Attracting and Leveraging Visitors at a Charity Cycling Event (original) (raw)

Attracting and Leveraging Visitors at a Charity Cycling Event

Ryan Snelgrove & Laura Wood

Sport events are increasingly being recognized as integral to a destination’s marketing strategy. Charity sport events are a type of event that can be leveraged by local businesses and destination marketers as a way of stimulating flow-on tourism, shaping an image and generating word of mouth. Yet, little research has been conducted in this area. Previous research has shown that length of stay in a destination and group composition can impact subsequent tourist behaviors. Thus, visitors’ push and pull motivations and their influences on participants’ choice of event and mode of participation (team versus individual) were assessed as a way of developing this line of research. The motives of supporting others, learning about the destination and cycling identity were predictive of event choice. Social motives and an identity tied to cycling predicted participants’ mode of participation. Further, motives were distinguished between first-time and repeat visitors. First-time visitors were more motivated than repeat visitors by the physical aspects of the event and the opportunity to learn about the destination. Conversely, repeat visitors were more motivated by identities tied to the cause and the sport at hand than first-time visitors.

Keywords: Charity Sport Events; Cycling; Sport Tourism; Tourist Motivation; Visitors

Introduction

Recently, scholars have suggested that sport events can be leveraged for the economic and social benefit of a host destination (e.g. Chalip, 2004; Chalip & McGuirty, 2004; O’Brien, 2007). Charity sport events represent one such opportunity (Filo et al., 2009b). Clearly, charity sport events do not exist to serve tourism purposes. However, if destinations realize the potential of these events and they are used strategically, they can result in economic and social benefits for the host (Chalip, 2006;

[1]

1. Ryan Snelgrove is at the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, Canada N2L 3G1. Laura Wood is at the School of Kinesiology, University of Western Ontario, 3M Centre, London, ON N6A 3K7, Canada. Correspondence to: Ryan Snelgrove, Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON N6A 3K7, Canada. Email: rsnelgro@uwaterloo.ca ↩︎

O’Brien, 2006). As these types of events are a common approach to fundraising for many charitable organizations (Nettleton & Hardey, 2006; Wharf Higgins & Lauzon, 2003), and can involve participants traveling to a destination to participate (Filo et al., 2008), they represent an opportunity for a destination to leverage existing events to promote flow-on tourism, shape the destination’s image and have participants recommend the destination to others (e.g. Filo et al., 2009a; Simpson & Siguaw, 2008; Taks et al., 2009).

Charity sport events require a unique research focus apart from other sport events as the cause and sport at hand have a significant and collective impact on participants’ attraction and attachment to the event (Filo et al., 2009b; Wood et al., 2010). However, ‘despite their prevalence there is little research on consumer behavior issues related to these events’ (Peloza & Hassay, 2007: 144). Although recent studies have examined the motivation behind charity sport event involvement (e.g. Filo et al., 2008, 2009b; Scott & Solomon, 2003; Webber, 2004; Wharf Higgins & Hodgins, 2008; Wharf Higgins & Lauzon, 2003; Wood et al., 2010), most have been exploratory and only limited work has focused on out-of-town participants (e.g. Filo et al., 2009a). Knowing what motivates visitors to participate is useful not only from a charity’s perspective (Filo et al., 2008; Wymer, 1997), but also for destination marketers and local businesses, to design and promote salient opportunities that meet the needs of visitors (Taks et al., 2009). Further, if leveraging is seen as an opportunity, destinations may view charity sport events as a partnership between the charity and city, in which the city is willing to help improve the quality of the event experience (e.g. securing access to scenic routes that showcase a location).

Before charity sport events can be effectively leveraged, further understandings are needed. That is, understanding why participants select a multi-day event over a singleday event may be important because the length of time spent in the destination can affect flow-on tourism and destination image (Downward et al., 2009; Fakeye & Crompton, 1991). Similarly, it may be helpful to understand the factors that predict solo or group travel to a charity sport event, as subsequent tourism behaviors may differ between the two groups (Bieger & Laesser, 2002; Campo-Martinez et al., 2010; Downward et al., 2009). Previous research in tourism studies and leisure research suggests that key behaviors, such as event type and mode of participation, may be predicted by participants’ motivations (Laverie & Arnett, 2000; McIntosh et al., 1994). Further, the motivations of visitors may differ between first-time and repeat visitors (Lau & McKercher, 2004) because of changes in destination image (Beerli & Martin, 2004; Correia et al., 2008). Thus, the purpose of this study is (1) to examine differences in motivation between first-time and repeat visitors, and (2) to examine the ability of motives to predict choice of charity cycling event and type of event involvement.

