Home⇛Asia Pacific Journal of Management and Sustainable Development⇛vol. 13 no. 1 Part 3 (2025)

Cultural Sensitivity and Tourists’ Engagement Among Culture-based Destinations in CALABARZON Region: The Mediating Role of Perceived Authenticity

Cherry D Abeleda | Evangeline O. Mendoza

Discipline: tourism, transport and travel

 

Abstract:

CALABARZON’s heritage corridors contain more than a thousand documented cultural assets, yet the region continues to balance the protection of living traditions with the expectations of curious travelers. Using survey responses from 394 domestic tourists, this study explores how an open attitude toward local customs (cultural sensitivity) leads to higher tourist engagement, and how this relationship becomes stronger when the experience is perceived as authentic. A mediation analysis using Hayes’ PROCESS Model 4 with 5,000 bootstrap samples in SPSS showed that cultural sensitivity significantly predicted perceived authenticity (a = 0.959, SE = 0.0124, t(393) = 77.07, p < .001, R2 = .24). Perceived authenticity then predicted tourist engagement (b = 0.442, SE = 0.0454, t(392) = 9.74, p < .001). The direct effect of cultural sensitivity on engagement remained significant (c' = 0.468, SE = 0.0449, t(392) = 10.40, p < .001), and the total effect was c = 0.891, SE = 0.0125, t(393) = 71.41, p < .001. Bootstrap results indicated a significant indirect effect (ab = 0.424, SE = 0.0439, 95% CI [0.340, 0.508]), representing 47.6% of the total effect. The model explained 94% of the variance in tourist engagement (R2 = .94). These findings encourage planners and tourism hosts to move beyond surface-level presentations and create meaningful, dialogue-driven experiences that highlight the voices of local communities.



References:

  1. Department of Tourism. Green Corridor Initiative (GCI): Programme brochure and launch notice – Region IV-A CALABARZON. Manila: DOT; 2021.
  2. National Commission for Culture and the Arts. Philippine Registry of Cultural Property (PRECUP): March 2025 status bulletin. Manila: NCCA; 2025.
  3. Bennett MJ. Basic concepts of intercultural communication: Selected readings. Yarmouth (ME): Intercultural Press; 1998.
  4. MacCannell D. Staged authenticity: arrangements of social space in tourist settings. Am J Sociol. 1973;79(3):589–603.
  5. Wang N. Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Ann Tour Res. 1999;26(2):349–70.
  6. Brodie RJ, Hollebeek LD, Jurić B, Ilić A. Customer engagement: conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. J Serv Res. 2011;14(3):252–71.
  7. United Nations World Tourism Organization. International tourism highlights – 2023 edition. Madrid: UNWTO; 2023.
  8. Zhou L, Yu C. High-engagement heritage experiences and visitor satisfaction. J Sustain Tour. 2022;30(7):1056–73.
  9. Tien CH, Chen LY, Huang YT. Sustaining tourist participation in heritage destinations: evidence from Taiwan. Curr Issues Tour. 2021;24(16):2308–25.
  10. Lin Y, Chen H, Yu Y. Attentiveness and narrative absorption in cultural walking tours. Tour Manag. 2021; 85:104293.
  11. Millard P, Scott N, Jiménez-Barreto J. Story-rich guiding and absorption among heritage visitors. J Hosp Tour Res. 2020;44(8):1217–38.
  12. Mandagi R, Centeno R. Etiquette prompts and tourist immersion in Batik workshops. Asia Pac J Tour Res. 2024;29(2):145–60.
  13. Cheng M, Zhang K, Morrison AM. Emotionally engaging authenticity: a dual-process model. Ann Tour Res. 2022; 94:103345.
  14. Taheri B, Farrington T, O’Gorman K, Hwang P. Real and resonant: authenticity drivers of heritage stewardship. J Bus Res. 2020; 117:579–89.
  15. Zhang H, Gu C, Cheng J. Participatory heritage experiences and perceived authenticity. Tour Geogr. 2022;24(2):221–41.
  16. Fritz WL, Möller H, Brady M. Measuring intercultural sensitivity: the interaction engagement scale. Int J Intercult Relat. 2002;26(6):607–24.
  17. Domínguez-Quintero AM, Rodríguez MRG, Paddison B. The mediating role of experience quality on authenticity and satisfaction in the context of cultural-heritage tourism. Curr Issues Tour. 2020;23(2):248–60.
  18. Parilla E. Tourist engagement and destination loyalty among local visitors in the Philippines. Int J Entrep Bus Creat Econ. 2023. https://doi.org/10.31098/ijebce.v3i2.1272
  19. National Economic and Development Authority. CALABARZON Regional Development Plan 2023–2028. Pasig City: NEDA; 2023.
  20. Park J, Kwon H. The effects of tourism storytelling using local cultural assets on behavior intention: focusing on Namwon. J Korea Contents Assoc. 2021; 21:89–107. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2021.21.08.089
  21. Sheldon P. Relating local culture to global contexts: tourism narratives beyond borders. J Travel Res. 2020;59(8):1334–48.
  22. Guo H, Jones D. Emotional connectedness and conservation support in cultural tourism. Int J Hosp Manag. 2021; 97:102994.
  23. Aguilar M, Lineses R. Pilgrimage sensitivity and authenticity in Filipino religious routes. Philipp J Soc Sci. 2019;44(2):95–118.
  24. Breiby MA. Visitor participation and authenticity in Nordic heritage. Scand J Hosp Tour. 2020;20(2):110–28.
  25. López L, Santos X. Cultural empathy and authenticity on the Camino de Santiago. Tour Cult Commun. 2018;18(3):201–13.
  26. Han J, Lee S. Narrative interpretation and volunteer behaviour in a Korean hanok village. J Sustain Tour. 2021;29(6):900–19.
  27. Bayih BE, Singh A. Middle-income travellers and cultural consumption in Southeast Asia. Tour Manag Perspect. 2020; 34:100674.
  28. Domínguez-Quintero AM. Development and validation of a perceived-authenticity scale. Tour Manag. 2018; 67:207–19.
  29. Shadowen N. The tourist engagement scale: development and initial validation. J Travel Res. 2015;54(4):506–19.
  30. Gedecho E, Masiero L, Wavei E, Qiu R, Kesande P. Investigating the determinants of outbound long-haul tourist daily expenditure and length of stay. Tour Econ. 2022; 29:1995–2011. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166221122490
  31. Beerli-Palacio A, Martín-Santana J. Cultural sensitivity: an antecedent of the image gap of tourist destinations. Span J Mark ESIC. 2018; 22:103–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-03-2018-002
  32. Paiva O, Seabra C. Cultural tourists: authenticity perception in World Heritage Historic Centres. 2016.
  33. Kumar N, Panda R, Adhikari K. Tourists' engagement and willingness to pay behavior during COVID-19: an assessment of antecedents, consequences and intermediate relationships. J Hosp Tour Insights. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1108/jhti-02-2022-0050
  34. Hayes AF. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2017.

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic