Next Article in Journal
Progress in Research on Terpenoid Biosynthesis and Terpene Synthases of Lauraceae Species
Next Article in Special Issue
Determinants of Forest Recreation Visitors’ Environmentally Responsible Behavior: The Moderating Role of Family Structure
Previous Article in Journal
Altitudinal Variation in Soil Acid Phosphomonoesterase Activity in Subalpine Coniferous Forests in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Time-Varying Evolution and Impact Analysis of Forest Tourism Carbon Emissions and Forest Park Carbon Sinks in China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 15
Issue 10
10.3390/f15101730
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Tourists’ Perceived Value on Environmentally Responsible Behavior in an Urban Forest Park: The Mediating Effects of Satisfaction and Subjective Well-Being

by
Jiali Zhao
1 and
Lisheng Weng
2,3,4,*
1
School of Continuing Education, Guizhou Vocational and Technical College of Water Resources and Hydropower, Guiyang 551400, China
2
School of Tourism Management, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China
3
Hubei Digital Culture and Tourism Research Institute, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China
4
China Resources & Environment and Development Academy, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Forests 2024, 15(10), 1730; https://doi.org/10.3390/f15101730
Submission received: 20 August 2024 / Revised: 12 September 2024 / Accepted: 25 September 2024 / Published: 29 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Forest Recreation and Ecotourism)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Urban forest parks serve as significant venues for tourists’ leisure and recreation. The experiences and perceptions of tourists in these parks considerably influence their attitudes and behaviors. While numerous studies have investigated the functions and values of urban forest parks at a macro level, the mechanisms influencing tourists’ perceived values and their environmentally responsible behavior at a micro level remain under explored. This research used structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the association between tourists’ perceived values and their environmentally responsible behavior, including the mediating functions of tourists’ satisfaction and their subjective well-being. 502 valid questionnaires in total were obtained from Changpoling National Forest Park in Guiyang City, Guizhou, China, for this case study. The results show that there are some variances in the impact of the dimensions of tourists’ perceived value on environmentally responsible behavior, in which service quality, resource quality, and emotional value impose a pronounced positive effect on environmentally responsible behavior, tourism costs impose a pronounced negative effect on environmentally responsible behavior, and the activity experience does not exert a pronounced effect on environmentally responsible behavior. Satisfaction and subjective well-being have a mediating function during the process of positive influence of tourists’ perceived value on their environmentally responsible behavior and serve as partial mediators, and the significant positive influence of satisfaction on subjective well-being as well as subjective well-being on environmentally responsible behavior are verified. This research can help better explain the mechanism of the effect of tourists’ perceived value exerted on environmental responsibility behavior in nature-based tourism destinations, and also has a guiding and reference significance for the sustainable development of urban forest parks.

1. Introduction

In the past decades, China’s forest tourism has developed rapidly, aligning with tourists’ aspirations to reconnect with nature [1]. Forest parks serve as multifunctional and comprehensive outdoor recreation areas that combine environmental protection with sightseeing tourism, offering citizens a respite from urban life and a chance to immerse themselves in nature [2]. Research indicates that spending just 20 min in a forest park can improve one’s state of mind, an effect termed the “twenty-minute effect” [3]. A reciprocal relationship exists between tourists and forest parks: the park’s natural environment positively influences tourists, making them feel comfortable, relaxed, and happy, which enhances their perceived value of the park and boosts their satisfaction and subjective well-being. Conversely, tourists gain environmental knowledge through various interpretive activities in the park, which alters their attitudes toward the eco-environment and encourages behavior that is environmentally responsible.
In tourism research, the notion of tourist perceived value has been widely studied by scholars. The literature has examined its impact on various factors such as satisfaction [4], subjective well-being [5], environmentally responsible behavior [6], place attachment [7], and tourists’ loyalty [8]. However, most studies have treated perceived value as a single variable. Some research suggests that perceived value can be divided into different dimensions, typically encompassing resource quality, service quality, activity experience, emotional value, and tourism cost [9]. Despite this, there has been limited exploration of how these five dimensions of perceived value impact environmentally responsible behavior, indicating a need for further investigation into this relationship.
In addition, there may be a large number of other mediating variables during the process of tourists’ perceived value on environmentally responsible behavior, and existing studies mostly focus on the direct impact of tourists’ perceived value imposed on environmentally responsible behavior, but ignore the complexity and indirectness between the two. Therefore, it is necessary to add appropriate mediating variables and demonstrate the strength of the association between these variables. Studies have verified the mediating roles played by tourism satisfaction and subjective well-being between relaxation experience and tourist loyalty by modeling the relationship between forest health tourism restoration experience, tourism satisfaction, subjective well-being, and tourist loyalty [10]. However, among the studies on the effect of tourists’ perceived value exerted on environmentally responsible behavior in urban forest parks, few studies have simultaneously used tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being as mediating variables, and then explored the impact mechanism of tourists’ perceived value exerted on environmentally responsible behavior. Therefore, the present research introduces tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being as mediating variables, which can offer a novel way of examining the effect mechanism of perceived value imposed on environmentally responsible behaviors of visitors in urban forest parks.
SOR (stimulus—organism—response) theory, introduced by Mehrabian et al. (1974) rooted in environmental psychology [11], is predominantly utilized to explain how external environmental stimuli generate individual emotional cognition, ultimately affecting behavior and response processes. According to this theory, tourists’ perceived value serves as the stimulus and environmentally responsible behavior constitutes the resultant response, with the impact of tourists’ perceived value exerted on environmentally responsible behavior mediated through the organism. Satisfaction and subjective well-being are crucial indicators of tourists’ experiences in forest parks, fulfilling physiological or psychological needs, fostering personal growth, and promoting environmentally responsible behavior [4,12,13]. However, current studies have not thoroughly examined the roles of satisfaction and subjective well-being in the association between visitors’ environmentally responsible behavior and perceived value.
From the aforementioned study background, this paper draws on SOR theory to examine the association between tourists’ perceived values and environmentally responsible behavior in urban forest parks. Tourists’ perceived value is taken as the stimulus variable (S), satisfaction and subjective well-being as organism variables (O), and environmentally responsible behavior as the response variable (R). The study aims to analyze the roles that tourists’ satisfaction and their subjective well-being might play. This research aims to: (1) construct a theoretical model incorporating the 5 segmented dimensions of visitors’ perceived value, visitor satisfaction, subjective well-being, and environmentally responsible behavior, and (2) examine the structural relationships among these four variables. Changpoling National Forest Park in Guiyang, Guizhou, China, was taken as the research area.

2. Literature Review and Research Hypothesis

2.1. SOR Theory

SOR theory originated from the stimulus–response theory put forward by Woodworth in 1929. Mehrabian and Russell introduced individuals’ internal cognitive and affective activities as the “organism” factor, formally constructing the SOR theory [14]. The theory posits that individuals respond to environmental stimuli with behaviors such as convergence (e.g., exploring, staying, interacting) or avoidance (e.g., reacting negatively) [15]. Since its introduction, SOR theory has been applied in various fields, including economics, education, marketing, tourism management, and information management systems [16,17]. In tourism research, SOR theory is frequently applied to forecast and analyze tourists’ behaviors. Bigne et al. (2020) utilized SOR theory to explain consumers’ decision-making processes when confronted with conflicting online reviews, reporting that external stimuli (online reviews) influence individuals’ internal cognitive and affective appraisals, which subsequently affect their behavioral intentions, using eye-tracking and conscious information processing models [18]. Kim et al. (2020) expanded the utilization of this theory, demonstrating the critical role of cognitive response in eliciting tourists’ emotional responses, VR attachment, and visit intentions by using real experience as the stimulus, cognitive and emotional response as the organism, and VR attachment and visit intentionality as the response outcome [19]. Liu (2021) applied SOR theory to analyze the factors influencing consumer behavioral intentions in sports tourism, using motivation, opportunity, and ability as stimulus factors, and consumer perceived usefulness, user-friendliness, and risk as organismic factors [20]. Some scholars believe that the application of SOR theory in tourism research exists in the abuse of theory, simple application and dogmatic use, and lack of close integration with the tourism context, the depth of the integration of SOR theory in the field of tourism is also a direction for in-depth discussion in this paper [21]. Based on this analysis, the current study uses tourists’ perceived value as an external stimulus, satisfaction and subjective well-being as organismic experiences, and environmentally responsible behavior as the final response to examine the mechanism influencing visitors’ perceived value of forest parks and their environmentally responsible behavior.

2.2. Relationships between Tourists’ Perceived Value, Subjective Well-Being, Satisfaction, and Environmentally Responsible Behavior

Perceived value pertains to tourists’ overall assessment of tourism products or services, encompassing their satisfaction from the travel experience, the quality of the tourism product, and the alignment with their expectations [22]. The food, service, and environment of a tourist destination are critical factors that influence tourists’ emotions and perceptions, leading to subjective value judgments after the experience, which subsequently affect their perceived value assessments. The dimensions of perceived value are multifaceted, complex, comparative, personalized, and situational [23]. Gallarza (2006) identified that tourists’ perceived value comprises multiple dimensions, including service quality, efficiency, and social value [24]. Zhang (2022) conducted a survey on tourists’ perceived value and experience at the Kaiping Watchtower in Guangdong Province, China, a UNESCO World Heritage site, and stated that emotional, functional, social, financial and brand values positively influenced tourists’ satisfaction and their willingness to revisit the site [25]. Huang (2007) utilized structural equation modeling and factor analysis to identify 5 dimensions of tourists’ perceived value: perceived quality, emotional value, perceived economic cost, social value and perceived nonmonetary cost [26]. In the context of this study, Dou’s (2016) research, which integrates tourism cost as a combination of perceived economic cost and perceived nonmonetary cost, further categorized the five dimensions of perceived values of tourists into resource quality, service quality, activity experience, emotional value, and tourism cost [9].
Tourist satisfaction is a psychological mood or emotional state and serves as a crucial indicator of the tourist experience (Huang 2015) [27]. It is generally defined as the psychological process through which tourists evaluate their expectations of a destination against the outcomes of their visit and experience [28,29]. Lee’s (2015) study indicated that forest park tourists’ satisfaction is affected by factors like natural resources and cultural heritage in the destination, transportation accessibility, tourism facility availability, tourism information services, tourism safety, and sustainability [30]. Many research have found a clear positive correlation exists between tourists’ satisfaction and tourism experience, with increased perceived value leading to higher satisfaction. Yao (2024) employed the SOR theoretical framework to investigate the associations among tourists’ recreational environments, perceived satisfaction, as well as post-trip behavioral propensities in forest parks located in urban areas, suggesting that satisfaction with individual attributes of a destination enhances overall satisfaction [31]. Tian and Pei (2021) examined the Yuanmingyuan Garden in Beijing and observed that the cultural aesthetic value, service function value, social realization value, and pleasurable recreation value of tourists’ perceived value of the cultural heritage site significantly positively influenced tourists’ satisfaction [32]. On this basis, this research hypothesize that:
H1. 
Perceived value imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction.
H1a. 
Resource quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction.
H1b. 
Service quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction.
H1c. 
Activity experience imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction.
H1d. 
Emotional value imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction.
H1e. 
Tourism cost imposes a significant negative influence on tourist satisfaction.
Subjective well-being is reflected in the positive emotions, engagement, and meaning that tourists derive from traveling [33]. Some studies have shown that subjective well-being largely depends on the individual’s choice of meaningful activities [34]. For instance, Geng et al. (2023)’s study confirmed that subjective well-being can be significantly enhanced by participating in recreational outdoor activities, such as riding in forest parks. The physical, mental, and societal advantages stemming from these endeavors exert both immediate and mediated favorable influences on augmenting tourists’ perceived life quality [35]. Additionally, subjective well-being emphasizes the positive feelings and perceptual experiences that arise from tourism activities, mainly through fulfilling the subject’s needs, participation, and immersion in activities, which hold certain positive values and meanings for tourists [5]. Li (2021) studied China’s largest tourism virtual reality network, Quanjingke (QJK), and found that perceived value positively affects residents’ subjective well-being in virtual reality (VR) tourism [36]. Regarding elderly tourists, Kim et al. (2015) pinpointed tourist engagement and perceived worth as determinants of experiential gratification, subsequently influencing leisure contentment and personal happiness [37]. Judging from this elaboration, this research proposes Hypothesis 2:
H2. 
Perceived value imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.
H2a. 
Resource quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.
H2b. 
Service quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.
H2c. 
The activity experience imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.
H2d. 
Emotional value imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being of.
H2e. 
Tourism costs impose a significant negative effect on tourists’ subjective well-being.
Environmental responsibility behavior involves actions by individuals that positively affect the environment, often requiring a compromise of personal interests [38]. Lee et al. (2013) outlined the foundation of environmental responsibility behavior in daily activities, identifying it as tourist behavior that minimizes environmental impact and proactively protects the environment, without disrupting the ecosystem and biosphere of the scenic spots. The travel process designed to minimize environmental impact involves proactive measures to protect the environment, ensuring no interference with the ecosystem or biosphere of the tourist location [39]. Scholars domestically and internationally have categorized environmentally responsible behaviors into various dimensions based on their manifestations and characteristics, including attention to local environmental protection information, adherence to ecological and environmental protection guidelines [40], participation in ecological activities, green consumption, and persuasive actions [41,42]. Lin (2018) found a correlation between tourism destinations and perceived value, emphasizing that a destination’s natural environment significantly influences tourists’ likelihood of revisiting [43]. Zhang’s (2022) study, utilizing Tangshan Mining Park in Nanjing as a case study, indicated that perceived value enhances tourists’ positive emotional experiences of the environment and strengthens the recall of their tourist experience, thereby encouraging environmentally friendly behaviors [6]. Similarly, Liu (2022) developed and empirically tested a theoretical framework of tourists’ satisfaction, perceived value, as well as their environmentally responsible behavior in the Beijing Olympic Forest Park, and the research results demonstrated that tourists’ perceived value imposes a pronounced effect on their environmentally responsible behavior, and that improving tourists’ satisfaction and perceived value helps to enhance their environmentally responsible behavior [44]. Consequently, Hypothesis 3 is put forward:
H3. 
Perceived value imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
H3a. 
Resource quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
H3b. 
Service quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
H3c. 
Activity experience imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
H3d. 
Emotional value imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
H3e. 
Tourism costs impose a significant negative influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
Individuals’ psycho-emotions significantly influence their behavioral decisions. Satisfaction is a crucial prerequisite for environmentally responsible behavior, as tourists with elevated levels of satisfaction are more inclined to give their time and energy to protect a destination’s ecological integrity [45]. For example, He et al. (2021) did a case study in the Yuelu Mountain–Orange Island tourist area in Hunan, China, utilizing perceived service quality as a stimulus, tourist satisfaction as an organismic response, and environmentally responsible behaviors as a response. Their findings indicated that service quality impacts tourists’ satisfaction, which subsequently affects their environmentally responsible behaviors, highlighting the importance of the destination’s service quality [13]. Similarly, Su et al. (2018) argued that the environmental reputation of a tourist destination impacts tourists’ intrinsic states, like consumer satisfaction and emotions, which in turn foster environmentally responsible behaviors [42]. Research by Ramkissoon (2013) and others on a national park in Australia examined tourists’ destination attachment, satisfaction, as well as their environmentally responsible behavior, confirming a positive association between tourists’ satisfaction and their environmentally responsible behavior [4].
H4. 
Satisfaction imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
The deep emotional and psychological states experienced during tourism are pivotal in motivating tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior [46,47,48]. For instance, Zhang et al. (2023) identified four indicators of well-being through contextual experiments and field surveys, reporting that pro-environmental behaviors were more prominent when subjective well-being was associated with meaningful happiness, such as the pursuit of meaning and self-actualization [49]. Similarly, Naoko and Kosuke (2019) examined the relationship between psychological states (e.g., stress, depression, and sleepiness) and environmental behaviors among adult residents of Japan, finding that environmental behaviors positively correlated with positive psychological states (e.g., subjective well-being), while negative emotions generally reduced environmentally altruistic behaviors [50]. Additionally, the impact of tourists’ well-being imposed on their environmentally responsible behavior is influenced by sociocultural dimensions as noted by Gao (2020) [12]. Kang and Wang’s (2017) study concluded that subjective well-being directly influences residents’ environmentally responsible behavior through four mechanisms—environmental concern, income level, social capital, and positive emotions—and indirectly promotes environmentally responsible behavior through enhanced trust, willingness to cooperate, and social engagement in such behaviors [51]. From the aforementioned analysis, this research proposes the hypotheses:
H5. 
Subjective well-being imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior.
A short and meaningful play experience, rather than merely consuming material goods, can significantly enhance tourist satisfaction and thereby improve tourists’ perception of happiness in life [52,53]. He et al. (2020) confirmed the influence of perceived service quality exerted on Chinese tourists’ life satisfaction and perceived happiness, reporting that tourists’ satisfaction exerted a favorable and direct effect on their subjective well-being [54]. Similarly, Chen et al. (2016) argued that positive emotions resulting from tourism, such as relaxation, mental enrichment, and improved health, contribute to tourist satisfaction and thus enhance overall well-being [55]. Wang and Ma (2020) combined in-depth interviews and questionnaire surveys to study the motivations of cyclists on the Sichuan–Tibet route and their impact on individuals’ well-being, finding that the enjoyment of nature and stress relief exerted a pronounced positive influence on tourism satisfaction, which improved cyclists’ subjective well-being [5]. The above studies suggest that higher levels of tour satisfaction contribute to subjective well-being. Hence, the subsequent hypothesis is put forth:
H6. 
Satisfaction imposes a significant positive influence on tourists’ subjective well-being.
The source of tourists’ perceived value stems from the comprehensive evaluation of the destination’s landscape resources, functional facilities, service quality, and interactive experiences during the tour. Higher perceived value acts as a stimulus to induce positive emotional experiences, which subsequently stimulate pro-environmental willingness and behaviors [9,44]. Kaida (2019), studying Japanese adults, found that positive affective states and personality traits can promote environmental protection behaviors, which subsequently enhance an individual’s subjective well-being, thus creating a virtuous cycle [51]. Nghiem et al. (2021) highlighted that exposure to nature and biodiversity positively influences satisfaction among tourists and subjective well-being, indicating that the relevance of nature is an important factor in individual well-being and their satisfaction [48]. Furthermore, scholars have analyzed the mediating functions of tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being. For instance, Liu (2021) constructed a model to explore the correlation between restoration experience, tourism satisfaction, subjective well-being and tourists’ loyalty in forest health tourism, using a model that explores the relationships among restoration experience, tourist satisfaction, subjective well-being, and loyalty to forest healthcare tourism, thus providing theoretical insights for enhancing immersive tourism experiences [10]. Satisfaction and subjective well-being have a cascading and gradually deepening superimposed effect. However, in the context of urban forest parks, few studies have simultaneously used tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being as mediating variables, and then explored the impact mechanism of tourists’ perceived value on their environmentally responsible behavior; this study will enrich the theoretical model of the effect of tourists’ perceived value on their environmentally responsible behavior. Therefore, the following hypotheses are put forward:
H7a. 
Satisfaction plays a mediating role in the effect of perceived value on environmentally responsible behavior.
H7b. 
Subjective well-being plays a mediating role in the effect of perceived value on environmentally responsible behavior.
H7c. 
Satisfaction and subjective well-being play a chain-mediating role in the effect of perceived value on environmentally responsible behavior.
Figure 1 depicts the conceptual framework that underpins this study as outlined below:

