Brazil 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup JST_August_2014

This article was downloaded by: [Dr Richard George]
On: 13 August 2014, At: 08:28
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Sport & Tourism
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjto20
Harnessing the power of football:
safety-risk perceptions of sport tourists
at the 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup
TM
in Brazil
Richard George
a
, Kamilla Swart
a
& David W. Jenkins
a
a
Department of Management Studies, University of Cape Town,
Cape Town, South Africa
Published online: 08 Aug 2014.
To cite this article: Richard George, Kamilla Swart & David W. Jenkins (2014): Harnessing the
power of football: safety-risk perceptions of sport tourists at the 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup
TM
in
Brazil, Journal of Sport & Tourism, DOI: 10.1080/14775085.2014.944203
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2014.944203
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions

Harnessing the power of football: safety-risk perceptions of sport
tourists at the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
in Brazil
Richard George
∗
, Kamilla Swart and David W. Jenkins
Department of Management Studies, University of Cape Town, Cape Town,
South Africa
(Received 7 February 2014; accepted 9 July 2014)
Commissioned to host the 2014 FIFA (Fe´de´ration Internationale de Football
Association) World CupTM
tournament, Brazil was given access to a global
platform which holds the power to stimulate considerable levels of tourism
value. However, tourist anxiety surrounding safety and security raised ques-
tions as to whether the event could successfully achieve the host nation’s
diverse set of underpinned socioeconomic objectives. As a benchmark of
success in this regard, Brazil was ﬁrst set to host the 2013 FIFA Confedera-
tions CupTM
, a prelude to the 2014 FIFA World CupTM
tournament. This
article investigates the constructs found to manage sport tourists’ safety-
risk perceptions; and examines how the interrelationships amongst these con-
structs can positively inﬂuence sport tourists’ repeat visitation intentions as a
practice that drives tourism growth. First, a mediation model regarding the
interrelationships between safety-risk perception, satisfaction, and repeat vis-
itation was synthesised from sport tourism literature. Following this, a self-
administered questionnaire was distributed to 187 domestic and international
sport tourists attending the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
in Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil. The results provided support for the mediation model,
whereby tourists’ decreased safety-risk perceptions directly and indirectly
improved tourists’ propensity to return to the host destination, with event sat-
isfaction occupying a mediating role. Managerial implications propose that it
is the responsibility of the event stakeholders to shift any short-term speculat-
ive investment in the safety and security improvements of the host destina-
tion, to investment that is more long term and sustainable in nature. In
response, tourists are expected to demonstrate a greater propensity to return
to the host destination, serving as a core stimulant of future tourism value.
Keywords: sport tourism; mega-events; safety-risk perception; 2013 FIFA
Confederations CupTM
Introduction
Mega-events such as the FIFA (Fe´de´ration Internationale de Football Associ-
ation) World CupTM
and the Olympic Games have begun to attract growing
# 2014 Taylor & Francis
∗
Corresponding author. Email: richard.george@uct.ac.za
Journal of Sport & Tourism, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2014.944203
Downloadedby[DrRichardGeorge]at08:2813August2014

interest within the sport tourism literature of the past decade, offering a platform
to showcase a purpose beyond the provision of entertainment (Darnell, 2010).
One of the most prevalent trends that have emerged in this regard documents the
influence that mega-events have in stimulating significant tourism growth for
host cities in emerging markets (Boo & Gu, 2010; Campo-Martıńez, Garau-
Vadell, & Martıńez-Ruiz, 2010; George, 2012; Taks, Chalip, Green,
Kesenne, & Martyn, 2009). In recent years, it has been the key stakeholders
in the political economy of international sport (e.g. FIFA and the International
Olympic Committee) that have provided this trend with greater impetus; com-
missioning the hosting of the 2008 Olympic Games in China, and the 2010
FIFA World CupTM
in South Africa, as events that showcased this capability
(Darnell, 2010). In alignment with the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China,
and South Africa) model of emerging markets, the stakeholders’ next invest-
ment was set to be in Brazil, which was commissioned to host two mega-
events within three years: the 2014 FIFA World CupTM
tournament and the
2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games (Schissel, 2012). Included in the 2014
FIFA World CupTM
tournament is the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
,
which is set as a prelude to the 2014 spectacle. This tournament is contested
by the winners of each of the six FIFA Confederation Championships
(UEFA, CONMEBOL, CONCACAF, CAF, AFC, and OFC), along with the
FIFA World CupTM
holders and the host nation’s national team (FIFA.com,
2013).
In alignment with its commitment to tourist sector development, Brazil’s bid
to host these two upcoming mega-events was heavily underpinned by several
social, economic, and developmental objectives (Schissel, 2012). However,
leading up to the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
, growing concern devel-
oped surrounding safety and security risks associated with attending the
event (NDTV Sports, 2013). International incidences such as the rape of an
Italian woman in Rio de Janeiro in March 2013 (BBC News, 2013a), the bomb-
ings at the Boston Marathon, USA, in April 2013 (BBC News, 2013b), and the
recent threat of riots and civil unrest across Brazil’s major cities (Daily Mail
Reporter, 2013a) fully justified cause for concern.
Research in this field suggests that in order to manage any prevailing tourist
anxieties, event stakeholders should seek to develop a better understanding of
the tourism components with which these risk concerns are associated (Boo
& Gu, 2010; Kozak, 2001; Qi, Gibson, & Zhang, 2009). It is from this position
that event stakeholders will be able to more effectively identify any potential
sources of tourism leverage, from which they can stimulate both current and
future tourism value (Chalip, 2004).
The focus of past mega-event research has worked to uncover the factors
influencing the provision of mega-event legacy, and has clearly identified
sport tourists’ travel-risk perceptions as a key deterrent in this regard, especially
in relation to the stimulation of repeat visitation to the host destination (Boo &
Gu, 2010; George, 2010; Neirotti & Hilliard, 2006; Qi et al., 2009; So¨nmez &
2 R. George et al.