Literature Review

Based on earlier work by Crompton (1979) and Dann (1977, 1981), studies in tourism often make a distinction between the motivations that ‘push’ a person to

want to travel, and those that ‘pull’ a person to a particular destination (Devesa et al., 2010). That is people may want to travel, in general, as a way of escaping everyday life, facilitating intellectual needs such as learning about a destination, socializing with others, or improving health (Beard & Ragheb, 1983; Ryan & Glendon, 1998; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Conversely, push motivations are inspired by a destination’s ‘attractiveness, such as beaches, recreation facilities, cultural attractions, entertainment, natural scenery, shopping, and parks’ (Yoon & Uysal, 2005: 47). In the case of sport event tourism as the primary reason for travel, the focus would be on the particular attributes associated with an event rather than the destination.

The approach presented in this study to understanding motivations to travel to a charity sport event is influenced by a separation of push and pull motivations. However, our approach differs somewhat. That is, we classify push motivations as those factors that drive a person to want to raise funds for a particular cause, much like wanting to travel in general. In this case we emphasize that push motivations, or the desire to raise funds, exist before one chooses a particular way of fulfilling that motivation. Thus, travel motivations are not considered to be a push motivation in this case. Conversely, because a number of events are available through a charity (e.g. a walk/run or a cycling event), each of which have various augmentations (e.g. location, single or multi-day), we classify pull motivations as those factors that explain event choice. Pull motivations may be event or destination related, because one or both may help in making a decision. Thus, it is expected that although push and pull motivations may be present for charity sport event participants, only pull motivations will aid in the prediction of event choice and mode of participation. The following review of the literature details push and pull motivations and the importance of distinguishing between first-time and repeat visitors.

Push Motives

A review of the literature on charity sport events (e.g. Filo et al., 2008; Scott & Solomon, 2003; Webber, 2004; Wood et al., 2010) suggests that push motivations include a desire to celebrate an identity tied to the cause, support others, and learn about the cause.

Cause fundraiser identity

Identity theory (Stryker, 1968, 1980) views individuals as constructing a sense of self by adjusting to situations or structure by taking on social roles. Those roles, then, are thought to shape social interaction, with reciprocal influence amongst society-selfsocial interaction occurring over time (Stryker, 2008). The self is composed of a hierarchy of roles, and behaviors are determined by role salience (Shamir, 1992; Stryker, 1980). As identities are based on social influences and norms, it is important to consider how people believe they are viewed by others (i.e. social identity) because of its influence on the self (e.g. Cooley, 1902; Mead, 1934; Shamir, 1992) and committing a person to a given set of behaviors (Becker, 1963). Further, the relationship between

self-identity and social identity may vary by context (Ellemers et al., 2002) warranting the study of both aspects. An identity tied to the cause has been conceptualized as a ‘cause fundraiser identity’ and is the approach taken in the current study (e.g. Wood et al., 2010). That is, following research on volunteer behaviors (e.g. Charng et al., 1988; Finkelstein et al., 2005; Lee et al., 1999), people who have a cause fundraiser identity are expected to be more likely to fundraise than others, but not necessarily in a particular way (i.e. event type).

Supporting others

Not surprisingly, the desire to support others is a strong motivator for participation in charity sport events (e.g. Filo et al., 2008; Scott & Solomon, 2003). In general, this desire is present at charity sport events because of a personal connection with the illness, such as having the illness oneself, the desire to honor someone important in one’s life who has been affected, or the fear of developing the illness oneself (Scott & Solomon, 2003). Regardless of their personal connection to the cause, participants are often motivated to be involved in the event in order to provide emotional and financial support to others (Scott & Solomon, 2003). Further, many volunteer fundraisers indicate that they are in a better situation than those who are diagnosed with the illness the event is supporting, and as a result they perceive a communal obligation to give back (Filo et al., 2008; Scott & Solomon, 2003). Thus, participation is driven by a desire to improve the well-being of others, some of whom are now unable to do so for themselves.

Learning about cause

An opportunity to learn more about the cause the event is supporting is another important motivator as it can provide interested event participants with an opportunity to become more knowledgeable about the cause, ultimately acting as a coping strategy for some (Filo et al., 2008; Wharf Higgins & Lauzon, 2003). That is, the event serves as a way of learning about the nuances of the illness and where participants can seek support, and meet similar others from whom they can learn. An ‘intellectual motivation’ (Beard & Ragheb, 1983; Mannell & Iso-Ahola, 1987) also relates to the educational opportunities that the event provides regarding the nonprofit’s mission, its constituents, and additional means through which individuals can support the charity (Filo et al., 2008).

