Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Destination Marketing & Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jdmm

Assessing destination image: An online marketing approach

and the case of TripAdvisor
Stella Kladou a,1, Eleni Mavragani b,n
a
Shefeld Hallam University, Shefeld Business School, City Campus, Howard Street, Shefeld S1 1WB, UK
b
International Hellenic University, 14th km Thessaloniki N. Moudania, Thermi, 57001 Thessaloniki, Greece

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Destination image is a popular research domain in the tourism literature, yet few studies focus on
Received 3 July 2014 destination image as reected by actual tourists' evaluations and reviews on social media. Given the
Accepted 23 April 2015 signicance of social media and the relationship between country and destination image, the study sets
Available online 3 June 2015
out to assess the cognitive, affective and conative components of image. This study considers the concept
Keywords: of destination image from the tourists' point of view, though their reviews of Istanbul on TripAdvisor
Destination image during the summer in 2013. This study, although limited in scope, will be of interest to academic
Online marketing researchers and industry practitioners who are seeking to better understand the behavior of travelers
Social media using the Internet.
TripAdvisor
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Istanbul

1. Introduction tend to be more realistic, complex, and differentiated (e.g. Chon,

Destinations today have to deal with a variety of new chal-
lenges in their effort to gain and maintain a competitive advan-
tage. Smart destinations, which have emerged out of the concept
of smart cities, particularly highlight the signicance of synergies
between stakeholders and of addressing travelers' needs before,
during and after their trip (Buhalis & Amaranggana, 2013). Within
this context, the potential for assessing destination image using an
online marketing approach arises.
Destination image is one of the most studied areas in the
tourism literature (Gallarza, Saura, & Caldern Garca, 2002). The
concept of destination image traditionally contains a cognitive and
an affective component. Other researchers argue, however, that
there is a third conative dimension which reects the behavioral
aspect (e.g. Gartner, 1993). Gunn (1988), focusing on the factors
inuencing image formation, identied a distinction between
organic and induced images, and argued that actual experience
effectively modies the destination's image. The importance of
modied-induced image, which results from visitors' actual
experience of a specic destination, becomes of particular sig-
nicance given that, as a result of visiting the destination, images
n
Corresponding author at: International Hellenic University, Greece, 14th km
Thessaloniki N. Moudania, 57001 Thermi, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Tel.: 30 6938141500.
E-mail addresses: S.Kladou@shu.ac.uk (S. Kladou),
mavraganie@gmail.com (E. Mavragani).
1
Tel.: 44 114 225 2190.
1987). Even so, image development must be based on reality,
otherwise the destination will not succeed in satisfying the
tourists, which will in turn have a negative effect on the image
that they will transmit by word of mouth (Beerli & Martin, 2004,
p. 677). This becomes of special importance given the develop-
ment of new information sources, such as social media, and the
inuence of user-generated content on the customers' decision-
making process (Jalilvand, Samiei, Dini, & Manzari, 2012).
Social media are used before, during and after holidays for
experience sharing and are a signicant information source (Xiang
& Gretzel, 2010). In fact, social media content is very often perceived
to be more trustworthy than ofcial tourism websites or mass-media
advertising (Fotis, Buhalis, & Rossides, 2012). Furthermore, the link
between destination image and search keywords is of critical impor-
tance to link between destination image studies and online marketing
(Pan & Li, 2011). Despite its signicance, however, there is a paucity of
research analyzing image as reected in social media (Zeng &
Gerritsen, 2014), particularly research that assesses the importance
of each component to the online user.
In an attempt to address this research gap, this study seeks
to assess the three image components (i.e. cognitive, affective and
conative) and to consider the concept of destination image from
the actual visitors' point of view. In order to achieve this objective,
a phenomenological study was carried out to determine visitors'
interpretation of the destination's image. To be specic, San Martin
and Rodriguez del Bosque's (2008) image framework is used to
facilitate the interpretation of the visitors' image. Given the
importance of induced images, interest focuses on visitors' reviews

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2015.04.003
2212-571X/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
188 S. Kladou, E. Mavragani / Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193
on the largest online network of travel consumers, TripAdvisor
(O'Connor, 2010). The study builds specically on the case of
Istanbul, seeking to shed light to the importance of the destina-
tion's image dimensions from the actual visitors' perspective. The
study also takes into consideration the challenges of segmenting
international travelers in the digital era, when online users'
proles (e.g. Ip, Lee, & Law, 2012) are not entirely aligned with
traditional segmentation criteria (e.g. Baloglu, 1997; Cleveland,
Papadopoulos, & Laroche, 2011).
The research outcomes offer marketing scholars greater insight
into the dimensions of destination image and their distinct
signicance when an online decision tool is employed. Implica-
tions for tourism practitioners stem from the dilemma of focusing
on several key themes in their mass-media marketing efforts, as is
suggested for more mainstream markets (e.g. Chen & Uysal, 2002),
or capturing the 'niche' image held by only a few tourists, as
suggested by Pan and Li (2011) in the context of online marketing.
Finally, the research provides guidelines to practitioners so that
they can develop a greater understanding of what tourists con-
sider to be signicant when evaluating a cultural destination.
2. Background
2.1. The case of Turkey and Istanbul
Building the city brand is an objective explicitly stressed in the
Turkish Strategic Plan for 2023 (Ministry of Culture and Tourism,
2007a). Istanbul is recognized as a 'strong card' for tourism develop-
ment in Turkey. This is also underscored by the city's international
arrivals, which in 2012 exceeded even those of Rome, one of the
world's most popular city destinations, (Euromonitor International,
2014; Istanbul Culture and Tourism Directorate, 2014). Turkish stake-
holders, such as the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, explicitly focus
upon projects and programs which will create a positive destination
image of Turkey (Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2007b). The
emphasis on image is not surprising, considering the importance of
re-positioning the image of the country as a whole, which suffers from
negative news in the mass media (Tasci, Gartner, & Cavusgil, 2007).
The research of Tasci et al. (2007) further reveals that Turkey lacks a
clear image. Therefore, the study focuses on Istanbul as a case for
assessing the importance of different components of destination
image for actual visitors.
Despite the aforementioned lack of clear image, Istanbul remains
a major destination attracting visitors of many different nationalities.
According to ofcial gures, in 2013, regardless of their travel motive
or duration of stay, more than 1.1 million arrivals were from
Germany, while around 573.500, 503.000, 478.200, 456.100 and
437.500 visitors were from Russia, the US, France, the UK and Italy
respectively (Istanbul Culture and Tourism Directorate, 2014). During
2013, around 386.300, 261.400, 241.200, 228.600 and 223.100 arrivals
are realized by Iranian, Libyan, Iraqi, Azerbaijani, and Saudi Arabian
nationals respectively. In 2013, the greatest number of international
arrivals to Istanbul occured between late spring and the beginning of
autumn (Istanbul Culture and Tourism Directorate, 2014).
2.2. Destination image and the role of social media
In order to effectively market tourism destinations, it is impor-
tant to be able to recognize the image that tourists have of a
destination, to identify its strengths and weaknesses (Chen & Uysal,
2002), and to position it efciently in the marketplace (Pike & Ryan,
2004). Destination image is therefore one of the most explored
elds in tourism research (Gallarza et al., 2002). Nevertheless, more
effort is required in order to explore the multi-dimensional nature
of destination image and the importance of each image dimension
as recognized by tourists in the digital era.
The various denitions of destination image and the frame-
works developed for its assessment reveal the importance of the
concept for both scholars and practitioners (Gallarza et al., 2002).
Different denitions have followed Hunt's (1971) rst identica-
tion of image as a factor in tourism. Developments in the literature
eventually led to the identication of three main components of
image, namely cognitive, affective and conative (Gartner, 1993).
The cognitive component is connected to awareness and refers to
what people know or may think they know about a destination
(Baloglu, 1999; Pike & Ryan, 2004). The affective component,
meanwhile, goes further than beliefs and knowledge of the
characteristics or attributes of a tourist destination, and evolves
around people's feelings toward the destination (Chen & Uysal,
2002; Kim & Richardson, 2003). Finally, the conative component is
the action step and refers to how people act on the information.
Konecnik and Gartner (2007, p. 403) argued that, destinations are
evaluated not solely from real or imagined attributes rather than
according to the 'brand'. The conative component and the sig-
nicance of the 'brand' are further emphasized given the nature of
tourism and the importance of experience for services such as
tourism, which are produced and consumed simultaneously.
According to San Martin and Rodriguez del Bosque (2008),
factors such as 'natural environment', 'cultural heritage', 'tourist
infrastructures' or 'atmosphere' underlie the cognitive structure of
destination image. They argue that, the cognitive component of
destination image derives from tourists' beliefs about the place
and, as such, is related to the destination's attributes. The attri-
butes of place can be classied into three sub-categories including
not only functional/tangible attributes (e.g. landscape, cultural
attractions, infrastructure) and psychological/abstract attributes
(e.g. hospitality, atmosphere) but also affective attributes, such as
the feelings and emotions that the destination may evoke (e.g.
pleasure, excitement). Tourists evaluate destinations based on
these dimensions and then decide on their behavior towards the
destination (e.g. whether they would visit the destination again or
recommend it to others): the conative component of destination
image.
Literature traditionally links consumer behavior to demographics
and develops corresponding segmentation criteria (e.g. Cleveland
et al., 2011). Tourism research has also investigated the relationship
between destination images and sociodemographic characteristics (e.
g. Baloglu, 1997). The conative component of destination image is
particularly connected to the action step and, thus, with behavior.
Sociodemographic variables clearly affect perceptions of destination
image, although studies disagree on the importance of different
variables. For instance, when Baloglu (1997) attempted to determine
whether destination image variations occurred as a result of the
inuence of sociodemographic variables, no signicant differences
were found between groups in terms of gender, income or education.
The study's segmentation criteria thus focused on tourists' marital
status, age and occupation. Other studies have, however, found some
differences in perceived image depending on gender, age, level of
education, occupation, income, marital status, and country of origin
(e.g. Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Calantone, Di Benetton, Hakam, &
Bojanic, 1989). Given the radical changes in consumer behaviors in
the digital era, however, research on social media users from a
market segmentation point of view needs to be further developed
(Foster, West, & Francescucci, 2011). Specic segmentation criteria
based on demographics may not be completely in line with the
prole of internet and social media users (e.g. Ip et al., 2012).
The internet has reshaped the way tourism-related information
is distributed and the way people plan for and consume travel
(Buhalis & Law, 2008). In line with technological advances, tourism
scholars have gradually started to focus on online destination
 S. Kladou, E. Mavragani / Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193
image (Choi, Lehto, & Morrison, 2007) and the role of social media
in online travel information search (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010).
However, such recent studies tend to concentrate on web-page
material, thus approaching online destination image from the
supplier's point-of-view. While some studies have focused on
social media and visitors' blogs (e.g. Cakmak & Isaac, 2012),
research on social media in tourism is still in its infancy (Zeng &
Gerritsen, 2014). In fact, Zeng & Gerritsen (2014, p.33) point out
that 'social media sources must be strategically included for
research data collection and analysis'.
Social media include a variety of websites and online platforms
on which people share their experiences in different ways (Xiang
& Gretzel, 2010). Consumers use social media to post their stories,
comments and evaluations, or even their pictures and movie clips.
Focusing specically on destinations, travelers share their evalua-
tions and perceptions of destination image using social media and
these evaluations are likely to inuence the choice of the destina-
tion: not only of friends and family but of other potential travelers
around the globe as well. Social media are used before, during and
after holidays for experience sharing and are a signicant informa-
tion source (Xiang & Gretzel, 2010). In fact, the validity of
electronic word-of-mouth is particularly emphasized, since social
media content is very often perceived to be more trustworthy than
ofcial tourism websites or mass-media advertising (Fotis et al.,
2012).
The power of social media has repeatedly troubled stake-
holders involved in the eld of tourism. Although Facebook is
the leading social medium (Zeng & Gerritsen, 2014), Xiang &
Gretzel (2010) recognize TripAdvisor as the most 'popular' social-
media website that contains travel-related content. As a result, the
image reected on TripAdvisor by actual tourists may inuence
the image created in the perception of potential tourists. More-
over, it can be used to evaluate local and national stakeholders'
efforts to support a specic destination image. Analyzing the
comments posted on TripAdvisor will offer an insight into the
weighted importance of each destination image component (i.e.
cognitive, affective, and conative) for those individuals choosing to
share their experience and evaluation on an online platform.
3. Methodology
A phenomenological study was embarked upon in this study in
order to determine visitors' interpretation of the destination's
image according to a destination image framework. Moreover, the
study sought to assess the importance that tourists attribute to
each destination image component and, as a result, decide to share
their comments on social media. Given that user-generated con-
tent inuences the customers' decision-making process (Jalilvand
et al., 2012), interest focused on visitors' reviews on the largest
online network of travel consumers, i.e. the TripAdvisor (O'Connor,
2010).
The main objective of the study was to determine visitors'
interpretation of the destination image components, according to
a destination image framework, as recognized by visitors' com-
ments on TripAdvisor. The selected framework has previously
been tested by San Martin & Rodriguez del Bosque (2008), using
a conventional quantitative method. Alternatively, the present
study was built upon a qualitative approach. The study analyzed
the comments already posted, thus strategically including a social-
media source for research data collection and analysis (Zeng &
Gerritsen, 2014). To be specic, destination image-search key-
words link is of critical importance to destination image studies
and online marketing (Pan & Li, 2011). Therefore, a content
analysis of TripAdvisor posts on the Historic Areas of Istanbul page
was carried out using specic keywords.
189
In more detail, the specic page was selected given that, in June
2014, it was the most popular page hosting reviews about Istanbul
on TripAdvisor. This was identied given that, at the time of the
research, the page hosted more than 3400 reviews and was ranked
rst among the 640 TipAdvisor pages referring to Istanbul attrac-
tions. Additionally, the specic page was awarded a Certicate of
Excellence in the historic sites category in 2014. Therefore, a study
focusing on the destination image of Istanbul was developed based
on a content analysis of postings and comments on the TripAdvi-
sor page of Historic Areas of Istanbul.
Analysis included all 203 reviews posted from June 2013 until the
end of September 2013. The reviews were collected and content-
analyzed using thematic content analysis (i.e. cognitive, affective, and
conative). To be exact, visitors' comments are assessed according to
specic words describing visitors' associations (Keller, 1993) and
feelings (Gartner, 1993). Following San Martin and Rodriguez del
Bosque's (2008) framework, component parts of the comments were
classied as cognitive destination-image components when they refer
to infrastructure, the atmosphere or the socioeconomic/natural/cul-
tural environment. In the same way, in the case of comments
according to which Istanbul is identied as a destination that offers
experiences arousing emotions (e.g. arousing, exciting or pleasant
experience), the respective comment was classied as an affective
image component. The conative component was recognized in cases
where the comment was connected with behavioral intentions, for
instance by mentioning possible recommendation or repeat future
visitation (San Martin & Rodriguez del Bosque, 2008).
In an attempt to provide signicant input for the destination
brand in general, a more in-depth evaluation of the destination
image was considered necessary. Studies tend to assess tourists'
positive and negative evaluations of the destination image
(Baloglu & McCleary, 1999; Jenkins, 1999). Therefore, distinguish-
ing between negative and positive image traits was considered
essential. In most cases, the difference between positive and
negative comments appeared to be more objective and distinct.
This is because of the use of specic words and expressions that
were negative or positive in nature. For instance, negative codes
which referred to negative image traits included the following:
heavy trafc, over-whelming busy, very confusing, dislike, and
advising travelers to be very careful. Furthermore, positive codes
refer red to image traits such as the following: friendly people, great
transportation, beautiful places, fantastic, love Istanbul, worth to see.
In a few cases, the reviewers did not use words that were negative
or positive but the content of the comment and the sentence was
expressed in a way which clearly expressed either positive or
negative evaluations. At this point, it is important to mention that
some words (e.g. 'busy', 'crowded') were classied into their
respective destination image components according to the mean-
ing of the sentence they were in. In some cases, for instance, such
words referred to the urban area and in others to monuments/
heritage sites. Thus, in the analysis the former was included as a
review on the natural environment and the latter on the cultural
environment.
In order to maintain consistency, the coding process was
conducted separately by the two authors. An inter-rater reliability
check was then conducted which found no conicts or different
classications. The inter-rater reliability check and the content
analysis revealed that San Martin and Rodriguez del Bosque (2008)
framework can be used as it is, and that there is no need for a more
detailed classication of the three destination image components
(e.g. to differentiate between tourism and general infrastructure in
the case of the cognitive component).
Given the current status of research, further to the content
analysis, a descriptive analysis was also considered necessary. This
was particularly useful when assessing the links between destination
image components and demographics, particularly because the large
190 S. Kladou, E. Mavragani / Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193

number of missing data in the case of demographics could not allow
clusters analysis using specialized software.
4. Findings
components. Additionally, in line with this framework, cognitive
destination image includes image traits which refer to infra-
structure and the socioeconomic environment, atmosphere, the
natural and the cultural environment.

People posting on TripAdvisor have the option to share or omit Table 1

their personal details. The demographic characteristics usually posted Number of references per Continent and Gender.
refer to nationality and gender, while other characteristics, such as age,
Continent of origin Number of comments (N 176)
occupational status, and household income are not generally added by
the reviewers. In fact, in the 203 reviews considered, 78 of the online America 68
reviewers did not state their gender either. From the 61.68% of Europe 58
reviewers who stated their gender, 77 were men, and 48 women Asia 30
Australia 17
(Table 1). Meanwhile, the vast majority of the reviewers (i.e. 86.21%)
Africa 3
shared information on their country of origin. In total there were 176
reviewers who mentioned their country of origin. Almost one in three Gender Number of comments (N 125)
Male 77
reviewers came from North America, since 45 reviewers stated that Female 48
they were US nationals and 20 that they were Canadian nationals.
Moreover, 25 reviewers were from European countries, with an
additional 33 reviewers coming specically from the U.K. Finally, 30
Table 2
reviewers were from Asian countries, 17 from Australia, three from Summary of number of references per destination image component.
South Africa and three from South American countries.
In line with the literature, the analysis of the data provides a Destination image component Frequencies (N 505) Percentage (%)
qualitative assessment of the reviewers' comments. Thus, com-
Cognitive 338 66.93
ments have been recognized as positive or negative and have been Affective 112 22.18
classied according to a specic destination image component (i.e. Conative 55 10.89
cognitive, affective, conative) (San Martin & Rodriguez del Bosque,
2008). Preliminary analysis reveals that within the 203 reviews,
505 references to destination image components can be detected.
Conative
Destination Image Component

This suggests that each review on average refers to more than two 1
54
destination image traits (mean: 2.49). However, as depicted in
Table 2, this does not mean that reviewers' comments coverred all
Affective

three components. In fact, 66.93% of the references focused on 4

cognitive destination image, while no more than 10.89% of the 108

references were about the conative component.

