Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021

FACTORS INFLUENCING INTENTION TO VISIT SOUTH KOREA DURING THE PANDEMIC
Andena Noviyati Nabila1, Ratna Asih2, Salsabila Putri Ramadhanti3, Fakhrunnisa4, Usep Suhud5
1andenanoviyatinabila_1707618016@mhs.unj.ac.id, 2ratnaasih_1707618053@mhs.unj.ac.id,
3salsabilaputriramadhanti_1707618070@mhs.unj.ac.id, 4fakhrunnisa_1707618004@mhs.unj.ac.id,
5usuhud@unj.ac.id
1,2,3,4,5Faculty of Economics, Jakarta State University, Indonesia
Abstract
This study examines the factors that influence the intention to visit South Korea during the pandemic.
This study uses six measured variables: perceived benefits, destination image, e-word of mouth,
destination service quality, culture, and visit intention. This study used a quantitative model by
collecting data using an online questionnaire and with the criteria for female or male respondents aged
25 years and over and visiting South Korea during the pandemic. The data collection was carried out in
January 2021. The total respondents in this study were 212 people consisting of 45 men and 167 women.
The results obtained from this study, namely destination service quality has a positive effect on e-word
of mouth, e-word of mouth has a positive impact on destination image.
Keyword: cultural, destination image, destination service quality, e-word of mouth, intention to visit
South Korea, perceived benefit, visit intention.

INTRODUCTION
Rastati (2018) states that South Korea, often referred to as the land of ginseng, can make cultural
transmission movements. Since the 1990s, Hallyu or Korean Wave has begun to be loved by various countries,
including Indonesia. The beginning of the popularity of the Korean Wave in the world occurred when South Korean
artists, both K-drama and K-Pop, began to get attention from young people in Japan, China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan,
then continued in Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Various Korean Wave products such as music (K-pop), drama (Kdrama), movies (K-film), fashion (K-fashion), food (K-food) and beauty (K-beauty).
Currently, the Korean Wave is increasingly in demand by various countries. Even the South Korean
government cooperates with television stations such as KBS, SBS, MNet, and tvN to promote their culture. The
resulting shows can increase visitors to South Korea to visit the shooting location, which makes the area a tourist
spot. It is undeniable that the scenery and atmosphere in South Korea will make anyone who sees it will be amazed
and curious. In addition, South Korean culinary tourism is also beautiful to tourists. It makes the viewer want to
experience the food or drink firsthand. And what is most loved is the K-Pop culture. South Korean music is the thing
that is most in demand by various groups, especially teenagers.
According to Asrori and Supriadianto (2019), the Korean Wave phenomenon is very influential on South
Korean tourism, making South Korea a popular tourist spot. Many people come to Korea for various purposes,
ranging from business, education, and tourism. Hallyu created a tremendous effect on the identity of the South
Korean nation, and because of Hallyu too, various things about Korea became global. They were seen in the number
of South Korean tourists in 2015 as 13.23 million tourists. In 2016 as many as 17.24 million tourists. In addition, in
2017, as many as 13.34 million tourists. In 2018 there were 15.35 million tourists, and in 2019 was about 17.5
million tourists. Where in 2019 was the highest achievement in the number of South Korean tourists.
According to Novyanti (2019) some cities that many foreign tourists visit are Seoul, Gyeonggi-do, Busan, Jejudo, Jeonju and so on. Seoul has the highest popularity as a tourist spot in South Korea and is also known as the
capital city of South Korea. Some of the reasons why Seoul is popular among foreign tourists are its beautiful,
modern scenery and the thick traditional South Korean atmosphere. However, in 2020 the Covid-19 virus emerged,
which spread to various countries. South Korea was no exception. Data from the Korea Tourism Organization (KTO)
shows that there were only 6,111 foreign tourists who visited South Korea last May. This number decreased by
99.5% compared to May 2019 which reached 1.23 million tourists (Perwitasari, 2020).
The virus resulted in multiple restrictions for activities, and one of them was a ban or restrictions on going
abroad. With travel restrictions amid this pandemic, the number of foreign tourists in each country has decreased.

43

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
LITERATURE REVIEW

1.

Visit Intention

According to Whang et al. (2016) visiting intention is defined as referring to the perceived likelihood of seeing
a particular place within a certain period. Chalip et al.(2003) explain the dimension of visit intention that each form
of media influences the image of the destination, which in turn affects the intention to visit. According to Zhang et
al.(2014) visit intention is the decision to visit a destination is a common thread in measuring behavioural
intentions. Allameh et al. (2015) reveal that the intention to visit is also mandatory to increase tourism.

2.

Perceived Benefits

Champion (2009) claims that perceived benefit is a construct of perceived benefit defined as beliefs about
positive outcomes associated with behaviour in response to actual or perceived threats. The construct of perceived
benefit is most often applied to health behaviours and specifically to individuals' perceptions of the benefits to be
gained by engaging in specific health actions. Han and Hwang (2013) identify the results of their study on perceived
benefits that the relative importance among dimensions of perceived benefits in generating tourists' perceptions
of the superior value of medical hotels and encouraging preferred behavioural intentions. Chandon et al. (2000)
suggest that perceived usefulness is a belief about a positive outcome associated with a behaviour in response to a
real or perceived threat.
According to Liang (2019) perceived benefit, which is a construct similar to perceived risk, but distinguished
from perceived value, is proposed as a variable that influences the behavioural intentions of medical tourists
through attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and subjective norms. However, perceived value emphasises
more on the monetary and objective evaluation of a product. Perceived benefits focus on multiple dimensions (e.g.,
value, convenience, enjoyment, and availability) of the benefits consumers find in a product and are often more
subjective. Kim, et al. (2008) explain that perceived benefit is defined as consumer beliefs about the extent to which
people will get better from the purchase and or use of an object.

3.

Destination Image

Crompton (1979) defines a destination image as a combination of beliefs, ideas, and impressions that a
person has about a destination. According to Baloglu and McCleary (1999), Destination image is also defined as a
person's mental representation of global knowledge, feelings, and impressions about a destination. Then, Hahm et
al. (2018) concluded that destination image “refers to a tourist's perspective on tourism attributes and may
represent a particular region, city, region, or country”. Molinillo et al. (2018) concluded that the destination image
in their minds was generated from information about the destination processed by potential visitors from various
sources. Beerli and Martin (2004) concluded that the destination image formed is not only influenced by
information obtained from various sources, but also by individual characteristics. Zöllei et al. (1989) concluded in
the journal Molinillo et al. (2018) Destination image is a complex, relative, multiple, and dynamic concept. On Tasci
and Gartner (2007) destination image is generally accepted as an important aspect of successful tourism
development and destination marketing because it impacts both supply and demand-side marketing aspects.

4.

E-Word of Mouth

Hennig-Thurau et al. (2004) define e-word of mouth communication as positive or negative statements made
by potential, current, or former customers about a product or company, which are available to many people and
institutions through the Internet. Sotiriadis and Van Zyl (2013) explained that a conceptual framework for e-word
of mouth, experience sharing, and review recommendations in a digital environment has been proposed. This
framework provides a useful foundation of understanding, taking into account the perspectives of the two parties
involved in online communication, namely the narrator/sender and the reader/receiver. According to Wijaya and
Paramita (2014), the development of internet technology in marketing dynamics is now affecting consumer
behavior, such as the delivery of opinions about a product which is digitally called e-word of mouth.
Ratchford et al. (2001) argue that e-word of mouth communication through electronic media allows
consumers to not only obtain information related to goods and services from the few people they know but also
from a wide and geographically dispersed group of people who have experience with the product or service. which
is relevant. Chaiken and Eagly (1976) explained that Although e-word of mouth creates basic information transfer,
the actual impact of the information received can differ from person to person. The same content can produce very
different responses in different recipients, depending on the recipient's perception, experience, and source. Senecal
44

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
and Nantel (2004) examine how e-word of mouth affects product choice using an experimental study on the use of
online recommendation sources by consumers.

5.

Destination Service Quality

Aldebi and Aljboory (2018) argued that destination service quality has been defined as the main tool that can
be utilized to ensure tourist satisfaction. The definition of destination service quality according to Tsaur et al. (2016)
Destination service quality refers to the difference between the expected and actual service experience levels of
tourists. So, service quality is a result that represents the psychological state of the customer because of his
satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the consumption of services or experiences. According to De Cieri (2005),
Destination service quality is a technique provided to tourists that helps them increase their level of positive
experience, which is necessary for today's competitive environment.
Gronroos (1982) defines destination service quality as the result of an evaluation process in which the
consumer compares his expectations with the service he perceives he has received. Parasuraman et al.(1988)view
service quality as the gap between consumer expectations and their perception of the actual service. They view
expectations as desires related to something desired. According to Cronin Jr and Taylor (1992), destination service
quality can be seen as an antecedent of service quality. Roest and Pieters (1997) state that service quality is a
relativistic and cognitive discrepancy between experience-based norms and performance about service benefits.

6.

Cultural

According to Adams' broader definition (1995) Cultural tourism is one type of travel to enrich oneself.
O'Leary et al. (1998) argue that cultural tourism does not have a generally accepted definition due to the complex
nature of 'culture'. The concept of cultural tourism has various definitions depending on the point of view of the
author or researcher. Iverson et al. (1997) find further that they are consistent with previous studies showing that
national culture influences tourist decision-making processes even within a subset of collectivist cultures (from this
case one can see that seemingly insignificant cultural differences such as decision-making time behavior have
serious marketing implications for consumers). host country).
According to Lau et al. (2001), cultural knowledge forms the basis for one's social reality; and the rules and
guidelines that define this reality are passed on throughout the child's upbringing and reinforced by interactions
with others. The definition of culture is “cultural values are the basis for specific norms that detail individual what
is appropriate in various situations which are reflected in societal institutions such as family, education, economic,
political and religious systems which function as their goals and modes of operations” Schwartz (1994, p. 42).
Gnoths and Zins (2013) suggest that culture includes values, morals, symbols, physical manifestations, and
behaviors that are governed by different worldviews.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

1.

Perceived Benefits and Destination Image

Khan et al. (2016) examine the international consumer travel decision-making process. One of the things
tested in this study is about the effect of perceived benefits on destination image. This researcher suggests that the
destination image is considered as the perception or impression about the destination held by tourists concerning
the expected consumption benefits or values. Mohammad Jamal et al.(2016) Research on the role of information
sources, perceived benefits and risks, and destination image has been studied significantly in the travel and tourism
literature in medical tourism. The results of this study indicate that the benefits received affect the description of
the objectives. Ruan et al. (2017) examine an integrated model of moderated risk mediation (man-made and natural
disasters) that explains the relationship between tourism benefits and destination image. The results of a study of
635 tourists show that the benefits received have a positive effect on the image of the destination.

2.

E-Word of Mouth and Destination Image

Setiawan et al. (2014) examined the causal relationship between e-word of mouth, destination image,
satisfaction, and loyalty of 150 domestic tourists in various tourist destinations around Denpasar - Bali. The results
show that e-word of mouth has a significant direct effect on destination image, while an indirect effect on
satisfaction and loyalty. Then, Jalilvand and Heidari (2017) tested the type of word-of-mouth in which
communication, face-to-face vs electronic, e-word of mouth had a stronger influence on destination image and
attitude. The test was conducted on 678 travelers in the online tourist community. The results show that e-word of
45

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
mouth has a stronger effect on destination image. Meanwhile, Ishida et al.(2016)examine the effect and differences
between the traditional word of mouth and electronic word of mouth, between the personal word of mouth and
commercial word of mouth, and between the positive and negative word of mouth on destination image. The results
showed that e-word of mouth influences destination image.