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Area

Changpo National Forest Park is Located in Baiyun District in Guiyang City, Guizhou Province, China, 3.5 km away from Guiyang administration center and 12 km away from Guiyang city center (Figure 2). Changpoling National Forest Park is situated in Baiyun District, northwest of Guiyang City, Guizhou Province, China, 3.5 km from Guiyang’s administrative center and 12 km from the old town (Figure 2). Covering an area of 1075 hectares, the park forms a crucial segment of Guiyang’s green belt, boasting a high forest coverage of 82.96% [56], and is acclaimed as an “ecological museum” due to its abundant ecological resources. It stands as the only national forest park in Guiyang City, developed from the Guiyang Changpoling State Forestry Farm established in 1958, and is a testament to the continuous afforestation, nurturing, and forest protection efforts of several generations of foresters. The park features a karst landform typical of the Qianzhong Shanyuan District, providing a scenic overlook of the city and a picturesque forest landscape. It is divided into five scenic spots: Cherry Blossom Lake, Forest Lawn, DuXi Forestry, and two ethnic minority villages. These areas offer excellent forest landscape value and serve as ideal locations for leisure and vacation, science and education promotion, as well as tourism and sports.

3.2. Questionnaire Design

In this study, data were obtained through questionnaires. The questionnaire was written according to relevant scales from both domestic and international sources, with adjustments made to accommodate the specific characteristics of the forest park. In the first part, screening questions were included to ensure that only tourists who had visited Changpoling National Forest Park were confirmed and allowed to participate in the statistical sample.
The questionnaire’s second segment encompassed the assessment of four key constructs. The first construct assessed the perceived value of tourists, according to the research by Gallarza and Saura (2006), Huang (2007), and Dou (2016) [9,24,26], encompassing five dimensions: resource quality, service quality, activity experience, emotional value, and tourism cost, with a total of 16 items. The second construct measured satisfaction, referencing the works of Oliver (1981) [57] and Liu (2022) [44], which included three questions, such as “This forest park is worth visiting”. The subjective well-being measure was adapted from the scales of Karademas (2006), Huta and Ryan (2010) [58,59], and combined with the studies of Geng et al. (2023) [35], using a four-item scale, with questions like “A visit to the forest park gives my life meaning”. The environmentally responsible behavior measure was designed following Tapi’s (2013) and Weng et al.’s (2023) [41,60] studies, with questions such as “I will discuss the park’s environmental issues with my peers”. The questionnaire’s third section zeroed in on the demographic features of the participants, like gender, age, educational achievements, and professional occupations.
Each of the items was rated utilizing a 5-point Likert scale, covering from 1 indicating ‘completely disagree’ to 5 signifying ‘completely agree’. All scales were translated into Chinese and then into English by another author following round-trip translation protocols. To ensure the clarity of the research questions, a presurvey with 50 participants was conducted. The questionnaire was polished and adjusted according to feedback. The questions were contextualized to finalize the Chinese questionnaire.

3.3. Data Collection and Analysis

A formal field survey was carried out from April to May 2024 in Changpoling National Forest Park. Most questionnaires were distributed at the forest lawn, a popular attraction where tourists often set up canopies, pitch tents, sleep in hammocks, and rest for extended periods. The research team comprised six research assistants specializing in tourism management. For this study, only tourists over 18 years old were selected. Each research assistant inquired whether tourists had previously visited the forest park before distributing the questionnaires. If the response was affirmative, the questionnaires were given. To enhance the tourists’ motivation and efficiency in completing the questionnaire, they were informed that a leaf-shaped refrigerator sticker would be given as a souvenir for conscientious participation. A sum of 564 questionnaires were disseminated, yielding 536 returns, ultimately resulting in 502 questionnaires being deemed valid subsequent to the final assessment process.
SPSS 27.0 and AMOS 24.0 were applied to analyze the research data. Initially, the total sample (S = 502) was analyzed descriptively. Subsequently, a validated factor analysis was done to measure the subordination of the scale to the latent variables. Third, reliability and validity assessments were performed to calculate the measurement scale’s reliability. Ultimately, the research hypotheses underwent verification via hypothesis examination and an analysis of mediating influences.

