Relationships between secure attachment, experiential co-creation and future experiential intentions in the tourism industry: The case of COVID-19

This paper aims to explore the relationships between the dimensions of secure attachment, the dimensions of experiential co-creation and future experiential intentions. A convenience sample of 505 tourists who had traveled by domestic or international airlines during the COVID-19 outbreak in Harts�eld–Jackson Atlanta International Airport was surveyed. The results will assist tourism operators in developing and implementing market-orientated service strategies to increase secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect, secure social bonding, experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection in order to enable tourists to have future intentions to experience the destination during the COVID-19 outbreak.


Introduction
Since December 2019, many gathered cases of "unknown viral pneumonia" have been reported, initially linked to exposure at the Huanan Seafood Market, Wuhan, China (Huang et al., 2020).A novel coronavirus was detected, capable of infecting humans, on 6 January 2020 (Li et al., 2020;Zhu et al., 2020) and termed 2019-nCoV (COVID- 19).COVID-19 has changed the world forever in every imaginable respect and has impacted heavily on international travel, tourism demand, and tourism industry, which is one of the world's largest employers and is highly sensitive to signi cant shocks like the COVID-19 pandemic (Chang, McAleer, & Ramos, 2020).With the COVID-19 cases rising signi cantly every day around the world, many tourists may worry about their holiday plans.Some of their concerns include if the destination they are traveling to may be affected and unsafe to travel, or if the situation will turn for the better a month or two down the road (Trip 101, 2000).According to the Luxury Travel Expert (2020), travel restrictions are being imposed around the world because of the COVID-19 outbreak, and the situation changes daily.This is probably the single one reason why tourists may want to postpone their travel plans since none of them can predict what the situation will be in the coming weeks.Oppermann (2000) suggests that tourists' past experience in uences their future travel choice and more speci cally, their destination choice through behavioral lens.Experiential intentions of tourists are a predictor of pro tability and revenue generation of tourism organizations (Bødker & Browning, 2012;Wu & Li, 2017).
Traveling is not only good for the soul but also good for health.Accordingly, people need to be more careful than usual to travel safely during the COVID-19 outbreak (Oh My Good Guide, 2020).During this COVID-19 pandemic, the safety and security situation in countries can change rapidly and without warning, from signi cant nes for tourists breaching curfews, to hostility experienced towards foreigners (World Travel & Tourism Council, 2020).As the COVID-19 situation evolves, many people around the world continue to travel: for leisure, for business and for vital humanitarian reasons (The World Tourism Organization, 2020).According to the World Tourism Organization (2020), there are three ways for tourists to keep safe while traveling in a destination.First, the best way to stay safe while traveling is to follow the latest World Health Organization guidelines as closely as possible.Second, tourists are required to wash hands regularly and thoroughly, avoid shaking hands or touching faces, try and stay away from crowded places.Third, where possible, tourists are required to maintain at least one meter between themselves and others.To understand whether tourists travel in a destination with high safety and security during the COVID-19 outbreak, there is a need to predict their future experiential intentions.
Place attachment is a term that refers to a complex emotional and psychological relationship between people and their environments, although it has been de ned in many different ways, such as in relation to sense of place, place bonding and place identity (Hernandez, Hidalgo, & Ruiz, 2014;Walker & Ryan, 2008).
It is a multi-dimensional construct comprising place identity, place dependence, place affect and place social bonding (Ramkissoon, Smith, & Weiler, 2013a).It is generally believed that place attachment provides individuals with many bene ts, such as fostering greater human resilience towards environmental risks (Mishra, Mazumdar, & Suar, 2010), improving perceived quality of life (Manzo, 2008), and increasing social well-being (Rollero & De Piccoli, 2010a).In particular, place attachment may contribute to fostering individual, group and cultural self-esteem (Loures & Burley, 2012;Low & Altman, 1992) in a time of increased mobility, globalization, greater uniformity and loss of cultural speci city (Liu et al., 2018).Many tourists inquire if it is safe to travel during the COVID-19 outbreak.Gössling, Scott, and Hall (2020) propose that the COVID-19 pandemic is an unknowable risk.However, it is unsure that traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak is entirely risk-free, regardless of ages, health or tourist destinations (Lociamica, 2020; Schengen Visa Info, 2020).As the travel situation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly changing from day to day, tourists need to know the most recent safety and security situation of destinations by consulting the website of the government in a country (The Luxury Travel Expert, 2020).According to the Ainsworth (1989) and Korstanje (2011) research on attachment theory, tourists who perceive their primary travel safety and security to be secure, are likely to develop secure attachment.However, based on the existing literature, very few studies focus on applying the dimensions of place attachment in the measurement of the dimensions of secure attachment (secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding) in the tourism industry.
In the tourism context, the concept of co-creation is particularly relevant.First, offering unique and memorable customer experiences are of paramount importance for tourism service providers in order to remain competitive.Creating a unique experience involves both customer participation and a connection which link the customer to the experience (Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Shaw, Bailey, & Williams, 2011).Several researchers (Prahalad, 2004;Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004;Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman, 1996) present that co-creation may add a dimension to trust and commitment that better explains the rmcustomer connection.Therefore, Randall, Gravier, and Prybutok (2011) nd that co-creation is a multidimensional construct comprising trust, commitment and connection.Wu and Cheng (2020) maintain that experiential co-creation is the sum of the psychological events a tourist goes through when contributing actively through physical and/or mental participation in activities.To the best of our knowledge, none of the studies examines whether experiential co-creation comprises experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection in the tourism industry.Morgan & Hunt, 1994) propose that trust is a precursor to commitment in a business-to-business exchange relationship.Randall et al. (2011) reveal that trust is a predictor of connection.In addition, they nd that future intentions are in uenced by trust, commitment and connection.
Although previous studies have paid great attention to examining the relevant issues of the dimensions of place attachment (place identity, place dependence, place affect and place social bonding), the dimensions of co-creation (trust, commitment and connection), and future intentions, very few studies focus on them from the tourists' perspectives in the tourism industry (Wu & Chang, 2019, 2020;Wu & Cheng, 2018, 2020; Wu, Cheng, Ai, & Chen, 2019c; Wu, Cheng, Ai, & Wu, 2020).Berrada (2017) proposes that experiences designed for and by tourists are social constructions stemming from a continuous process of learning and creative collaboration between the various tourism stakeholders.A tourist experience is not only in uenced by touchable products and experienced services, but also to the degree in which a speci c experience is unforgettable and thus, memorable (Cornelisse, 2014).The global spread of COVID-19 is causing signi cant changes to the way tourists travel to keep attachment to the safety and security.Accordingly, this study attempts to ll the research gap and proposes eight new and novel constructs-the dimensions of secure attachment (secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding), the dimensions of experiential co-creation (experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection), and future experiential intentions, as well as their relationships perceived by tourists visiting the destination during the COVID-19 outbreak.
This study contributes to the services and experiential marketing literature from theoretical and practical perspectives.From the theoretical perspective, this study proposes eight constructs-secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect, secure social bonding, experiential trust, experiential commitment, experiential connection and future experiential intentions.In addition, this paper provides a research framework to explore the relationships between these eight constructs.Moreover, it focuses on nding the correct standpoint and evaluation for novel and new concepts of marketing in the tourism industry to increase perceptions of future experiential intentions from seven drivers: secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect, secure social bonding, experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection.From a managerial perspective, this study will bene t marketers and practitioners in the tourism industry and provide them with an opportunity to develop and implement services and experiential marketing strategies to ensure that high perceptions of secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding lead to increased perceptions of experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection, which in turn, result in future experiential intentions.
2 Related Concepts And Hypotheses

Place attachment
Place attachment is de ned as the development of affective bond or link between people or individuals and speci c places (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001) expressed through the interplay of affects and emotions, knowledge and beliefs, and behavior and actions (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983).It is also re ected in the functional bonding between people and places described as place dependence (Stokols & Shumaker, 1981).Williams, Patterson, Roggenbuck, and Watson (1992 present that place attachment is developed when a place is well-identi ed and felt signi cant by the users and able to provide condition to ful ll their functional needs and supports their behavioral goals better than a known alternative.Several researchers (Halpenny, 2010 Scannell & Gifford, 2010).Place identity refers to the connection between a place and the personal identity of an individual (Kyle et al., 2004;Moore & Graefe, 1994).When tourists visit a certain location, their affective or symbolic meaning of that place evolves and their identi cation develops through their accumulated experiences in that place (Moore & Graefe, 1994;Williams et al., 1992).Place dependence depicts the suitability of a place in meeting an individual's functional needs (Suntikul & Jachna, 2016).It is based on the physical features and conditions of a place (Prayag & Ryan, 2012).For example, golfers develop attachment to a golf course due to its attributes that facilitate the enjoyment of playing golf (Lee, Kyle, & Scott, 2012).Place affect refers to the emotional bonds individuals share with settings in a place (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001;Kals et al., 1999).Researchers have noted an affective attachment that individuals develop towards a place by constructing their emotions (Rollero & De Piccoli, 2010b), which go beyond cognition or judgments (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001).Place social bonding describes the process that meaningful interpersonal relationships in a place enhance the sense of belonging to a group and the particular setting (Hammitt et al., 2009;Kyle et al., 2005).Researchers have pointed out that an individual's experiences in the presence of signi cant others (e.g.family and close friends) within a place form a place-based social bonding (Scannell & Gifford, 2010).

Secure attachment
Secure attachment is de ned as a positive view of self and others, with characteristics of having "a sense of self-worth and the con dence that others will be available and supportive, and have comfort seeking and expecting comfort from others" (Ponizovsky, Vitenberg, Baumgarten-Katz & Grinshpoon, p. 165, 2013).Alternatively, secure attachment is referred to as "the stable tendency of an individual to make substantial efforts to seek and maintain proximity to and contact with one or a few speci c individuals who provide subjective potential for physical and/or psychological safety and security" (Berman & Sperling, 1994, p. 8).According to Bowlby (1980, p. 242), an individual who has experienced secure attachment "is likely to possess a representational model of attachment gures as being available, responsive and helpful."Isa, Ariyanto, and Kiumarsi (2020) present that secure attachment results in improving the emotions and mental states of individuals in places, a factor which is positively connected to the heritage culture and community culture of places.Karsono, Indira, and Deni (2015) indicate that the security attributes in a place in uence place attachment.Altman and Low (1992) propose that the typical security associated with places invites tourists to develop strong place attachment.According to Knez (2014), place-related attachment is in agreement with the Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, and Wall (1978) concept of secure attachment, includes a dimension of closeness/belonging (an emotional component of people-place bonding).As for some potential advantages of place attachment, Payton, Fulton, and Anderson (2005) suggest that secure attachment to a place can serve as a means of uniting individuals and groups for an environmental and social cause and altering their behavior, which explain why the residents of a speci c location often come together to clean up their neighborhood.Scannell and Gifford (2017) propose that secure attachment to places and their people has been shown to improve satisfaction, a sense of control and an association with either a positive or negative affect.To the best of our knowledge, none of the studies focuses on secure attachment regarding tourists' travel during the COVID-19 outbreak.
This study proposes the concept of secure attachment as a way to extend the scope of place attachment.
Building on previous literature, this paper focuses on four components of secure attachment: secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding.First, secure identity is de ned as that part of an individual's personal identity based on the physical and symbolic features of the safety and security during the travel period (Baumeister & Dong, 2016;Proshansky et al., 1983).According to Baumeiste et al. (2016) and Breakwell (1992), secure identity process theory suggests that an individual absorbs information from the physical and/or psychological safety and security that are placed into preexisting mental structures, continuously adjusted and subsequently evaluated so as to attribute meanings to the new elements.Second, secure dependence is de ned as how best the physical and/or psychological safety and security can provide travel experiences (Williams et al., 1992) and its relative quality compared to alternative physical and/or psychological safety and security (Halpenny, 2010).
Secure dependence conceptually represents the conative domain and embodies the actions or behavioral tendencies of an individual regarding the physical and/or psychological safety and security during the travel period (Borden & Schettino, 1979).Third, secure affect refers to the emotions and feelings of an individual towards the physical and/or psychological safety and security during the travel period (Halpenny, 2010).Researchers have noted an affective attachment that individuals develop towards the physical and/or psychological safety and security by constructing their emotions (Rollero & De Piccoli, 2010b), which go beyond cognition or judgments (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001).Fourth, secure social bonding is referred to as the interpersonal relationship that connects one person to another across time and space, which appear to be largely cognitive (JUNO, 2020; Ramkissoon, Weiler, & Smith, 2012).Secure social bonding measures how individuals are connected to the physical and/or psychological safety and security during the travel period in an active and social manner, re ecting the participation of individuals in local activities and how they feel about what the physical and/or psychological safety and security during the travel period have to offer in that respect (Candiotti, Zuberbühler, & Lemasson, 2012;Song & Soopramanien, 2019).Based on the aforementioned review, the dimensions of secure attachment (secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding) remain sparse in the tourism industry, particularly in the context of COVID-19.

Co-creation
Co-creation has been used to clarify current changes in the tourism supply chain (Räikkönen & Honkanen, 2013), analyze the overall destination experience (Zouni & Kouremenos, 2008), and study new approaches to marketing (Lichrou, O'Malley, & Patterson, 2008).It is de ned as processes that entail interactions and collaboration between people, rather than just involvement and co-creativity.Since, value co-creation occurs in the customers' realm, value co-creation models must take into consideration customers' use processes and their relationship to the goals or objectives of the customers (Mukhtar, Ismail, & Yahya, 2012).Customers are now armed with new connective tools and desire to interact and co-create value (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004).Further, new age channels have enabled customer cocreation in tourism as well as other domains (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009; Cabiddu, Lui, & Piccoli, 2013; Rihova, Buhalis, Gouthro, & Moital, 2018).In the tourism industry, a "system of social ruling is making way for communicative self-steering" (Binkhorst & Dekker, 2009, p. 311) and co-creation is becoming an increasingly popular source of differentiation (Turner & Shockley, 2014).Randall et al. (2011) propose that co-creation is a multi-dimensional concept which comprises trust, commitment and connection.
Trust is regarded as an essential key to maintaining continuity in the customer provider relationship (Chiu, Hsu, Lai, & Chang, 2012; Han & Hyun, 2013).Sirdeshmukh, Singh, and Sabol (2002) refer to trust as "expectations held by the consumer that the service provider is dependable and can be relied on to deliver on its promises" (p.17).Alternatively, Doney and Cannon (1997, p. 36) de ne trust as "the perceived credibility and benevolence of a target of trust."Trust plays a critical role in helping exchange relationships (Moorman, Deshpande, & Zaltman, 1993), differentiating between effective and ineffective sales relationships (Smith & Barclay, 1997), and satisfying customers' expectation (Sirdeshmukh et al., 2002).The literature implies that trust is tourists' con dence in a service transaction on the condition that they are satis ed with it and a willingness to support it by maintaining good relationships between customers and service providers (Song, Lee, Kim, Bendle, & Shin, 2014).
Commitment is an important variable in discriminating between stayers and leavers in business alliances (Mummalaneni, 1987).It is the desire to continue the relationship and to work to ensure its continuance.It implies importance of the relationship to the partners and a desire to continue the relationship into the future, assuming that the alliance will bring future value or bene ts to the partners (Hardwick & Ford, 1986).Morgan and Hunt (1994) de ne commitment as an exchange partner believing that an ongoing relationship with another is so important as to warrant maximum efforts at maintaining it; namely, the committed party believes the relationship is worth working on to ensure that it endures inde nitely.Like trust, commitment is regarded an important factor in successful relations (Morgan & Hunt, 1994).Berry (1995) contends that relationships in the services marketing area are built on the foundation of mutual commitment.
Connection is de ned as the ease and effort in developing meaningful, quality relationships with others by exchanging thoughts and feelings and includes sociability and intimacy (Seal, Naumann, Scott, & Royce-Davis, 2011).Alternatively, it refers to the extent of formal linkage from one site to others.It is characterized according to the degree of linkage and the amount of information quoted from other sites: outsourced content, percent of home site content and pathways of connection (Lee & Benbasat, 2004).Randall et al. (2011) propose that connection focuses on measuring the degree of relational connectedness as the emotional attachment with both the service organization as well as with fellow customers of that organization.According to WordPress (2020), customers want a service provider who creates strong points of connection.A point of connection is de ned as anytime the customer comes in contact with anything or anyone that has anything to do with his/her organization.A powerful point of connection creates a bond with customers and ensures a high level of trust.

Experiential co-creation
Co-creation is the coming together of two parties to jointly create value.The tourist interacts with the provider and his/her facilities in order to create value (Awuor, Hayombe, & Ayieko, 2015).By its very de nition, the value involved is experiential value or alternatively value-in-use (Grönroos & Voima, 2013).
In the context of tourism, for experiential co-creation to occur, it is essential that destinations and tourism service providers involve tourists in cooperatively working together with the aim of creating a better offering (Buonincontri, Morvillo, Okumus, & van Niekerk, 2017).In return, this enhances value for both the tourist and the destination (Grissemann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2012; Mathis, 2013).Previous studies have suggested that the degree of experiential co-creation is in uenced by several factors.In particular, tourists' interactions, their active participation in the experience and their attitudes on sharing the experience with others are identi ed as the antecedents of experiential co-creation (Green, 2002; Neuhofer, Buhalis, & Ladkin, 2012).Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004) de ne experiential co-creation as the joint creation of value by the organization and the customers, allowing the customers to co-construct service experiences to suit their context.The bene t of experiential co-creation is related to the ability of customers and organizations to collaborate for the satisfaction and the expectations of both (Chathoth et al., 2014).According to Jaakkola, Helkkula, Aarikka-Stenroos, and Verleye (2015) and Randall et al. (2011), experiential co-creation is proposed to comprise experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection.
Experiential trust is de ned as the willingness of the average customer to rely on the ability of the experience to perform its stated functions (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001;Wu, 2017).Kramer and Tyler (1996) show that experiential trust develops with knowledge of the one trusted over time, and identi cation-based trust is based on a sense of shared values.In general, experiential trust helps tourists feel control even in situations where the quality of service is hard to grasp (Leiphart & Barnes, 2005).Kramer and Tyler (1996) propose that experiential trust reproduces over time and through repetition.Wu (2017) and Wu, Chang, and Wu (2019a) identify that experiential trust has been increasingly playing an important role in the tourism industry.
Commitment is the attitudinal component of customer loyalty that is developed after an experience (or experiences) with a product and/or service is completed (Lariviere, Keiningham, Cooil, Aksoy, & Malthouse, 2014).It will not only be affected by customer experience but also vice versa (for repeated customer-provider interactions).Speci cally, a customer's commitment to a product and/or service biases his/her perceptions of the experience through dynamics such as cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957), self-perception (Bem, 1967) and biased scanning (Janis & King, 1954).Experiential commitment is de ned as feelings of personal involvement with the phenomena in a cathetic and communicative sense (Wimberley, 1978).Likewise, it is the emotional reaction tourists experience when they are communicating with destinations, or the transcendent force of their particular destination (Wu & Chang, 2019; Wu & Cheng, 2018).The parties in the relationship identify experiential commitment as the key endeavor to develop and maintain their relationship (Cai & Wheale, 2004).
Connection is a very personal experience.What is connection for one person may not be for another.Connection can be related to people, art, landscapes and houses.It can also ow strongly or meander peacefully.In addition, it can be seasonal with different characteristics that bring their own values (Learning About Dogs Ltd, 2020).According to Schmitt, Brakus, and Zarantonello (2015) and van der Westhuizen (2018), customers may describe the experience associated with services and/or products through relationships, thus demonstrating the relationship between connection and product and/or service experiences, although previously unexplored.Duchon and Plowman (2005) and Petchsawang and Duchon (2009) refer to experiential connection as one's experience of a deep sense of connection with other people and their work, implying that one feels part of the community and can identify him/herself with the group's common purpose.Connectivity is a unique way of knowing that emerges from an experiential connection to products and/or services and a virtual connection to others with the same product and/or service (Barker & Galardi, 2011).

Future experiential intentions
According to Lee, Huh, and Hong (2008), behavioral intentions are often used to assess tourists' potential for revisiting since they are considered to be a relatively accurate predictor of future behavior.Numerous studies developed models depicting future intentions as nal consequences of tourism behaviors ( Alternatively, they are referred to as the willingness of tourists to revisit a destination (Sankrusme, 2017).In practice, Hennig-Thurau, Gwinner, and Gremler (2002) and Oliver (1999) consider future intentions as conative loyalty, which is characterized with deeper of commitment of tourists with the destination.Yazıcı, Kocak, and Altunsöz (2017) tested a model in which perceived experiences were proposed to interact with festival satisfaction to predict future intentions using an experiential marketing approach.In the network, customers obtain experiential values by experiencing sharing services, which exert an impact on their future intentions using energy sharing services (Tsou, Chen, Chou, & Chen, 2019).As customers accumulate more direct experiences, they are more likely to act out of perceptions of products, emotional reactions and future intentions, forming high consistency of attitude and behavior (Breckler & Wiggins, 1984).Ahn and Back (2019) show that many service organizations have adopted an experiential marketing approach to obtain positive future intentions by reinforcing positive customer experiences.Wu, Chen, and Cheng (2019b) and Wu and Cheng (2020) de ne future experiential intentions as tourists' subjective probability that they will perform some experiential behavior in the future.Julaimi, Abdul Talib, and Suhaimi (2016) and Wu and Cheng (2020) indicate that even though there is a close relationship between travel experiences and future intentions, future experiential intentions have not been widely explored in the tourism industry.
The literature on the process dimension suggests that place attachment promotes self-esteem in youth and enhances their trust towards peers and adults (Scannell & Gifford, 2010).Stefaniak, Bilewicz, and Lewicka (2017) identify that increased dimensions of place attachment enhance trust.Manturuk, Lindblad, and Quercia (2017) present that the dimensions of place attachment may generate feelings of trust towards one's neighbors.Lewicka (2011) proposes that the effects of the dimensions of place attachment on trust are positive.Lee (2015) nds that trust is in uenced by the dimensions of place attachment.However, to the best of our knowledge, none of the studies focuses on examining secure attachment with its four dimensions (secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding), and its role in predicting experiential trust in the tourism industry, particularly in the context of COVID-19.Consequently, the following hypotheses are developed: H1a Secure identity has a positive in uence on experiential trust.
H1b Secure dependence has a positive in uence on experiential trust.
H1c Secure affect has a positive in uence on experiential trust.
H1d Secure social bonding has a positive in uence on experiential trust.
It is generally accepted that trust is a precursor to commitment in a business-to-business exchange relationship (Gil-Saura et al., 2009; Moliner et al., 2007;Morgan & Hunt, 1994).Several researchers (Achrol, 1991;Farrelly & Quester, 2003; Moorman, Zaltman, & Deshpande, 1992) emphasize that greater levels of trust improve the level of commitment to a given relationship.Hadjikhani and Thilenius (2005) reveal that trust can be expected to have a direct and positive impact on commitment because trading relationships based on trust are usually highly appreciated by those involved in them.Hess and Story (2005) nd that personal and functional connections are driven by trust.Randall et al. (2011) propose that trust is an antecedent of connection, indicating that trust positively in uences connection.Hall (2001) shows that trust plays a role in making the connection between uncertainty and special features.Colquitt and Rodell (2011) present that trust is an important factor in in uencing the performance of connection.Hess and Story (2005) describe that the relative strengths of personal and functional connections determine the nature and outcomes of relationship commitment.In addition, they show that a consumer has a primarily personal or functional connection to the brand implies signi cantly different levels and types of commitment.Bowen and Shoemaker (2003) present that the organization's external connection can make the customer's commitment to it.Kim, Park, and Glovinsky (2018) propose that connection will have a positive in uence on commitment to the brand.However, the relationships between experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection remain sparse in the tourism industry.Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed: H2 Experiential trust has a positive in uence on experiential commitment.
H3 Experiential trust has a positive in uence on experiential connection.
H4 Experiential connection has a positive in uence on experiential connection.Seo, Back, and Shanklin (2011) propose that commitment is a signi cant determinant of future intentions.Rosenbaum, Massiah, and Jackson (2006) show that trust can be used to predict future intentions.Accordingly, high levels of trust lead to high perceptions of future intentions.Chen (2007) reveals that trust has a direct effect on future intentions.According to Li, Chou, and Yan (2009), higher levels of customer trust lead to higher levels of customer future intentions.Garbarino and Johnson (1999) present that commitment and trust are in uential in the future intentions of an exchange partner.In addition, they report that commitment and trust are predictors of future intentions in the case of relational customers.Morgan and Hunt (1994) propose that commitment and trust have been proven to have a strong effect on the future intentions of the customers.Randall et al. (2011) argue that connection positively in uences future intentions.Lin, Wu, and Chang (2006) nd that destination connections contribute to a positive in uence on future visit intentions.Steinhart and Jiang (2019) describe that people's perceptions of future intentions will be high when they perceive themselves as having abundant social connections.However, to the best of our knowledge, none of the studies focuses on the relationships between experiential trust, experiential commitment, experiential connection and future experiential intentions in the tourism industry.As a consequence, the following hypotheses are proposed: H5 Experiential commitment has a positive in uence on future experiential intentions.
H6 Experiential trust has a positive in uence on future experiential intentions.
H7 Experiential connection has a positive in uence on future experiential intentions.All construct items were measured using seven-point Likert-type scales anchored by "strongly disagree" (1) and "strongly agree" (7).
The content-based validity of the instrument was initially established by sending it to 15 experts, including seven tourism managers and eight assistant and associate professors from the USA, all of whom specialized in tourism marketing.To ensure clarity, a pilot study was conducted where questionnaires were distributed to 45 tourists who had traveled during the COVID-19 outbreak to seek feedback on the design.Based on this feedback, several minor changes were made in order to tailor the questionnaire to the target audience.

Data collection and procedure
A survey was conducted to collect the data from the tourists in Harts eld-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, USA.A convenience sampling method was used to select the study elements aged over 18 years between March 18 and May 18, 2020.Persons who had traveled by domestic or international airlines during the COVID-19 outbreak were targeted for inclusion in the study.The rationale for selecting this airport is that it has been the world's busiest airport every year since 2000.Also, this surveyed airport reached a total number of passengers of 107,394,029 in 2018 (Russell Publishing Limited, 2020).The questionnaires were distributed by university researchers and students to the respondents.The surveyors were trained to randomly approach respondents, informing them about the purpose of the survey before they were given the questionnaire.After the respondents indicated they were willing to respond, they were given the questionnaires to ll in.The questionnaire was self-completed by the tourists, with assistance available if required.The respondents were required to complete and return the questionnaire to the surveyors on the spot.To ensure con dentiality, the names of study participants were not required and the surveyors ensured that all survey respondents' responses would remain completely con dential and anonymous.Non-respondents who chose not to participate generally noted that they did not want to be disturbed during their tours.The coupon for the quick service restaurant was giving out as a gift to increase the response rate.A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed and 545 questionnaires were collected back, representing a response rate of 90.83%.During the data re nement process, 40 questionnaires were eliminated from the study and 505 questionnaires were coded for the purpose of data analysis.4 Results

Sample pro le
Table 1 provides the demographic pro le of the respondents who participated in this study.Most respondents were male (53.86%), single (56.83%), and aged between 25 and 34 years (41.78%).The majority of respondents held a college or university degree (46.34%), and worked full time (32.87%).The respondents' average monthly income mainly ranged between US$951 and US$1,500 (41.58%).

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
EFA was applied to the captured responses corresponding to attributes.Before establishing the factor structure, initially the correlation matrix was checked to nd its suitability for factor analysis.The sample size adequacy for factor analysis was determined by The Kasier-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy value, which was found to be more than 0.92 (Kaiser, 1974).Also, the test statistic for Bartlett's Test of Sphericity (BTS) (Bartlett, 1954) value was found to be big enough.The BTS was also signi cant at low signi cance level (0.000).To extract the factors, principal axis factoring method was used by applying the constraint of higher than one eigenvalue for each factor (Malhotra & Birks, 2007).Moreover, only variables with loadings of at least 0.50 were included in the analysis.After EFA was conducted, a total of 29 items loaded properly on the factors.Only one item (i.e.I experience a sense of connection with the settings and facilities provided the destination I visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.)from experiential connection was removed from this study respectively since it did not load on any of the factors and its factor loading value was below 0.50.Accordingly, the nal factors including secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect, secure social bonding, experiential trust, experiential commitment, experiential connection and future experiential intentions consisted of three, three, three, three, three, seven, three and three, respectively.The total variance explained was thus 61.19%, which was above the suggested threshold of 60% (Hinkin, 2005).Cronbach's alpha (α) was used to analyze the reliability of the instruments.Reliability over 0.80 is good; reliability in the range of 0.70 is acceptable; and reliability less than 0.60 is considered poor (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010).The Cronbach's coe cient α estimates for the eight variables were greater than the 0.70 considered acceptable.The EFA results satis ed the requirement for the reliability coe cient of the measurement scales, revealing high internal consistency (Hair et al., 2010).

Convergent and discriminant validity of the measures
A variance in ation factor (VIF) value greater than 10 is usually considered problematic (Hair et al., 2010).
In this study, the VIF values for all eight constructs of this study ranged between 1.80 and 2.62.
Accordingly, the data can be assumed to be free of the problem of multi-collinearity.Using LISREL 8.7., con rmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the sample validity.Table 2 indicates the CFA results.The composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) were calculated manually to measure construct reliability and convergent validity.According to Hair et al. (2010), the acceptable CR value is 0.70 and above.Accordingly, all of the eight constructs had good reliability.For assessing construct validity, each construct was considered to possess convergent validity if a construct had 0.50 or greater AVE values (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).The measure displayed convergent validity because the AVE values were greater than the common target of 0.50, ranging between 0.54 and 0.64 for all constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981;Hair et al., 2010).In addition, the measure was considered to display discriminant validity because the AVE values for each construct were greater than the squared correlations (see Table 3; Lichtenstein, Netemeyer, & Burton, 1990).According to the CFA results, the constructs examined in this study were acceptable in terms of convergent and discriminant validity, and could be conducted using structural equation modeling (SEM) for further path analysis.

Results of the measurement model test
The overall t of the measurement models was found to be adequate (see Table 4).The Chi-square/df ratios (2.42) were lower than the suggested threshold (e.g. less than 3.0; Carmines & Mclver, 1981).The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value (0.05) was lower than 0.08, indicating adequate t (Hari et al., 2010).Moreover, all other indices (e.g.CFI, GFI, IFI and NFI estimates) were greater than the recommended threshold of 0.90 (Hair et al., 2010).Moreover, the AGFI estimate was above the recommended threshold of 0.80 (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989).

Research hypothesis test
To test the hypotheses in the conceptual research model using SEM, the results are given in Table 5.In addition, the results of the full model in this study are displayed in Figure 1.
Hypotheses 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d propose that secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding positively in uence experiential trust.The hypotheses are partially supported.The results display that secure dependence ( = 0.42, p < 0.001), secure affect ( = 0.24, p < 0.001) and secure social bonding ( = 0.13, p < 0.01) have a positive in uence on experiential trust.However, the effect of secure identity ( = 0.07, p = n.s.) on experiential trust is not supported.These four variables explain 49.82% of the variance in experiential trust.
Hypotheses 2 and 4 assume that experiential trust and experiential connection positively in uence experiential commitment.Both of the hypotheses are fully supported.The results show that experiential trust ( = 0.41, p < 0.001) and experiential connection ( = 0.37, p < 0.001).These two variables explain 45.43% of the variance in experiential commitment.Hypothesis 3 postulates that experiential connection is positively in uenced by experiential trust.The hypothesis is supported, revealing that the effect of experiential trust ( = 0.53, p < 0.001) on experiential connection is signi cant.This variable explains 23.92% of the variance in experiential connection.
Hypotheses 5, 6 and 7 predict that future experiential intentions are positively in uenced by experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection.The hypotheses are fully supported.The results display that experiential commitment ( = 0.40, p < 0.001), experiential trust ( = 0.36, p < 0.001) and experiential connection ( = 0.12, p < 0.05) have a positive in uence on future experiential intentions.These three variables explain 44.14% of the variance in future experiential intentions.

Conclusion And Discussion
First, this paper represents one of the rst studies to introduce the concept of place attachment to the eld of secure research and test the concept of secure attachment.In addition, it proposes the concept of secure attachment as a way to extend the scope of place attachment.By modifying the existing the dimensions of place attachment (place identity, place dependence, place affect and place social bonding) proposed by Ramkissoon et al. (2013b), this paper focuses on the dimensions of secure attachment: secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding.Second, tourists will evaluate the likelihood of their experiences with the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak in the future.To enable tourists to have consistently positive emotional experiences, which include the product and/or service provided by the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak, this paper expands the dimensions of co-creation (trust, commitment and connection) from experiential perspectives of tourists traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak.Namely, the dimensions of experiential co-creation (experiential trust, experiential commitment and experiential connection) are proposed in this paper.To the best of our knowledge, this is the rst study to examine the relationships between the dimensions of secure attachment, the dimensions of experiential co-creation and future experiential intentions for tourists traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak.The related literature was reviewed to generate a theoretical model of the factors above.
The objective of this study is partially supported.First, the statistical results show that the dimensions of secure attachment (secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding) have a positive effect in experiential trust.These ndings concur with the propositions of Gut and Jarrell (2007) and Manturuk et al. (2017) that place attachment generates feelings of trust towards destinations with high safety and security.Accordingly, the dimensions related to secure attachment play a critical role in in uencing perceptions of trust (Esbjørn, Breinholst, Kriss, Hald, & Steele, 2015).However, the study result displays that the positive effect of secure identity on experiential trust is insigni cant.There are three reasons for this discrepancy.One is attributed to the fact that secure identity is necessary but not a su cient condition for forming experiential trust.Another is attributed to the fact that as perception levels of secure identity increase, perceptions of trust in the experiences of traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak decrease.The other is attributed to the fact that the majority of tourists may not agree that they identify strongly with the safe destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak, they do not have great con dence in this safe destination.The study nding disagrees with the propositions of Ramkissoon et al. (2013b) and Ujang (2012) that to secure identity is to ensure continuity in the physical, social together with meanings and attachment held by the tourist.Second, the study results display that experiential commitment is positively in uenced by experiential trust.This nding is consistent with de Figueiredo Marcos and de Matos Coelho (2018), who propose that a relationship based on trust from both parties creates su cient value to commit the parties to the relationship.If one party exploits the vulnerabilities of the other, the perceived risk relating to subsequent transactions, and thus their relationship, will increase.Third, the study nding shows that experiential trust has a positive in uence on experiential connection, which in turn, results in experiential commitment.This result concurs with the contention of Hadjikhani and Thilenius (2005) that trust increase by vertical connections leading to increased commitment, thus strengthening the relationship while horizontal connection, on the contrary, weakens it.Finally, the study result reveals that future experiential intentions are positively in uenced by experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection.This nding agrees with the contentions of several studies 6 Implications

Theoretical implications
This study contributes to tourism operators and marketing literature from an academic perspective.It also provides new insights into the dimensions which tourists consider important when evaluating secure attachment, and the effects of the dimensions of secure attachment on the dimensions of experiential cocreation, which in turn, result in future experiential intentions.Currently, no previous studies on tourists' experiences have used a conceptual research model to synthesize the dimensions of secure attachment, the dimensions of experiential co-creation and future experiential intentions in a path model.First, the study nding indicates that experiential trust is positively in uenced by secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding.The positive relationships identi ed between experiential trust, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding may be interpreted as trust being increased as a result of experiencing a high quality of tourist destinations with high safety and security when tourists have high perceptions of secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding.Second, the empirical results show that experiential commitment is positively in uenced by experiential trust and experiential connection.The positive relationship identi ed between experiential trust and experiential commitment may be interpreted as the higher the experiential trust perceived by tourists, the more they feel emotionally attached to their experiences with the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.In addition, the positive relationship identi ed between experiential connection and experiential commitment may be interpreted as the higher the experiential connection perceived by tourists, the more they believe that they are committed to their experiences with the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.Third, the statistical result shows that experiential connection is positively in uenced by experiential trust.The positive relationship identi ed between experiential trust and experiential connection may be interpreted as the higher the experiential trust perceived by tourists, the more they experience a sense of connection with the service providers in the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.Finally, the results display that future experiential intentions are positively in uenced by experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection.The positive relationships identi ed between experiential commitment, experiential trust, experiential connection and future experiential intentions may be interpreted as experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection being important drivers of future experiential intentions.
However, the empirical result shows that secure identity does not play a critical role in in uencing perceptions of experiential trust in visiting a tourist destination during the COVID-19 outbreak.The insigni cant relationship identi ed between secure identity and experiential trust may be interpreted as the higher the secure identity perceived by tourists, the less they are certain that visiting the tourist destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak would do everything to satisfy their demands.The analysis of the relationships between the proposed hypotheses enhances the establishment of generalizations across the relevant streams of research and includes existing gaps in the tourism literature.We hope that the research results are helpful for managers, researchers and practitioners, in addition to providing a useful contribution to relevant studies and future researches as a reference.

Practical implications
From a practical perspective, this study provides further insights for tourism operators to better understand the dimensions of secure attachment, the dimensions of experiential co-creation and future experiential intentions using the proposed model, providing useful information to marketing management which is designing products and/or services provided by tourism operators.The study results will provide tourism operators with a clear understanding of relevant constructs: secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding, experiential trust, experiential commitment, experiential connection and future experiential intentions perceived by tourists traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak.To provide tourists with a highly safe experience of traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak, understanding these relationships will provide tourism marketers and administrators with information they can apply in developing and implementing products and/or services and marketing strategies.
Accordingly, tourism operators should know exactly where and how to invest their money to do the most good, considering the scarcity of resources.According to the results of this study, all the hypotheses proposed in this study are partially supported.First of all, the SEM ndings show that secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding have a positive in uence on experiential trust.Tourism operators should invest more resources in the increase of secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding which is useful to make tourists realize that visiting the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak would do everything to satisfy their demands.However, the statistical result indicates that the positive effect of secure identity on experiential trust is insigni cant.There are three reasons to explain this result.One is attributed to the view that tourists may not consider secure identity as an important factor in in uencing perceptions of experiential trust.Another is attributed to the view that the majority of tourists may not have great con dence in the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak even though they feel safe to visit that destination.Accordingly, secure identity may not be a key determinant of experiential trust.The other is attributed to the view that most tourists may not agree that visiting the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak would do everything to satisfy their demands.To increase perceptions of experiential trust, tourism operators should use some strategies to motivate tourists to identify strongly with the safe destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Second, the study results display that experiential commitment is positively in uenced by experiential trust and experiential connection.This may be because the majority of single customers are expected to experience high perceptions of experiential trust when traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak.Therefore, tourism operators should realize that experiential trust plays a critical role in increasing perceptions of commitment to the traveling experience during the COVID-19 outbreak.Also, tourism operators should adopt measures (e.g. increase the clean and hygienic setting and environment free from being infected with COVID-19) in order to make tourists feel emotionally attached to their experiences with the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.Third, the study nding indicates that experiential trust has a positive in uence on experiential connection.Tourism operators should monitor tourists' perceived experiential trust in order to make tourists experience a sense of connection with the service provider, people and volunteer service provider in the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.
Finally, the empirical results display that future experiential intentions are positively in uenced by experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection.This may be because the majority of tourists are expected to have high perceptions of experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection when they are willing to recommend their experiences with the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak to their relatives and close friends.Tourism operators should be aware that experiential commitment, experiential trust and experiential connection play critical roles in increasing perceptions of intentions to experience the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak in the future.To increase tourists' perceptions of future intentions to return or revisit the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak, tourism operators should make them not only feel emotionally attached to their experience with the destination, but also believe that the destination really takes care of their need for support.In addition, tourism operators should make tourists experience a sense of connection with the setting and environment with high safety and security provided by the destination they visit during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Limitations And Future Research Suggestions
To help with appropriate interpretation of the ndings, the limitations of this study must be discussed.
First and foremost, this paper obtained a relatively large response (N = 505).Since the sample was con ned to the respondents in Harts eld-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, USA, this may limit the ability to generalize the results to respondents in other regions or countries.

1
Questionnaire and pre-testThis study adapted the measurement items from previous studies and all scales included multiple items.To measure the dimensions of secure attachment (secure identity, secure dependence, secure affect and secure social bonding), 12 items were adapted fromRamkissoon  et al. (2013a).Based on Wu and Chang (2019, 2020), three items were developed to assess experiential trust.Seven questions based on Wu and Chang (2019, 2020) were designed to measure experiential commitment.Experiential connection was measured with four items from Randall et al.'s (2011) study.Finally, future experiential intentions were measured with three items of the scale created by Wu and Cheng (2020) and Wu et al. (2019b).

(
Randall et al., 2011; Wu & Cheng, 2020; Wu et al., 2019b) that commitment, trust and connection are key drivers of intentions to return or revisit the destination in the future.

Table 2
Future research is encouraged to test the conceptual model developed in this study across different respondents in other regions or countries.Second, this study did not examine the moderating roles of respondents' of subjects across time, which may have caused misidenti cation of the relationships between independent and dependent variables.This limits strong assertions about the ordered structure of the model even if we strictly follow the literature in developing such a structure.Future research will bene t from the collection of longitudinal and experimental data to measure the direction of causality among relationships more precisely.Measurement model and con rmatory factor analysis.Items with factor loadings of less than 0.50 were deleted based on the measurement scale re nement procedure.*0.001Table Descriptive statistics and correlation of study variables.Squared correlations of paired constructs are on the off-diagonal.
characteristics (i.e.gender, marital status, age, education, occupation and monthly income) on the perceptions of the dimensions of secure attachment, the dimensions of experiential co-creation and future experiential intentions.A more detailed understanding of what moderators signi cantly in uence tourists' overall evaluation of traveling during the COVID-19 outbreak will be bene cial for tourism marketers' strategies.Finally, the cross-sectional design used in this study limits the ability of observing changing patterns

Table 4
Results of the measurement and structural model tests.Note: P, p-value; RMSEA, root mean square of approximation; SRMR, standardized root mean residual; CFI, comparative t index; GFI, goodness-of-t index; IFI, incremental t index; NFI, normed t index; AGFI, adjusted goodness-of-t index.

Table 5
Hypothesis test results.