3.

Destination Service Quality and E-Word of Mouth

Alexandries et al. (2002) examine the effect of service quality on visit intentions in the hospitality sector in
Greece. One that is tested is the effect of service quality on e-word of mouth. The results of the study show that the
service quality dimension explains a very high proportion of variance in the word of mouth communication and
purchase intentions. Hossain and Kim (2018) examine the impact of service quality dimensions on word of mouth
and Facebook user satisfaction. The results obtained that, from the four dimensions of service quality, two
dimensions, namely interaction quality, and outcome quality are significantly related to word of mouth.
Then, this study was strengthened by the research of Hossain et al. (2019) which examines the factors that
influence e-word of mouth communication by SNS users. This study uses a multidimensional service quality
dimension as one that is tested regarding its effect on e-word of mouth. The results obtained only one dimension
that has a significant positive effect on e-word of mouth, namely the quality of interaction services. And the other
two dimensions, namely yield quality and environmental quality, seem insignificant but still have a positive impact.

4.

Destination Image and Visit Intention

Chaulagain et al. (2019) examine the impact of country image and destination image on the travel intentions
of United States tourists. One of the hypotheses tested by the researcher is the effect of destination image on visit
intention. The results of this study prove that the image of the destination has a positive effect on visiting intentions.
Meanwhile, Chalip et al. (2003) examine the influence of sporting event media on destination image on intention to
visit. One of the hypotheses tested is also the effect of destination image on visit intention. The result of this study
is that the image of the destination is significantly related to the intention to visit. A study conducted by Kanwel et
al. (2019) examines the impact of destination image on tourist loyalty, and intention to visit Pakistan. One of the
research hypotheses is the effect of destination image on intention to visit. The results of the hypothesis indicate
that the image of the destination has a positive effect on the intention to visit.

5.

E-Word of Mouth and Visit Intention

Jalilvand et al. (2012) reviewing e-word of mouth is considered an important source of information that
influences visit intentions and choice of destination. Chaerunnisaa (2013) analyze the effect of e-word of mouth on
visit intention and resulted that e-word of mouth actually only had a strong impact on the formation of the image
of a tourist destination and did not directly shape the attitude of tourists and the desire of tourists to travel. Gretzel
et al. (2016) examine how electronic word of mouth (e-word of mouth), attitude, and city image affect the intention
of tourists to visit a tourism city. The results show that e-word of mouth is a significant determinant of intention to
visit.

6.

Cultural and Visit Intention

Shen et al. (2009) examine the intention of Chinese visitors to visit world cultural heritage sites within the
framework of the theory of planned behavior, with the addition of the construction of past experiences and the
involvement of cultural tourism. The results showed that cultural engagement was a valid predictor construct for
visiting intentions. Bi and Gu (2019) examine how cultural distance affects international tourists' intentions to visit
destination countries. The study was conducted on 729 potential tourists in China. The results of this study cultural
affect the intention of tourists to visit the destination country. Matzler et al. (2016) examined the role of cultural
differences on the impact of brand personality perceptions on tourists' visiting intentions. One that is tested is the
influence of culture on the intention to visit. The results of this study are culture is one of the factors that influence
the intention to visit.

46

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021

7.

Hypothesis

Figure1 Research Model Theoretical Framework

Source: Researcher Data, 2021

Based on the theoretical basis and research framework as described above, then the proposed hypothesis is:
H1 – Perceived benefits will affect the destination image during the pandemic
H2 – E-word of mouth will affect the destination image during the pandemic
H3 – Destination service quality will affect e-word of mouth during the pandemic
H4 – Destination image will affect visit intention during the pandemic
H5 – E-word of mouth will affect visit intention during the pandemic
H6 – Culture will affect visit intention during the pandemic
RESEARCH METHODS

1.

Sample

In this study, we designed a questionnaire by determining respondents and developing indicators. This
research will be conducted by involving 210 respondents, with the following characteristics:
a. Gender (male and female)
b. Age (aged 25 years and over)
c. Job-status
d. Marital status
e. Educational status
f. Domicile (Jabodetabek and outside Jabodetabek)

2.

Questionnaire Development

In this study there are 6 (six) variables measured, namely destination image, destination service quality, eword of mouth, visit intention, perceived benefits, and culture.

3.

Destination Image

The destination image variable was measured using five indicators adapted from Valek and Williams
research (2018), that is:
a. I felt very welcome by the local people when I visited Korea.
b. I'm very satisfied to be in Korea so far during the pandemic.
c. Korea offers many interesting tourist spots to visit during the pandemic.
d. While in Korea many extraordinary experiences have occurred during the pandemic.
e. Korea is a safe travel destination during the pandemic.

4.

Destination Service Quality

The destination service quality variable is measured using six indicators adapted from research Narayan et
al. (2008) that is:
47

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

5.

There is an information center for tourists at the airport.
The existence of an information center for tourists in tourist attractions.
Guides for tourists are provided at tourist spots.
There is a money exchange facility in the tourist area.
There are money exchange or bank facilities at the airport.
Ease and smoothness of internet connectivity at tourist attractions/places of visit.
E-word of Mouth

The e-word of mouth variable was measured using five indicators adapted from Abubakar's research (2016)
and Gretzel et al. (2016), that is:
a. I often read visitor reviews online to find out tourist destinations in Korea with a good impression during the
pandemic.
b. I often gather information from visitors' online travel reviews before travelling to Korea during the pandemic.
c. When I travel to Korea, online visitor travel reviews make me confident in travelling to that place during the
pandemic.
d. I often consult other visitors' online travel reviews to help them choose exciting destinations to visit in Korea
during the pandemic.
e. If I don't read visitors' online travel reviews when I travel to Korea during the pandemic, I worry about my
decision.

6.

Visit Intention

Variable visit intention was measured using six indicators adapted from research Chen and Tung(2014) and
Gretzel et al. (2016), that is:
a. I am willing to travel to visit Korea during the pandemic.
b. I plan to keep travelling to visit Korea during the pandemic.
c. I will keep trying to travel to visit Korea during the pandemic.
d. I predict that I will continue to travel to visit Korea as a tourist destination next month during the pandemic.
e. I will visit Korea, which has more historical value than other countries during the pandemic
f. If everything goes as I thought, I will plan to travel to visit Korea during the pandemic while on holiday.

7.

Perceived Benefits

The perceived benefits variable was measured using four indicators adapted from the research of Hunt and Ditton
(2001) and Forsythe et al.(2006) that is:
a. I'd travel to Korea to have a fun and entertaining experience during the pandemic.
b. I'd travel to Korea to escape the daily routine.
c. I'd feel the atmosphere of a different environment by travelling to Korea.
d. I'd feel happy travelling to Korea.

8.

Cultural

Cultural variables were measured using four indicators adapted from the research of Gnoth and Zins (2013) and
Crompton and McKay (1997), that is:
a. I’d study the history of several historical places in Korea.
b. I’d learn about the characteristics of the residents around the mosque during the pandemic.
c. I'd travel to Korea because I like exploring new things.
d. Travelling to Korea would increase my knowledge of Korean culture.

9.

Determination of Respondents' Answer Score

The questionnaire is made in the form of questions with answer choices that have been provided. Answers
are made using a likert-type scale based on the aspect measured for each variable. Respondents were given six
alternative answers by having the most appropriate one and each answer is given the highest score and the lowest
score ranging from 1 for strongly disagree to 6 for strongly agree.

48

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021

10.

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)

According to Kasanah (2015), The analytical method used in this study is structural equation modeling,
which is a second-generation structural equation model with multivariate analysis techniques that allow
researchers to examine the relationship between complex variables, both recursive and non-recursive to obtain a
comprehensive picture of a model. According to Maharani (2013) Evaluation of the Goodness of Fit criteria is as
follows:
a. X2 – Chi-square statistics
b. RMSEA (The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation)
c. GFI (Goodness of Fit Index)
d. AGFI (Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index)
e. CMIN/DF
f. TLI (Tucker Lewis Index)
g. CFI (Comparative Fit Index)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

1.

Characteristics of Respondents

Respondents in this study were 212 respondents. The description of the characteristics of respondents from
this study includes gender, age, employment status, marital status, educational status, and domicile. Based on this
study the authors involved 212 respondents, it can be seen that most of the responses were female with a total of
167 respondents or (78.8%.) And male respondents were 45 respondents or (21.2%). Based on the most age who
filled out the questionnaire were in the age range of 25-29 years as many as 147 respondents or (69.3%), then the
second most was the age range of 30-34 years as many as 26 people or (12.3%), then the age of 40-34. 44 years as
many as 16 respondents or (7.5%), then age 35-39 as many as 12 respondents or (5.7%), then 45-49 as many as 7
respondents or (3.3%), and the last 50 years and more as many as 4 respondents or (1.9%). Based on the
educational status of the most respondents who filled out the questionnaire were undergraduate as many as 124
respondents or (58.5%), high school as many as 57 respondents or (26.9%), then diploma as many as 19
respondents or (9.0%), then master as many as 7 respondents or (3.3%). Based on the work status of the
respondents who filled out the questionnaire, most of them worked as many as 147 respondents or (69.3%), then
25 respondents did not work or 11.8%, then had their own business as many as 24 respondents or (11.3%), then
not yet working. working as many as 15 respondents or (7.1%), and lastly retired as many as 1 respondents or
(0.5%). Based on marital status, most respondents who filled out the questionnaire were unmarried (52.4%), then
married status as many as 99 respondents or (46.7%), then divorced/separated as many as 1 respondent or 0.5%
then the spouse died as many as 1 respondents or 0.5%. Based on domicile, it can be seen that most of the
respondents are in Jabodetabek with a total of 167 respondents or (78.8%). And respondents outside Jabodetabek
as many as 45 respondents or (21.2%).

2.

Orderly

Table 1 EFA and cronbach's alpha variable
Code
DI4
DI2
DI3
DI5
DS2
DS3

Indicators
Destination Image
I feel in Korea there will be many amazing experiences that occur
during the pandemic
I feel very satisfied to be in Korea so far during the pandemic
I feel Korea offers many interesting tourist attractions to visit during
the pandemic
I feel Korea was a safe tourist destination during the pandemic
Destination Service Quality
The existence of an information center for tourists in tourist
attractions
Guide for tourists is provided at tourist attractions

Factor
Loadings
0,919

Cronbach's
Alpha
α = 0,913

0,909
0,902
0,850
0,864

α = 0,840

0,860

49

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
DS1

The presence of an information center for travelers at the airport

0,831

DS4

0,739

VI2

There are money exchange facilities in the tourist attractions
E-Word of Mouth
I often gather information from visitors' online travel reviews before
travelling to Korea during the pandemic
When I travel to Korea, online visitor travel reviews make me
confident in travelling to that place during the pandemic
I often consult other visitors' online travel reviews to help them
choose exciting destinations to visit in Korea during the pandemic
I often read visitor reviews online to find out tourist destinations in
Korea with a good impression during the pandemic
If I don't read visitors' online travel reviews when I travel to Korea
during the pandemic, I worry about my decision
Visit Intention
I plan to keep travelling to visit Korea during the pandemic

VI3

I will keep trying to travel to visit Korea during the pandemic

0.946

VI4

I predict that I will continue to travel to visit Korea as a tourist
destination next month during the pandemic.

0.925

VI5

I will visit Korea, which has more historical value than other
countries during the pandemic

0.916

VI6

If everything goes as I thought, I will plan to travel to visit Korea
during the pandemic while on holiday.
I am willing to travel to visit Korea during the pandemic

0.910

E2
E3
E4
E1
E5

VI1

Perceived Benefit
PB3
I'd feel the atmosphere of a different environment by travelling to
Korea.
PB1
I'd travel to Korea to have a fun and entertaining experience during
the pandemic.
PB2
I'd travel to Korea to escape the daily routine.
PB4
I'd feel happy travelling to Korea.
Cultural
Cul3
I'd travel to Korea because I like exploring new things.
Cul4
Travelling to Korea would increase my knowledge of Korean culture.
Cul2
I’d learn about the characteristics of the residents around the mosque
during the pandemic.
Cul 1 I’d study the history of several historical places in Korea
Source: Researcher Data, 2021

0.898

α = 0,930

0.890
0.882
0.849
0.731
α = 0,966
0.960

0.907
0.896

α = 0,842

0.823
0.800
0.792
0,839
0,799
0,777

α = 0,795

0,7

Table 1 shows that the destination image variable has no dimensions. Destination image has four indicators,
as well as factor loadings ranging from 0.850 to 0.919 which indicates that all indicators are valid. Additionally, the
destination image variable has a cronbach's alpha value of α = 0.913 which means it is trustworthy. The destination
service quality variable has no dimensions. Destination service quality has four indicators, as well as factor loadings
ranging from 0.739 to 0.864 which indicates that all indicators are valid. Additionally, the destination service quality
variable has a cronbach's alpha value of α = 0.840 which means it is trustworthy. The e-word of mouth variable has
no dimensions. The e-word of mouth has five indicators, as well as factor loadings ranging from 0.731 to 0.898
indicating that all indicators are valid. Additionally, the e-word of mouth variable has a cronbach's alpha value of α
= 0.9to 30 which means it is trustworthy. The visit intention variable has no dimensions. Visit intention has four
indicators, as well as factor loadings ranging from 0.907 to 0.960 which indicates that all indicators are valid. In
addition, the visit intention variable has a cronbach's alpha value of α = 0.966 which means it is trustworthy. The
perceived benefits variable has no dimensions. Perceived benefits have four indicators, as well as factor loadings
ranging from 0.792 to 0.896 which indicates that all indicators are valid. Additionally, the perceived benefits
variable has a cronbach's alpha value of α = 0.842 which means it is trustworthy. The cultural variable has no
dimensions. Cultural has four indicators, as well as factor loadings ranging from 0.737 to 0.839 which indicates that
all indicators are valid. Additionally, the perceived benefits variable has a cronbach's alpha value of α = 0.795which
means it is trustworthy.

50

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021

3.

Hypothesis Test Results

Once the model is analyzed through Confirmatory Factor Analysis and can be seen each indicator can be
defined latent construct, then a full SEM Model can be analyzed. The result of AMOS processing is as in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Structural Equation Model

Source: Researcher Data, 2021

Table 2 Results of goodness of fit full model
Goodness of fit Index
Chi-Square
Probabilitas
RMSEA
GFI
AGFI
CMIN/DF
TLI
CFI
Source: Researcher Data, 2021

Cut of Point
< 117,63
≥ 0,05
≤ 0,08
≥ 0,90
≥ 0,90
≤ 2,00
≥ 0,95
≥ 0,95

Analysis Results
98,684
0,066
0,034
0,944
0,915
1,249
0,987
0,991

Table 2 shows goodness of fit results with Chi-Square values of 98.684, P 0.066 ≥ 0.05, RMSEA value of
0.034 ≤ 0.08, GFI value of 0.944 ≥ 0.90, AGFI value of 0.915 ≥ 0.90, CMIN/DF value of 1.249 ≤ 2.00, TLI value of
0.987 ≥ 0.95, and CFI value of 0.991 ≥ 0.95 can be concluded that all goodness of fit criteria get good results. The
test results are significant values from the estimated standardized loading parameters in the following table:

Table 3 Hypothesis Testing
EWOM
Destination service quality
EWOM
Perceived benefit
Destination image
E-word of mouth
Destination image
Destination service quality
Destination image
Perceived benefit
Visit intention
Cultural
Visit intention
E-word of mouth
Visit intention
Destination image
Source: Researcher Data, 2021

C.R.
3,225
7,291
2,921
4,932
4,616
,760
3,616
7,134

P
0,001
***
0,003
***
***
0,447
***
***

Lable
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Accepted
Rejected
Accepted
Accepted

Table 3 shows that the test that the e-word of mouth (ewom) hypothesis test against destination service
quality was accepted due to the value of P 0.001 < 0.05. The e-word of mouth hypothesis test against perceived
benefits is accepted because the value of P 0.003 < 0.05. The test of destination image hypothesis against e-word of
mouth is accepted because the value of P 0.003 < 0.05. The test of destination image hypothesis against destination
service quality is accepted because the value of P 0.001 < 0.05. Test the destination image hypothesis against
51

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
perceived benefit received this is due to the value of P 0.001 < 0.05. The visit intention hypothesis test against
cultural was rejected because of the value of P 0.447 > 0.05. The visit intention hypothesis test against e-word of
mouth is accepted because the value of P 0.001 < 0.05. The visit intention hypothesis test on destination image was
accepted because the value of P 0.001 < 0.05.

4.

Perceived Benefits Affects Destination Image

Hypothesis 1 that states perceived benefits have a positive significant influence on the destination image.
The results of this test showed a significance value of P 0.000 < 0.05 indicating that the model used for this study
was accepted. This suggests that the factors that affect the destination image are the perceived benefits factor. This
hypothesis is supported by research conducted by Mohammad Jamal et al. (2016) researching the role of resources,
perceived benefits, and risks, and the image of destinations has been significantly studied in travel and tourism
literature in medical tourism. The results of the study showed that the benefits received influenced the picture of
purpose. So, how much benefit is felt from tourist destinations can affect the image or image of the destination.

5.

E-Word of Mouth Affects Destination Image

Hypothesis 2 states e-word of mouth has a positive significant influence on destination image. The results of
this test showed a significance value of P 0.003 < 0.05 indicating that the model used for this study was accepted.
This indicates that the factor that affects the destination image is the e-word of mouth factor. This hypothesis is
supported by research conducted by Jalilvand and Heidari (2017) testing the type of word-of-mouth where
communication, face-to-face vs. electronic, e-word of mouth has a stronger influence on the image and attitude of
the destination. The test was conducted by 678 tourists in the online tourist community. The results showed that
the e-word of mouth had a stronger effect on the destination image. So, the stronger the influence of e-word of
mouth, it can affect the image of the destination.

6.

Destination Service Quality Affects E-Word of Mouth

Hypothesis 3 that states destination service quality has a positive significant influence on the e-word of
mouth. The results of this test showed a significance value of P 0.001 < 0.05 indicating that the model used for this
study was accepted. This indicates that the factor that affects e-word of mouth is the destination service quality
factor. This hypothesis is supported by research conducted by Alexandris et al. (2002) examined the effect of quality
of service on the intention of visiting hospitality in Greece. One of the tests is the influence of service quality on eword of mouth. The results of the study show that the quality dimension of service explains the very high proportion
of variants in word-of-mouth communication and purchasing. So, good or bad quality destination service can then
affect the e-word of mouth.

7.

Destination Image Affects Visit Intention

Hypothesis 4 that states destination image has a positive significant influence on visit intention. The results
of this test showed a significance value of P 0.001 < 0.05 indicating that the model used for this study was accepted.
This indicates that the factor that affects visit intention is the destination image factor. This hypothesis is supported
by research conducted by Kanwel et al. (2019) examined the impact of destination imagery on tourist loyalty, and
intention to visit in Pakistan. One hypothesis of the study is the influence of destination imagery on the intention of
visiting. The results of the hypothesis show that the image of the destination positively affects the intention to visit.
So, the stronger the influence of destination imagery, the more influence the intention to visit a destination.

8.

E-Word of Mouth Affects Visit Intention

Hypothesis 5 states e-word of mouth has a positive significant influence on visit intention. The results of this
test showed a significance value of P 0.001 < 0.05 indicating that the model used for this study was accepted. This
indicates that the factor that influences visit intention is the e-word of mouth factor. This hypothesis is supported
by research conducted by Gretzel et al. (2016) examines how electronic word of mouth, attitude, and city image
affect tourists' intention to visit a tourism city. The results show that the e-word of mouth is a significant
determinant of the intention of visiting. So, the stronger the influence of e-word of mouth, it can affect the intention
to visit a destination.

52

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021

9.

Cultural Does Not Affect Visit Intention

Hypothesis 6 that states cultural has no negatively significant effect on visit intention. The results of this test
showed a significance value of P 0.447 > 0.05 indicating that the model used for this study was rejected. This
suggests that cultural factors are not factors that influence visit intention. This hypothesis is supported by research
conducted by Bi and Gu (2019) examining how cultural distance affects the intention of international tourists to
visit the destination country. The study was conducted on 729 potential tourists in China. The results of the study
culturally affect the intention of tourists to visit the destination country. These researchers proved that there was
no positive and significant influence on the expected cultural and visiting intentions. So, the stronger the expected
cultural influence, it can not affect the intention to visit a destination.
CONCLUSION
This study was conducted to examine the effect of perceived benefits and e-word of mouth on South Korean
destination image, the effect of destination service quality on e-word of mouth, and the effect of destination image,
e-word of mouth, and culture on visit intention. The six variables are thought to have a positive relationship. It turns
out that after the analysis, not all variables have a positive relationship. Based on the analysis that has been done, it
can be concluded that from this study perceived benefits can affect the destination image positively and
significantly, which means that the greater the perceived benefits, the more influencing the destination image. The
variable e-word of mouth can also affect the destination image positively and significantly, which means that the
stronger the influence of e-word of mouth, the stronger the influence on the image or description of the destination.
The destination service quality variable can also affect e-word of mouth positively and significantly, which means
that good or bad destination service quality can affect e-word of mouth. The destination image variable can also
affect visit intention positively and significantly, which means that the stronger the influence of the destination
image, the more it can affect the intention to visit a destination. The e-word of mouth variable can also affect visit
intention positively and significantly, which means that the stronger the influence of e-word of mouth, the more it
can affect the intention to visit a destination. As for the other variable test, namely, culture cannot affect visit
intention positively and significantly, which means that culture has a low influence on visit intention, so that value
is rejected. Based on the study results in terms of the structural model used, this model is good even though there
are shortcomings seen from the confirmatory and marginal test in its goodness of fit. This shortcoming lies in the
cultural variable, which has no relationship with visit intentions in research on intentions to visit South Korea
during the pandemic.
RECOMMENDATION
This study has weaknesses due to the limitations of the author. These weaknesses include the data collection
method using only questionnaire data. The variables used in this study do not represent all the factors that affect
destination image, e-word of mouth, and visit intention. The sampling that uses convenient sampling results in
results that cannot be generalized. In addition, there are still not many previous studies regarding some of the
variables used in this study, which also makes this research still have many weaknesses.
Further research, it is necessary to use the "satisfaction" variable, which shows that respondents know that
the satisfaction felt when visiting South Korea is very good, so this can be one factor that influences visiting
intentions. In addition, in the future, research related to the topic of visiting needs to be reconsidered to use other
variables that can affect visiting intention.
Then, tourism managers can focus on the local tourist market until later tourist destinations are ready to be
fully opened to a larger market. It is also recommended for tourism managers during a pandemic like this to:
a. Pay attention to mandatory or mandatory health protocols and maintain the cleanliness of tourist sites;
b. Maintaining safety and security (the mitigation system is strengthened for natural and non-natural disasters
such as disease outbreaks); and
c. Maintaining comfort (hospitality), carrying out essential infrastructure development such as roads and bridges
at tourist attraction

53

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021

REFERENCES
Abubakar, A. M. (2016). Does eWOM influence destination trust and travel intention: A medical tourism
perspective. Economic research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 29(1), 598–611.
Adams, G. D. (1995). Cultural tourism: The arrival of the intelligent traveler. Museum News, 74(6), 32–37.
Aldebi, H., & Aljboory, N. (2018). The impact of the tourism promotion-mix elements on the foreign tourists’ mental
images of the Jordanian tourist destinations: A field study. International Business Research, 11(1), 74–86.
Alexandris, K., Dimitriadis, N., & Markata, D. (2002). Can perceptions of service quality predict behavioral
intentions? An exploratory study in the hotel sector in Greece. Managing Service Quality: An International
Journal, 12(4), 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520210434839
Allameh, S. M., Pool, J. K., Jaberi, A., Salehzadeh, R., & Asadi, H. (2015). Factors influencing sport tourists’ revisit
intentions. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics.
Asrori, Y. W., & Supriadianto, S. (2019). Hallyu dan pengaruhnya pada perkembangan objek wisata tematik Korea
Selatan. Jurnal Pariwisata Terapan, 3(1), 76. https://doi.org/10.22146/jpt.49278
Baloglu, S., & McCleary, K. W. (1999). A model of destination image formation. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4),
868–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-7383(99)00030-4
Beerli, A., & Martín, J. D. (2004). Tourists’ characteristics and the perceived image of tourist destinations: A
quantitative analysis - a case study of Lanzarote, Spain. Tourism Management, 25(5), 623–636.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2003.06.004
Bi, J., & Gu, C. (2019). Cultural distance and international tourists’ intention to visit a destination. Asia Pacific Journal
of Tourism Research, 24(8), 839–849.
Chaerunnisaa, D. (2013). Analisis hubungan electronic word of mouth, citra daerah tujuan wisata, sikap wisatawan
terhadap daerah tujuan wisata dan keinginan berwisata: Studi kasus Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta:
Relationships analysis of electronic word-of-mouth, destination.
Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. (1976). Communication modality as a determinant of message persuasiveness and
message comprehensibility. Journal of personality and social psychology, 34(4), 605.
Chalip, L., Green, B. C., & Hill, B. (2003). Effects of sport event media on destination image and intention to visit.
Journal of sport management, 17(3), 214–234.
Champion, V. (2009). Perceived benefits. Health behavior constructs: Theory, measurement and research. Bethesda,
MD: National cancer institute.
Chandon, P., Wansink, B., & Laurent, G. (2000). A benefit congruency framework of sales promotion effectiveness.
Journal of marketing, 64(4), 65–81.
Chaulagain, S., Wiitala, J., & Fu, X. (2019). The impact of country image and destination image on US tourists’ travel
intention. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 12, 1–11.
Chen, M.-F., & Tung, P.-J. (2014). Developing an extended theory of planned behavior model to predict consumers’
intention to visit green hotels. International journal of hospitality management, 36, 221–230.
Crompton, J. L., & McKay, S. L. (1997). Motives of visitors attending festival events. Annals of tourism research, 24(2),
425–439.
Cronin Jr, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of marketing,
56(3), 55–68.
54

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
De Cieri, H. L. (2005). The International Journal of Human Resource Management (1 ed., Vol. 16). Routledge.
Forsythe, S., Liu, C., Shannon, D., & Gardner, L. C. (2006). Development of a scale to measure the perceived benefits
and
risks
of
online
shopping.
Journal
of
Interactive
Marketing,
20(2),
55–75.
https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20061
Gnoth, J., & Zins, A. H. (2013). Developing a tourism cultural contact scale. Journal of Business Research, 66(6), 738–
744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.09.012
Gretzel, U., Zhong, L., Koo, C., Doosti, S., Jalilvand, M. R., Asadi, A., Pool, J. K., & Adl, P. M. (2016). Analyzing the
influence of electronic word of mouth on visit intention: The mediating role of tourists’ attitude and city
image. International Journal of Tourism Cities.
Grönroos, C. (1982). An applied service marketing theory. European journal of marketing.
Hahm, J. (Jeannie), Tasci, A. D., & Terry, D. B. (2018). Investigating the interplay among the Olympic Games image,
destination image, and country image for four previous hosts. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing,
35(6), 755–771. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2017.1421116
Han, H., & Hwang, J. (2013). Multi-dimensions of the perceived benefits in a medical hotel and their roles in
international travelers’ decision-making process. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 35, 100–
108.
Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K. P., Walsh, G., & Gremler, D. D. (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumeropinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of interactive
marketing, 18(1), 38–52.
Hossain, M. A., Jahan, N., Fang, Y., Hoque, S., & Hossain, M. S. (2019). Nexus of electronic word-of-mouth to social
networking sites: A sustainable chatter of new digital social media. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(3), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030759
Hossain, M. A., & Kim, M. (2018). Does multidimensional service quality generate sustainable use intention for
facebook? Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072283
Hunt, K. M., & Ditton, R. B. (2001). Perceived benefits of recreational fishing to Hispanic-American and Anglo anglers.
Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 6(3), 153–172.
Ishida, K., Slevitch, L., & Siamionava, K. (2016). The effects of traditional and electronic word-of-mouth on
destination image: A case of vacation tourists visiting Branson, Missouri. Administrative Sciences, 6(4), 12.
https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci6040012
Iverson, T. J. (1997). Decision timing: A comparison of Korean and Japanese travelers. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 16(2), 209–219.
Jalilvand, M. R., & Heidari, A. (2017). Comparing face-to-face and electronic word-of-mouth in destination image
formation: The case of Iran. Information Technology and People, 30(4), 710–735.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-09-2016-0204
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 & Management, 1(1–2), 134–143.
John L. Crompton. (1979). An assessment of the image of Mexico as a vacation destination and the influence of
geographical location upon that image. Journal of Travel Research, 1(Spring), 18–23.
Kanwel, S., Lingqiang, Z., Asif, M., Hwang, J., Hussain, A., & Jameel, A. (2019). The influence of destination image on
tourist loyalty and intention to visit: Testing a multiple mediation approach. Sustainability, 11(22), 6401.

