1 绪论
1.1 研究背景
Consumers require power nowadays due to the increasing uncertainty in their daily life. They perceive different levels of power under various situations. For instance, one will perceive a high level of power when he receives premium service with a “diamond” VIP card from a brand. In contrast, low level of power will be perceived when one only receives standard service without a VIP card. Moreover, cultural orientation influences how consumers conceptualize power (Torelli & Shavitt, 2010, 2011). People with a vertical individualist (VI) cultural orientation view power in personal terms (i.e. power is for gaining status over and recognition by others), whereas people with a horizontal collectivist (HC) cultural orientation view power in social terms (i.e. power is for benefiting and helping others) (Torelli & Shavitt, 2011).
Taking together the previous literature, we propose that the above two types of power could influence consumers’ tourism destination evaluation. Furthermore, the present research adopts a new perspective on tourism destination evaluation by positing that the effect of power type depends partly on whether the arousal of tourism advertisement is high or low, and how regulatory focus serves as the underlying mechanism. We build a moderated mediation model to understand the jointed effects of power type and advertisement arousal. We posit that the interactive effect of the two key constructs stems from consumers’ different level of regulatory focus. Specifically, we predict that the two types of power generate relatively stronger or weaker promotion focus over prevention focus that triggers different evaluation responses of tourism destination, depending on the level of advertisement arousal. Thus, the purpose of this research is to probe into the interplay of power type and advertisement arousal in shaping consumers’ evaluation of tourism destination. In sum, this work bridges the research of power in social psychology realm and tourism destination area.
...............................
1.2 研究意义（Research Significance）
1.2.1 理论意义（Theoretical Significance）
Power has become a hot research topic in the field of consumer behavior, and the research on tourism destination evaluation is also very rich. However there are very few studies have researched on the mechanism between power and tourism destination, especially when it has the advertisement arousal as the moderating role. Therefore, this study links the three important theories both the theory of power, theory of tourism destination evaluation, and the theory of arousal together. It leads to the great theoretical significances.
First, this paper explores the influence mechanism of power on tourism destination evaluation. For many years, scholars have been very rich in the study of both power and tourism destination evaluation, but never explored the connection between these two variables. This article is mainly study the mechanism of the influence of power on tourism destination evaluation. The important theoretical significance was found in this paper.
Second, this paper classifies power through cultural orientation perspective which divided power into two types including socialized power and personalized power. Previous studies often explored the influence of different level of powers on consumer behavior, but very few studies focus on the impacts of power types. However there are some studies found that power type also has significant impact on consumer behavior. Therefore, this study is the first study that distinguishes the impact of different types of power on consumer behavior when they evaluate tourism destination. It could guide the way for future research.
Third, this study explores the role of regulatory on the mechanism of power type and tourism destination evaluation. This paper not only discusses the influence of different types of power on tourism destination evaluation when there are have the advertisement arousal as the moderating role, but also discusses the mediating role of regulatory focus on this mechanism.
..............................
2 Literature Review
2.1 Power
2.1.1 The Development of Power Theories
Dahl (1957) said a bottomless swamp might be a good speech refers to the whole study of power. Power concept was widespread mentioned, even through power is very complicated to conceptualise (Elmholdt & Fogsgaard, 2016; Goltz, 2003). There are many people at different times try to define the meaning of power base on different perspectives. However, the historical line of power theory takes back to the ideas of power by Nicollò Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes since early 16th century (Elmholdt & Fogsgaard, 2016). Machiavelli wrote The Prince, the strategic and idea about power and organization in the classics of political writing. His idea represents sovereign power and the ability to sustain the state (Grose, Dutt, & Grabe, 2014). In his view, power does not a resource; it likes the military image, has the decentralized system and strives for strategy advantages. He believes that it’s very difficult to achieving the totally power. Power theory by Machiavelli focuses specifically on the way to use power and power effects. His study answers the question “What does power do?”, while Hobbes’s theory focuses on the question “What is power?” (Elmholdt & Fogsgaard, 2016). Power on Hobbes’s perspective was seen as the position of will, the most important factor to get what individual wants, or “the production of intended effects” (Giddens, 1984; Hobbes, 1968; Overback, 2010; Russell, 1938). “It can be used to move or alter physical aspects of the world or to act on or alter the will of others so that one’s own will is carried out (this includes the use of fear and intimidation)”. It represents the idea of centralized system which believes in total power, the basic principle of total political society that one person has power while others lost power. His idea was more accepted and appropriate than Machiavelli’s view since the mid-twentieth century (Grose, Dutt, & Grabe, 2014).
Theories of power after Hobbes were developed in the direction of his line. In 1947, Max Weber who was the German sociologist, philosopher, and political economist preserved Hobbes’s power idea and linked it with rule and authority concepts. He defined power as the domination’s factor. In 1978 he described power as “any chance to assert, even against resistance, one’s own will in social relations, no matter what the chance may be” (Horley & Clarke, 2016; Levold, 1988; Overbak, 2010). Power in his perspective is a system’s function, not a capability or property of someone. It is the person and constellations’ possible qualities to give someone’s position in a given situation. We can say that power indicate the relationship’s position of individuals or actors in the dynamic (Levold, 1988). Therefore, power by Weber represents a dynamic positional relationship between individuals or groups, the prerequisites and conditions by socialization. He believed that there are some sources to acquiring power; e.g. money, knowledge, violence (Levold, 1988).
.............................
2.2 旅游目的地（Tourism Destination）
2.2.1 旅游目的地的概念 (The Concept of Tourism Destination)
According to the rising rate of travelers around the world, tourism industry influences people in many ways (Ben-Dalia, Collins-Kreiner, & Churchman, 2013; Fan, Wang, & Bi, 2010; Higginsdesbiolles, 2006). There are 528 million international tourist arrival in 2005, but increased to 1.19 billion international tourist arrivals in 2016. The more increasing of visitors mean the more culture exchange, and more economic improving. It’s the implicit evidence that the development of tourism plays an important role in national economy of many countries （Fan, Wang, & Bi, 2010; Higginsdesbiolles, 2006). We can see it from the statistic of Direct and total contribution of travel and tourism to the global economy from 2006 to 2017. The total contribution of travel and tourism to the global economy increased from 6.03 U.S. dollars in 2006 to 8.27 U.S. dollars in 2017. From this statistic, it’s no great surprise that the expanding of tourism industry increases income, job opportunities, and livingstandard of local people. It comes as no surprise that the study in the field of tourism became the research hotspot in the recent years （Fan, Wang, & Bi, 2010; McCartney, Butler, & Bennett, 2008; Ortega and Gonsalez, 2007; Pike, 2010; World Tourism Association, 2007).
Previous study suggests that to institutional tourism, it’s very important to understand the nature or the concept of tourism destination. That made the concept of tourism destination widespread focus in tourism field more than fifty years. However, the definition of tourism destination still be the augment. There are different meanings of tourism destination from different perspectives (Fan, Wang, & Bi, 2010; Saraniemi & Kylanen, 2010).
...........................
3 理论模型和研究假设……………………………25
3.1 广告唤醒的适度…………………………25
3.2 调节定向的中介作用……………………25
4 研究 1………………………… 30
4.1 设计与参与者………………………30
4.2 操作及程序…………………………31
5 研究 2………………………… 36
5.1 设计与参与者………………………36
5.2 操作及程序………………37
5 Study2
5.1 设计与参与者（Design and Participants）
The purpose of this study is to test the moderating role of advertisement arousal in the effect of power type on consumers’ attitude toward another tourism destination. Two hundred and five MBA students (48.8% female; Mage =33.40 years, SD=2.56) were randomly assigned to one condition of a 2 (power type: personalized power vs. socialized power) × 2 (advertisement arousal: low vs. high) between-subjects design. The independent variable was power type, the dependent variable was attitude toward tourism destination, and the moderating variable was advertisement arousal.
.........................
6 综合讨论
6.1 研究结论（Conclusions）
Through the two empirical research studies, this paper verified the correspondence between the two types of power (personalized power vs. socialized power), the different types of advertisement arousal (high arousal vs. low arousal), regulatory focus (promotion focus vs. prevention focus), and tourism destination evaluation. Firstly, we examined the mechanism of Advertisements arousal in moderating the influence of power type on consumers’ attitude toward tourism destination (H1). Through the manipulation of power and variable measurement, both study 1 and 2 found individuals who were in the socialized power condition (vs. personalized power) exhibit higher evaluation of tourism destination when the advertisement arousal is low (supporting H1a). In contrast, the individuals who were in the personalized power condition (vs. socialized power) exhibit higher evaluation of tourism destination when the advertisement arousal is high (supporting H1b). Then, we examined the impact of power type on consumers’ regulatory focus (H2). The result of regulatory focus measurement shows that individuals in personalized power (vs. socialized power) condition perceives relatively stronger promotion over prevention focus while individuals in socialized power perceives relatively weaker promotion over prevention focus. To add to it, the results have showed that advertisement arousal plays the moderating role on the impact of the regulatory focus on consumers’ attitude toward tourism destination (H3). When advertisement arousal was high, the relatively stronger promotion over prevention focus had a significant positive effect on attitude toward tourism destination. Finally, an important point is that advertisement arousal will moderate the indirect effect of power type personalized power vs. social power) on consumers’ attitude toward tourism destination through the relative strengthen of promotion over prevention focus (H4)
reference(omitted)