Graefe, 1998). In response, the literature proceeded to identify several con-
structs that illustrate the potential to explain and manage the threat that tourists’
travel-risk perceptions pose on their future travel intentions, namely satisfaction
(Boo & Gu, 2010; Taylor & Toohey, 2007), previous travel experience (Boo &
Gu, 2010; George, 2010; Qi et al., 2009), and destination image (George &
Mawby, 2013; Qi et al., 2009). The strongest argument, in this regard, has
been presented for tourists’ satisfaction levels surrounding the event, which
was presented based on the independent associations that this construct holds
with the travel-risk (Boo & Gu, 2010; Taylor & Toohey, 2007) and repeat vis-
itation (Boo & Gu, 2010; Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007) variables. Tourist satisfac-
tion has also been previously tested as an event management mechanism for this
threat (Boo & Gu, 2010), but was found to be insignificant in this instance.
The synthesised review of this literature clearly identifies tourists’ satisfac-
tion levels surrounding an event as the tool that exhibits the greatest potential to
explain and manage the threat that tourists’ travel-risk perceptions pose on their
future travel intentions. Although this capability has been hypothesised and
tested previously with an insignificant outcome (Boo & Gu, 2010), Boo
and Gu’s (2010) study geared its measurements of travel-risk, satisfaction
and repeat visitation purely towards the event, which changes its host destina-
tion on every occurrence. As a result, the findings of Boo and Gu’s (2010) study
could not comment on the significance of these relationships in the context of
the destination. This means that destination marketers remain restricted in their
ability to effectively respond to the threat of tourists’ perceived travel-risk on
their future travel intentions to the host destination, beyond the speculative
changes which can be made to the independent variable itself.
The objective of this study is to determine how tourists’ satisfaction with
their experience of Rio de Janeiro during the 2013 FIFA Confederations
CupTM
explains the relationship between their safety-risk perceptions of the
host destination, and their likelihood to revisit the host destination in the
future. Moreover, the findings of this research are expected to inform destina-
tion marketers as to the specific areas of the destination risk profile which
should be targeted in order to more effectively manage the threat that tourists’
safety-risk perceptions pose on their future travel intentions to the host destina-
tion. This will assist event stakeholders by gearing the event more directly
towards the creation of future tourism value, and will support the creation of
legacy that underpins the success of an event bid.
Presented next is a discussion of the literature pertaining to travel-risk per-
ceptions, satisfaction, and repeat visitation, along with an explanation as to how
these constructs are configured into a proposed conceptual model.
Modelled constructs
This study is based on previous research that investigated a variety of sport
tourism-based constructs pertinent to mega-events, focusing specifically on
Journal of Sport & Tourism 3

those that demonstrate the potential to explain and manage the threat that safety-
risk perceptions pose on legacy development for the host destination. In an
attempt to highlight the most pertinent findings of this literature analysis, this
study hypothesises a new mediation model (Figure 1).
Perceived risk and sport tourism
Perceived risk is the uncertainty, negative consequences, and exposure to the
possibility of loss or injury an individual perceives when adopting a certain life-
style or performing a particular activity (George, 2012; Reisinger & Mavondo,
2005; Richter, 2003). When faced with certain levels of risk, individuals experi-
ence anxiety (Reisinger & Mavondo, 2006); and in response they adapt their
behaviour, whereby they suspend their purchase decision or adopt strategies
that attempt to contain the level of risk they experience to a level that is
more tolerable (Mowen & Minor, 1998). In the context of destination market-
ing, an individual’s perception of risk thus serves as a critical consideration for
travellers when selecting a destination for domestic and international travel
(George, 2003; Rittichainuwat & Chakraborty, 2009; So¨nmez & Graefe,
1998). In this regard, researchers have also found that tourists’ perceptions of
risk are affected by a number of individual determinants, such as: age (Floyd,
Gibson, Pennington-Gray, & Thapa, 2004; Gibson & Yiannakis, 2002),
gender (Carr, 2001; Kozak, Crotts, & Law, 2007; Lepp & Gibson, 2003; Qi
et al., 2009; So¨nmez & Graefe, 1998), and nationality (Fuchs & Reichal,
2004; George, 2012; Qi et al., 2009; Reisinger & Mavondo, 2006).
Furthermore, in recent years travel-related risk has been associated with
several dimensions, including health threats (Lepp & Gibson, 2003; Rittichai-
nuwat & Chakraborty, 2009), terrorism (Aranã & Leoń, 2008), natural disasters
(Faulkner & Vikulov, 2001), war and political instability (Gartner & Shen,
1992), and crime in or around tourist destinations (Barker, Page, & Meyer,
2003). In response, if individuals perceive a threat from any of these risk dimen-
sions, they may be influenced to change their choice of travel destination, or
may even be discouraged to travel altogether (Kozak et al., 2007).
Despite the established significance of perceived risk as a predictor of travel
behaviour, there is a narrow scope of research that explores the significance of
this construct in the context of sport tourism (Qi et al., 2009). Populating the
Figure 1. Proposed mediation model.
4 R. George et al.

majority of this limited scope is research that focuses on terrorism as the key
risk dimension relating to mega-events (Qi et al., 2009). However, as develop-
ing nations have become more frequently selected to host mega-events, conven-
tional crime has emerged as another key risk dimension surrounding sport
tourism (Barker, Page, & Meyer, 2002; George, 2012). Based on the compara-
tive nature of this study, tourists’ perceptions of risk in relation to crime and
terrorism safety will be measured, serving as the most prevalently explored pre-
dictive dimensions of travel-related risk. For methodical purposes, this con-
struct will be labelled safety-risk perception.
Safety-risk perception
The literature has indicated a close association between disorder and terrorism,
event tourism, and crime; especially in relation to mega-sporting events (Boo &
Gu, 2010; George, 2012; George & Mawby, 2013; Zekulin, 2009). Further-
more, travel-risk fostering from these relationships has intensified in recent
times, following the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombings and the threat of
riots and civil unrest in future host destinations (Daily Mail Reporter, 2013a).
The dimension of terrorism-risk is well documented in the context of mega-
event tourism, with a particular focus lent towards the Olympic Games (Qi
et al., 2009; Taylor & Toohey, 2007). The US Department of State defines ter-
rorism as ‘premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against civi-
lians and unarmed military personnel by sub-national groups . . . usually
intended to influence an audience’ (1996, p. 4). Based on their ability to
attract mass crowds of international tourists, mega-sporting events are, there-
fore, perceived as ideal targets by terrorist groups, who identify tourists as
‘soft’ targets (Richter, 1983).
Crime-risk is another dimension of travel-risk in the context of mega-event
tourism, and has received a growth in attention over the past two decades
(George, 2012). This literature predominantly documents the significant
effect that crime has on a tourist’s decision-making behaviour, and hence jus-
tifies the exploration of crime as a critical dimension of travel risk (Barker
et al., 2002). Crime has been found to be most prolific within large crowds
of tourists, given that: (i) criminals are more difficult to identify, (ii) there
exists a larger pool of potential victims, and (iii) tourists are more lucrative
targets as they tend to carry more money and additional valuables (Jarrel &
Howsen, 1990).
Despite the growing interest in this subject area, there still remains an irre-
futable need for additional empirical research which attempts to develop sol-
utions that reduce the impact of crime and terrorism on the mega-event sport
tourism industry (Barker et al., 2002; Boo & Gu, 2010). Research attempting
to fill this void has identified destination satisfaction, as a key travel-risk
reduction dimension considered prior to repeat travel to a destination (Qi
et al., 2009).