55

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
Kasanah, A. (2015). Penggunaan metode structural equation modeling untuk analisis faktor yang mempengaruhi
kualitas pelayanan perpustakaan dengan program lisrel 8.80. Universitas Negeri Semarang.
Khan, M. J., Chelliah, S., & Haron, M. S. (2016). International patients’ travel decision making process- a con-ceptual
framework. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 45(2), 134–145.
Kim, D. J., Ferrin, D. L., & Rao, H. R. (2008). A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce:
The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decision support systems, 44(2), 544–564.
Lau, I. Y. M., Chiu, C., & Lee, S. (2001). Communication and shared reality: Implications for the psychological
foundations of culture. Social Cognition, 19(3: Special issue), 350–371.
Liang, L. J., Choi, H. C., Joppe, M., & Lee, W. (2019). Examining medical tourists’ intention to visit a tourist destination:
Application of an extended medtour scale in a cosmetic tourism context. International Journal of Tourism
Research, 21(6), 772–784.
Maharany, A. M., Albi, M., Abror, M. R. Al, Idzni, S. N., & Suhud, U. (2013). Investigasi peran expected satisfaction,
social intention, dan brand image: Akankah mempengaruhi word-of-mouth pelanggan restoran jepang.
Encephale, 53(1), 59–65.
Matzler, K., Strobl, A., Stokburger-Sauer, N., Bobovnicky, A., & Bauer, F. (2016). Brand personality and culture: The
role of cultural differences on the impact of brand personality perceptions on tourists’ visit intentions.
Tourism Management, 52, 507–520.
Mohammad Jamal, K., Chelliah, S., & Haron, M. S. (2016). International patients’ travel decision making process- a
conceptual
framework.
Iranian
journal
of
public
health,
45(2),
134.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Conceptual-Framework-International-Patients-Travel-DecisionMaking_fig1_301671462
Molinillo, S., Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Anaya-Sánchez, R., & Buhalis, D. (2018). DMO online platforms: Image and
intention to visit. Tourism Management, 65, 116–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.09.021
Narayan, B., Rajendran, C., & Sai, L. P. (2008). Scales to measure and benchmark service quality in tourism industry.
Benchmarking: An International Journal.
Novyanti, V. (2019). Bab I faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi visit intention penduduk kota Batam ke Korea Selatan.
Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Visit Intention Penduduk Kota Batam ke Korea Selatan, 1–8.
O’Leary, J. T., Morrison, A. M., & Alzua, A. (1998). Cultural and heritage tourism: Identifying niches for international
travelers. Journal of tourism studies, 9(2), 2.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. (1988). Servqual: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer
perceptions of service quality. 1988, 64(1), 12–40.
Rastati, R. (2018). Korean Wave: Pariwisata, soft power, dan gerakan ekspansi budaya pop. In Pmb Lipi.
Ratchford, B. T., Talukdar, D., & Lee, M.-S. (2001). A model of consumer choice of the Internet as an information
source. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 5(3), 7–21.
Roest, H., & Pieters, R. (1997). The nomological net of perceived service quality. International Journal of Service
Industry Management.
Ruan, W.-Q., Li, Y.-Q., & Liu, C.-H. S. (2017). Measuring tourism risk impacts on destination image. Sustainability,
9(9), 1501.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of social
issues, 50(4), 19–45.

56

Jelajah: Journal Tourism and Hospitality

e-ISSN 2685-094X

Vol. 3 No. 1, 2021
Senecal, S., & Nantel, J. (2004). The influence of online product recommendations on consumers’ online choices.
Journal of retailing, 80(2), 159–169.
Setiawan, P. Y., Troena, E. A., & Armanu, N. (2014). The effect of e-WOM on destination image, satisfaction and
loyalty. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 3(1), 22–29.
Shen, S., Schüttemeyer, A., & Braun, B. (2009). Visitors’intention to visit world cultural heritage sites: An empirical
study of Suzhou, China. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 26(7), 722–734.
Sotiriadis, M. D., & Van Zyl, C. (2013). Electronic word-of-mouth and online reviews in tourism services: The use of
twitter by tourists. Electronic Commerce Research, 13(1), 103–124.
Tasci, A. D. A., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Destination image and its functional relationships. Journal of Travel Research,
45(4), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287507299569
Tsaur, S.-H., Yen, C.-H., & Yan, Y.-T. (2016). Destination brand identity: Scale development and validation. Asia Pacific
Journal of Tourism Research, 21(12), 1310–1323.
Valek, N. S., & Williams, R. B. (2018). One place, two perspectives: Destination image for tourists and nationals in
Abu Dhabi. Tourism management perspectives, 27, 152–161.
Whang, H., Yong, S., & Ko, E. (2016). Pop culture, destination images, and visit intentions: Theory and research on
travel motivations of Chinese and Russian tourists. Journal of business research, 69(2), 631–641.
Wijaya, T., & Paramita, L. (2014). Pengaruh electronic word of mouth (ewom) terhadap keputusan pembelian
kamera Dslr.
Zhang, H., Fu, X., Cai, L. A., & Lu, L. (2014). Destination image and tourist loyalty: A meta-analysis. Tourism
Management, 40, 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.06.006
Zöllei, I., Karácsony, G., Baltás, B., & Nagy, S. (1989). Role of oxygen-derived free radicals in hemorrhagic shockinduced gastric lesions of rats. Acta physiologica Hungarica, 73(2–3), 357–362.

57