Cognitive

The next step included an attempt to reveal whether reviewers 59

tended to share their positive or negative evaluations and beliefs 279
about the destination. Analysis indicates that 87.33% of the
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
references (i.e. 441 out of 505 references in total) positively
Number of references (N=505)
evaluate the destination. In detail, 279 of the positive comments
refer to cognitive, 108 to affective and 54 to conative destination Fig. 1. Negative and positive comments about the three image components.
image (Fig. 1).
At this point, a question arises with regard to the connection
between tourists' evaluations and reviewers' demographics. When
focusing on those reviewers who have provided information about Table 3
Distribution of positive and negative comments.
their gender, Table 3 indicates that 79.22% of male reviewers (i.e.
61 out of 77) posted only positive reviews. The respective Male Female Total
percentage for female reviewers was 64.58% (i.e. 31 out of 48).
In fact, 31.25% of the female reviewers recognized both negative Only positive comments 61 31 92
and positive aspects of the destination in their comments, as Only negative comments 5 2 7
Positive and negative comments 11 15 26
opposed to 14.29% of the male reviewers (i.e. 15 out of 48 and 11 Total 77 48 125
out of 77 respectively). As a result, women were twice more likely
to post both negative and positive comments than men.
Finally, only seven tourists posted only negative comments. Inter-
estingly, these comments revolved around cognitive image comments.
The two comments posted by female reviewers were from an
American and an Australian tourist who had been deceived by a taxi
driver and a pick-pocket respectively. The reason for negative image
evaluations in the case of male reviewers focused on the crowded,
busy and noisy city.
At this point, a more in-depth approach to the comments is
considered necessary. Particularly in the case of cognitive desti-
nation image, the pattern seems in line with the framework
developed by San Martin and Rodriguez del Bosque (2008), as
portrayed in Fig. 2. To be specic, reviews can be classied
according to their cognitive, affective and conative image Fig. 2. An insight into cognitive destination image.
 S. Kladou, E. Mavragani / Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193
Seeking to shed more light on the 'popular' cognitive component,
on the one hand there were 66 positive references regarding infra-
structure and the socioeconomic environment. These references
mentioned the location, the safe and 'walkable' environment the
friendly people, the good shopping and transportation alternatives. On
the other hand, 45 negative comments were recognized. As a male US
national characteristically wrote, 'You feel intimidated by the crowd
and the city'. Negative reviews mainly mentioned the trafc, the long
waiting queues as well as street sellers ('pushy sellers' and taxi drivers.
Additionally, 71 positive comments referred to the atmosphere,
and repeatedly used adjectives such as cosmopolitan, restful,
calming, peaceful, and romantic. Istanbul, in short, is identied as
'a beautiful city [where one can] walk and feel the authentic
features'. The negative comments about atmosphere were only
three and come from Americans. Istanbul, for instance, was
considered 'very Middle Eastern', although the reviewer had
sought for a different experience as their organic image seems to
have classied the city as 'more European'. Negative comments
referred to the opinion that the area was 'very noisy'. Yet, one of
these visitors added that a return visit is possible (i.e. 'I will
probably go back' to use his own words).
Ten positive comments described the natural environment
(fauna/ora, landscapes, and parks) and referred mostly to the
parks of Istanbul (i.e. both on the European and Anatolian side of
the city), the tree-line country yard, and the sunsets. Visitors also
pointed out the importance of choosing the right season, because of
the summer heat. The negative comments were only eight in
number: three of the negative reviews were posted by British
tourists, and two by Australian. Three reviews referred to the
'crowded urban environment' and one to the 'busy' landscapes.
Negative comments included suggestions to avoid the hot months
as well.
As also depicted in Fig. 2, the vast majority of the comments
referred to the cultural environment. To be exact, comments
included 100 and 132 references to the cultural environment (e.
g. cultural attractions, cultural activities, and customs). Most
references were about the cultural aspects of the Golden Horn
area, such as Aghia Soa, the mosques, other heritage sites and
museums. For instance, visitors, among others, mentioned: '[the]
historic areas are fantastic' (Australia, female); 'history worth to
see' (Belgium, male); 'A glimpse of two millennia history!' (USA,
male). In addition, nine positive comments referred to the food and
ve to the Turkish bath (hammam). On the other hand, the
negative comments are only three. In detail, a male tourist from
South Africa who does not share any positive comments only
posted: Terrible state of neglect. The other two comments came
from tourists who also shared some positive reviews. To be exact, a
male tourist from Brazil commented that women must be aware
of [the] dress code but underlined positive comments reecting
the atmosphere, the cultural environment and the affective
destination image and added his impression that Istanbul is a
fascinating city. Finally, another male reviewer from the UK liked
the Blue Mosque and the Top Kapi Palace, yet referred to Aghia
Sophia as an experience that provides poor value for money.
Seeking to analyze more the affective component, 108 positive
comments were identied. Comments included the use of adjec-
tives such as 'magnicent' or 'nice', which were recorded seven
and four times respectively. Furthermore, seven reviewers men-
tioned the word 'experience', and three more refered to Istanbul as
an 'interesting' city. Moreover, 13 reviewers characterized the city
as 'beautiful' and 13 more characterized it as 'great'. There were
nine comments including the verb 'enjoy', and eight more includ-
ing the verb 'like'. Some stronger affective image components (e.g.
heart touching, surprise, wonderful, outstanding, excellent, WOW,
awesome, inspiring, astonished, unique, fun, breath-taking) were
recorded as well. The word 'love' was used by 17 reviewers, while
191
10 more evaluated Istanbul as an 'amazing' destination. Finally, a
US female tourist characteristically wrote: 'I fell in love'.
The affective component included four negative comments: a
British female tourist negatively commented on the street-sellers
and stated that she 'disliked' the city. Furthermore, a male tourist
wrote that 'It will not be a transformative experience' but adds
that 'the top three attractions are conveniently located and you
must see them'. Additionally, a Canadian tourist characterized the
city as clean and busy and the people as friendly, yet adds that the
city 'isn't anything of special interest'. Finally, an Australian female
tourist posted mostly negative comments referring to the people
and service and wrote '[there were] people constantly wanting our
money, bad taxi service and food'. In general she commented that
she was 'quite disheartened' by the experience, but was impressed
by the rich culture and history.
Proceeding to the conative component, 54 positive references
can be recognized. Different levels of excitement can be detected,
as reected by the intention to revisit or recommend in the
following examples: 'and off you go!', '[it is a destination] to
experience and visit!', '[Istanbul is] not to be missed, recom-
mended andwill return', '[Istanbul is] worth to see, must see',
'[I will] denitely go back!', '[Istanbul is] worth seeing', '[I] can't
wait to go back', '[one] must see [the city]', '[Istanbul is a city] to
discover and observe'. Particularly tourists in eight comments
say that '[one] must visit [Istanbul]' and 12 more times they
commented that '[Istanbul is] worth to see'. The only negative
comment connected to conative destination image was from a
female Australian tourist who was mugged and advised potential
travelers to 'be careful!'.
5. Discussion and conclusions
The ndings of this studyn are presented here at two levels,
with the rst level focusing specically on destination image. At
this level, the importance of each destination image component
(i.e. cognitive, affective, conative) has been evaluated according to
two distinct characteristics. The rst refers to whether the
reviewer has chosen to refer to a destination attribute which is
recognized as a cognitive, affective or conative destination image
component. The second refers to whether each particular image
trait has been evaluated in a positive or a negative way. At the
second level, the study takes into consideration the available
demographics of TripAdvisor reviewers. As a result, the analysis
of image components is followed by a qualitative preliminary
descriptive assessment based on available demographic
characteristics.
Results suggest that TripAdvisor reviewers' image traits can be
classied under specic destination image components. Speci-
cally, reviewers evaluate a range of destination characteristics, yet
the cognitive component is the one that mostly attracts visitors'
evaluations. Cognitive image components have already been
reported as the most popular for online users, yet in this study
the importance of the various sub-components seems to differ.
Previous studies on the role of social media in online travel
information search have pointed out that certain keywords
(e.g. nightlife and restaurants) are more likely to generate more
social media search results than others (e.g. attractions) (Xiang &
Gretzel, 2010). Furthermore, Xiang and Gretzel (2010) argue that
virtual community websites are more closely tied to 'core' tourism
businesses such as attractions, activities, and accommodation,
while consumer review sites are related to shopping, hotels and
restaurants, and, social networking, blogs, and photo/video shar-
ing sites with events, nightlife, and parks. Analysis of the TripAd-
visor posts on the Historical Areas of Istanbul page reveals that
attractions, activities and other elements of the cognitive
192 S. Kladou, E. Mavragani / Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193
component are considered signicant enough to be mentioned
from a destination image point of view. In fact, characteristics of
the cultural environment constituted the component that received
the largest number of references. The reasoning probably justify-
ing reviewers' focus on such elements can be found at the fact that
they were rating the attraction entitled 'Historical Areas of
Istanbul'. Finally, the signicance of the sub-components presents
a different picture when focusing on positive versus negative
image traits. In this case, more reviews refer to negative attributes
with a more long-lasting effect on the urban environment and
visiting experience (e.g. heavy trafc, sellers' and taxi drivers'
behavior).
The classication of positive/negative reviews and their respec-
tive destination image component can be further discussed in line
with reviewers' and actual visitors' demographics and attitudes.
Focusing particularly on the demographic characteristics of the
sample, it seems that, in this case, mostly men tend to share their
views on TripAdvisor or, given the number of the missing values,
men more than women state their gender when posting their
reviews. This does not come as a surprise, given that men have
been found to have higher average online travel spending than
women (Travel Industry Association of America, 2001). Further-
more, US, Canadian and UK nationals are those who mostly post
their reviews on TripAdvisor, although most of the arrivals come
from German and Russian nationals (Istanbul Culture and Tourism
Directorate, 2014). This nding is in line with previous ndings
which reveal that European-Middle East and African travelers
comment about historical sites more than travelers from other
regions (Text100, 2012), and stress out the leading role of UK social
network penetration in the EU-5 (eMarketer, 2013). Similarly, the
study focuses on the Historical Areas of Istanbul, and travelers
from the US focus on museum and galleries when posting their
comments on social media (Text100, 2012).
Findings further suggest that men tend to share more positive
comments than negative ones. Additionally, reviews which explicitly
refer to conative destination image comprise only one negative post. In
corporate marketing literature, affective associations, as expressed
with emotional evaluations, are referred to as attitudes toward
products (Shimp, 1989). Moreover, the various attitudes which the
consumer develops of the product features are compensatory, mean-
ing that a negative attitude with respect to one attribute could offset
positive feelings with respect to others, and vice versa (Gross &
Peterson, 1987). Thus, a consumer forms an overall attitude toward a
product by balancing his or her attitude combinations (Leisen, 2001).
Similarly, a given tourism destination might consist of natural attrac-
tions, cultural attractions, and other features (e.g. San Martin &
Rodriguez del Bosque, 2008). Given that the overall attitude toward
a destination depends on the 'balanced' outcome of perceived
experience with the perceived importance of the destination char-
acteristics, one may conclude that online reviewers tend to be
positively inclined toward their visiting experience in Istanbul.
6. Implementation, limitations and future research
From an academic perspective, this study is mostly signicant
from a methodological point of view. Zeng and Gerritsen (2014)
have stressed the need to strategically include social media sources
for research data collection and analysis. Despite the importance of
recognizing the images that tourists have of a destination (e.g. Chen
& Uysal, 2002; Pike & Ryan, 2004) and the increasing signicance of
online information sources and social media (e.g. Buhalis & Law,
2008), there is a paucity of studies investigating destination image
in an online context. Thus, this study implements a previously
tested destination image framework by interpreting and classifying
actual visitors' reviews on TripAdvisor. The present study
contributes to the literature by assessing the three image compo-
nents as presented on TripAdvisor by tourists who choose to share
their opinion with potential travelers, and reveals the central
importance of cognitive image.
The main objective of the study concerned investigating the
three image components (cognitive, affective, conative) as they
are reected on social media. Moreover, the study sought to
critically assess the reviews and provide a qualitative insight that
would be valuable to both scholars and practitioners. Particularly
for the case of online marketing, previous studies have men-
tioned the signicance of capturing the 'niche' image held by only
a few tourists (Pan & Li, 2011). On the other hand, the range of
comments on TripAdvisor support the signicance of more
generic destination products and overall atmosphere. In particu-
lar, tourists may comment more on cognitive aspects, yet in their
comments they refer to aspects covering a wide variety of
characteristics (e.g. culture, people, atmosphere). Thus, 'destina-
tions are evaluated []according to the "brand". (Konecnik &
Gartner, 2007, p. 43), and a positive attitude towards a destina-
tion seems to be connected to more than one attribute. This
nding is in line with works on destination and place branding
(e.g. Kladou & Kehagias, 2014) and provides further evidence
regarding the importance of collaboration among destination
stakeholders.
Going one step forward, an important challenge in the promo-
tion of a tourist destination is to recognize both its strengths and
weaknesses in the individual's mind (San Martin & Rodriguez del
Bosque, 2008). he smart way to brand destinations today is by
dynamically taking into account the organic images portrayed by
actual tourists in social media. Hence, it is important to mine social
media data to capture and understand the positive and negative
images shared by consumers so destinations can respond to these
with a strong brand highlighting the positive and addressing the
negative images.
Furthermore, this study has set out to assess reviewers' evaluations
according to their demographics, and provides a descriptive analysis.
This becomes particularly important given the various approaches
regarding segmentation in a tourism context (e.g. Baloglu, 1997;
Baloglu & McCleary, 1999) and the differences pinpointed by online
users' prole (e.g. Ip et al., 2012). In an attempt to use social media as
the primary source for data collection, the study built upon reviews
posted on TripAdvisor rather than developing an alternative research
tool. As a result, the demographic information used to assess the
prole of the internet users is limited to gender and nationality.
Moreover, several of the reviewers did not wish to share this
information either. Therefore, proling users of TripAdvisor for plan-
ning and online experience sharing is limited compared to previous
studies (e.g. Ip et al., 2012). Consequently, this research methodology
should be applied to other studies and tourist destinations in order to
generalize the ndings. Future research focusing on travel social media
other than TripAdvisor is expected to contribute to the generalization
of the ndings based on users' demographics. Future studies can also
enhance their methods and follow a mixed approach by inviting
online users to complete an online questionnaire once they have
shared their reviews on TripAdvisor or alternative social media.
The exploratory nature of this study leads to an additional
limitation, as the data reect only a snapshot of reviews on
TripAdvisor. Given the importance of more generic brands, Istan-
bul destination image needs to be assessed in a more collective
manner. TripAdvisor reviews on other Istanbul pages (e.g. Beyoglu,
Taksim reviews) could add to the complete reection of Istanbul as
a destination. Furthermore, analysis of a collection of TripAdvisor
pages throughout the year and as these develop over time will
offer stakeholders a more in-depth knowledge of visitors' reec-
tions. Finally, evaluating additional destinations could add to the
literature related to destination image and branding. This will also
 S. Kladou, E. Mavragani / Journal of Destination Marketing & Management 4 (2015) 187193
allow for additional comparisons and analysis of the online
tourism domain beyond the context used in this study.
References
Baloglu, S. (1997). The relationship between destination images and sociodemo-
graphic and trip characteristics of international travelers. Journal of Vacation
Marketing, 3(3), 221233.
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of
Tourism Research, 26, 868897.
Baloglu, S. (1999). A path analytic model of visitation intention involving informa-
tion sources, socio-psychological motivations, and destination image. Journal of
Travel and Tourism Marketing, 8(3), 8191.
Beerli, A., & Martin, J. D. (2004). Factors inuencing destination image. Annals of
Tourism Research, 31(3), 657681.
Buhalis, D., & Amaranggana, A. (2013). Smart tourism destinations. In: Z. Xiang, &
Tussyadiah (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in tourism, 2014
(pp. 553564). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Buhalis, D., & Law, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism
management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet the state of eTourism
research. Tourism Management, 29(4), 609623.
Cakmak, E., & Isaac, R. K. (2012). What destination marketers can learn from their
visitors' blogs: An image analysis of Bethlehem, Palestine. Journal of Destination
Marketing and Management, 1(1-2), 124133.
Calantone, R., Di Benetton, C., Hakam, A., & Bojanic, D. (1989). Multiple multi-
national tourism positioning using correspondence analysis. Journal of Travel
Research, 28(2), 2532.
Chen, J. S., & Uysal, M. (2002). Market positioning analysis: A hybrid approach.
Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 9871003.
Choi, S., Lehto, X. Y., & Morrison, A. M. (2007). Destination image representation on
the web: Content analysis of Macau travel related websites. Tourism Manage-
ment, 28(1), 118129.
Chon, Kye-Sung (1987). An assessment of images of Korea as a tourist destination
by American tourists. Hotel and Tourism Management Review, 3, 155170.
Cleveland, M., Papadopoulos, N., & Laroche, M. (2011). Identity, demographics, and
consumer behaviors: International market segmentation across product cate-
gories. International Marketing Review, 28(3), 244266.
eMarketer (2013). UK remains top facebook market in Western Europe [WWW page].
From: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/UK-Remains-Top-Facebook-Market-
Western-Europe/1009876 Retrieved 20.05.13.
Euromonitor International (2014) Top 100 city destinations ranking. Available
online at: http://blog.euromonitor.com/2014/01/euromonitor-international
s-top-city-destinations-ranking.html Accessed 10.05.14.
Foster, M., West, B., & Francescucci, A. (2011). Exploring social media user
segmentation and online brand proles. Journal of Brand Management, 19, 417.
Fotis, J., Buhalis, D., & Rossides, N. (2012). Social media use and impact during the
holiday travel planning process. In: M. Fuchs, F. Ricci, & L. Cantoni (Eds.),
Information and communication technologies in tourism (pp. 1324). Vienna,
Austria: Springer Verlag.
Gallarza, M. G., Saura, I. G., & Caldern Garca, H. (2002). Destination Image:
Towards a conceptual framework. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 5678.
Gartner, W. (1993). Image formation process. In: M. Uysal, & D. R. Fesenmaier (Eds.),
Communication and channel systems in tourism marketing (pp. 191215). New
York: The Haworth Press.
Gross, C. W., & Peterson, R. T. (1987). Marketing concepts and decision making. St.
Paul, MN: West Publishing.
193
Gunn, C. (1988). Vacationscapes: Designing tourist regions. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Hunt, J. D. (1971). Image: A factor in tourism. Cited in N. Telisman-Kosuta (1989).
Tourism Destination Image. In Tourism Marketing and Management Handbook, S. F.
Ip, C., Lee, H., & Law, R. (2012). Proling the users of travel websites for planning
and online experience sharing. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 36
(3), 418426.
Istanbul Culture and Tourism Directorate (2014). Istanbul Tourism Statistics for
2013 [WWW page]. From: http://www.istanbulkulturturizm.gov.tr/Eklenti/
21413,aralik-2013.doc Retrieved 20.02.14.
Jalilvand, M. R., Samiei, N., Dini, B., & Manzari, P. Y. (2012). Examining the structural
relationships of electronic word of mouth, destination image, tourist attitude
toward destination and travel intention: An integrated approach. Journal of
Destination Marketing and Management, 1, 134143.
Jenkins, O. (1999). Understanding and measuring tourist destination images.
International Journal of Tourism Research, 1, 115.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based
brand equity. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 122.
Kim, H., & Richardson, S. L. (2003). Motion picture impacts on destination images.
Annals of Tourism Research, 30(1), 216237.
Kladou, S., & Kehagias, J. (2014). Assessing destination brand equity: An integrated
approach. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 3(1), 210.
Konecnik, M., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Customer-based brand equity for a
destination. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(2), 400421.
Leisen, B. (2001). Image segmentation: the case of a tourism destination. Journal of
Services Marketing, 15(1), 4966.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2007a). Strategic Plan 2023 [WWW page]. From:
http://www.ktbyatirimisletmeler.gov.tr/Eklenti/906,ttstratejisi2023pdf.pdf?0
Retrieved 20.02.14.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2007b). Action Plan 20072013 [WWW page]. From:
http://teftis.kulturturizm.gov.tr/Eklenti/1350,eylemplanixls.xls Retrieved 20.02.14.
O'Connor, P. (2010). Managing a hotel's image on TripAdvisor. Journal of Hospitality
Marketing and Management, 19(7), 754772.
Pan, B., & Li, X. (2011). The long tail of destination image and online marketing.
Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 132152.
Pike, S., & Ryan, C. (2004). Destination positioning analysis through a comparison of
cognitive, affective, and conative perceptions. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4),
333342.
San Martin, H., & Rodriguez del Bosque, I. A. (2008). Exploring the cognitive
affective nature of destination image and the role of psychological factors in its
formation. Tourism Management, 29, 263277.
Shimp, T. A. (1989). Promotion management and marketing communications (2nd
ed.). Orlando, FL: The Dreyden Press.
Tasci, A. D. A., Gartner, W. C., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2007). Measurement of destination
brand bias using a quasi-experimental design. Tourism Management, 28,
15291540.
Text100 (2012). Travel & Tourism Digital Index 2012 [WWW page]. From: http://
info.text100.com/travel-tourism-digital-index-2012/info.text100.com/travel-
tourism-digital-index-2012.html Retrieved 20.02.14.
Travel Industry Association of America. (2001). E-travel consumersHow they plan
and buy leisure travel online (Research report). Washington, DC: Travel Industry
Association of America.
Xiang, Z., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Role of social media in online travel information
search. Tourism Management, 31, 179188.
Zeng, B., & Gerritsen, R. (2014). What do we know about social media in tourism? A
review. Tourism Management Perspectives, 10, 2736.