In addition to the motivation to fundraise for a particular charity in general (push motivation), individuals may also be motivated to engage in particular types of charity sport events (pull motivation). The following section addresses that latter type of motivation.

Pull Motives

A review of literature on charity sport events (e.g. Filo et al., 2008; Scott & Solomon, 2003; Webber, 2004; Wood et al., 2010) suggests that pull motivations could include a

desire to celebrate an identity tied to the sport at hand, socialize with others, engage in physical activity, and learn about a particular host destination.

Sport (cycling) identity

Similar to a fundraiser identity, a set of behaviors can be connected to a sport identity. Research has found that a sport identity plays an important role in individuals’ sport behaviors such as the goods purchased (Dimanche & Samdahl, 1994), loyalty to an activity or event (Green, 2001; Green & Chalip, 1998; Laverie & Arnett, 2000; Trail et al., 2005), loyalty to a destination (Simpson & Siguaw, 2008), or willingness to travel to a sport event (Snelgrove et al., 2008). Consequently, these researchers have advocated for the design of event elements and promotional materials that appeal to and celebrate a particular identity as a way of increasing relevant behaviors.

Social

This motive refers to event participants’ desire to spend time with others and engage in conversations surrounding their connection to the charity and cause, and to share stories with others regarding their experiences (Filo et al., 2008; Scott & Solomon, 2003). Connecting with others in a meaningful way was described as an important motivator for some of the participants in the Grape Escape, a cycling event in support of the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada (Wharf Higgins & Hodgins, 2008). That is, participants were interested in spending time with their family, friends, and colleagues and the event afforded them the opportunity to do so. Further, charity sport events provide participants with an opportunity to connect with past participants and to meet new people, both important reasons for participation (Filo et al., 2008). The ways in which people want to socialize is also important as participants are attracted to both organized and informal settings (Filo et al., 2008; Wharf Higgins & Lauzon, 2003). Further, whether participants travel to an event and participate as a group or individually may also have important implications for leveraging these events. However, research has yet to address whether participants motivated by socialization are more likely to participate as a part of a team than individually.

Physical

In some cases, participants are involved primarily because of the sport and therefore attracted to sport related event elements (Wood et al., 2010); yet others may be drawn to both the sport and cause (Filo et al., 2008; Wood et al., 2010). In a study of a cycling event organized by the MS Society of Canada, Wharf Higgins & Hodgins (2008) found that the second most identified motivation was to cycle and be physically active. Further, having a ‘physical challenge’ was found to be a motivator for participation in the LIVESTRONG Challenge, a cycling event in support of the Lance Armstrong Foundation (Filo et al., 2008), and is consistent with previous tourism research (e.g. Beard & Ragheb, 1983; Ryan & Glendon, 1998). Not only are individuals

motivated to engage in a particular sport, but also they are interested in the event’s ability to espouse the rituals commonly associated with the activity (Wharf Higgins & Lauzon, 2003; Wood et al., 2010). For example, if the sport is running, these participants are interested in having race numbers, timing results and other characteristics associated with running events (Green, 2001). Thus, it would seem reasonable to expect that participants strongly motivated by physicality would be more likely to participate in events that are more physically challenging. However, it remains unclear as to whether this motivation is influential in participants’ choice of charity sport event.

Learning about the destination

Intellectual or learning motives are also salient in their ability to influence travel to a sport event, as some individuals see it as an opportunity to explore or develop a greater understanding of a particular destination (Ryan & Glendon, 1998; Snelgrove et al., 2008). Kim & Chalip (2004) found that a desire to learn about South Korea was a significant predictor of event interest and a desire to travel to the FIFA World Cup held in that country. In their study on the Gold Coast Airport Marathon, Funk & Bruun (2007) found similar results. However, in both cases these events focused on large international events. In fact, limited attention has been given to the motivations of participants at small- and medium-sized sport events (Snelgrove et al., 2008). Taks et al. (2009) found that sport tourists at a medium-sized event interested in learning about a destination were more likely to engage in information search about a destination and classic tourist activities while in the city. However, a limited understanding remains as to the relationship between this motivation and charity sport event behaviors.

First-time and Repeat Visitors

Studies in tourism behavior often distinguish first-time and repeat visitors as a basis of designing marketing strategy and understanding the development of loyalty (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Li et al., 2008). One way that repeat visitors to a destination can be distinguished from first-time visitors, is through the images they have of a destination (Beerli & Martin, 2004). That is, people’s images of a destination change after an actual visit. For example, Correia et al. (2008) found that first-time and repeat visitors to Cape Verde differed in their perceptions of the destination. The theoretical explanation for these differences in image formation is that the emotional experience of a destination replaces the cognitive images held before initial travel (Beerli & Martín, 2004). Other research has found that first-time and repeat visitors differ in their motivations and subsequent behaviors (Iso-Ahola, 1982; Lau & McKercher, 2004). For example, Lau & McKercher’s (2004) study of travel to Hong Kong found that first-time visitors were more motivated by intellectual and cultural enrichment, while repeat visitors were more motivated by relationship enhancement and benefit seeking. Similar results have been found in leisure studies in that people’s motivations change or strengthen over time (e.g. Laverie & Arnett, 2000). However, limited research has

addressed how first-time and repeat visitors differ at charity sport events, despite calls for research in this area (e.g. Filo et al., 2008; Wood et al., 2010).

Method

Context

The MS Society is a nonprofit organization that strives to find a cure for MS, and supports individuals and their families affected by this disease. In order to achieve these goals, the society organizes a variety of different leisure events each year to generate funds. This paper focuses on the MS Bike Tour. The tour is a fundraising event that provides participants with the opportunity to cycle through different communities with often scenic and stunning views around Canada.

The Brampton to Waterloo, two-day event has one of the largest distances of all the tours with a 120-mile route. Participants begin the tour in Brampton following an early morning breakfast with all event attendees. Cyclists arrive in Waterloo, on a university campus, to cheering crowds at the day’s finish line. A barbecue is in operation all day so participants are able to have food and refreshments upon arrival. Participants then have time to check into their rooms, explore the university campus and surrounding area, or spend time at the beer tent before the evening festivities begin. Our informal observations and those of event organizers indicate that all three were undertaken by participants. In the context of the beer tent, in which both alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks can be purchased, the fundraising awards are presented to participants for top fundraiser, top team and many other categories. The next morning participants are given a wake-up call and breakfast and they take-off on route back to Brampton. Upon arriving back in Brampton the barbecues are once again in operation and the participants are provided lunch and an opportunity to spend time with one another. The Niagara tour is a one-day event with the option of either a 25 -mile or 45 -mile route. Similar services and amenities to the Brampton to Waterloo event are offered at the Niagara tour.

There are opportunities to engage in activities in the host destination prior to or after the events, and possible exposure to the scenic aspects of the regions exists during the tours. Niagara Falls, Ontario is widely known as a destination for the whole family. Located within 1 hour of the Toronto area and 20 minutes from Buffalo, Niagara Falls is located on the Niagara River opposite Niagara Falls, New York. Although Brampton and Waterloo offer a number of classic tourist activities, neither city is widely considered to be a tourist destination.

Procedures and Participants

Motivations and related behavioral information were quantitatively measured using a close-ended questionnaire. In doing so, this study adds an alternate perspective to previous qualitative work by objectively observing the order of importance of motives in predicting important behaviors. While findings from previous qualitative work on charity sport events are beneficial in explicating rich detail, and in some cases social

processes, a quantitative survey design may be more precise in establishing the strength of relationships amongst constructs.

As noted, survey data were collected in person at two bike tours in Ontario, Canada (i.e. Brampton to Waterloo, Niagara) by approaching as many people as possible in the social areas and finish lines. This approach resulted in the distribution of 236 questionnaires in total. Of this amount 206 were returned to the research booth resulting in a response rate of 87%87 \%, and 190 questionnaires were deemed to be useable. There were approximately 300 event participants at each of the bike tours where the data were collected. Thus, the results represent approximately 35%35 \% of all attendees at the events. This study focuses on the participants who self-identified on the questionnaire as visitors to the areas under study (n=162)(n=162). Approximately 61%61 \% of the visitors were male and the ages of participants ranged from 18 to 67 (mean =41.3,SD=11.1=41.3, \mathrm{SD}=11.1 ). Approximately 44%44 \% of visitors signed up for the event as an individual participant, and 56%56 \% signed up as part of a team (i.e. four or more cyclists).

Questionnaire

The questionnaire contained three sections. Part A contained identity measures, Part B questions surrounding motives, and Part C descriptive and demographics questions. Personal attachment to fundraising for the cause was assessed using a measure of self-identity and social identity adapted from Callero (1985). These measures of identity have found support in numerous other studies (e.g. Charng et al., 1988; Green, 2001; Laverie & Arnett, 2000; Shamir, 1992; Snelgrove et al., 2008). For each identity variable, three items were rated on a six-point scale with disagreement and agreement anchored at opposing ends. Items measuring social, learning, and physical activity motives were adapted from Beard & Ragheb’s (1983) Leisure Motivation Scale to fit the context under study. The measures created by Beard and Ragheb have found statistical support in numerous subsequent studies (e.g. Kim & Chalip, 2004; Ryan & Glendon, 1998; Snelgrove et al., 2008), and qualitative support in research on charity sport events (e.g. Filo et al., 2008). Items used to measure the supporting others motive were created for this study, and were based on past work (i.e. Filo et al., 2008; Scott & Solomon, 2003; Wharf Higgins & Lauzon, 2003). Respondents were asked to rate the degree to which they agree or disagree with each of the items on a six-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘strongly disagree’) to 6 (‘strongly agree’) (see Table 1 for the list of items). Visitors and locals were distinguished with the yes/no question: ‘Do you live in [Brampton/Waterloo or Niagara region]?’ Participation in previous tours was measured with the question: ‘Have you participated in previous MS Bike Tours?’ Mode of participation was assessed with the question: ‘Did you sign up as a part of a team or as an individual?’

Results

An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with varimax rotation was conducted to determine if the factors derived from previous qualitative work on charity sport events,

Table 1 Exploratory factor analysis of scale items

Note: All units in bold emphasizes the factor each item loaded on.
and quantitative work in other contexts, delineated as expected. An EFA was deemed appropriate because of the exploratory nature of this work in a quantitative sense. Inspection of Table 1 indicates that a seven factor solution is appropriate. All

factors delineated as expected, with the self and social identity variables combining into single factors. The combination of self and social identity variables follows previous research using these measures and can be supported conceptually as discussed previously (Snelgrove et al., 2008).

Cronbach’s alpha was measured to assess the internal consistency of the derived factors. Table 2 indicates acceptable internal reliability for all factors (Hair et al., 1998). The means and standard deviations (SDs) of each factor also appear in Table 2 separated between first-time and repeat visitors. T-tests were calculated to assess statistically significant differences in these mean scores. The majority of push and pull motives were, on average, positively rated as reasons for event attendance. Exceptions included, learning about the cause which had a neutral score, and learning about the destination which was not a motivator, on average. Amongst the strongest motivators was a desire to support others, physical, and an identity tied to cycling. First-time visitors were more motivated than repeat visitors by the physical aspects of the event (t=2.135,p<0.05)(t=2.135, p<0.05) and the opportunity to learn about the destination (t=3.106(t=3.106, p<0.01p<0.01 ). Conversely, repeat visitors were more motivated by identities tied to the cause (t=−5.366,p<0.001)(t=-5.366, p<0.001) and the sport (t=−2.692,p<0.01)(t=-2.692, p<0.01) at hand, than first-time visitors. There were no statistically significant (p>0.05)(p>0.05) differences between the two groups in terms of supporting others, learning about the cause, and socializing.

Logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the ability of motivations to predict event type and mode of participation. The results of the regression analyses can be seen in Table 3. A strong desire to support others (push motive) and learn about the destination (pull motive) were predictive of participation in the one-day cycling event in Niagara. Similarly, a strong cycling identity (pull motive) was predictive of participation in the two-day Brampton to Waterloo tour. Participants motivated by an identity tied to cycling (pull motive) were more likely to participate as an individual, and those who had a desire to socialize with others (pull motive) were more likely to participate as a part of a team.

Table 2 Cronbach’s alphas and tt-values for first-time and repeat visitors

Note: n=162.∗∗∗p<0.001,∗∗p<0.01n=162 .{ }^{* * *} p<0.001,{ }^{* *} p<0.01 and ∗p<0.05{ }^{*} p<0.05.

Table 3 Logistic regression analyses

Note: ∗∗∗p<0.001,∗∗p<0.01{ }^{* * *} p<0.001,{ }^{* *} p<0.01 and ∗p<0.05{ }^{*} p<0.05. Event type coded as multi-day =1=1, single day =0=0; Mode of participation coded as team =1=1, individual =0=0.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was (1) to examine differences in motivation between firsttime and repeat visitors, and (2) to examine the ability of motives to predict choice of charity cycling event and type of event involvement. Salient motives provide not only direction to charitable organizations on how to reach potential out-of-town volunteer fundraisers, but also insight to destination marketers and local businesses. Leveraging charity sport events can mean incorporating destination activities as an extension of the event (e.g. Costa & Chalip, 2005), and understanding visitors’ motives may be an important first step in that regard.

Theoretical Implications

Although some researchers have alluded to the tourist aspect of charity sport event participation (e.g. Filo et al., 2008), only limited research has focused directly on visitors. From a destination’s perspective it appears as though event participants are not interested in learning about and exploring the destination in which they are situated. However, survey responses may be as much indicative of a limited awareness of the tourist opportunities available, prior to, during, or after the event (Taks et al., 2009) or the lack of integration and leveraging of the destination with the event’s activities (Chalip, 2004; Chalip & McGuirty, 2004). Future research that assesses participants’ awareness of opportunities (Filo et al., 2009a) and the effectiveness of leveraging (e.g. Costa & Chalip, 2005; O’Brien, 2007) would be beneficial. Another explanation may be that participants had previously attended the destinations at hand and were

no longer motivated by a desire to learn and explore. Future research would benefit from measuring whether participants have previously visited a destination outside of event involvement (e.g. Beerli & Martin, 2004; Correia et al., 2008; Taks et al., 2009), and assessing how motives change over time using longitudinal (prospective or retrospective) methods (Snelgrove & Havitz, 2010; Wood et al., 2010).

It has been suggested that distinguishing first-time and repeat visitors in terms of motivations is important as actual experiences alter people’s motivations and therefore their subsequent behaviors (Fakeye & Crompton, 1991; Li et al., 2008). Similarly, in the charity sport event context, Filo et al. (2009b) called for a comparison of firsttime and repeat event participants to assess changes in motivations and event meanings over time. This study provides empirical evidence that describes how these two groups differ in their motivations. Specifically, findings suggest that first-time visitors may not have a strong connection to the cause or sport but may develop event related identities over time (Laverie & Arnett, 2000; Wood et al., 2010). Conversely, whereas first-time visitors may be initially motivated by physical aspects of the event and learning about the destination, they seem to be less motivated by these factors over time. As these findings are largely exploratory, research that describes the ways in which individuals change over time, and the factors that are associated with those changes is needed. Further, research that addresses how some of these changes arise may benefit from employing a developmental framework, such as the Psychological Continuum Model (Funk & James, 2006) that has already received some use in a charity sport event context (e.g. Filo et al., 2008, 2009b).

Motives were also framed within a push and pull framework, commonly found in studies of tourist behavior (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Such a classification was made to suggest that although certain motives are important in the desire to fundraise (push motives), only certain motives would predict event participation (pull motives). However, one push motive and only some pull motives were predictive of event choice and mode of participation. More specifically, three factors were found to account for 28%28 \% of the variance in cycling event type (i.e. two-day, Brampton to Waterloo, or one-day Niagara tour). Participants who had desires to learn about a destination or support others were more likely to have chosen the one-day event in Niagara. Although participants overall were not motivated by a need to learn about the destination, it appears as though those who were motivated in that way chose Niagara, in part, as a way of fulfilling that need. This is perhaps not surprising given Niagara is well known as a tourist destination, whereas Brampton and Waterloo are not commonly thought of in that way. This finding is consistent with the idea that participants will seek destinations that meet their motives, based on the image they hold of a particular location (Beerli & Martin, 2004). Thus, in attempting to reach charity sport participants, destination marketers should consider that appealing to a learning motive may only be successful when their location’s image is comprised of opportunities to satisfy that motive.

The finding that a desire to support others was predictive of participation in the one-day event in Niagara was not expected. One possible explanation is that participants with such a motivation may have desired to show support to a close friend or

family member who has MS in person. That person may have found it easier to attend the one-day event with a shorter course as a participant, given the physical demands of the illness and support often required in mid to later stages (Mostert & Kesselring, 2002; Wineman, 1990). Although such an explanation is speculative, it provides an opportunity for future research to explore. Also the findings support the idea that volunteer fundraising is a way in which people chose to support close others (Filo et al., 2008), and adds new understandings to an under-researched area within the study of MS (Pakenham, 1999).

Two factors explained 19%19 \% of the variance in participants’ involvement as a team member or individual. Perhaps not surprisingly, a desire to socialize with others was predictive of participation in a team setting. Although previous research has suggested that socializing is an important part of travel to a sport event (Snelgrove et al., 2008) and the charity sport event experience (Filo et al., 2008, 2009b), this finding provides an indication of how participants wish to socialize. Conversely, an identity tied to cycling was predictive of participation as an individual. Although previous research has suggested that organizers facilitate the celebration of identities tied to the charity event (e.g. Filo et al., 2009b; Hassay & Peloza, 2009; Wood et al., 2010), findings presented in this study suggest facilitating and emphasizing opportunities for teams to interact with one another. Ethnographic research would be particularly beneficial to elaborate on this finding to observe how charity sport event participants interact with one another.

Practical Implications for Leveraging

A number of suggestions for practice can be made from this study’s findings. For example, in the current study participants identified that they were strongly motivated to participate to support others. Destinations such as Niagara, Brampton, and Waterloo could leverage this motive by collaborating with local sponsors. That is, local businesses sponsoring the event could engage in a cause-related marketing campaign by providing volunteer fundraisers an opportunity to purchase products and/or services with a portion of the proceeds being donated to the MS Society. This effort may be enhanced by an opportunity to have the donation made in the name of the person participants are supporting, a motive that is salient to many volunteers (Scott & Solomon, 2003). Thus, fundraisers would be afforded an additional opportunity to provide support for important others and the destination would benefit from the increased economic activity.