4. Research Results

4.1. Sample Profile

Table 1 comprehensive summarizes the details about this sample. The data indicate that 50.6% (n = 254) of the 502 participants were men, while 49.4% (n = 248) were women. Their ages primarily covered from 23 to 45 years. Over 70% of them had a university degree or above. Additionally, the majority of participants (62.75%, n = 315) were employed as corporate workers, business owners, or self-employed, and 85.86% had a monthly income exceeding RMB 4500 (USD 616).

4.2. Measurement Model Testing

4.2.1. Reliability Testing and Validation Factor Analysis

The reliability test intends to measure the internal consistency of the measurement scale. Typically, a Cronbach’s alpha exceeding 0.7 signifies robust internal coherence among the variables comprising the scale, indicative of strong reliability. The analysis results show that for the entire scale, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is 0.917. Additionally, the alpha coefficients for the perceived values of resource quality, service quality, activity experience, emotional value, tourism cost, satisfaction, perceived happiness, and environmentally responsible behaviors are 0.872, 0.833, 0.778, 0.812, 0.809, 0.807, 0.876, and 0.853, respectively (Table 2). The coefficients demonstrate a strong reliability of the measurements for this research.
CFA, i.e. the validated factor analysis was applied to additionally examine the measurement model’s quality. The model fit metrics in Table 2 reaches the required cutoffs (χ2/df = 1.121, NFI = 0.946, CFI = 0.994, GFI = 0.956, AGFI = 0.944, RMSEA = 0.016, SRMR = 0.026). The data align favorably with the measurement model, as validated by these metrics [35,41,61].

4.2.2. Validity Tests

Measurement Model Validation: before the data analysis, the measurement model’s validity was initially evaluated. This procedure primarily encompassed evaluations pertaining to reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and content validity. Convergent validity is conceptualized as the degree to which indicators of a single construct converge, typically appraised by the composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE)metrics. According to Hair et al., latent variable reliability can be tested by CR and AVE, where the standardized value for CR is 0.7 and for AVE is 0.5, with an acceptable range of 0.36–0.5 [62]. The statistics in Table 2 clearly indicate that the AVE values are above 0.5, the threshold, whereas the CR values are above 0.6, the minimum requirement. In the study, the AVE values of the 5 dimensions of tourists’ perceived value were 0.730, 0.660, 0.750, 0.628, and 0.666. The AVE values of satisfaction, well-being, and environmentally responsible behaviors were 0.592, 0.647, and 0.674. These values meet the criterion for convergent validity, and therefore, all the entries were retained.
When the square value of the AVE of a latent variable exceeds the correlation coefficient between that variable and others, it signifies that a favorable discriminant validity exists among those variables. The table above exhibits that the correlation coefficients among the study variables are inferior to the square root of each latent variable’s AVE, signifying satisfactory discriminant validity. From Table 3, the range of correlation coefficients among variables spans from 0.001 to 0.780. Furthermore, the square root of each variable’s AVE is above its correlations with other variables, indicating satisfactory discriminant validity, consistent with Shneider’s (2012) findings [63].

4.3. Structural Modeling and Hypothesis Verification

4.3.1. Test of Structural Model Fit Goodness-of-Fit

The statistics were examined for skewness and kurtosis in order to validate that they conformed to a normal distribution. The observed values of skewness were between −0.907 and −0.109, while the values of kurtosis were between −2.77 and 0.218. The research findings indicate a normal distribution of the data.

4.3.2. Hypothesis Verification

The SEM was applied to validate the research hypotheses, and Table 4 presents the outcomes. The standardized coefficient pertaining to hypothesis H1a is recorded as 0.16 (t = 3.727, p = 0.000 < 0.001), implying that a statistically pronounced positive correlation exists between resource quality in the perceived value of tourists and tourists’ satisfaction. The standardized path coefficients for H1b, H1d, and H1e are 0.203, 0.168 (t = 3.797, p = 0.000 < 0.001), t = 3.172, p = 0.002 < 0.05), and t = 2.902, p = 0.004 < 0.05), respectively. These coefficients show that service quality and emotional value in perceived value positively affect tourists’ satisfaction, while tourism cost negatively affects tourists’ satisfaction. Hence, hypotheses H1a, H1b, H1d, and H1e are verified. The coefficient of the standardized path for hypothesis H1c is indicated as 0.036 (t = 1.227, p = 0.220), demonstrating that the activity experience of perceived value fails to pronouncedly affect tourists’ satisfaction. Thus, H1c is not supported. Possible reasons for this are that Changpoling National Forest Park managers do not accurately understand the activity experience needs of visitors to nature-based destinations, and that the park’s services and activity facilities are not highly experiential.
For H2a, the coefficient is 0.168 (t = 3.778, p = 0.000 < 0.001), demonstrating a statistically pronounced positive correlation between the quality of resources in tourists’ perceived value and subjective well-being. The coefficients for H2b, H2d, and H2e are 0.192, 0.150, and 0.199 (t = 3.459, p = 0.000 < 0.001; t = 2.767, p = 0.006 < 0.05; t = 3.498, p = 0.000 < 0.001). These research results show that emotional value and service quality in tourists’ perceived value impose a pronounced positive effect on their well-being, while tourism cost imposes a negative impact. Thus, hypotheses H2a, H2b, H2d, and H2e are supported. For H2c, the coefficient is 0.020 (t = 0.669, p = 0.503), demonstrating that the activity experience of perceived value does not obviously affect the subjective well-being of tourists. Therefore, H2c is not supported. The possible reason for this is the variability in the effects of various levels of activity experience on tourists’ well-being during nature-based destination play experiences.
For H3a, the coefficient is 0.129 (t = 2.842, p = 0.004 < 0.05), implying that the perceived value of resource quality bears a statistically pronounced positive correlation with environmentally responsible behaviors. For H3b, H3d and H3e, the coefficients are 0.173, 0.149, and 0.186 (t = 3.036, p = 0.002 < 0.05; t = 2.708, p = 0.007 < 0.05; t = 3.192, p = 0.001 < 0.05), indicating a positive influence of emotional value and service quality exerted on eco-responsible behavior, countered by a negative effect from tourism cost. Thus, hypotheses H3a, H3b, H3d, and H3e are validated. For H3c, the coefficient is 0.031 (t = 1.076, p = 0.282), implying that activity experience in the perceived value does not significantly affect subjective well-being. Therefore, H3c is not substantiated. Possible reasons for this are that the infrastructure of Changpoling National Forest Park needs to be improved, the interpretation system is also deficient, and the knowledge related to environmental protection is not adequately conveyed to the tourists [64].
For H4, the coefficient is 0.277 (t = 3.690, p = 0.000 < 0.001), implying that a statistically pronounced positive correlation exists between tourists’ satisfaction and their environmentally responsible behavior. Therefore, hypothesis H4 is supported. For H5, the coefficient is 0.217 (t = 3.184, p = 0.001 < 0.05), demonstrating a statistically pronounced positive correlation between tourists’ subjective well-being and their environmentally responsible behavior. Hence, hypothesis H5 is verified. For H6, the coefficient is 0.264 (t = 3.643, p = 0.000 < 0.001), implying a statistically pronounced positive correlation between tourists’ satisfaction and their subjective well-being. Thus, hypothesis H6 is validated.

4.4. Chain Mediation of Satisfaction and Happiness

Using tourists’ satisfaction and their subjective well-being as mediating variables, this research conducted 2000 sample tests via the self-help method and calculated the indirect effects. Table 5 shows the analysis results. The bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals (1.332–1.875) and percentile 95% confidence intervals (1.331–1.873) for the total influence of tourists’ perceived value on their environmentally responsible behaviors excluded 0, implying that the total influence was significant, with a strength of 1.570. The direct bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals were 0.617–1.326 and percentile 95% confidence intervals of the effects were 0.620–1.329, both of which excluded 0, implying that the direct impact of tourists’ perceived value on their environmentally responsible behavior also existed; thus, the mediating impacts of tourists’ satisfaction and their subjective well-being were partially mediated. The 95% confidence intervals (0.392–0.907) and 95% confidence intervals (0.377–0.892) for the total indirect effect (bias-corrected, mediated impact) excluded 0, suggesting that the mediating impact of satisfaction and subjective well-being was present. The positive deviation intervals (CIs) for satisfaction as an indirect effect were 0.070–0.584, and the percentile 95% CI intervals were 0.049–0.561, none of which included 0. The positive deviation intervals (CIs) for subjective well-being as an indirect effect were 0.057–0.381, and the 95% confidence intervals were 0.044–0.359, none of which included 0. The mediating function of tourists’ satisfaction and their subjective well-being was observed. Their subjective well-being acted a chain-mediating part with the positive interval (CI) range of 0.053–0.350, and the percentile 95% CI interval of 0.038–0.321 excluded 0. This finding indicates that the mediating impact of satisfaction and well-being exists. Therefore, hypotheses H7a, H7b, and H7c are verified.

5. Discussion

5.1. Theoretical Implications

This research has some crucial theoretical contributions to exploring perceived touristic value and environmentally responsible behavior at destinations. First, utilizing the SOR research paradigm, this paper conceptualizes the superposition of the five dimensions of tourists’ perceived value in urban forest parks as the stimulus, their satisfaction and subjective well-being as the organism, and their environmentally responsible behavior as the response. The interrelationships among perceived value, satisfaction, subjective well-being, and environmentally responsible behavior of urban forest park tourists are thoroughly examined, further enriching the theoretical framework of the effect of perceived value exerted on environmentally responsible behavior. Nature-based tourist destinations enhance individuals’ health, alleviate urban life stress, foster emotional connections, and provide high perceived value during recreational experiences, thereby boosting satisfaction and subjective well-being. Additionally, the environmental knowledge acquired during visits to forest parks contributes to altering attitudes towards the environment and promotes behavior that is environmentally responsible.
Second, at this stage, most studies on the underlying mechanisms that govern the influence on tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior emphasize the relationships among a single or two variables related to place attachment, satisfaction, tourists’ loyalty, and their environmentally responsible behavior and has failed to explore the associations among multiple variables. In this study, the structural associations among four variables—tourists’ perceived value, satisfaction, environmentally responsible behavior and subjective well-being—were examined against the backdrop of a nature-based tourism destination, specifically focusing on tourists visiting a forest park in the urban area. The research results demonstrate that visitors’ perceived value significantly influences their satisfaction, well-being, and environmentally responsible behavior. Furthermore, satisfaction and subjective well-being serve as crucial mediators in the association between tourists’ perceived value and their environmentally responsible behavior, aligning with existing empirical evidence that satisfaction [4,13,44] and subjective well-being [12,49,50,51] mediate the connection between tourists’ perceived value and their environmentally responsible behavior. The research findings imply that tourists’ perceived value experience at a destination is critical in fostering positive emotions, and individuals tend to have a more gratifying experience when they feel meaningful to society [65]. Positive emotions such as satisfaction and subjective well-being act a pivotal part in shaping tourists’ willingness toward environmentally responsible behavior [5,12]. To enhance environmentally responsible behavior by increasing tourists’ perceived value, scenic spots must address and improve factors affecting tourists’ satisfaction and subjective well-being, thereby promoting and sustaining tourists’ perceived value of environmentally responsible behavior and supporting the sustainable growth of urban forest parks. Therefore, this study elucidates the mechanism through which perceived value impacts environmentally responsible behavior and introduces new mediating variables for studying such behaviors. Practically, it offers theoretical guidance for boosting tourists’ behavior that is environmentally responsible and promoting forest tourism.
Third, this study examines and validates five segmented dimensions of perceived value and utilizes the segmentation against the backdrop of nature tourism. Previous research often assesses overall perceived value and overlooks the segmented dimensions [8,66,67]. This study addresses this gap by exploring five dimensions of perceived value: resource quality, service quality, activity experience, emotional value, and tourism cost, and applies these dimensions in a forest park in the urban setting. The research results from reliability tests, validity assessments, as well as factor analysis indicated that among those five subdimensions, resource quality, service quality, and emotional value significantly positively affected satisfaction, subjective well-being, and environmentally responsible behaviors, while tourism cost had significant negative effects on these outcomes. This finding aligns with previous research [8,9]. However, activity experience did not significantly influence tourist satisfaction, subjective well-being, or environmentally responsible behavior, and the mediation by satisfaction and subjective well-being was only partial; this differs from prior studies [9,44]. There may be three reasons for this: On the one hand, the supporting facilities and equipment of this urban forest park are incomplete, which is mainly reflected in the lack of presence and single form of related service facilities, leisure facilities and sports facilities, resulting in a weak activity experience for visitors. Secondly, there are differences in the effect of various degrees of activity experience imposed on tourists’ well-being. Some visitors may only want to fully relax through outdoor activities, without fully integrating into the collective and making more friends. Third, the planning and management needs to be improved; the lack of tourist signs, signposts, directional signs, and explanatory signs for plant and animal science, etc., in the process of tourists playing and experiencing does not lead to enough ecological and environmental protection knowledge, and then fails to stimulate tourists to actively form attitudes and behaviors concerning environmental protection.
Tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior is very significant for the sustainable growth of urban forest parks; however, providing tourists with high-quality perceived value and positive emotional experience is the core point to motivate their environmentally responsible behavior. Therefore, this paper encourages urban forest managers to carry out rational planning for urban forest parks, improve the quality of interpretation services, strengthen maintenance management, and explore diversified environmental education channels. By effectively enhancing tourists’ satisfaction with this urban forest park and stimulating their subjective sense of well-being, it will promote tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior. This is also of practical significance for promoting green travel and creating an ecological civilization and sustainable urban forest park [68].

5.2. Practical Implications

This research gives some references for enhancing environmentally responsible behavior and management practices in urban forest parks, as reflected in the following three aspects. First, the study demonstrates that tourists’ perceived value serves as a crucial determinant of their satisfaction, subjective well-being, as well as environmentally responsible behavior. Attaining perceived value enhances tourists’ satisfaction and promotes improved subjective well-being, which subsequently motivates tourists to actively engage in environmental protection efforts. Natural resources are fundamental to the development and purpose of forest parks. Forest parks should leverage their ecological resource advantages while prioritizing the protection of natural resources. Their objectives include facilitating ecotourism, offering excursions, vacations, rest, health care, and convalescence, providing scientific education, delivering cultural and recreational services, and enhancing tourist engagement and satisfaction. Therefore, forest park managers are advised to enhance tourists’ experiences across the five dimensions of perceived value to foster ecological and environmental awareness and encourage active participation in environmental protection efforts.
Second, suggestions are provided to enhance the activity experience of tourists. During their visit to the forest park, tourists develop subjective evaluations of the activity experience, which subsequently influence their behavioral intentions. Therefore, enhancing the quality of the activity experience is crucial. Moreover, infrastructure positively impacts tourists’ activity experience. The extent of a scenic area’s environmental infrastructure influences the convenience for tourists in engaging in environmentally responsible behaviors [67]. The managers of Changpoling National Forest Park can prioritize the enhancement of environmental infrastructure and integrate various sports, leisure, and recreational facilities with diverse activities. This approach will offer tourists improved recreational experiences and facilitate the acquisition of ecological and environmental protection knowledge during their visit, thereby advancing the quality of their environmental experience. Knowledge of ecological and environmental protection gained through activities can further encourage tourists to engage in environmental protection actions.
Third, service providers and managers can regularly organize some activities related to forest environmental protection. For instance, activities such as exploring forest experience pavilions, identifying aromatic plants, engaging in the five senses of walking and forest bathing, attending forest concerts, participating in forest-themed games, and attending nature education seminars can assist tourists in gaining knowledge about ecological and environmental protection while relaxing and relieving stress. These activities are expected to reinforce tourists’ attitudes towards the environment and promote responsible behaviors. Moreover, those managers should accurately identify the primary types of visitor groups in urban forest parks, plan and design forest environmental protection activities based on the characteristics of these groups, and effectively address tourists’ needs, so that tourists in the participation of activities enhance the sense of intimacy with the environment in the meantime, and obtain better play satisfaction and subjective sense of well-being, so as to enhance conscious participation in the environmental protection of the mobility of the environment.

6. Conclusions

Urban forest parks are situated in the transition zone between urban built-up areas and natural scenic areas, serving both ecological protection and recreational functions. The SEM was employed to evaluate 502 valid questionnaires to empirically explore the associations among tourists’ perceived value (including resource quality, service quality, activity experience, emotional value, and tourism cost), satisfaction, subjective well-being, and environmentally responsible behaviors, using Changpoling National Forest Park in Guiyang, China, as the research area. Besides, this research validated the five sub-dimensions of tourists’ perceived value. The research results demonstrated that resource quality, service quality, emotional value, and tourism costs provided by urban forest parks imposed a pronounced effect on tourists’ satisfaction, well-being, and behaviour that is environmentally responsible. Moreover, their satisfaction and well-being imposed a pronounced and positive impact on their environmentally responsible behaviour. This research also examined the mediating function of tourists’ satisfaction and their well-being. The research results indicated that satisfaction and well-being partly mediated the association between tourists’ perceived value and their environmentally responsible behaviour. This research benefits the theoretic explorations and practices in terms of the sustainable growth of nature tourism destinations. Furthermore, for nature tourism, its scenic spots should emphasize the five segmented dimensions of tourists’ perceived value, especially the activity experience. As a result, the environmentally responsible behaviour of tourists can be effectively enhanced. Not only will this facilitate the understanding of tourist behaviour, but also the discussion of positive emotions such as tourist satisfaction and subjective well-being will make a positive contribution to the study of environmental psychology.
This paper bears some limitations which should be addressed in further study. To begin with, it selected Changpoling National Forest Park in Guiyang, Guizhou, China, and future research needs to assess and test whether these findings are potentially generalizable to urban forest parks in different countries or studies in different cultural and economic and cultural contexts to reinforce the research findings’ generalizability. Second, introducing only two mediating variables, satisfaction and subjective well-being, could not comprehensively reveal that experiences and perceptions in urban forest parks have an important influence mechanism on their attitudes and behaviors, and future research should focus on incorporating more mediating variables such as place attachment and social norms, so as to clearly elucidate the influence mechanism of perceived value on environmentally responsible behavior. Third, this research failed to examine the effects of moderating variables like gender, age, education level, and earning. Including the moderating factors in future research could enhance the study’s comprehensiveness. Fourth, the previous tourism experience may help better understand the stimulating effect of perceived value exerted on environmentally responsible behaviors. Therefore, a comparative study can be conducted to analyze the differences of non-first-time and first-time visitors to urban forest parks.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.Z. and L.W.; methodology, J.Z. and L.W.; software, J.Z. validation, J.Z. and L.W.; formal analysis, J.Z.; investigation, J.Z.; data curation, J.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, J.Z.; writing—review and editing, J.Z. and L.W.; visualization, L.W.; supervision, L.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Social Science Fund of China under Grant 21CH197, the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2023M731716], the General project of China Resources & Environment and Development Academy [070-803165].

Data Availability Statement

Data is available upon request.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to all the participants involved in this research for their support in data collection.

Conflicts of Interest

No conflict of interest is declared.

