Next Article in Journal
Correction: Gao, X.; Lee, G.M. A Novel Reverse Logistics Network Design Considering Multi-Level Investments for Facility Reconstruction with Environmental Considerations. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2710
Previous Article in Journal
Validating the Community Forest Intention Model: Exploring Tourist Experience, Satisfaction, and Sustainable Intentions in Community-Based Ecotourism
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 17
Issue 17
10.3390/su17177645
sustainability-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

How Power Distance Belief Shapes Ecotourism Intention: The Moderating Role of Conspicuous Versus Experiential Content on Social Media in Promoting Sustainable Travel

by
Hao He
,
Jiayi Cheng
,
Xiang Zou
* and
Shiqi Xing
School of Economics and Management, Changsha University of Science and Technology, Changsha 410076, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2025, 17(17), 7645; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177645
Submission received: 23 July 2025 / Revised: 20 August 2025 / Accepted: 21 August 2025 / Published: 25 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Tourism, Culture, and Heritage)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

As environmental conservation and community development gain importance, ecotourism has emerged as a significant segment of the global tourism industry. However, the cultural factors that drive tourist behavior in this domain remain underexplored. This research examined how power distance belief (PDB), interacts with the type of tourism content shared on social media (conspicuous versus experiential) to influence travelers’ ecotourism intentions. To test our hypotheses, we conducted two experimental studies using a 2 (PDB: high vs. low) × 2 (tourism content type: conspicuous vs. experiential) between-subjects design. Participants for both experiments (N = 480) were recruited through an online survey platform. In the experiments, participants’ PDB was situationally primed, and tourism content type was manipulated using specifically created fictitious posts adapted from a real social media platform. Other key variables were measured using validated multi-item scales. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and moderated mediation analysis (PROCESS Model 15). The findings reveal that travelers with high PDB show higher ecotourism intentions when exposed to conspicuous content, whereas travelers with low PDB exhibit higher intentions when exposed to experiential content. This interactive effect is mediated by travelers’ social comparison motives. These findings offer novel insights into the motivations underlying ecotourism behavior by identifying distinct pathways through which social media can promote sustainable tourism behaviors, and provide practical guidance for eco-destination managers to design targeted marketing strategies that encourage sustainable tourism practices across different consumer segments.

1. Introduction

Ecotourism, a form of responsible travel to natural areas aimed at preserving natural and cultural heritage while providing economic development for local communities [1], has become an important sector within the global tourism industry [2]. The worldwide ecotourism market, valued at USD 56.53 billion in 2024, is anticipated to reach USD 195.77 billion by 2033 [3]. However, despite its growing popularity, the psychological and cultural factors that drive ecotourism remain underexplored [4]. While most existing research has confirmed that environmental values are key predictors of ecotourism engagement [5,6,7,8], emerging evidence suggests that motives for status enhancement may also contribute to travelers’ interest in ecotourism [9]. This highlights an urgent need for further studies to identify the complex factors that affect travelers’ willingness to visit ecotourism destinations.
To bridge this research gap, this research attempts to investigate whether and how power distance belief impacts ecotourism intention, thereby deepening our understanding of ecotourism motivations from a cultural value perspective. Power distance belief (PDB), a personal cultural value characterized by individuals’ acceptance and expectation of unequal power distribution in society [10], has been shown to significantly influence consumer behavior across various domains [11,12,13,14]. PDB is particularly relevant to ecotourism because ecotourism inherently involves a tension between environmental consciousness and potential status signaling opportunities [9,15]. Individuals with high PDB are more likely to accept inequality as natural and legitimate, and often seek to elevate their social standing through consumption [16,17], such as exclusive travel experiences. In contrast, those with low PDB prefer egalitarian interactions, question authority, and value equality in social systems [18], potentially viewing ecotourism as a means of authentic environmental or local community engagement rather than status display. Given these differences, we propose that PDB may shape how travelers evaluate ecotourism options, and we argue that this effect is contingent on the content travelers are exposed to on social media platforms.
Social media platforms increasingly function as primary tools in travel decision-making processes [19], with user-generated content fundamentally shaping the image of ecotourism destinations [20] and influencing travelers’ choices. The nature of content shared on these platforms varies considerably [21,22]. Previous research on tourism has differentiated between two types of content sharing on social media: conspicuous content and experiential content [23,24,25]. Conspicuous content highlights exclusive or luxurious aspects of tourism experiences, such as visiting rare or restricted destinations or participating in unique or costly activities [21,26]. By contrast, experiential content focuses on the emotional aspects of tourism, emphasizing authentic connections with local communities and meaningful engagement with natural landscapes [25,27]. We argue that these content types may interact with travelers’ cultural values to shape their ecotourism intentions. Specifically, individuals with high PDB may be more influenced by conspicuous content that aligns with their desire for status signaling, whereas those with low PDB may resonate more with experiential content that emphasizes egalitarian and authentic environmental engagement. Accordingly, this study investigates the link between PDB and ecotourism intention, and explores how the type of ecotourism content shared on social media (conspicuous vs. experiential) moderates this relationship.
This research has made several contributions to the existing literature. First, it contributes to an emerging debate on the drivers of ecotourism by establishing a novel link between PDB and ecotourism intentions. While prior research has predominantly examined the positive influence of environment-related factors like travelers’ environmental values and knowledge [8,28,29], recent studies suggest that conspicuous motives also serve as important drivers [9]. By extending this inquiry, this study examines the antecedents and moderation conditions of ecotourism intention from the cultural value perspective of PDB. The results demonstrate that ecotourism behavior is influenced by both environmental and status-driven motives, thereby expanding our understanding of motivations beyond traditional environmental factors. Second, this study extends research on how PDB affects consumption behaviors. Previous studies have shown that individuals with high PDB feel less responsible for helping others [14], which implies that they may also have a lower intention for pro-environmental activities like ecotourism [30]. However, this study demonstrates that when ecotourism is framed as a status-signaling opportunity (e.g., through exposure to conspicuous ecotourism content on social media), consumers with high PDB may actually exhibit higher ecotourism intentions. This finding adds evidence that the influence of PDB on consumer behavior is more nuanced and context-dependent than previously understood [31]. Third, this study extends research on how travel information shared on social media influences ecotourism intentions. By distinguishing between conspicuous tourism content and experiential tourism content [21,22,23], this study reveals that these content types have differential effects on travelers’ ecotourism intentions depending on their PDB. These results provide new insights into the mechanisms underlying social media’s influence on destination choice.
From a practical perspective, the findings help practitioners develop more effective market segmentation strategies by understanding how PDB influences ecotourism preferences, enabling them to tailor offerings accordingly. Additionally, this study provides specific guidance for social media marketing strategies by revealing how conspicuous versus experiential content resonates differently among individuals with varying PDB levels.
Formally, this research aims to examine how PDB and tourism content type shared on social media interact to influence travelers’ ecotourism intentions, with the goal of identifying effective pathways for promoting sustainable travel across diverse cultural segments. We expect to find that (1) the relationship between PDB and ecotourism intention depends on the content type travelers are exposed to on social media; high-PDB travelers respond more favorably when exposed to conspicuous content, while low-PDB travelers respond more favorably when exposed to experiential content; and (2) the social comparison motive mediates these effects. These anticipated findings will provide both theoretical insights into cultural drivers of sustainable tourism and practical guidance for developing targeted marketing strategies that effectively promote ecotourism practices.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Ecotourism and Its Drivers

Ecotourism is widely recognized as a nature-centered tourism model that balances conservation with development [1]. By emphasizing sustainability and cultural respect, it fosters harmonious relationships among tourists, locals, and nature [32]. Prior research suggests that ecotourism includes three key principles [33,34,35]: first, ecotourism requires tourism activities to be conducted with low environmental impact while contributing to biodiversity conservation. Second, ecotourism should provide direct economic returns to local communities. Third, ecotourism should enhance travelers’ and local residents’ awareness and understanding of the environment and culture through experiential learning, thereby fostering their sense of responsibility for environmental protection [36].
Understanding what motivates people to choose ecotourism has been a key area of ecotourism research. Given the unique features of ecotourism, prior research has primarily examined environmental and social responsibility-related factors, such as environmental concerns, beliefs, attitudes, knowledge, and personal values [5,6,7,37,38,39]. This stream of research suggests that travelers who care more about the environment and feel connected to nature are more likely to choose ecotourism [40]; their primary goal is to enjoy natural areas while supporting conservation efforts [41].
While environmental concerns remain important, recent studies indicate that ecotourism involves many other motivations, such as escaping daily routines, meeting new people, and self-development [42]. Notably, in recent years, scholars have begun to examine how symbolic and conspicuous consumption influences ecotourism [9]. Based on conspicuous consumption theory [43], research has confirmed that tourism activities are increasingly viewed as symbols of identity and means of social expression [23,24]. In the digital age, the rapid development of social media has turned the pursuit of social return into a powerful driver for people’s travel choices [44]. Consequently, travelers are not only seeking personal experiences but also pursuing opportunities to showcase their lifestyle choices and social status through their travel activities [22].
Recent research also indicates that ecotourism can serve as a status symbol, as it allows individuals to demonstrate their financial standing through premium experiences, exhibit moral superiority through environmental awareness and social responsibility, and showcase unique experiences in remote or exclusive destinations with limited accessibility [45,46]. In the following, we will discuss how motivations, ranging from environmental responsibility to symbolic consumption, influence ecotourism choices differently depending on travelers’ PDB levels.

2.2. Power Distance Belief and Ecotourism Intention

Power distance belief (PDB) refers to individuals’ acceptance of hierarchy and inequality within a society [10,11]. Individuals with high PDB tend to accept and adhere to hierarchical structures and power differentials in society, whereas those with low PDB prefer egalitarian values and are less likely to accept authority and status-based distinctions [47,48]. The concept of PDB is derived from the notion of Power Distance in Hofstede’s cultural dimension theory [49,50]. Initial research on power distance primarily focused on national and societal levels, examining cross-cultural differences [14]. Later studies suggest that power distance also varies significantly among individuals and can be primed situationally, serving similar psychological functions as country-level power distance [51,52].
PDB has been shown to exert significant influence on consumer decision-making across different domains, such as uniqueness consumption [13], preference for status brands [53], charitable behavior [14], responses to educational marketing messages [51], avoidance tendencies in purchasing decisions [11], and consumer responses to company moral transgressions [52]. However, the influence of PDB on ecotourism intentions has been rarely discussed.
Research on PDB suggests a potential negative association with ecotourism. Studies have shown that individuals with high PDB tend to exhibit lower ethical sensitivity. For example, individuals with high PDB are more accustomed to hierarchy and inequality, which reduces their sense of responsibility to help the disadvantaged and decreases their charitable behavior [14]. These individuals also tend to show lower empathy toward the vulnerable and exhibit weaker negative reactions to corporate moral transgressions [52]. Similarly, employees with high PDB are more likely to tolerate unfair environments [54].
Moreover, research on consumer decision-making reveals that consumers with high PDB place greater emphasis on the status-enhancement function of consumption rather than the consumption experience itself. For instance, their willingness to purchase luxury goods increases under conditions where these items clearly signal status, such as in public settings [55] or when brand logos are easily recognizable [16]. Similarly, when choosing educational products, they focus on education’s role in achieving social advancement rather than personal growth [51]. These findings suggest fundamental conflicts between high PDB and the core principles of ecotourism, which emphasize environmental protection, support for community economies, and authentic natural experiences. As a result, individuals with high PDB may show less interest in ecotourism and prefer luxury tourism instead.
Conversely, individuals with low PDB tend to value equality and democracy, which may translate into greater concern for environmental justice [14,30], and stronger criticism of environmentally harmful companies [52]. These traits, combined with their inclination to seek experiences that foster self-discovery [51], make ecotourism particularly appealing to them.
Despite potential value conflicts, high PDB may serve as a powerful driving force for ecotourism intentions under specific conditions. Social comparison theory identifies two forms of social comparison: vertical and horizontal [56,57]. Vertical comparison involves individuals distinguishing themselves from others across social hierarchies to demonstrate superiority in status, role, or achievement [58,59]; horizontal comparison involves individuals making comparisons within the same hierarchy to highlight their unique values and traits [59]. According to research on PDB, individuals with high PDB are particularly sensitive to status differentials [53], which makes them engage more frequently in vertical social comparisons [13]. They tend to prioritize improving their standing within the social hierarchy, which in turn fosters a desire for status-signaling products, such as luxury goods [53,60] or unique consumption experiences [13].
Ecotourism is often associated with remote, pristine, and strictly protected areas [42], which gives it a sense of exclusivity and distinctiveness. As environmental conservation becomes an increasingly mainstream societal value, ecotourism may also acquire high cultural capital [9]. Consequently, marketing frameworks and narratives become especially critical for appealing to consumers with different PDB. When an ecotourism product is presented as unique or difficult to access, it can effectively appeal to high-PDB individuals by aligning with their tendency to make upward social comparisons. Building on this understanding, the following section will discuss how tourism information on social media shapes the ecotourism decisions of consumers with varying PDBs.

2.3. Moderating Role of Conspicuous Content and Experiential Content

In the digital age, social media platforms have become an important source of information for travel decision-making [22,27]. Travelers share text, images, audio, and video content on social media to document and showcase their travel experiences and to share travel knowledge [61]. These personal stories help shape travelers’ perceptions of destinations and serve as a window for others to learn about different places [27]. As a result, social media now plays a key role in how individuals search for travel information and decide on destinations [62].
Research on tourism has identified exhibiting and bragging as two distinct sharing practices [25]. Exhibiting is a form of sharing practice involving documenting and presenting tourism experiences to others, while bragging refers to a form of sharing practice that emphasizes superiority and aims at boasting about a tourism experience [25]. This classification is also supported by other studies. For instance, travelers can describe and present their feelings, emotions, and fantasies about tourism to share information or maintain connection with other people [63]; they may view tourism as an inward hedonic experience which could convey their taste and self-concept [44,64]. Meanwhile, travelers can also display their tourism experience with symbols of wealth and social status to showcase superiority [64], viewing tourism sharing as a way to brag and project social status [21,44,64]. Prior research also suggested that travelers carefully select materials from their travel experiences to achieve different sharing behaviors [21,44]; consequently, travel content shared on social media also presents diverse characteristics.
Building on these streams of research, ecotourism content shared on social media can be categorized into two main types: experiential content and conspicuous content [21]. Experiential content refers to posts that aim to share authentic travel experiences, provide practical information, and build emotional connections. This type of content focuses on details, stories, insights, and discoveries during the trip [61]. It is more likely to trigger deeper emotional resonance and meaningful discussions, such as reflections on cultural differences or the purpose of travel [65]. In contrast, conspicuous content is primarily intended to showcase one’s lifestyle and social status, often aiming to attract admiration [23]. Such posts tend to highlight elements with clear symbolic value [22] and are crafted to present a flawless, idealized version of life to achieve a sense of superiority [21]. Notably, conspicuous and experiential content reflect how travelers choose to present the features of a destination based on their personal intentions, rather than an absolute classification of destination characteristics themselves [9]. As Li and Stodolska [23] point out, any destination can be portrayed through either a conspicuous or an experiential lens. For example, even remote destinations described as unremarkable, ordinary, lowkey, or obscure can still enhance one’s status depending on how they are framed.
We propose that in the context of ecotourism, these two different content frames will moderate the relationship between PDB and ecotourism intentions, with this interactive effect mediated through travelers’ social comparison motives. Individuals with high PDB view social inequality as a natural and legitimate foundation of societal order. This acceptance of hierarchy makes them highly sensitive to differences in social status and drives a continuous, status-oriented social comparison motivation [13]. They are more likely to believe that conspicuous consumption is an effective way to enhance one’s social standing [66], with upward social comparison serving as an important driving force that motivates them to imitate and strive for status display [57,67]. When high PDB individuals are exposed to conspicuous ecotourism content on social media, where ecotourism is portrayed as a symbol of status [66], this matches their status-driven comparison needs. As a result, they may perceive ecotourism as a viable path to gaining higher social status, thereby increasing their intention to travel to such destinations. Conversely, individuals with low PDB believe that all people are born equal and advocate for equal rights [11]. They seek personal growth and experiences that align with their internal values, such as environmental protection, rather than external symbols of status [58]. Under such circumstances, conspicuous content seriously conflicts with their values of equality and environmental protection [31]. This inconsistency ultimately fails to inspire intentions for traveling to these ecotourism destinations.
When exposed to experiential ecotourism content, which lacks explicit symbols of hierarchy and status, the link between status comparison motivation and travel intention could be weakened among high PDB viewers. Conversely, such content resonates well with low PDB individuals, who value authenticity, community contribution, and personal development. This alignment enhances their travel intention. Our conceptual model is illustrated in Figure 1.
While prior research has separately examined PDB effects on consumer behavior [11,12,13] and tourism content sharing on social media [21,23,25], our hypotheses represent the first theoretical integration of these frameworks in the ecotourism domain. Thus, we propose the following hypotheses:
H1: 
Power distance belief and ecotourism content sharing on social media will interact to influence travelers’ ecotourism intentions.
H1a: 
When exposed to conspicuous ecotourism content, travelers with high PDB will have higher ecotourism intentions compared to those with low PDB.
H1b: 
When exposed to experiential ecotourism content, travelers with low PDB will show higher ecotourism intentions compared to those with high PDB.
H2: 
The interaction effect of PDB and ecotourism content sharing on social media on tourism intentions is mediated by the activation of travelers’ social comparison motives.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study 1: Moderating Effect of Tourism Content Type on PDB

3.1.1. Procedures

The aim of Study 1 was to examine the interaction effect between travelers’ PDB and type of tourism content in the conceptual model proposed by the authors. Study 1 adopted a quantitative methodology using a scenario-based experiment as the research approach. A 2 (PDB: high vs. low) × 2 (tourism content type: conspicuous vs. experiential) between-subjects design was employed. In Study 1, posts about ecotourism destinations published on the Xiaohongshu platform were used as the experimental background. Xiaohongshu is among the largest social media platforms in China for sharing travel experiences. To control for the potential influence of differences among real tourism destinations on the experimental results, we used a fictitious ecotourism destination in the study.
The experiment consisted of four parts. The first part involved the manipulation of PDB. Participants were then presented with posts featuring either conspicuous or experiential tourism content in the second part. The third part of the experiment measured participants’ ecotourism intentions. Finally, participants provided demographic information.

3.1.2. Instruments

All construct measures were adapted from validated scales in existing literature. Scale properties, including their sources, sample items, and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, are presented in Table 1 for both studies.
Manipulation of PDB: Following the prior research [51,55], participants were asked to read an article titled “Cultural Awareness Month” to prime their PDB. In the low-PDB (high-PDB) condition, the article presented values associated with an egalitarian (hierarchical) society, along with an image of a balanced scale (pyramid). The effectiveness of the manipulation of PDB was measured with a three-item scale adapted from Tu et al. [51] (e.g., “at the moment, I mainly believe”).
Manipulation of tourism content type: Both types of tourism content were manipulated with a post that comprised photos and text. We conducted a pretest to ensure that the selected images appropriately represented the characteristics of each content type. We recruited 50 participants through the Credamo.com platform to evaluate the categorization of the relevant images downloaded from Xiaohongshu. Thirty images were rated to assess the level of conspicuousness and experiential features. After viewing the images, participants assessed the degree of conspicuousness and the experiential nature of each image. Images for conspicuous or experiential tourism content were then selected based on the ranking of evaluation scores. In the conspicuous content condition, we used a passage with a boastful tone to describe the travel activities; in the experiential content condition, we used a passage to describe the emotional experiences during the journey (see Supplementary Materials). Following the approaches of Phillips et al. [24] and Köchling [68], we conducted a manipulation check to assess whether the tourism content was perceived as intended. We used two 7-point scales to assess perceptions of conspicuous tourism content (e.g., “Visiting this destination signifies social status and wealth”). We also used two 7-point scales to assess perceptions of experiential tourism content (e.g., “I imagine how good I would feel when visiting this destination”).
Measurement of key variables: We assessed participants’ ecotourism intention using two 7-point items adapted from Yao et al. [22] (e.g., “I would consider traveling to the destination shown in these photos”).

3.1.3. Data Analysis

A total of 160 participants were recruited via the Credamo.com in exchange for monetary compensation, of whom 104 were female, accounting for 65% of the sample (Mage = 29.96, SD = 8.14). Credamo.com is a widely recognized online survey platform used extensively in academic research within China. We conducted a post hoc power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.7 to assess the adequacy of the current sample size. With the present sample (N = 160), the statistical power to detect the interaction effect (Cohen’s f = 0.33, η p 2 = 0.097) was 0.98, which is well above the conventional threshold of 0.80 [69]. This result indicates that the sample size in Study 1 was sufficient. The demographic characteristics of the participants are presented in Table 2.
This study used IBM SPSS 20 for data analysis. Manipulation checks were conducted for PDB and tourism information types. The results suggest that, compared to those in the low-PDB condition, participants in the high-PDB condition perceived social hierarchy to be significantly more important (Mlow = 2.16, SD = 1.25, Mhigh = 4.96, SD = 1.63, t = −12.20, p < 0.001). Participants exposed to experiential tourism content viewed the content as more experiential (Mexperiential = 5.68, SD = 0.76; Mconspicuous = 5.07, SD = 0.99; t = 4.34, p < 0.001); while participants exposed to the conspicuous tourism content viewed the content as more conspicuous (Mexperiential = 3.58, SD = 1.37; Mconspicuous = 4.73, SD = 1.56; t = −4.95, p < 0.001). These results confirm that the manipulations of both PDB and tourism content type were successful.
Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients for all measurement scales in Study 1 exceeded 0.7 (see Table 1), well above the recommended threshold of 0.6, indicating good internal consistency reliability [70,71]. Results of ANOVA with ecotourism intention as dependent variable and PDB and tourism content type as independent variable showed that neither PDB nor tourism content type had a significant effect (ps > 0.54). However, their interaction effect was significant (F (1, 156) = 16.80, p < 0.001; η2 = 0.097; Figure 2). Results of simple main effect analysis revealed that, when exposed to conspicuous content, participants with high PDB showed significantly higher ecotourism intentions than those with low PDB (Mlow = 5.46, SD = 1.15, Mhigh = 6.09, SD = 0.64, F (1, 156) = 11.17, p = 0.001). When exposed to experiential content, participants with high PDB showed significantly lower ecotourism intentions than those with low PDB (Mlow = 6.00, SD = 0.76, Mhigh = 5.54, SD = 0.72, F (1, 156) = 6.12, p = 0.014). Additionally, for participants with high PDB, conspicuous tourism content was more effective in promoting travel intentions compared to experiential tourism content (Mexperiential = 5.54, SD = 0.72; Mconspicuous = 6.09, SD = 0.64; F (1, 156) = 8.63, p = 0.004). For participants with low PDB, experiential tourism content was more effective in promoting travel intentions than conspicuous content (Mexperiential = 6.00, SD = 0.76; Mconspicuous = 5.46, SD = 1.15; F (1, 156) = 8.24, p = 0.005).

3.2. Study 2: Moderated Mediation Effect of Social Comparison Motive

3.2.1. Procedures

Study 2 aimed to examine the mediating role of the social comparison motive as proposed in our conceptual model, while further validating the interaction effect between PDB and tourism content types. A quantitative methodology featuring a scenario-based experiment was adopted as the research approach. Study 2 employed a 2 (PDB: high vs. low) × 2 (tourism content type: conspicuous vs. experiential) between-subjects design. This study employed a similar procedure to Study 1. Posts about a fictitious ecotourism destination published on the Xiaohongshu platform were used as the experimental background, with thematic modifications compared to Study 1 (see Supplementary Materials). Participants were asked to complete four tasks. In the first section, the manipulation of PDB was carried out. Then, in the second section, the manipulation of tourism information was conducted. After that, participants rated their ecotourism intention and social comparison motive. Finally, manipulation checks were completed and demographic information was provided.

3.2.2. Instruments

Manipulation of PDB: Study 2 used the same approach to manipulate PDB and tourism information as in Study 1. Participants were asked to read an article titled “Cultural Awareness Month” to prime their PDB. The effectiveness of the manipulation of PDB was measured with a three-item scale as used in Study 1.
Manipulation of tourism content type: Tourism content type was manipulated using posts with combinations of pictures and text descriptions. We conducted a manipulation check to assess whether the tourism content was perceived as intended. We used two 7-point scales as used in Study 1 to assess perceptions of conspicuous tourism content and perceptions of experiential tourism content.
Measurement of key variables: We assessed participants’ ecotourism intention with the same scale in Study 1, and the social comparison motive with three 7-point scales adapted from Qin and Wang [13] (e.g., “I often compare myself to others to make myself feel better”, see Table 1).

3.2.3. Data Analysis

A total of 320 participants were recruited via the Credamo.com for monetary compensation; 171 were female, accounting for 53% of the sample. We conducted a post hoc power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.7 to assess the adequacy of the sample size. With the current sample size (N = 320), the statistical power to detect the interaction effect (Cohen’s f = 0.212, η p 2 = 0.043) was 0.96, substantially exceeding the conventional threshold of 0.80 [69]. This indicates that the sample size for Study 2 was sufficient. Participants’ demographic characteristics are presented in Table 3.
Study 2 used IBM SPSS 20 for data analysis. Manipulation checks were conducted for PDB and tourism information types. The results indicated that the manipulation of PDB was successful (Mlow = 2.44, SD = 1.62, Mhigh = 4.64, SD = 1.92, t = −11.12, p < 0.001). The results of the manipulation check also indicated that the manipulations of tourism information types were successful. Participants exposed to experiential tourism content perceived the content as more experiential (Mexperiential = 5.78, SD = 0.90; Mconspicuous = 5.23, SD = 1.08; t = 5.03, p < 0.001). Conversely, participants exposed to the conspicuous tourism content perceived the content as more conspicuous (Mexperiential = 4.21, SD = 1.67; Mconspicuous = 4.83, SD = 1.62; t = −3.38, p = 0.001).
Consistent with Study 1, all Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients in Study 2 surpassed 0.7 (see Table 1), confirming adequate scale reliability [70,71]. Results of ANOVA on ecotourism intentions revealed that neither PDB nor tourism content type had a significant effect (ps > 0.67). However, their interaction effect was significant (F (1, 316) = 14.27, p < 0.001; η2 = 0.043; Figure 3). Results of simple main effect analysis showed that, when exposed to conspicuous content, participants with high PDB showed significantly higher ecotourism intentions than those with low PDB (Mlow = 5.25, SD = 1.31, Mhigh = 5.76, SD = 1.11, F (1, 316) = 8.23, p = 0.004). When exposed to experiential content, participants with high PDB showed significantly lower ecotourism intentions than those with low PDB (Mlow = 5.67, SD = 0.96, Mhigh = 5.23, SD = 1.06, F (1, 316) = 6.15, p = 0.014). Additionally, for participants with high PDB, conspicuous tourism content promoted ecotourism intentions more significantly compared to experiential tourism content (Mexperiential = 5.23, SD = 1.06; Mconspicuous = 5.76, SD = 1.11; F (1, 316) = 8.86, p = 0.003). For participants with low PDB, experiential tourism content was more effective in promoting ecotourism intentions than conspicuous content (Mexperiential = 5.67, SD = 0.96; Mconspicuous = 5.25, SD = 1.31; F (1, 316) = 5.64, p = 0.018).
We ran a mediation analysis in SPSS (PROCESS, Model 15) with 5000 bootstrap samples and 95% confidence intervals, considering PDB as independent variable (0 = low PDB, 1 = high PDB), ecotourism intentions as dependent variable, social comparison motives as mediator, and ecotourism content type as moderator (0 = experiential, 1 = conspicuous). Results suggested that the moderated mediation effect was significant (index of moderated mediation = 0.1898, SE = 0.0901, 95% CI = [0.0278, 0.3817]; Table 4). However, when examining the conditional indirect effects, the indirect effect of PDB on ecotourism intentions through social comparison motive was insignificant in the experiential content condition (β = −0.0955, SE = 0.0611, 95% CI = [−0.2191, 0.0212]), nor in the conspicuous content condition (β = 0.0943, SE = 0.0605, 95% CI = [−0.0155, 0.2281]; Table 5).
To further probe the interaction effects of social comparison motive and ecotourism content type on ecotourism intentions, we performed a simple slope analysis to assess the effect of social comparison on ecotourism intentions at each level of content type. The results revealed that, under the experiential content condition, social comparison had a marginally significant negative effect on ecotourism intentions (β = −0.3434, SE = 0.1825, p = 0.0608). Conversely, under the conspicuous content condition, the effect of social comparison on ecotourism intentions was significantly positive (β = 0.4106, SE = 0.1826, p = 0.0252).

4. Discussion

4.1. Summary of Empirical Findings

This research examined how PDB and types of ecotourism content on social media (conspicuous vs. experiential) interact to influence travelers’ ecotourism intentions. Through two experiments, our findings reveal that the effect of travelers’ PDB on ecotourism intentions is contingent on the characteristics of ecotourism content they encounter on social media. Furthermore, our findings suggest that the interaction effect is mediated by social comparison motivation.
Study 1 provided strong support for H1a and H1b. As hypothesized, when exposed to conspicuous ecotourism content on social media, travelers with high PDB demonstrate higher ecotourism intentions than those with low PDB. Conversely, when exposed to experiential content, travelers with low PDB exhibit higher ecotourism intentions than those with high PDB. Furthermore, the data analysis reveals that for travelers with high PDB, exposure to conspicuous content generates higher ecotourism intentions compared to experiential content. For travelers with low PDB, exposure to experiential content elicits higher ecotourism intentions compared to conspicuous content.
Results of Study 2 revealed a significant moderated mediation effect, indicating that the type of ecotourism content significantly moderated the indirect effect of PDB on ecotourism intentions through social comparison. When content focuses on status signaling, travelers’ social comparison motives serve as a significant predictor of their travel intention; when content emphasizes authentic natural experiences, a higher tendency for social comparison might lead to a lower intention to engage in sustainable travel. The results of analysis demonstrate that the content frame does not simply moderate the strength of the effect of social comparison, but fundamentally reverses its direction. These findings provided support for H2.
In sum, our findings align with existing literature suggesting that high-PDB individuals are more sensitive to status differentials [12] and frequently engage in vertical social comparisons [13]. When ecotourism is framed as exclusive or unique, it effectively appeals to their desire to enhance social standing, thus boosting their travel intentions. Conversely, low-PDB individuals value equality and authentic engagement over status displays [12]. Experiential content, with its focus on personal growth and genuine connection, resonates with their core values, thereby enhancing their travel intention as predicted.

4.2. Theoretical Contribution

First, by examining the impact of PDB on ecotourism intentions, this study provides a framework that integrates previous research on ecotourism motivation from a cultural values perspective, deepening our understanding of ecotourism drivers. While extensive research has demonstrated that travelers’ environmental values are important drivers of ecotourism [8,28,29], recent studies have found that social returns such as social status and personal image are also significant predictors of ecotourism intentions [9]. By comparing how PDB influences ecotourism intentions in response to different types of social media ecotourism content, our research offers insights into how ecotourism satisfies both pro-environmental and status-seeking motivations, offering implications for ecotourism market segmentation based on diverse motivational profiles [42].
Second, this study extends the research of PDB to the tourism domain, thereby enriching our understanding of how PDB influences consumer behavior. Although previous research has found that materialism, as an important characteristic of individuals with high PDB [11], reduces ecotourism intentions [31], this suggests that high PDB may negatively affect ecotourism intentions. Our research demonstrates that when provided with signals linking ecotourism to social status (e.g., exposure to conspicuous travel content on social media), high power distance belief travelers also exhibit higher ecotourism intentions. This finding not only aligns with research showing that status-seeking motivations similarly drive ecotourism [9], but also echoes findings in the domain of charitable giving, where situational factors were shown to reverse the negative relationship between PDB and moral behavior [72].
Finally, our findings add to the growing body of research exploring how social media content related to tourism shapes ecotourism intentions. Research on how social media shapes tourism consumption has gained prominence in tourism research [21]. While previous studies have examined travelers’ motivations for sharing experiences online and explored the consequences of such content [21,64], it has not directly compared how conspicuous versus experiential content differ in influencing tourism behavior. By investigating how these two content types shape travel decisions in ecotourism contexts, our study deepens understanding of how social media influences tourism consumption [9].

4.3. Practical Implication

Our findings offer valuable insights for ecotourism marketing practices. The study shows that travelers with different levels of PDB are driven by distinct motivations when engaging in ecotourism. This understanding can assist ecotourism destination managers in developing more effective market segmentation strategies based on travelers’ PDB profiles. Furthermore, the research highlights that destination-related content shared by travelers on social media plays a crucial role in shaping others’ ecotourism intentions. As such, managers can strategically guide social media content according to the target market. They can also leverage the types of content shared online to help shape and strengthen the destination’s ecotourism image, thereby increasing its appeal to potential travelers.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study provides robust evidence that travelers’ cultural values and the framing of user-generated content on social media jointly influence ecotourism intentions. Specifically, we demonstrated that travelers with high PDB are more persuaded by conspicuous content that signals social status, whereas those with low PDB respond more favorably to experiential content emphasizing authentic engagement. The underlying mechanism driving this relationship involves social comparison motives. These distinctions are of critical importance for practitioners. Our findings highlight the need for destination marketers to move beyond one-size-fits-all communication strategies. To effectively promote sustainable tourism, marketers should develop segmented strategies that harness the power of culturally aligned user-generated content, ensuring deeper resonance with target audiences and more meaningful engagement.

Limitation and Direction for Future Research

First, we only used priming methods to manipulate PDB and did not examine country as a proxy variable. Future research could conduct cross-national comparisons to enhance the robustness of findings. Second, we employed a fictitious ecotourism destination as the stimulus and measured only travelers’ intentions rather than actual behaviors. This approach may limit the external validity of our conclusions. For greater external validity, subsequent studies could employ field experiments with actual ecotourism destinations. Third, our research focused solely on the effects of social media content types while controlling for the identity of the content creator. However, creator identity is also an important factor influencing travelers’ information processing, and future research could explore this factor in greater depth. Finally, our findings indicate that status signaling is a key driver motivating high PDB tourists to engage in ecotourism. While attracting more visitors can provide greater financial support for environmental conservation and community development, it also introduces risks of overtourism and cultural commodification. These trade-offs merit further investigation in future research.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su17177645/s1, Manipulation of PDB; Manipulation of tourism content on social media for study 1; Manipulation of tourism content on social media for study 2.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, H.H. and X.Z.; Methodology, H.H. and X.Z.; Software, S.X.; Validation, X.Z. and J.C.; Formal Analysis, H.H. and X.Z.; Investigation, J.C. and S.X.; Resources, H.H.; Data Curation, J.C. and S.X.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, J.C. and S.X.; Writing—Review and Editing, H.H. and X.Z.; Visualization, H.H.; Supervision, X.Z.; Project Administration, H.H. and X.Z.; Funding Acquisition, H.H. and X.Z. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by General Project of Hunan Provincial Social Science Achievement Appraisal Committee (No. XSP25YBC296), and Key Scientific Research Project of the Hunan Provincial Department of Education (No.22A0210).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical review and approval for this study were waived because the research posed only minimal risk to participants. Specifically, it involved an anonymous survey, collected no personally identifiable information, and included no medical, psychological, or physical interventions. This approach is consistent with the Ethical Review Measures for Human-Related Research in China, which exempts such non-biomedical surveys of general consumers from formal ethical review.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
PDBPower distance belief
SEStandard Error
CIConfidence Interval

References

  1. Orams, M.B. Towards a More Desirable Form of Ecotourism. Tour. Manag. 1995, 16, 3–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Lei, Y.; Xu, D.; Yuan, S. The Progress of Ecotourism Research in China: Identifying Key Areas, Highlights, and Trends Through Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2025, 17, 1423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Straits Research. Ecotourism Market Share by Segments, Regions & Companies by 2033. Available online: https://straitsresearch.com/report/ecotourism-market (accessed on 20 July 2025).
  4. Carvache-Franco, M.; Orden-Mejía, M.; Hassan, T.; Carvache-Franco, O.; Carvache-Franco, W. Exploring the Relationship Between Motivations, Satisfaction, and Loyalty: Insights from the Galápagos Islands, a World Heritage Site. Sustainability 2025, 17, 3034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Alashiq, S.; Aljuhmani, H.Y. From Sustainable Tourism to Social Engagement: A Value-Belief-Norm Approach to the Roles of Environmental Knowledge, Eco-Destination Image, and Biospheric Value. Sustainability 2025, 17, 4353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pham, H.S.T.; Nguyen, T.K.C. Ecotourism Intention: The Roles of Environmental Concern, Time Perspective and Destination Image. Tour. Rev. 2021, 76, 1141–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Teeroovengadum, V. Environmental Identity and Ecotourism Behaviours: Examination of the Direct and Indirect Effects. Tour. Rev. 2019, 74, 257–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Luong, T.B. Eco-Destination Image, Environment Beliefs, Ecotourism Attitudes, and Ecotourism Intention: The Moderating Role of Biospheric Values. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2023, 57, 315–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Beall, J.M.; Boley, B.B.; Landon, A.C.; Woosnam, K.M. What Drives Ecotourism: Environmental Values or Symbolic Conspicuous Consumption? J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 29, 1215–1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Oyserman, D.; Ann, A. High Power, Low Power, and Equality: Culture Beyond Individualism and Collectivism. J. Consum. Psychol. 2006, 16, 352–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lee, H.; Lalwani, A.K. Power Distance Belief and Consumer Purchase Avoidance: Exploring the Role of Cultural Factors in Retail Dynamics. J. Mark. Res. 2024, 61, 349–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Park, S.; Kim, C.; Park, J. How Power Distance Belief, Self-Construal, and Relationship Norms Impact Conspicuous Consumption. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2023, 75, 103518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Qin, Y.; Wang, X. Power Distance Belief and the Desire for Uniqueness. J. Bus. Res. 2023, 160, 113766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Winterich, K.P.; Zhang, Y. Accepting Inequality Deters Responsibility: How Power Distance Decreases Charitable Behavior. J. Consum. Res. 2014, 41, 274–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fissi, S.; Gori, E.; Contri, M.; Romolini, A. The Marriage Between Luxury Hospitality, Ecotourism, and Social Initiatives: A New Business Model from Italy. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Aw, E.C.X.; Chuah, S.H.W.; Sabri, M.F.; Basha, N.K. Go Loud or Go Home? How Power Distance Belief Influences the Effect of Brand Prominence on Luxury Goods Purchase Intention. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 58, 102288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wang, J.J.; Torelli, C.J.; Lalwani, A.K. The Interactive Effect of Power Distance Belief and Consumers’ Status on Preference for National (vs. Private-Label) Brands. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 107, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Adamovic, M. How Does Employee Cultural Background Influence the Effects of Telework on Job Stress? The Roles of Power Distance, Individualism, and Beliefs about Telework. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022, 62, 102437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Qiu, L.; Li, X.; Choi, S.H. Exploring the Influence of Short Video Platforms on Tourist Attitudes and Travel Intention: A Social–Technical Perspective. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2024, 31, 100826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lorgeoux, C.; Divakaran, P.K.P. How Foreign Social Media Influencers Help Shape Destination Country’s Tourism Image: The Case of South Korea’s Tourism Image in France. Tour. Anal. 2023, 28, 337–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Huang, Y.; Wu, W.; Qian, L. Explicit vs. Implicit? How Different Self-Presentations of Luxury Tourism Experience Trigger Others’ Value Co-Destruction Intention in Online Travel Communities. Tour. Manag. 2025, 107, 105058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yao, Y.; Jia, G.; Hou, Y. Impulsive Travel Intention Induced by Sharing Conspicuous Travel Experience on Social Media: A Moderated Mediation Analysis. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2021, 49, 431–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Li, M.Z.; Stodolska, M. Beyond Luxury Consumption: The Meaning and Meaning-Making Mechanism in Conspicuous Outbound Tourism. J. Leis. Res. 2022, 53, 687–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Phillips, W.J.; Back, K.J. Conspicuous Consumption Applied to Tourism Destination. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2011, 28, 583–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kostopoulos, I.; Magrizos, S.; Harris, L.C. Tourists as Experience Collectors: A New Travelling Mind-Set. Leis. Sci. 2023, 47, 1290–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Liu, H.; Wu, L.; Li, X. Social Media Envy: How Experience Sharing on Social Networking Sites Drives Millennials’ Aspirational Tourism Consumption. J. Travel Res. 2019, 58, 355–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Narangajavana, Y.; Fiol, L.J.C.; Tena, M.A.M.; García, J.S. The Influence of Social Media in Creating Expectations. An Empirical Study for a Tourist Destination. Ann. Tour. Res. 2017, 65, 60–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Jayasekara, K.D.D.; Rajapaksa, D.; Gunawardena, U.A.D.P. Impacts of Environmental Knowledge, Motives, and Behavior on Ecotourism. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lee, Y.J. Towards a Sustainable Future: Analysing Meta-Competencies in Community-Based Ecotourism on Liuqiu Island. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2025, 62, 96–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Li, Y.; Keh, H.T.; Wang, X. Powering Sustainable Consumption: The Roles of Green Consumption Values and Power Distance Belief. J. Bus. Ethics 2021, 169, 499–516. [Google Scholar]
  31. Lu, A.C.C.; Gursoy, D.; Del Chiappa, G. The Influence of Materialism on Ecotourism Attitudes and Behaviors. J. Travel Res. 2016, 55, 176–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fu, Y.; Zhao, J. Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior to Understand Ecotourism Behavior: The Role of Human–Land Coordination and Self-Mastery. Sustainability 2024, 16, 9248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mehmetoglu, M. Nature-Based Tourism: A Contrast to Everyday Life. J. Ecotour. 2007, 6, 111–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Miller, D.; Merrilees, B.; Coghlan, A. Sustainable Urban Tourism: Understanding and Developing Visitor Pro-Environmental Behaviours. J. Sustain. Tour. 2015, 23, 26–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Rahman, M.K.; Masud, M.M.; Akhtar, R.; Hossain, M.M. Impact of Community Participation on Sustainable Development of Marine Protected Areas: Assessment of Ecotourism Development. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2022, 24, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Salman, A.; Jaafar, M.; Mohamad, D.A. Comprehensive Review of the Role of Ecotourism in Sustainable Tourism Development. e-Rev. Tour. Res. 2020, 18, 215–233. [Google Scholar]
  37. Han, H.; Yu, J.; Kim, H.C.; Kim, W. Impact of Social/Personal Norms and Willingness to Sacrifice on Young Vacationers’ Pro-Environmental Intentions for Waste Reduction and Recycling. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 2117–2133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Landon, A.C.; Woosnam, K.M.; Boley, B.B. Modeling the Psychological Antecedents to Tourists’ Pro-Sustainable Behaviors: An Application of the Value-Belief-Norm Model. J. Sustain. Tour. 2018, 26, 957–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Martinez-Martinez, A.; Cegarra-Navarro, J.G.; Garcia-Perez, A.; Wensley, A. Knowledge Agents as Drivers of Environmental Sustainability and Business Performance in the Hospitality Sector. Tour. Manag. 2019, 70, 381–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Nguyen, T.K.C.; Phong, L.T. Impact of Environmental Belief and Nature-Based Destination Image on Ecotourism Attitude. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights 2020, 3, 489–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kim, M.S.; Stepchenkova, S. Altruistic Values and Environmental Knowledge as Triggers of Pro-Environmental Behavior Among Tourists. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 1575–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Carvache-franco, M.; Carrascosa-lopez, C.; Carvache-Franco, W. Market Segmentation by Motivations in Ecotourism: Application in the Posets-Maladeta Natural Park, Spain. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Veblen, T. The Theory of the Leisure Class; Viking Press: New York, NY, USA, 1967. [Google Scholar]
  44. Boley, B.B.; Jordan, E.; Kline, C.; Knollenberg, W. Social Return and Intent to Travel. Tour. Manag. 2018, 64, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Boley, B.B.; Jordan, E.; Woosnam, K.M.; Maruyama, N.; Xiao, X.; Rojas, C. Buttressing Social Return’s Influence on Travel Behaviour. Curr. Issues Tour. 2023, 26, 2829–2844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Šagovnović, I.; Kovačić, S. Traveling, Showing Status and Being Conspicuous: The Power of Destination as a Conspicuous Brand. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2024, 26, e2744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lee, H.; Cho, H. When Do People Rely More on Unique versus Common Attributes? The Effect of Power Distance Belief on Preference for Alignable versus Nonalignable Attributes. J. Consum. Behav. 2022, 21, 855–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Winterich, K.P.; Gangwar, M.; Grewal, R. When Celebrities Count: Power Distance Beliefs and Celebrity Endorsements. J. Mark. 2018, 82, 70–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Hofstede, G. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations, 2nd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  50. Hofstede, G. Culture and Organizations. Int. J. Manag. Organ. Stud. 1980, 10, 15–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Tu, L.L.; Kwon, J.; Gao, H.C. Heart or Mind? The Impact of Power Distance Belief on the Persuasiveness of Cognitive Versus Affective Appeals in Education Marketing Messages. J. Mark. Res. 2021, 59, 173–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Xu, H.Y.; Bolton, L.E.; Winterich, K.P. How Do Consumers React to Company Moral Transgressions? The Role of Power Distance Belief and Empathy for Victims. J. Consum. Res. 2021, 48, 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kim, Y.; Zhang, Y. The Impact of Power-Distance Belief on Consumers’ Preference for Status Brands. J. Glob. Mark. 2014, 27, 13–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lian, H.W.; Ferris, D.L.; Brown, D.J. Does Power Distance Exacerbate or Mitigate the Effects of Abusive Supervision? It Depends on the Outcome. J. Appl. Psychol. 2012, 97, 107–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Gao, H.C.; Winterich, K.P.; Zhang, Y.L. All That Glitters Is Not Gold: How Others’ Status Influences the Effect of Power Distance Belief on Status Consumption. J. Consum. Res. 2016, 43, 265–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Festinger, L. A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Hum. Relat. 1954, 7, 117–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Song, H.; Cramer, E.M.; Park, N. Cultural Differences in Social Comparison on Facebook. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2019, 38, 172–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ordabayeva, N.; Fernandes, D. Better or Different? How Political Ideology Shapes Preferences for Differentiation in the Social Hierarchy. J. Consum. Res. 2018, 45, 227–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Vignoles, V.L.; Chryssochoou, X.; Breakwell, G.M. The Distinctiveness Principle: Identity, Meaning, and the Bounds of Cultural Relativity. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2000, 4, 337–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kim, J.C.; Park, B.; Dubois, D. How Consumers’ Political Ideology and Status-Maintenance Goals Interact to Shape Their Desire for Luxury Goods. J. Mark. 2018, 82, 132–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lyu, S.O. Travel Selfies on Social Media as Objectified Self-Presentation. Tour. Manag. 2016, 54, 185–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Park, J.Y.; Lee, H.E. How Consumer Photo Reviews and Online Platform Types Influence Luxury Hotel Booking Intentions Through Envy. J. Travel Res. 2025, 64, 1275–1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Munar, A.M.; Jacobsen, J.K.S. Motivations for Sharing Tourism Experiences through Social Media. Tour. Manag. 2014, 43, 46–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Liu, H.B.; Li, X. How Travel Earns Us Bragging Rights: A Qualitative Inquiry and Conceptualization of Travel Bragging Rights. J. Travel Res. 2020, 60, 1635–1653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Hong, S.; Jahng, M.R.; Lee, N. Do You Filter Who You Are?: Excessive Self-Presentation, Social Cues, and User Evaluations of Instagram Selfies. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020, 104, 106159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Jiang, L.; Gao, H.C.; Shi, L.D.H. The Effect of Power Distance Beliefs on the Inconspicuous versus Conspicuous Consumption of Luxury Accessories in China and the USA. J. Mark. Manag. 2021, 37, 1459–1489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. He, Y.; Mo, Z.; Wan, X.Q.; Li, M.Y.; Fu, H.J. Who Will Embrace Upward Line Extension? The Role of Power Distance Belief. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2023, 75, 103475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Köchling, A. Experiential Marketing as a Tool to Enhance Tourists’ Pre-Travel Online Destination Experiences? A Web-Based Experiment. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2021, 22, 100669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kiernan, M.; Baiocchi, M.T. Casting New Light on Statistical Power: An Illuminating Analogy and Strategies to Avoid Underpowered Trials. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2022, 191, 1500–1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Stojanović, T.; Trisic, I.; Brdanin, E.; Stetic, S.; Nechita, F.; Candrea, A.N. Natural and Sociocultural Values of a Tourism Destination in the Function of Sustainable Tourism Development—An Example of a Protected Area. Sustainability 2024, 16, 759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Trišić, I.; Privitera, D.; Ristić, V.; Štetić, S.; Milojković, D.; Maksin, M. Protected Areas in the Function of Sustainable Tourism Development—A Case of Deliblato Sands Special Nature Reserve, Vojvodina Province. Land 2023, 12, 487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ryoo, Y.; Sung, Y.; Chechelnytska, I. What Makes Materialistic Consumers More Ethical? Self-Benefit vs. Other-Benefit Appeals. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 110, 173–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 17 07645 g001
Figure 1. Conceptual model of this article.
Figure 1. Conceptual model of this article.
Sustainability 17 07645 g001
Sustainability 17 07645 g003
Figure 2. The interaction between PDB and tourism content type (study 1).
Figure 2. The interaction between PDB and tourism content type (study 1).
Sustainability 17 07645 g003
Sustainability 17 07645 g002
Figure 3. The interaction between PDB and tourism content type (study 2).
Figure 3. The interaction between PDB and tourism content type (study 2).
Sustainability 17 07645 g002
Table 1. Measurement of key variables.
Table 1. Measurement of key variables.
ConstructMeasuresαSource
Study 1Study 2
Ecotourism
Intention		I would consider traveling to the destination shown in these photos0.790.85[22]
Seeing these photos suddenly made me feel an urge to visit this place
(1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree)
Social
Comparison Motive		I often compare myself to others to make myself feel betterN/A0.91[13]
I often compare myself to others to enhance my sense of self-worth
I often compare myself to others to set goals for myself
(1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree)
Power
Distance
Belief 		At the moment, I mainly believe0.970.95[51]
Right now, I feel that
The thoughts currently in my mind align with
(1 = social equality is very important, 7 = social hierarchy is very important)
Experiential
Content		I imagine how good I would feel when visiting this destination0.840.90[24,68]
I can easily imagine myself experiencing this destination while browsing social media
(1 = not at all, 7 = to a great extent)
Conspicuous
Content		Visiting this destination signifies social status and wealth0.830.77[24,68]
Visiting this destination is a way to be admired and noticed by others
(1 = not at all, 7 = to a great extent)
Table 2. Demographic data in Study 1.
Table 2. Demographic data in Study 1.
VariableCategoryNumberPercentage (%)
GenderMale5635.0
Female10465.0
OccupationCivil servant159.4
State-owned enterprise2415.0
Private enterprise6741.0
Public institution116.9
Foreign-funded enterprise106.3
Student3320.6
EducationalBachelor’s degree10766.9
Doctoral degree21.3
Senior high school etc.95.6
Master’s degree2716.9
Junior college159.4
AgeMage = 29.96, SD = 8.14
Table 3. Demographic data in Study 2.
Table 3. Demographic data in Study 2.
VariableCategoryNumberPercentage (%)
GenderMale14946.6
Female17153.4
Age0–20 years82.5
21–30 years19059.4
31–40 years10332.2
41–50 years123.8
51–60 years72.2
OccupationCivil servant103.1
State-owned enterprise5918.4
Private enterprise15247.5
Public institution4112.8
Foreign-funded enterprise103.1
Student4815.0
EducationalBachelor’s degree23372.8
Doctoral degree51.6
Senior high school etc.113.4
Master’s degree3510.9
Junior college3410.6
Primary school or below10.3
Junior high school10.3
Table 4. Results of moderated mediation analysis (Study 2).
Table 4. Results of moderated mediation analysis (Study 2).
PredictorModel 1
(Social Comparison Motive)		Model 2
(Ecotourism Intentions)
βSEtβSEt
PDB (X)0.91250.17665.17 ***−1.0970.4080−2.69 **
Social comparison motive (M) −0.31260.1253−2.49 *
Ecotourism content type (W) −1.9960.4596−4.34 ***
X × W 0.75400.25812.92 **
M × W 0.20800.07882.64 **
R20.080.06
F26.70 ***4.34 ***
Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Table 5. Results of conditional indirect effects (Study 2).
Table 5. Results of conditional indirect effects (Study 2).
PathIndexContent TypeβSEBootstrap 95% CIs
LowerUpper
PDB→ social comparison motive → ecotourism intentions0.1898experiential−0.09550.0611−0.219110.0212
conspicuous0.09430.0605−0.01550.2281
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

He, H.; Cheng, J.; Zou, X.; Xing, S. How Power Distance Belief Shapes Ecotourism Intention: The Moderating Role of Conspicuous Versus Experiential Content on Social Media in Promoting Sustainable Travel. Sustainability 2025, 17, 7645. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177645

AMA Style

He H, Cheng J, Zou X, Xing S. How Power Distance Belief Shapes Ecotourism Intention: The Moderating Role of Conspicuous Versus Experiential Content on Social Media in Promoting Sustainable Travel. Sustainability. 2025; 17(17):7645. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177645

Chicago/Turabian Style

He, Hao, Jiayi Cheng, Xiang Zou, and Shiqi Xing. 2025. "How Power Distance Belief Shapes Ecotourism Intention: The Moderating Role of Conspicuous Versus Experiential Content on Social Media in Promoting Sustainable Travel" Sustainability 17, no. 17: 7645. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177645

APA Style

He, H., Cheng, J., Zou, X., & Xing, S. (2025). How Power Distance Belief Shapes Ecotourism Intention: The Moderating Role of Conspicuous Versus Experiential Content on Social Media in Promoting Sustainable Travel. Sustainability, 17(17), 7645. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17177645

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