Satisfaction
Synthesising definitions published in previous studies, Giese and Cote (2002)
identified three core dimensions of satisfaction: (i) satisfaction is a response
(i.e. cognitive or emotional), (ii) the response pertains to a specific focus (i.e.
expectations vs. experience), and (iii) the response occurs at a particular time.
The context in which satisfaction has previously been defined is extremely
diverse, and as a result, Giese and Cote (2002) postulate that a contextually
sound definition of satisfaction should, at least, adhere to the three abovemen-
tioned dimensions. Based on its relevance to the topic, and its accreditation to
the three core elements of satisfaction, this study will adopt a three-pronged
definition suggested by Yoon and Uysal (2005).
Yoon and Uysal’s (2005) definition states that satisfaction is the emotional
result of three subconscious comparative paradigms. The first of these para-
digms compares performance with expectations; indicating that the extent of
a tourist’s satisfaction is determined based on the degree to which the perform-
ance of the experience exceeds, or fails to exceed, their expectations (Bitner,
1990; Oliver, 1980; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The second paradigm, based on
equity theory (Oliver & Swan, 1989), equates a consumer’s cost to his/her
anticipated rewards; suggesting that a tourist’s satisfaction is determined by
the extent to which the value of the experience equates to the time, effort,
and money they spend on the experience (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). The third para-
digm, based on norm theory (LaTour & Peat, 1979), compares tourists’ experi-
ences with an ‘ideal standard’, most commonly formulated based on previous
experiences (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). This paradigm hypothesises that a tourist’s
satisfaction is determined by the extent to which the performance of the experi-
ence exceeds, or fails to exceed, the performance of their previous experiences
(Yoon & Uysal, 2005). These paradigms will be labelled as ‘expectation’,
‘equity’, and ‘relative’ satisfaction.
The scope of initial research surrounding satisfaction in the context of mega-
sporting events documents how the activities that sport tourists participate in
serve as a core component in evaluating service performance; which in turn,
can be inherently associated with their related satisfaction levels (Bitner,
1990; Oliver, 1980). Progressive research then inferred that sport tourists
who perceive different levels of travel-risk with regards to activities surround-
ing an event may differ relatively in the amount of satisfaction they experience
by attending that event (Barker et al., 2003; Campo-Martıńez et al., 2010). More
specifically, it has been suggested that a negative statistical relationship exists
between tourists’ levels of perceived travel-risk and their associated levels of
satisfaction (Boo & Gu, 2010; Taylor & Toohey, 2007). The significance of
this association, however, is under-researched, underlining a potential limit-
ation to existing literature, especially in consideration of the documented
association that satisfaction levels hold with future travel intentions (Boo &
Gu, 2010). Therefore, based on the aforementioned conclusions, and in the
6 R. George et al.

interest of further informing this body of literature, the following hypothesis is
derived:
Hypothesis 1: Sport tourists’ heightened safety-risk perceptions of Rio de Janeiro
during the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
significantly reduce their satisfac-
tion levels with the host destination.
The relationship between travel-risk perception and satisfaction is most valu-
able when attempting to predict future travel behaviour; where research
explores the mediating role that satisfaction assumes in this regard (Boo &
Gu, 2010).
Repeat visitation
The Olympic Games is the single most viewed multi-sport event in history, with
the London 2012 Olympic Games achieving a global reach of 3.6 billion
viewers, featuring a record-breaking 8.2 million ticket sales (International
Olympic Committee, 2012). As these statistics suggest, mega-events attract a
significant amount of media attention and tourist visits for host destinations
(George, 2012). As a result, these sporting spectacles hold the potential to
offer long-term benefits for host destinations in the form of flow-on tourism,
a benefit fostered by securing repeat visitation (Taks et al., 2009).
Repeat visitation is defined as a tourist’s post-purchase decision to revisit a
destination following a previous visit (Rittichainuwat, Qu, & Leong, 2003).
Gitelson and Crompton (1984) explain that the decision to revisit a destination
is typically driven by five different motives, namely: (i) to further explore the
destination, (ii) to reduce the potential risk of having an unsatisfactory experi-
ence, (iii) to expose the destination to other people, (iv) to assure that oneself is
surrounded by the same kind of people, and (v) to preserve emotional childhood
attachments. These findings would suggest that when making decisions sur-
rounding future travel plans, tourists leverage their information search capabili-
ties in order to minimise the travel-risk, and consequentially maximise the
satisfaction which they experience on their trip (George, 2012).
Satisfaction is one of the most frequently referenced dimensions used to
explain repeat visitation (Bowen, 2001). Until recently, various studies reported
satisfaction as being a strong predictor of behavioural intentions in the post-trip
phase (Baker & Crompton, 2000; Chen & Gursoy, 2001; Kozak, 2001; Lee,
Graefe, & Burns, 2004; Rittichainuwat, Qu, & Mongkhonvanit, 2002).
However, results from a more recent study by Kaplanidou and Vogt (2007)
suggest that satisfaction with a major sporting event was not a significant pre-
dictor of tourists’ intentions to revisit a host destination. Recognising this con-
trast, Kaplanidou and Vogt (2007) explain that the divergence of these findings
is a result of the study investigating a non-recurring event, which is more likely
to be evaluated separately from its host destination.

The majority of research has found that satisfaction has a significant positive
influence on the likelihood of repeat visitation to a destination hosting a mega-
event (Bigne, Sanchez, & Sanchez, 2001; Boo & Gu, 2010; Chen & Gursoy,
2001; Cronin, Brady, & Hult, 2000). Petrick, Morais, and Norman (2001)
explain that highly satisfied individuals typically adopt more positive attitudes
towards attending another event in the host destination, and are, thus, more
willing to consider repeating their purchase. Therefore, in consideration of
the above conclusions, the following hypothesis is derived:
Hypothesis 2: Sport tourists’ satisfaction with attending the 2013 FIFA Confed-
erations CupTM
in Rio de Janeiro positively influences their intentions to revisit
the host destination in the future.
Finally, the area highlighted in tourism research found to threaten repeat visita-
tion, is the issue of tourists’ perceptions of travel-risk whereby studies have
reported conflicting results.
Research measuring safety and security risk at the 2004 Olympic Games
(Neirotti & Hilliard, 2006) and at the 2008 Olympic Games (Boo & Gu,
2010) reported that spectators who felt safe and expressed satisfaction with
the security measures associated with these mega-events were more likely to
attend future Olympic Games. George (2012) explains that if tourists perceive
their personal safety to be at risk whilst visiting a destination, they will adopt a
negative image towards the destination and, in response, are less likely to revisit
the destination. However, various studies exploring crime-safety, in multiple
tourist destinations, reported that an experience of personal theft would not
affect a tourist’s decision to return to the afflicted destination (George, 2003;
Holcomb & Pizam, 2006; Mawby, Brunt, & Hambly, 2000).
On review, perceived safety-risk is a core, prevailing factor in the destina-
tion-selection process; inferring that when tourists are asked to indicate their
preference between two destinations presenting similar benefits, they will
select the safer option (So¨nmez & Graefe, 1998). Based on the above con-
clusion, the following hypothesis was formulated:
Hypothesis 3: Sport tourists’ heightened safety-risk perceptions of Rio de Janeiro
during the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
significantly reduce their intentions
to revisit the host destination in the future.
Considering the significance of this hypothesised relationship in the sport
tourism industry, and in order to more accurately define the motives surround-
ing repeat visitation intentions, this study has geared its measure of repeat vis-
itation towards exploring tourists’ perceptions of safety-risk.
The configuration of the hypotheses illustrated in the proposed mediation
model would suggest that this study explores the mediating role of satisfac-
tion, in the context of predicting tourists’ future travel behaviour. The only
documented research that tests similar hypotheses concluded that tourists’
8 R. George et al.