References

  1. Yu, C.-P.; Lee, H.-Y.; Luo, X. The effect of virtual reality forest and urban environments on physiological and psychological responses. Urban For. Urban Green. 2018, 35, 106–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chen, B.; Qi, X.; Qiu, Z. Recreational use of urban forest parks: A case study in Fuzhou National Forest Park, China. J. For. Res. 2018, 23, 183–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yuen, H.K.; Jenkins, G.R. Factors associated with changes in subjective well-being immediately after urban park visit. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 2020, 30, 134–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ramkissoon, H.; Smith, L.D.G.; Weiler, B. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 552–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wang, H.; Ma, Z. Study on the relationship between travel motivation and subjective well-being of cyclists on Sichuan-Tibet Route: The mediating role of travel satisfaction. Tour. Sci. 2020, 34, 53–65. [Google Scholar]
  6. Zhang, T.; Wei, C.; Nie, L. Experiencing authenticity to environmentally responsible behavior: Assessing the effects of perceived value, tourist emotion, and recollection on industrial heritage tourism. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1081464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, Q.; Yang, D.; Li, W. Driving factors of tourists’ pro-environment behavior in Forest parks: A case study of Zhangjiajie National Forest Park. Areal Res. Dev. 2018, 37, 101–106. [Google Scholar]
  8. Weng, L.; Huang, Z.; Bao, J. A model of tourism advertising effects. Tour. Manag. 2021, 85, 104278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dou, L. Tourists perceived value, satisfaction with the environment is responsible for the behavior. J. Arid Zone Resour. Environ. 2016, 30, 197–202. [Google Scholar]
  10. Liu, M. Study on the Impact of Forest Health Tourism Restoration Experience on Tourist Loyalty. Master’s Thesis, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  11. Mehrabian, A.; Russell, J.A. The basic emotional impact of environments. Percept. Motor Skill. 1974, 38, 283–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gao, Y.; Bai, K.; Ma, Y. A meta-analysis of the impact of tourists’ Happiness on their environmental responsibility behavior. Tour. Sci. 2020, 34, 16–31. [Google Scholar]
  13. He, X.; Cheng, J.; Hu, D.; Su, L. The impact mechanism of service quality on tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior. Econ. Geogr. 2021, 232–240. [Google Scholar]
  14. Russell, J.A. An Approach to Environmental Psychology; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  15. Russell, J.A.; Mehrabian, A. Distinguishing anger and anxiety in terms of emotional response factors. J. Consult. Clin. Psych. 1974, 42, 79–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Jayadi, E.I.P.; Murwani, I.A. The implementation of SOR framework (Stimulus, organism, and Response) in user behavior analysis of Instagram shop features on purchase intention. Scholars J. Eng. Technol. 2022, 10, 42–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lee, Y.Y.; Gan, C.L. Applications of SOR and para-social interactions (PSI) towards impulse buying: The Malaysian perspective. J. Mark. Anal. 2020, 8, 85–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bigne, E.; Chatzipanagiotou, K.; Ruiz, C. Pictorial content, sequence of conflicting online reviews and consumer decision-making: The stimulus-organism-response model revisited. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 115, 403–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kim, M.J.; Lee, C.-K.; Jung, T. Exploring consumer behavior in virtual reality tourism using an extended stimulus-organism-response model. J. Travel Res. 2020, 59, 69–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, L.; Shi, X. Influencing mechanism of sports tourism consumption behavior in the context of COVID-19: An empirical analysis of MOA-TAM integrated model based on S-O-R framework. Tour. Trib. 2021, 36, 52–70. [Google Scholar]
  21. Wu, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhao, Y. Traceability, Application and Prospects of SOR Theory in Tourism Research. J. Travel Forum 2024, 17, 85–95. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kashyap, R.; Bojanic, D.C. A structural analysis of value, quality, and price perceptions of business and leisure travelers. J. Travel Res. 2000, 39, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sánchez-Fernández, R.; Iniesta-Bonillo, M.Á. The concept of perceived value: A systematic review of the research. Mark. Theor. 2007, 7, 427–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gallarza, M.G.; Saura, I.G. Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty: An investigation of university students’ travel behaviour. Tour. Manag. 2006, 27, 437–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, L.; Yang, S.; Wang, D.; Ma, E. Perceived value of, and experience with, a World Heritage Site in China—The case of Kaiping Diaolou and villages in China. J. Herit. Tour. 2022, 17, 91–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Huang, Y.; Huang, F. The model, measurement and empirical research of tourist perceived value. Tour. Trib. 2007, 22, 42–47. [Google Scholar]
  27. Huang, D.; Chen, F. Summary of researches on tourist satisfaction home and abroad. J. Chongqing Technol. Bus. Univ. 2015, 32, 49–55. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ying, L. An analysis of tourists’ satisfaction and influencing factors in tourist destinations—Taking Xi’an domestic tourism market as an example. Tour. Trib. 2008, 23, 43–48. [Google Scholar]
  29. Wang, X.; Liu, Z.H.; Zhang, H. Review and forecast of tourist satisfaction research. J. Beijing Int. Stud. Univ. 2010, 32, 22–29. [Google Scholar]
  30. Lee, C.-F. Tourist satisfaction with forest recreation experience: A segment-based approach. Anatolia 2015, 26, 535–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yao, X.; Sun, Y.; Sun, B.; Huang, Y. The impact of the urban forest park recreation environment and perceived satisfaction on post-tour behavioral intention—Using Tongzhou grand canal forest park as an example. Forests 2024, 15, 330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Tian, C.; Pei, Z. Research on the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty of tourists in cultural heritage sites: An empirical analysis based on the Old Summer Palace in Beijing. J. Arid Land Resour. Environ. 2021, 35, 203–208. [Google Scholar]
  33. Filep, S.; Deery, M. Towards a picture of tourists’ happiness. Tour. Anal. 2010, 15, 399–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sheldon, K.M.; Lyubomirsky, S. Achieving sustainable new happiness: Prospects, practices, and prescriptions. Posit. Psychol. Pract. 2004, 127–145. [Google Scholar]
  35. Geng, W.; Wan, Q.; Wang, H.; Dai, Y.; Weng, L.; Zhao, M.; Lei, Y.; Duan, Y. Leisure involvement, leisure benefits, and subjective well-being of bicycle riders in an urban forest park: The moderation of age. Forests 2023, 14, 1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, Y.; Song, H.; Guo, R. A study on the causal process of virtual reality tourism and its attributes in terms of their effects on subjective well-being during COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Health R. 2021, 18, 1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kim, H.; Woo, E.; Uysal, M. Tourism experience and quality of life among elderly tourists. Tour. Manag. 2015, 46, 465–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Borden, R.J.; Schettino, A.P. Determinants of environmentally responsible behavior. J. Environ. Educ. 1979, 10, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lee, T.H.; Jan, F.-H.; Yang, C.-C. Conceptualizing and measuring environmentally responsible behaviors from the perspective of community-based tourists. Tour. Manag. 2013, 36, 454–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tonge, J.; Ryan, M.M.; Moore, S.A.; Beckley, L.E. The effect of place attachment on pro-environment behavioral intentions of visitors to coastal natural area tourist destinations. J. Travel Res. 2015, 54, 730–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Weng, L.; Zhu, Y.; Xu, X.; Yang, J.; Zheng, S.; Liu, H.; Wang, H.; Zhu, L. The influence of visitors’ recreation experience and environmental attitude on environmentally responsible behavior: A case study of an urban forest park, China. Forests 2022, 14, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Su, Y.; Wang, Y.; Sun, Y.; Min, Q.; Jiao, W. Study on the relationship between environmental responsibility behavior and food tourism preference of tourists in agricultural cultural heritage sites: A case study of rice-fish symbiosis system in Qingtian, Zhejiang. Chin. J. Eco-Agr. 2020, 28, 1414–1424. [Google Scholar]
  43. Lin, J.S.-S. The moderating role of intercultural service encounters in the relationship among tourist’s destination image, perceived value and environmentally responsible behaviors. Am. J. Tour. Manag. 2018, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  44. Liu, Q.; Wang, X.; Liu, J. Study on the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and environmental responsibility behavior of forest park visitors. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 38, 137–141. [Google Scholar]
  45. Davis, J.L.; Le, B.; Coy, A.E. Building a model of commitment to the natural environment to predict ecological behavior and willingness to sacrifice. J. Environ. Psychol. 2011, 31, 257–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Nawijn, J. Positive psychology in tourism: A critique. Ann. Tour. Res. 2016, 56, 151–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Carter, D.M. Recognizing the role of positive emotions in fostering environmentally responsible behaviors. Ecopsychology 2011, 3, 65–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Nghiem, T.P.L.; Wong, K.L.; Jeevanandam, L.; Chang, C.C.; Tan, L.Y.C.; Goh, Y.; Carrasco, L.R. Biodiverse urban forests, happy people: Experimental evidence linking perceived biodiversity, restoration, and emotional wellbeing. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 59, 127030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhang, H.; Zhang, X.; Yang, Y.; Ma, J. From nature experience to visitors’ pro-environmental behavior: The role of perceived restorativeness and well-being. J. Sustain. Tour. 2024, 32, 861–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kaida, N.; Kaida, K. Positive associations of optimism–pessimism orientation with pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being: A longitudinal study on quality of life and everyday behavior. Qual. Life Res. 2019, 28, 3323–3332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kang, N.; Wang, E. Subjective well-being research on the influence of the residents’ environmental behavior. J. Stat. Res. 2017, 34, 82–93. [Google Scholar]
  52. Albayrak, T.; Caber, M. Examining the relationship between tourist motivation and satisfaction by two competing methods. Tour. Manag. 2018, 69, 201–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sirgy, M.J.; Kruger, P.S.; Lee, D.-J.; Yu, G.B. How does a travel trip affect tourists’ life satisfaction? J. Travel Res. 2011, 50, 261–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. He, X.; Su, L.; Swanson, S.R. The service quality to subjective well-being of Chinese tourists connection: A model with replications. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 2076–2092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Chen, Y.; Fu, X.; Lehto, X.Y. Chinese tourist vacation satisfaction and subjective well-being. Appl. Res. Qual. Life 2016, 11, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Li, J. Construction and Evaluation of Sustainable Development Index System of National Forest Parks in Guizhou Province. Master’s Thesis, Guizhou University, Guiyang, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  57. Oliver, R.L. Effect of satisfaction and its antecedents on consumer preference and intention. Adv. Consum. Res. 1981, 8, 88–93. [Google Scholar]
