The perceived value of accessibility in religious sites – do disabled and non-disabled travellers behave differently?

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims at exploring whether there are differences in behaviour between people with special access needs and those who do not have these needs at a religious destination. In particular, a comparison is made between the role and structure of the perceived value of accessibility and its effect on satisfaction and loyalty.

Design/methodology/approach

Data are collected using a self-administered questionnaire (n = 523). Information on perceived value of accessibility, satisfaction and loyalty is subjected to confirmatory factor analysis to ensure the reliability and validity of the three components. Structural equation modelling is used to test the hypothesized relationship between these constructs.

Findings

The weight of the items of the perceived value of accessibility is different between the groups analysed and its effects on satisfaction and loyalty are higher among people with access needs.

Research limitations/implications

Results imply that the perceived value of accessibility may be a determinant in predicting satisfaction. Thus, any study addressing the role of accessibility in a destination should take this factor into consideration. At the same time, from a practical point of view, ensuring accessibility will also benefit destinations in providing better experiences. A clear limitation of this study is the use of a convenience sample.

Originality/value

Religious tourism and accessible tourism have been treated as two separate issues in academic literature. However, curative shrines are sites where religious tourism and accessible tourism naturally merge. Hence, the originality of this article lies in its focus on accessible tourism in these religious sites.

Citation

Gassiot Melian, A., Prats, L. and Coromina, L. (2016), "The perceived value of accessibility in religious sites – do disabled and non-disabled travellers behave differently?", Tourism Review, Vol. 71 No. 2, pp. 105-117. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-11-2015-0057