level of satisfaction with the 2008 Olympic Games did not mediate the
relationship between tourists’ travel-risk perceptions and their likelihood to
attend the next Olympic Games (Boo & Gu, 2010). Surpassing this, rather
little is known in terms of the most appropriate approach available to
manage travel-risk perception, especially within the context of the host desti-
nation itself.
This leaves event stakeholders poorly informed as to the specific areas of the
destination risk profile which should be targeted in order to more effectively
manage the threat that tourists’ safety-risk perceptions pose on their future
travel intentions to the host destination. It also highlights a potential limitation
in the existing literature, indicating that this mediation effect needs to be inves-
tigated further (Campo-Martıńez et al., 2010).
Methodology
Sampling
This study targeted domestic and international tourists attending any of the
three 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
matches hosted in the city of Rio de
Janeiro. This target population is in alignment with the findings of studies con-
ducted by George (2012) and Qi et al. (2009) who investigated travel-risk per-
ceptions at the 2010 FIFA World CupTM
and the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games,
respectively.
To ensure a representative sample of the target population, this study defined
domestic tourists as all event attendees who were Brazilian residents, but did not
reside in Rio de Janeiro; and international tourists as all event attendees who
were residents of a foreign country (Turco et al., 2012). In order to account
for sampling frame error, respondents were screened before the data collection
phase to ensure that they satisfied the criteria for the target population.
The sampling technique that was used in this study was non-probability pro-
portional quota sampling. The quota sampling method involved a two-stage
process. First, the control characteristic that determined the quota was enforced
by the fieldworker through the use of one verbal and two written screening
questions, all three of which validated whether the respondents were part of
the predetermined sample. In terms of identifying a representative sample,
the literature suggests a number of converging appropriate quota proportions,
the most significant of which reports that 58% and 42% of event attendees at
the 2006 FIFA World CupTM
were domestic tourists and international tourists,
respectively (Germany, 2013). However, considering the unique nature of the
FIFA Confederations CupTM
, which is typically considered as a prelude to
the FIFA World CupTM
, the event is expected to have somewhat less of an inter-
national appeal. Following this, when respondents were determined to be a part
of the quota, sample elements were selected based on the fieldworker’s
judgement.

A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 187 domestic and inter-
national tourists at three different matches at the 2013 FIFA Confederations
CupTM
in Brazil during the period 15–30 June 2013. The final realised
sample included a total of 183 usable questionnaires, representing a 97%
response rate. The remaining four questionnaires were deemed unusable as
they contained a number of non-response items.
Data collection
Research data were collected through the use of a structured, direct survey
method; issuing respondents with a self-administered questionnaire containing
fixed-alternative questions (Malhotra, 2010). These questionnaires were disse-
minated amongst respondents using the (mall) Event-Intercept personal (face-
to-face) interview method of administration (Malhotra, 2010). The question-
naire was translated into Portuguese, Italian, Japanese, and Spanish in order
to cater for non-English-speaking respondents. The questionnaire was either
administered in hard copy, if requested in a foreign language, or was adminis-
tered through the use of an IPod Touch if the respondent had a comprehensive
understanding of the English language.
Instrument and procedures
The questionnaire included four sections: (i) satisfaction, (ii) perception of
travel-risk, (iii) repeat visitation, and (iv) demographics. The details of the
first four individual sections are outlined in Table 1.
The satisfaction construct, illustrated in Table 1, was measured using three
individual items. The points of the single item that measures expectation satis-
faction range from 1 (Much Worse Than I Expected) to 5 (Much Better Than I
Expected); equity satisfaction range from 1 (Definitely Not Worth It) to 5 (Defi-
nitely Well Worth It); and relative satisfaction range from 1 (Much Worse) to 5
(Much Better). In terms of their specific dimensions, a high score on the satis-
faction scales indicates that respondents were satisfied, and a low score indi-
cates respondents were dissatisfied.
The points of the 15 items that measure safety-risk perception and repeat vis-
itation, illustrated in Table 1, range from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly
Agree) and 6 (Do Not Know). For the safety-risk perception scale, a high
score indicates that respondents perceive safety-risk to be high in Rio de
Janeiro, and a low score indicates that respondents perceive safety-risk to be
low in Rio de Janeiro. For the repeat visitation scale, a high score indicates
that respondents intend to revisit Rio de Janeiro in the future, and a low
score indicates that respondents do not intend to revisit Rio de Janeiro in the
future.
In order to validate the proposed mediation model, Smart PLS statistical
software package was used to perform structural equation modelling and path
10 R. George et al.

analysis (Malhotra, 2010). Data were also analysed using the SPSS statistical
package in order to obtain both the descriptive and inferential statistics that
cannot be calculated in Smart PLS.
Results
Descriptive statistics
The realised sample consisted of 183 respondents, 64.5% of whom were dom-
estic tourists and 35.5% were international tourists from overseas. The
majority of respondents were between the ages of 22–29 (35.5%) and 30–
39 (33.9%) years. Moreover, most respondents were aware of incidences of
crime in Brazil during the build up to the 2013 FIFA Confederations
CupTM
(61.0%). Twenty-ﬁve per cent of total respondents had personally
experienced crime in Brazil; and of these, 65% had experienced a form of
robbery and 32.5% had been assaulted. However, a majority of these inci-
dences were reported by Brazilian nationals, and thus are not likely to have
occurred in direct relation to the hosting of the event. In relation to previous
travel experience, 33% of respondents indicated that it was their ﬁrst visit to
Rio de Janeiro, while 29.5% indicated that they had visited the city on 10 or
more occasions.
Table 1. Measurements and scales.
Constructs;
Dimensions Scale design Items Literature
Question
range
Satisfaction 5-Point Likert 3 Adapted from: Yoon and
Uysal (2005)
5–7
Expectation
satisfaction
5-Point Likert 1 Adapted from: Yoon and
Uysal (2005)
5
Equity satisfaction 5-Point Likert 1 Adapted from: Yoon and
Uysal (2005)
6
Relative
satisfaction
5-Point Likert 1 Adapted from: Yoon and
Uysal (2005)
7
Safety-risk
perception
6-Point Likert 10 Adapted from: George (2012),
George and Mawby (2013).
8–17
Perception of
crime-Safetya
8–12
Perception of
terrorism riskb
6-Point Likert 5 George and Mawby (2013). 13–17
Repeat visitationc
18–22
a
Items 8 and 10 reversed scored.
b
c