  58. Karademas, E.C. Self-efficacy, social support and well-being: The mediating role of optimism. Pers. Indiv. Differ. 2006, 40, 1281–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Huta, V.; Ryan, R.M. Pursuing pleasure or virtue: The differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. J. Happiness Stud. 2010, 11, 735–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Tapia-Fonllem, C.; Corral-Verdugo, V.; Fraijo-Sing, B.; Durón-Ramos, M.F. Assessing sustainable behavior and its correlates: A measure of pro-ecological, frugal, altruistic and equitable actions. Sustainability 2013, 5, 711–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hair, J.F.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Mena, J.A. An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 2012, 40, 414–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Schneider, C.Q.; Wagemann, C. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  64. Weng, L.; Liang, Z.; Bao, J. The effect of tour interpretation on perceived heritage values: A comparison of tourists with and without tour guiding interpretation at a heritage destination. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2020, 16, 100431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rahmani, K.; Gnoth, J.; Mather, D. Hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: A psycholinguistic view. Tourism Manage. 2018, 69, 155–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lu, L.; Jiao, M.; Weng, L. Influence of first-time visitors’ perceptions of destination image on perceived value and destination loyalty: A case study of grand canal Forest Park, Beijing. Forests 2023, 14, 504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Wang, C.; Zhang, J.; Yu, P.; Hu, H. The theory of planned behavior as a model for understanding tourists’ responsible environmental behaviors: The moderating role of environmental interpretations. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 194, 425–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Huang, Z.; Weng, L.; Bao, J. How do visitors respond to sustainable tourism interpretations? A further investigation into content and media format. Tour. Manag. 2022, 92, 104535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Forests 15 01730 g001
Figure 1. The conceptual framework for this research.
Figure 1. The conceptual framework for this research.
Forests 15 01730 g001
Forests 15 01730 g002
Figure 2. Geographic location of Changpoling International Forest Park, Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China.
Figure 2. Geographic location of Changpoling International Forest Park, Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China.
Forests 15 01730 g002
Table 1. Profile of the sample.
Table 1. Profile of the sample.
Frequency (n = 502)Percentage (%)
GenderMale25450.60
Female24849.40
Age18–22 265.18
23–35 17534.86
35–45 14629.08
46–559218.33
56–65 397.77
Over 65 244.78
EducationHigh school or below173.39
Associate degree9118.13
Bachelor’s degree25751.20
Master’s degree or above13727.29
OccupationEnterprise employee25651.00
Self-employment or owner5911.75
Student132.59
Government officials9418.73
Professionals, teachers, or technical5911.75
Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries personnel214.18
Personal monthlyLess than 3000132.59
Income (RMB)3001–45005811.55
4501–600017434.66
6001–750014729.28
7501–10,0005510.96
10,001–15,000397.77
More than 15,000163.19
Table 2. Analyses of reliability and validity.
Table 2. Analyses of reliability and validity.
VariantMean
(SD)		Factor LoadingCRAVECronbach’s α
Quality of resources 0.9150.7300.872
    Rich and diverse flora and fauna3.71 (1.313)0.883
    Unique landscape modeling3.63 (1.297)0.846
    Good ecological environment3.69 (1.295)0.864
    Comfortable and pleasant microclimate3.79 (1.203)0.824
Quality of service 0.8530.6600.833
    Convenient public transportation3.54 (1.360)0.848
    Easy access to information3.51 (1.362)0.808
    The quality of service is excellent3.52 (1.307)0.781
Activity Experience 0.9000.7500.778
    Easy-to-understand service facilities3.92 (1.115)0.840
    Leisure facilities are comfortable and safe3.99 (1.124)0.868
    Convenient and diversified sports facilities3.91 (1.138)0.889
Sentimental value 0.8350.6280.812
    You can experience new and exciting things3.59 (1.280)0.776
    Make new friends3.63 (1.270)0.821
    Enhancing relationships with family and friends3.63 (1.268)0.781
Tourist cost 0.8560.6660.809
    It is worth the time3.70 (1.237)0.856
    It is worth the money3.73 (1.251)0.820
    It is worth the effort3.69 (1.212)0.770
Tourism satisfaction 0.8130.5920.807
    Enjoyed my time in this forest park.3.80 (1.196)0.752
    This forest park is well worth a visit3.87 (1.215)0.777
    Love this forest park.3.74 (1.217)0.778
Subjective well-being 0.8800.6470.876
    I had a great time at Forest Park.3.41 (1.349)0.822
    A trip to Forest Park makes me feel satisfied with my life3.46 (1.297)0.798
    A trip to Forest Park gave my life meaning3.58 (1.245)0.798
    A trip to Forest Park has helped me harmonize myrelationships.3.47 (1.349)0.798
Environmentally responsible behavior 0.8610.6740.853
    Appreciate the responsibility of caring for the park’s environment3.45 (1.411)0.843
    Maximize environmentally friendly behaviors in the park3.47 (1.282)0.816
    Discussing environmental issues in the most area with fellow travelers3.45 (1.348)0.803
Note: Model fit indices: χ2/df = 1.121, NFI = 0.946, CFI = 0.994, GFI = 0.956, AGFI = 0.944, RMSEA = 0.016, SRMR = 0.026. The entire factor loads exceed 0.5, and the values of p (p < 0.001) are significant.
Table 3. Discriminant validity and variable correlations.
Table 3. Discriminant validity and variable correlations.
VariablesQuality of ResourcesQuality of ServiceActivity ExperienceSentimental ValueTourist CostTourist SatisfactionSubjective Well-BeingEnvironmentally Responsible Behavior
Quality of resources0.855
Quality of service0.6360.813
Activity experience0.0180.0010.866
Sentimental value0.5610.5610.0120.793
Tourist cost0.6540.6850.0280.5870.816
Tourist satisfaction0.6340.6510.0610.5810.6440.769
Subjective well-being0.6890.7010.0470.6200.7090.7010.804
Environmentally responsible behavior0.7180.7390.0650.6610.7500.7510.7800.821
Note: The bolded diagonal values means the root mean square of the AVE, and the correlation coefficients between the dimensions are below the diagonal.
Table 4. Standardization path coefficients and hypothesis verification results.
Table 4. Standardization path coefficients and hypothesis verification results.
Hypothesis PathsEstimateE.tpResults
H1a: Resource quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction0.1610.0433.727***Supported
H1b: Service quality imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction0.2030.0533.797***Supported
H1c: Activity experience imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction0.0360.0291.2270.220Unsupported
H1d: Emotional value imposes a significant positive influence on tourist satisfaction0.1680.0533.1720.002Supported
H1e: Tourism cost imposes a significant negative influence on tourist satisfaction0.1610.0552.9020.004Supported
H2a: Resource quality imposes a significant positive influence on subjective well-being0.1680.0453.778***Supported
H2b: Service quality imposes a significant positive influence on subjective well-being0.1920.0563.459***Supported
H2c: Activity experience imposes a significant positive influence on subjective well-being0.0200.0290.6690.503Unsupported
H2d: Emotional values impose a significant positive influence on subjective well-being0.1500.0542.7670.006Supported
H2e: Travel cost imposes a significant negative influence on subjective well-being0.1990.0573.498***Supported
H3a: Resource quality imposes a significant positive influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.1290.0452.8420.004Supported
H3b: Service quality imposes a significant positive influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.1730.0573.0360.002Supported
H3c: Activity experience imposes a significant positive influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.0310.0291.0760.282Unsupported
H3d: Emotional values impose a significant positive influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.1490.0552.7080.007Supported
H3e: Tourism costs impose a significant negative influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.1860.0583.1920.001Supported
H4: Tourist satisfaction imposes a significant positive influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.2770.0753.690***Supported
H5: Subjective well-being imposes a significant positive influence on environmentally responsible behavior0.2170.0683.1840.001Supported
H6: Tourist satisfaction imposes a significant positive influence on subjective well-being0.2640.0733.643***Supported
Note: *** p < 0.001.
Table 5. Mediation effect analysis results.
Table 5. Mediation effect analysis results.
Hypothesis PathsPath
Effects		Size of Effect Bias-Corrected 95% CIPercentile 95% CI Zp
LowerUpperLowerUpper
Total effect: Perceived value → environmentally responsible behaviorTotal1.5701.3321.8751.3311.873***
Direct effect: Perceived value → environmentally responsible behaviorDirect0.9190.6171.3260.6201.329***
Total indirect effects: Perceived value → Environmentally responsible behaviorIndirect0.6510.3920.9070.3770.892***
H7a: Perceived value → Tourist satisfaction → Environmentally responsible behaviorIndirect0.2960.0700.5840.0490.5610.013
H7b: Perceived value → Subjective well-being of tourists → Environmentally responsible behaviorIndirect0.1890.0570.3810.0440.3590.003
H7c: Perceived value → Tourist satisfaction→ Subjective well-being → Environmentally responsible behaviorIndirect0.1660.0530.3500.0380.3210.003
Note: *** p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhao, J.; Weng, L. The Impact of Tourists’ Perceived Value on Environmentally Responsible Behavior in an Urban Forest Park: The Mediating Effects of Satisfaction and Subjective Well-Being. Forests 2024, 15, 1730. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15101730

AMA Style

Zhao J, Weng L. The Impact of Tourists’ Perceived Value on Environmentally Responsible Behavior in an Urban Forest Park: The Mediating Effects of Satisfaction and Subjective Well-Being. Forests. 2024; 15(10):1730. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15101730

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhao, Jiali, and Lisheng Weng. 2024. "The Impact of Tourists’ Perceived Value on Environmentally Responsible Behavior in an Urban Forest Park: The Mediating Effects of Satisfaction and Subjective Well-Being" Forests 15, no. 10: 1730. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15101730

APA Style

Zhao, J., & Weng, L. (2024). The Impact of Tourists’ Perceived Value on Environmentally Responsible Behavior in an Urban Forest Park: The Mediating Effects of Satisfaction and Subjective Well-Being. Forests, 15(10), 1730. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15101730

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop