensive measurement of MTPV using a 24-item scale across six dimensions.
  • Demonstrates robust psychometric properties (reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity) for the MTPV scale.
  • Empirically shows that cognitive, affective, and Islamic attributes jointly shape Muslim tourist value perceptions.
• Theoretical implications:
  • Supports Holbrook & Hirschman’s experiential view in the context of Islamic tourism; value is experiential, contextual, and multi-faceted for Muslims.
  • Extends value-in-use to value-in-context by incorporating Shari’ah-compliant attributes into perceived value.
  • Validates a multi-dimensional approach consistent with Sweeney & Soutar (cognitive and affective) while adding Islamic dimensions, aligning with Lusch & Vargo (value co-creation in service contexts).
• Managerial implications:
  • Tourism/hospitality firms should market and design offerings as Shari’ah-compliant experiences (Halal food, separated facilities, prayer spaces, Shari’ah-compatible media, etc.) to maximize perceived value for Muslim tourists.
  • Invest in product development to incorporate Islamic attributes (physical and nonphysical) to differentiate offerings and improve willingness to buy.
  • Consider marketing strategies that communicate both functional value (quality and price) and Islamic value signals to better position products within Muslim markets.
  • Conceptualize MTPV as a holistic construct—managers should address all six dimensions to optimize customer value, rather than focusing solely on traditional functional aspects.

Practical and Theoretical Implications of MTPV Dimensions

• Cognitive value: quality and price perceptions drive rational purchasing decisions; ensuring consistent quality and transparent pricing improves perceived value.
• Affective value: emotional and social rewards contribute to memorable experiences; designers should craft experiences that evoke positive feelings and social validation.
• Islamic value: physical attributes (e.g., prayer facilities, Halal food, Qur’an availability, Shari’ah-compliant amenities) and nonphysical attributes (e.g., segregated services, Shari’ah-aligned entertainment, non-depicting art) add unique value to Muslim consumers by aligning with religious norms and ethics.
• The six-dimension model suggests that even if traditional metrics indicate strong value, gaps in Islamic attributes can undermine overall MTPV for Muslim tourists.

Limitations and Future Research

• Limitations:
  • Six constructs used (Quality, Price, Emotional, Social, Islamic Physical Attributes, Islamic Nonphysical Attributes); may omit other relevant dimensions such as reputation, aesthetics, and religiosity.
  • Cross-sectional data limit causal inference.
  • Generalizability concerns due to country composition and sampling frame; replication in other contexts recommended.
• Future directions:
  • Extend MTPV to other service sectors (e.g., banking, insurance) and different cultural contexts.
  • Develop an index of practice to quantify MTPV performance over time and identify improvement opportunities.
  • Explore causal relationships: post-purchase satisfaction and loyalty as outcomes of MTPV components.
  • Experiment with additional items under each dimension; test one or more Islamic attributes in depth for richer insight.
  • Investigate how MTPV sequences unfold in tourists’ postpurchase behaviors.

Conclusion

• The study confirms that Muslim tourist perceived value is multidimensional, encompassing cognitive (quality, price), affective (emotional, social), and Islamic (physical, nonphysical) attributes.
• The 24-item MTPV scale demonstrates solid reliability and validity, with a six-factor structure providing the best fit to data.
• Practically, firms serving Muslim travelers should implement Shari’ah-compliant, culturally sensitive offerings across tangible and intangible attributes to maximize value and competitiveness in a dynamic, growing market.

References (Selected)

• Battour, Ismail, Battor (2011) on Islamic destination attributes; Halal, prayer facilities, dress codes.
• Jafari & Scott (2013); Zamani-Farahani & Henderson (2010, 2012) on Islamic tourism development.
• Laderlah et al. (2011); Ozdemir & Met (2012) on Islamic tourism features and expectations in destinations.
• Sweeney & Soutar (2001); Petrick (2002); Prebensen et al. (2013) on multidimensional perceived value.
• Lusch & Vargo (2011); Vargo (2009) on value-in-context and service-dominant logic.
• Holbrook & Hirschman (1982); Havlena & Holbrook (1986) on experiential aspects of consumption.

Appendix: Key Tables and Figures (Summarized)

• Table 2: Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) for six constructs: Quality 0.901; Price 0.868; Emotional 0.934; Social 0.899; Islamic Physical Attributes 0.919; Islamic Nonphysical Attributes 0.955.
• Table 3: EFA results; six factors; initial eigenvalues 10.262, 3.572, 1.935, 1.490, 1.169, 1.006; variance explained per factor: 42.758%, 14.882%, 8.061%, 6.210%, 4.869%, 4.192%; cumulative 80.974%.
• Table 4: Model comparisons; Null χ2 = 6544.75; Three factors χ2 = 4157.80; Six factors χ2 = 1344.53; CFI 0.462 → 0.666 → 0.905; RMSEA 0.216 → 0.171 → 0.093.
• Table 5: Item-level CFA results for each dimension (loadings shown; example items provided in text).
• Table 6: Convergent validity results; CRs and AVEs listed as above.
• Table 7: Discriminant validity results; correlations among constructs and AVE diagonals; diagonal AVEs shown in bold on the diagonal; all constructs satisfy discriminant validity.