The means associated with the safety-risk perception, repeat visitation, and
satisfaction constructs (refer to Table 2) are 2.850, 4.213, and 3.747, respect-
ively. This implies that, on average, respondents were neutral with regards to
their perceptions of safety-risk, strongly agreed with an intention to revisit
Rio de Janeiro, and felt that the host destination was worth visiting based on
their satisfaction with the event. In general, however, an ANOVA test, in
support of the conclusions of existing literature (George, 2012), indicates that
respondents who travelled alone (M ¼ 3.159) were more safety-risk perceptive
than those who travelled with family (M ¼ 2.673) and friends (M ¼ 2.759).
With the literature offering limited insight into the observed group composition
proportions of sport tourists at mega-events, and with this study reporting the
majority of its respondents as travelling with friends (45.4%) and family
(21.9%), this realised sample may marginally underestimate the sample popu-
lation’s average perceptions of safety-risk. In addition, an independent sample
t-test, again in support of the conclusions of existing literature (Boo & Gu,
2010; Carr, 2001; Lepp & Gibson, 2003; Qi et al., 2009), indicates that
female respondents (M ¼ 3.16) perceived signiﬁcantly greater safety-risk
than male respondents (M ¼ 2.73). In this regard, this study reports the majority
of its respondents as male (72.7%), in alignment with a number of previously
observed gender proportions (George, 2012; Taylor & Toohey, 2007; Turco
et al., 2012). As a result, this realised sample effectively accounts for gender
proportion disparity when estimating the sample population’s average percep-
tions of safety-risk.
Measurement model
In relation to the measurement model, the reliability and validity were analysed
using the Conﬁrmatory Factor Analysis technique.
For internal consistency reliability, both the Cronbach alpha and Compo-
site Reliability measures (refer to Table 3) for the safety-risk perception con-
struct exceed the 0.7 benchmark (Nunnally, 1978). In addition, both repeat
visitation and satisfaction are approaching internal consistency reliability, as
their Cronbach a values are 0.632 and 0.637, respectively. In terms of indi-
cator reliability, all items loaded on to the corresponding latent variable
structures. Although most items exhibited item loadings less than 0.7,
Table 2. Summated scale descriptives (n ¼ 183).
Mean SD
Safety-risk perception 2.850 0.754
Repeat visitation 4.213 0.645
Satisfaction 3.747 0.664
Note: SD, standard deviation.
12 R. George et al.

only three item loadings (RV3, CR2, and CR6) were below the minimal
threshold of 0.5 (Malhotra, 2010). Nevertheless, these items were retained;
as CR2 (0.457) and CR6 (0.359) both measure the safety-risk perception
latent variable, which was found to be statistically reliable. Furthermore,
RV3 (0.486) is approaching the 0.5 threshold, and when deleted has no
effect on the reliability of the repeat visitation latent variable. Based on
these findings, the scales used to measure the key constructs were found
to be reliable.
With respect to convergent reliability, all items loaded significantly on to
their corresponding latent variables. However, only the satisfaction construct
was found to have average variance extracted (AVE) values that exceeded
the 0.5 threshold (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Although the AVE values of all
the latent variables do not adhere to the 0.5 threshold, it can be concluded
that the model exhibits convergent reliability; as all latent variables illustrate
significant factor loadings, and composite reliability at the 0.7 threshold
(Malhotra, 2010).
Finally, discriminant validity was considered in two steps. First, the Fornell
and Larcker (1981) criterion was used to determine whether the square root of
each construct’s AVE values were greater than the correlations amongst it, and
any other latent variables within the model. Second, the loadings of the indi-
cators on their assigned latent variables were reviewed, attempting to determine
as to whether these loadings were higher than their cross loadings on all other
latent variables.
Following this analysis, it could be concluded that the Fornell–Larcker cri-
terion was met, with all items loading on to their respective latent variables
(refer to Table 4). Thus, in conclusion, the measurement model exhibits discri-
minant validity.
Structural model
To begin, all of the paths hypothesised between the latent variables were esti-
mated. This assisted in determining any mediation effects, and indicated the
predictive power of the model.
The results indicate that the model explains 16.8% of the variation that exists
within the repeat visitation construct (refer to Figure 2); and as a result, this
Table 3. Reliability indicators of the measurement model.
AVE Composite reliability Cronbach a
Safety-risk perception 0.348 0.838 0.799
Repeat visitation 0.403 0.767 0.632
Satisfaction 0.572 0.799 0.637
Note: AVE, average variance extracted.

implies that the variance explained by the model is relatively weak (Chin,
1998). Regardless of this weak explanation, however, all hypothesised paths
except one were found to be significant at the 0.05 (5%) significance level. Vali-
dating both hypotheses 1 and 3, the model indicates that tourists’ heightened
safety-risk perceptions during the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
signifi-
cantly reduce their satisfaction levels and repeat visitation intentions surround-
ing the host destination, respectively. In addition, validating hypothesis 2, the
model indicates that tourists’ satisfaction with the hosting of the 2013 FIFA
Confederations CupTM
positively influences their intentions to revisit the host
destination in the future. As a result, these findings conclude that satisfaction
partially mediates the relationship between travel-risk perception and repeat
visitation.
Discussion
The results of this research indicate that the data offer support for the proposed
mediation model, which is maintained by three core findings. The first of which
concludes that tourists who experienced lower perceptions of travel-risk within
Rio de Janeiro were found to exhibit a stronger intention to return to the host
destination in the future. This relationship has been well documented in
mega-event literature, in multiple contexts; with Qi et al. (2009), Boo and Gu
(2010), and George (2010) all reporting on the positive relationship they
found to hold between tourists’ reduced perceptions of travel-risk and their
repeat visitation intentions surrounding both the event and the host destination
itself.
Table 4. Latent variable correlation matrix.
1 2 3
1. Safety-risk perception 0.5902
2. Repeat visitation 20.2978 0.6349
3. Satisfaction 20.3435 0.3650 0.7563
Note: AVEs on diagonal in bold.
Figure 2. Structural model.
14 R. George et al.

The second core finding of this research found that as tourists’ safety-risk
perceptions of Rio de Janeiro declined, the more likely they were to feel satis-
fied with their decision to travel to the host destination for the 2013 FIFA Con-
federations CupTM
. This finding is somewhat progressive in the realm of
mega-event research, due to the link that this relationship holds with the host
destination, as opposed to the event itself. Previous research of a similar
nature supports such findings, whereby Boo and Gu (2010) found that as tour-
ists’ travel-risk perceptions decline, their event satisfaction levels increase
significantly.
The third and final core finding of this research indicates that tourists who
were satisfied with their decision to travel to Rio de Janeiro for the 2013
FIFA Confederations CupTM
were more likely to revisit the host destination
in the future. This is consistent with existing literature, which documents a posi-
tive relationship between event satisfaction and repeat visitation (Baker &
Crompton, 2000; Boo & Gu, 2010). Nevertheless, this finding again remains
somewhat progressive, based on the link that this relationship holds with the
host destination, as opposed to the event itself.
Managerial implications
The primary contribution of this research is held in the identification and vali-
dation of tourist destination satisfaction as a variable that can explain and
manage the threat that tourists’ travel-risk perceptions pose on their future
travel intentions to the host destination. The discovery and validation of a
mediation relationship in this context offers a number of practical implications
for mega-event stakeholders, especially for those that operate in emerging
markets.
The first practical implication that this study proposes is based on the finding
that tourists’ safety-risk perceptions of Rio de Janeiro directly influence their
propensity to return to the host destination in the future. In this regard, this
study suggests that event stakeholders, who have bid to host mega-events
with the intention of leveraging tourism value, are advised to invest more
heavily in provisions that make their city a safer destination for tourists to
visit. Due to the extensive set of research that has previously documented the
significance of this relationship the literature already documents a number of
useful suggestions that detail the specific areas in which they can target this
investment. Previous examples of this include the employment of additional
safety and security forces, as exhibited by the British Government leading up
to the 2012 London Olympic Games (George & Mawby, 2013), as well as
the efforts of the Brazilian Government to eradicate drug-related violence in
Rio de Janeiro leading up to the 2013 FIFA Confederations CupTM
(Daily
Mail Reporter, 2013b). The only issue with investing in safety and security pro-
visions in this regard, despite it being somewhat effective, is that this invest-
ment is expensive and speculative in nature. With a better understanding of

the effect that tourists’ safety-risk perceptions of a destination have on their
repeat visitation intentions of that destination, event stakeholders will be able
to make more informed decisions as to the areas of the destination’s risk
profile where an investment will prove most effective.
This highlights the importance of the discovery and validation of tourist des-
tination satisfaction as a variable that can explain and manage the threat that
tourists’ travel-risk perceptions pose on their future travel intentions to the
host destination. More specifically, the partial mediating role that tourists’ sat-
isfaction with the host destination adopts in this regard offers a number of key
practical implications. The first practical proposition is informed by the way in
which individuals measure their perceptions of safety-risk and levels of satisfac-
tion surrounding the destination. Typically, both of these measures are linked to
the activities in which tourists participate in during their trip to a destination,
with the attendance of the associated mega-event only occupying one of
these spots (Barker et al., 2003; Campo-Martıńez et al., 2010). As a result,
instead of focusing short-term speculative investment on improving the
safety and security features of the mega-event itself, event stakeholders are
advised to diversify their safety and security investment across a number of
key tourist activities throughout the host destination. More specifically, event
stakeholders should invest in longer term sustainable safety and security
improvements (i.e. CCTV cameras, access control stations, and protocol adap-
tations) in order to prolong the initial heightened impression tourists hold
during the event to a fixed impression that can form a safety and security
legacy following the event. More targeted investment, in this regard, will
ensure that event stakeholders’ safety and security improvements will
strengthen tourists’ intentions to revisit the host destination, both directly
through observation and indirectly through an unobserved increase in satisfac-
tion. Furthermore, safety and security improvements that are longer term in
nature are likely to remain prevalent in the minds of tourists for longer,
which is especially important if there is a lengthy disconnect between tourists’
first experiences with a destination, and their subsequent considerations to
return to the destination at a later stage.
Another core practical proposition of this research is uncovered by the influ-
ence that tourists’ satisfaction with a host destination has on their intentions to
revisit the destination at a later stage. This proposition is informed by the docu-
mented means in which individuals measure the levels of satisfaction that they
associate with a destination (cf. Yoon & Uysal, 2005) and how this measure
links to their potential motives for repeat visitation.
With respect to ‘equity’ satisfaction, event stakeholders are advised to mini-
mise the time, money, and effort required of tourists to plan and partake in a trip to
the host destination. Possible reductions in time and effort could be achieved by
streamlining and packaging the booking process; offering the capability for tour-
ists to book accommodation, transport, and tickets for activities all on a single
booking platform. Furthermore, reductions in perceived cost could be achieved
16 R. George et al.

by strategically pricing the proposed travel packages and limiting the inflation of
activity prices during mega-events. To strengthen repeat visitation intentions in
this regard, event stakeholders are advised to employ post-trip promotional
efforts which remind tourists of the ‘equity’ satisfaction that this experience pro-
vided them with. These efforts should suggest that this experience can be easily
replicated and will minimise any unnecessary risk that can be associated with
purchasing an alternative, potentially unsatisfactory experience.
With respect to ‘expectation’ satisfaction, event stakeholders are advised to
ensure that tourists’ trips to the host destination, for the purpose of attending a
mega-event,successfullyexceed theirexpectations. This canbeachievedbyshift-
ing investment away from extravagant marketing campaigns and redirecting it
towards improving customer service operations. This strategy will force event sta-
keholders to remain reliant on the status and reputation of the mega-event alone to
attract initial tourist visits. Investments in customer service operations should
focus on offering training courses for local workers across all sectors, aimed at
improving their language skills and business etiquette. ‘Expectation’ satisfaction
will strengthen tourists’ repeat visitation intentions in this regard, with the help of
additional, tailored post-trip promotional efforts. These promotional efforts
should leverage the ‘expectation’ satisfaction established during the tourists’
initial experience of the destination, whilst attending the mega-event and use it
topromotetheideathatthehostdestinationisabletoexceedany prevailingexpec-
tations of the destination; especially those that can be linked to tourists’ motiv-
ations for repeat visitation (cf. Gitelson & Crompton, 1984).
Finally, with respect to ‘relative’ satisfaction, event stakeholders have little
control over tourists’ reported measures, due to their inability to control tourists’
previous travel experiences. The best strategy for event stakeholders in this
regard would be to support the shift of investment into the improvement of cus-
tomer service operations, which would strengthen the relative performance of
the host destination when compared to previous alternative destination experi-
ences. Furthermore, ‘relative’ satisfaction will strengthen tourists’ repeat visita-
tion intentions in this regard, with the help of additional, tailored, post-trip
promotional efforts. These promotional efforts should leverage the ‘relative’
satisfaction established during the tourists’ initial experience of the destination,
whilst attending the mega-event, and use it to reinforce the idea that a repeat
visit to the host destination is the choice of future travel that is most likely to
fulfil any prevailing future travel motives.
It should be noted that in order to most effectively leverage the satisfaction
established during the tourists’ initial experience of the destination, whilst
attending the mega-event, the proposed post-trip promotional efforts should
be targeted specifically at potential repeat travellers and should be geared
towards highlighting the ability of the destination to fulfil the documented
motives typically associated with destination repeat visitation (cf. Gitleson &
Crompton, 1984). In this regard, all post-trip promotional content should
promote: (i) information about areas of the destination which have not yet

been visited, (ii) the ease within which the destination can replicate and guar-
antee a satisfactory visit, (iii) potential package deals that encourage travel in
larger groups, and (iv) informed trip suggestions based on previous travel
patterns.
Limitations
The main limitation of this study surrounds the amount of variance the model
explains, 0.168. Typically, an explanation of a greater proportion of variance in
a model is desirable; Malhotra (2010) suggests that values exceeding 0.60 are
considered acceptable. However, Colton and Bower (2002) report that it is a
common misconception that models with low R-squared values can exhibit
no meaningful relationships in the data. In fact, Colton and Bower (2002)
suggest that research which reflects human behaviour can often fail to
explain high proportions of variance; concluding that significant inferences
from the data can still hold practical importance.
A further limitation to the study surrounds the extent to which the final
realised sample differs slightly from the targeted sample, in terms of the
quota proportions. The implications of reporting a greater sample of domestic
tourists, than the predetermined reported quota, suggests that this realised
sample: (i) may marginally underestimate the sample populations’ overall per-
ception of safety-risk, due to the de-sensitivity to risk that domestic tourists will
have experienced whilst residing in the country and (ii) may marginally over-
estimate the sample populations’ overall intention to revisit the host destination,
as domestic tourists travel behaviour in this regard will be more routine.
The final limitation of the study surrounds the extenuating circumstances
under which the fieldwork was conducted. During the data collection
process, a number of violent protests occurred within the research area that
directly influenced the event on which the research was based. As a result, it
is entirely possible that under these unique set of circumstances, this research
recorded measures of safety-risk perceptions that were higher than typically
expected, and measures of satisfaction and intentions to revisit the host destina-
tion that were higher than typically expected, as demonstrated by the significant
relationships illustrated in the model. This is in response to the reports and
encounters of violent mobs, strong repressive actions from the local police,
and general public disruption across Brazil’s major cities.
Future research
Further research should investigate the incorporation of additional constructs
such as information search, as modelled by Taks et al. (2009), in order to
explain more variation in the conceptual model. The decision to exclude infor-
mation search from this mediation analysis was based on the composition of
this study’s targeted sample, which reported 64.5% of respondents as domestic
18 R. George et al.

tourists. Snepenger and Snepenger (1993) explain in this regard, that routine
trips made by domestic tourists require very little or no information search,
compared to overseas trips made by international tourists which require exten-
sive external information search. As a result of this study receiving such a high
proportion of domestic tourists, it was determined that the construct of infor-
mation search would hold little relevance amongst this study’s realised sample.
Complimenting this line of research, future studies could further investigate
which safety-risk information sources are the most prominent in reducing tour-
ists’ perceptions of safety-risk surrounding a host destination. Previous research
has identified: television, magazines, and newspapers (Chen & Gursoy, 2000;
Fodness & Murray, 1999; Money & Crotts, 2003) as the most popular pre-
trip information sources; however, no past research has statistically associated
these communication platforms with the ability to control travel-related risk
perceptions. Research of this nature would highlight the areas where event sta-
keholders should focus their investment in an attempt to tackle tourists’ safety
and security anxieties surrounding the host destination. An investment of this
nature would be expected to further increase tourists’ propensity to return to
a host destination, forming a stimulant for socioeconomic value and tourism
growth opportunities.
Finally, future studies could also investigate the role that destination image
adopts within this mediation model. Previous research has documented a link
between tourists’ images of the destination and their perceptions of travel-
risk (Qi et al., 2009). Furthermore, this study’s findings suggest that destination
image can be inherently linked to the creation of ‘expectation’ satisfaction, a
notion that is supported by existing literature (Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007).
Research of this nature has the potential to shift the implications of this
mediation model from being purely mitigating in nature to being able to offer
more predictive courses of action. In this respect, event stakeholders will be
informed as to both the pre-trip and post-trip communication strategies that
are most effective in stimulating repeat travel intentions amongst tourists, fol-
lowing the hosting of a mega-event.
References
Aranã, J. E., & Leoń, C J. (2008). The impact of terrorism on tourism demand. Annals
of Tourism Research, 35(2), 299–315.
Baker, D., & Crompton, J. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioural intentions.
Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785–804.
Barker, M., Page, S., & Meyer, D. (2002). Modelling tourism crime: The 2000
America’s Cup. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 762–782.
Barker, M., Page, S., & Meyer, D. (2003). Urban visitor perceptions of safety during a
special event. Journal of Travel Research, 41(4), 355–361.
BBC News. (2013a). Rio de Janeiro bus rape: Shock over latest Brazil attack. Retrieved
from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-22421512

BBC News. (2013b). Newspaper review: Papers reflect on Boston bombings. Retrieved
from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22178829
Bigne, J. E., Sanchez, M. I., & Sanchez, J. (2001). Tourism image, evaluation variables
and after purchase behaviour: Inter-relationship. Tourism Management, 22(6),
607–616.
Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The effects of physical surround-
ings and employee responses. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 69–82.
Boo, S., & Gu, H. (2010). Risk perception of mega-events. Journal of Sport & Tourism,
15(2), 139–161.
Bowen, D. (2001). Antecedents of consumer satisfaction and dis-satisfaction on long-
haul inclusive tours: A reality check on theoretical considerations. Tourism
Management, 22(1), 49–61.
Campo-Martıńez, S., Garau-Vadell, J. B., & Martıńez-Ruiz, M. P. (2010). Factors
influencing repeat visits to a destination: The influence of group composition.
Tourism Management, 31(6), 862–870.
Carr, N. (2001). An exploratory study of gendered differences in you tourists percep-
tion of danger within London. Tourism Management, 22(1), 565–570.
Chalip, L. (2004). Beyond impact: A general model for sport event leverage. In B. W.
Ritchie & D. Adair (Eds.), Sport tourism: Interrelationships, impacts and issues
(pp. 226–252). Clevedon: Channel View.
Chen, J. S., & Gursoy, D. (2000). Cross-cultural comparison of the information sources
used by first-time and repeat travelers and its marketing implications. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 19(1), 191–203.
Chen, J. S., & Gursoy, D. (2001). An investigation of tourists’ destination loyalty and
preferences. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
13(2), 79–85.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation
modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research
(pp. 89–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Colton, J. A., & Bower, K. M. (2002). Some misconceptions about R2
. International
Society of Six Sigma Professionals, EXTRAOrdinary Sense, 3(2), 20–22.
Cronin, J. J. Jr., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality,
value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioural intentions in service
environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193–218.
Daily Mail Reporter. (2013a). Riot police, tear gas and fire . . . but it’s not for real!
Brazilian authorities prepare for Confederations Cup with World Cup just one
year away. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-
2332849/Brazil-security-forces-prepare-riots-Confederations-Cup.html
Daily Mail Reporter. (2013b). Cleaning up Brazil’s most dangerous favelas: How
armed police are waging war on vicious drug cartels that rule the slums of Rio as
they fight to make the city safe before the 2016 Olympic Games. Retrieved from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2342458/Cleaning-Brazils-dangerous-fav
elas-How-armed-police-waging-war-vicious-drug-cartels-rule-slums-Rio-fight-make-
city-safe-eyes-world-turn-2016-Olympic-Games.html
Darnell, S. C. (2010). Mega sport for all? Assessing the development promises of Rio
2016. In R. Barney, J. Forsyth, & M. Heine (Eds.), Rethinking matters Olympic:
Investigations into the socio-cultural study of the modern Olympic movement,
10th international symposium for Olympic research (pp. 498–507). London,
ON: International Centre for Olympic Studies. Retrieved from http://www.uwo.
ca/olympic/files/downloads/2010_edition_collection.pdf
20 R. George et al.

Faulkner, B., & Vikulov, S. (2001). Katherine, washed out one day, back on track the
next: A post-mortem of a tourism disaster. Tourism Management, 22, 331–344.
FIFA.com. (2013). More than 588,178 tickets sold for the FIFA Confederations Cup.
Retrieved from http://www.ﬁfa.com/confederationscup/organisation/ticketing/
news/newsid=2075224/index.html
Floyd, M. F., Gibson, H., Pennington-Gray, L., & Thapa, B. (2004). The effect of risk
perceptions on intentions to travel in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Journal
of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 15(2–3), 19–38.
Fodness, D., & Murray, B. (1999). A model of tourist information search behaviour.
Journal of Travel Research, 37(3), 220–230.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing
Research, 18(3), 382–388.
Fuchs, G., & Reichal, A. (2004). Cultural differences in tourist destination risk percep-
tion: An exploratory study. Tourism, 52(1), 21–37.
Gartner, W. C., & Shen, J. (1992). The impact of Tiananmen Square on China’s tourism
image. Journal of Travel Research, 30(4), 47–52.
George, R. (2003). Tourists’ perceptions of safety and security while visiting Cape
Town. Tourism Management, 24(8), 575–585.
George, R. (2010). Visitor perceptions of crime-safety and attitudes towards risk: The
case of Table Mountain National Park, Cape Town. Tourism Management, 31,
806–815.
George, R. (2012). International tourists’ perceptions of crime-risk and their future
travel intentions during the 2010 FIFA World CupTM
in South Africa. Crime
Prevention and Community Safety, 14(2), 79–103.
George, R., & Mawby, R. (2013). Security at the 2012 London Olympics: Spectators’
perceptions of London as a safe city. Security Journal, 21, 95–116.
Germany. (2013). National tourist board. ‘A time to make friendsTM
’: The 2006 FIFA
World CupTM
and its effect on the image and economy of Germany. Berlin:
Government Printer.
Gibson, H., & Yiannakis, A. (2002). Tourist roles: Needs and the life course. Annals of
Tourism Research, 29(2), 358–383.
Giese, J. L., & Cote, J. A. (2002). Deﬁning consumer satisfaction. Academy of
Marketing Science Review, 2000(1), 1–24.
Gitelson, R. J., & Crompton, J. L. (1984). Insights into the repeat vacation phenom-
enon. Annals of Tourism Research, 11(1), 199–217.
Holcomb, J., & Pizam, A. (2006). Do incidents of theft at tourist destinations have
a negative effect on tourists’ decisions to travel to affected destinations? In
Y. Mansfeld & A. Pizam (Eds.), Tourism, security and safety: From theory to prac-
tice (pp. 105–124). Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
International Olympic Committee. (2012). Marketing report London 2012. Retrieved
from http://www.olympic.org/Documents/IOC_Marketing/London_2012/LR_
IOC_MarketingReport_medium_res1.pdf
Jarrel, S., & Howsen, R. M. (1990). Transient crowding and crime. American Journal
of Economics and Sociology, 49(4), 483–493.
Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2007). The interrelationship between sport event and des-
tination image and sport tourists’ behaviours. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 12(3–4),
183–206.
Kozak, M. (2001). Repeaters’ behaviour at two distinct destinations. Annals of Tourism
Research, 28(3), 784–807.

Kozak, M., Crotts, J. C., & Law, R. (2007). The impact of the perception of risk on
international travellers. International Journal of Tourism Research, 9(1), 233–242.
LaTour, S. A., & Peat, N. C. (1979). Conceptual and methodological issues in consu-
mer satisfaction research. Advances in Consumer Research, 6(1), 431–437.
Lee, J., Graefe, A., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Service quality, satisfaction, and behavioral
intention among forest visitors. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 17(1),
73–82.
Lepp, A., & Gibson, H. (2003). Tourist roles, perceived risk and international tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), 606–624.
Malhotra, N. (2010). Marketing research: An applied orientation (6th ed.). Cape Town:
Pearson.
Mawby, R. I., Brunt, P., & Hambly, Z. (2000). Fear of crime among British holiday-
makers. British Journal of Criminology, 40(2), 468–479.
Money, R. B., & Crotts, J. C. (2003). The effect of uncertainty avoidance on infor-
mation search, planning, and purchases of international travel vacations. Tourism
Management, 24(2), 191–202.
Mowen, J., & Minor, M. (1998). Consumer behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
NDTV Sports. (2013). Brazil football chief admits 2014 World Cup safety concerns.
Retrieved from http://sports.ndtv.com/football/news/202819-brazil-football-chief-
admits-2014-world-cup-safety-concerns
Neirotti, L. D., & Hilliard, T. (2006). Impact of Olympic spectator safety perception
and security concerns on travel decisions. Tourism Review International, 10(1),
269–284.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satis-
faction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(1), 460–469.
Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989). Equity and disconﬁrmation perceptions as inﬂu-
ences on merchant and product satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 1(1),
372–383.
Petrick, J. F., Morais, D. D., & Norman, W. C. (2001). An examination of the determi-
nants of entertainment vacationers’ intentions to revisit. Journal of Travel
Research, 40(1), 41–48.
Qi, C. X., Gibson, H. J., & Zhang, J. (2009). Perceptions of risk and travel intentions:
The case of China and the Beijing Olympic Games. Journal of Sport & Tourism,
14(1), 43–67.
Reisinger, Y., & Mavondo, F. (2005). Travel anxiety and intentions to travel interna-
tionally: Implications of travel risk perceptions. Journal of Travel Research,
43(3), 212–225.
Reisinger, Y., & Mavondo, F. (2006). Cultural differences in travel risk perception.
Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 20(1), 13–31.
Richter, L. K. (1983). Tourism politics and political science: A case of not so benign
neglect. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(3), 313–315.
Richter, L. K. (2003). International tourism and its global public health consequences.
Journal of Travel Research, 41(4), 340–347.
Rittichainuwat, B., & Chakraborty, G. (2009). Perceived travel risks regarding terror-
ism and disease: The case of Thailand. Tourism Management, 30(3), 410–418.
Rittichainuwat, B., Qu, H., & Leong, J. (2003). The collective impacts of a bundle of
travel determinants on repeat visitation. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Research, 27(1), 217–236.
22 R. George et al.

Rittichainuwat, B. N., Qu, H., & Mongkhonvanit, C. (2002). A study of the impact of
travel satisfaction on the likelihood of travelers to revisit Thailand. Journal of
Travel & Tourism Marketing, 12(2), 19–43.
Schissel, L. (2012). Rio 2016: Mega-event urban planning and imagining the anti-
Olympics scale-shift process (Unpublished thesis). University of Miami.
Snepenger, D., & Snepenger, M. (1993). Information search by pleasure travellers. In
M. A. Kahn, M. D. Olsen, & T. Var (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of hospitality and
tourism (pp. 830–835). New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
So¨nmez, S. F., & Graefe, A. R. (1998). Determining future travel behaviour from past
travel experience and perceptions of risk and safety. Journal of Travel Research,
37(1), 171–177.
Taks, M., Chalip, L., Green, B. C., Kesenne, S., & Martyn, S. (2009). Factors affecting
repeat visitation and ﬂow-on tourism as sources of event strategy sustainability.
Journal of Sport & Tourism, 14(2–3), 121–142.
Taylor, T., & Toohey, K. (2007). Perceptions of terrorism threats at the 2004 Olympic
Games: Implications for sport events. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 12(2), 99–114.
Turco, D., Tichaawa, T., Moodley, V., Munien, S., Jaggernath, J., & Stofberg, Q.
(2012). Proﬁles of foreign visitors attending the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South
Africa. African Journal for Physical, Health Education, Recreation and Dance,
1(1), 73–80.
US Department of State. (1996). Patterns of global terrorism: 1996. Washington, DC:
Author.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satis-
faction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1),
45–56.
Zekulin, M. (2009). Olympic security: Assessing the risk of terrorism at the 2010
Vancouver Winter Games. Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, 12(1), 1–25.

Brazil 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup JST_August_2014

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (14)

Similaire à Brazil 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup JST_August_2014

Similaire à Brazil 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup JST_August_2014 (20)

Brazil 2013 FIFA Confederations Cup JST_August_2014