Tactics designed to channel participants’ purchasing behavior, and specifically towards event sponsors, have proven to be successful in previous research (e.g. O’Brien, 2007), providing there is local support (Costa & Chalip, 2005). Another important motive expressed by the volunteer fundraisers was the opportunity to socialize with others. In order to leverage this motive, local restaurants, pubs or eateries could offer a post-event celebration for the fundraisers following the event activities. That is, offering a happy hour with some free appetizers (with the intention that additional food and drinks will be purchased) may encourage participants to stay

longer in the destination and to experience some of the culinary options that the location has to offer. As O’Brien (2006) noted, sport events provide the opportunity for the development of relationships that can lead to future business. Further, an implication for destination marketers is that charity sport event teams should be targeted in cases in which social activities are being promoted.

Limitations

The findings of this study should be considered along with its limitations. First, the interpretation of relationships found between motives and event type are complicated because the two bike tours can be distinguished by event and destination elements. The degree to which one matters more than another is not entirely clear. Future research may benefit from using laboratory experimental designs with conjoint analysis to delineate these nuances. The benefit of such approaches, though, may be tempered by a disconnection from ‘real life’ decisions. Second, consistent with recent research this study focused exclusively on cycling as a sport (e.g. Filo et al., 2008, 2009b; Wharf Higgins & Hodgins, 2008; Wood et al., 2010), and therefore the results may not be generalizable to other activities. Previous calls (e.g. Wood et al., 2010) for an expansion of research into unstudied activities and causes should be heeded, to assess generalizability. This may be especially relevant given the prevalence of walks, which could be considered less physically demanding than cycling or running, and perhaps more accessible to people with physically limiting illnesses such as MS. Third, as previously identified, participants previous exposure to the destination at hand and their image of the destination were not measured, but could have impacted the salience or focus of motives. Fourth, it could be argued that the convenience sample used may limit the generalizability of the study’s findings. Last, as in other research involving acts of altruism, respondents may be influenced to respond positively to questions that measure motivations. Although responses to such questions varied, future research may benefit from considering approaches that assess or minimize such biases.

Conclusion

The findings from this study provide initial insight into the ways in which first-time and repeat visitors differ in their motivations to be involved in a charity sport event. Further, motives that predict choice of event and mode of participation were identified. Taken together, these findings addressed unanswered questions related to charity sport event behavior, provided direction for future research, and suggested some practical ways in which these events could be leveraged.

References

Beard, J., & Ragheb, M. (1983). Measuring leisure motivation. Journal of Leisure Research, 15, 219−228219-228.

Becker, H.S. (1963). Outsiders: studies in the sociology of deviance. New York, NY: Free Press.
Beerli, A., & Martin, J. (2004). Tourists’ characteristics and the perceived image of tourist destinations: a quantitative analysis - a case study of Lanzarote, Spain. Tourism Management, 25,623−63625,623-636.
Bieger, T., & Laesser, C. (2002). Market segmentation by motivation: the case of Switzerland. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 68-76.
Callero, P.L. (1985). Role-identity salience. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 203-215.
Campo-Martinez, S., Garau-Vadell, J.B., & Martinez-Ruiz, M.P. (2010). Factors influencing repeat visits to a destination: the influence of group composition. Tourism Management, 31, 862−870862-870.
Chalip, L. (2004). Beyond impact: a general model for host community event leverage. In B.W. Ritchie & D. Adair (Eds), Sport tourism: interrelationships, impacts and issues, pp. 226-252. Clevedon: Channel View.
Chalip, L. (2006). Towards social leverage of sport events. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 11, 109-127.
Chalip, L., & McGuirty, J. (2004). Bundling sport events with the host destination. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 9, 267-282.
Charng, H.W., Piliavin, J.A., & Callero, P.L. (1988). Role identity and reasoned action in the prediction of repeated behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 303-317.
Cooley, C.H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New York, NY: Scribner.
Correia, A., Oliveira, N., & Butler, R. (2008). First-time and repeat visitors to Cape Verde: the overall image. Tourism Economics, 14, 185-203.
Costa, C.A., & Chalip, L. (2005). Adventure sport tourism in rural revitalization - an ethnographic evaluation. European Sport Management Quarterly, 5, 257-279.
Crompton, J.L. (1979). Motivations of pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6, 408-424.
Dann, G.M. (1977). Anomie ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 4(4), 184−194184-194.
Dann, G.M. (1981). Tourism motivations: an appraisal. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(2), 189-219.
Devesa, M., Laguna, M., & Palacios, A. (2010). The role of motivation in visitor satisfaction: empirical evidence in rural tourism. Tourism Management, 31, 547-552.
Dimanche, F., & Samdahl, D. (1994). Leisure as symbolic consumption: a conceptualization and prospectus for future research. Leisure Sciences, 16, 119-129.
Downward, P., Lumsdon, L., & Weston, R. (2009). Visitor expenditure: the case of cycle recreation and tourism. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 14, 25-42.
Ellemers, N., Spears, R., & Doosje, B. (2002). Self and social identity. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 161−186161-186.
Fakeye, P.C., & Crompton, J.L. (1991). Image differences between prospective, first-time, and repeat visitors to the lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research, 30(2), 10-16.
Filo, K.R., Funk, D.C., & Hornby, G. (2009a). The role of web site content on motive and attitude change for sport events. Journal of Sport Management, 23, 21-40.
Filo, K.R., Funk, D.C., & O’Brien, D. (2008). It’s really not about the bike: exploring attraction and attachment to the events of the Lance Armstrong foundation. Journal of Sport Management, 22,501−52522,501-525.
Filo, K.R., Funk, D.C., & O’Brien, D. (2009b). The meaning behind attachment: exploring camaraderie, cause, and competency at a charity sport event. Journal of Sport Management, 23, 361−387361-387.
Finkelstein, M.A., Penner, L.A., & Brannick, M.T. (2005). Motive, role identity, and prosocial personality as predictors of volunteer activity. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 403-418.
Funk, D.C., & Bruun, T.J. (2007). The role of socio-psychological and culture-education motives in marketing international sport tourism: a cross-cultural perspective. Tourism Management, 28(3),806−81928(3), 806-819.

Funk, D.C., & James, J. (2006). Consumer loyalty: the meaning of attachment in the development of sport team allegiance. Journal of Sport Management, 20, 189-217.
Green, B.C. (2001). Leveraging subculture and identity to promote sport events. Sport Management Review, 4, 1-20.
Green, B.C., & Chalip, L. (1998). Sport tourism as the celebration of subculture. Annals of Tourism Research, 25, 275-291.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hassay, D.N., & Peloza, J. (2009). Building the charity brand community. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 21, 24-55.
Iso-Ahola, S. (1982). Towards a social psychology of tourist motivation: a rejoinder. Annals of Tourism Research, 9, 256-261.
Kim, N.S., & Chalip, L. (2004). Why travel to the FIFA World Cup? Tourism Management, 25, 695−707695-707.
Lau, A.L. S., & McKercher, B. (2004). Exploration versus acquisition: a comparison of first-time and repeat visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 279-285.
Laverie, D.A., & Arnett, D.B. (2000). Factors affecting fan attendance: the influence of identity salience and satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 32, 225-246.
Lee, L., Piliavin, J.A., & Call, V.R. (1999). Giving time, money, and blood: similarities and differences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62, 276-290.
Li, R., Cheng, C., Kim, H., & Petrick, J. (2008). A systematic comparison of first-time and repeat visitors via a two-phase online survey. Tourism Management, 29, 278-293.
Mannell, R.C., & Iso-Ahola, S.E. (1987). Psychological nature of leisure and tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 14, 314-331.
McIntosh, R., Goeldner, C., & Ritchie, B. (1994). Tourism: principles, practices, philosophies. New York, NY: Wiley.
Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, self and society: from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Mostert, S., & Kesselring, J. (2002). Effects of short-term exercise training program on aerobic fitness, fatigue, health perception and activity level of subjects with multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis, 8,161−1688,161-168.
Nettleton, S., & Hardey, M. (2006). Running away with health: the urban marathon and the construction of ‘charitable bodies’. Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness, and Medicine, 10, 441-460.
O’Brien, D. (2006). Strategic business leveraging and the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. Annals of Tourism Research, 33, 240-261.
O’Brien, D. (2007). Points of leverage: maximizing host community benefit from a regional surfing festival. European Sport Management Quarterly, 7, 141-165.
Pakenham, K.I. (1999). Adjustment to multiple sclerosis: application of a stress coping model. Health Psychology, 18, 383-392.
Peloza, J., & Hassay, D.N. (2007). A typology of charity support behaviors: toward a holistic view of helping. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 17(1), 135-151.
Ryan, C., & Glendon, I. (1998). Application of leisure motivation scale to tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 24, 169-184.
Scott, A., & Solomon, P.J. (2003). The marketing of cause-related events: a study of participants as consumers. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 11(2), 43-66.
Shamir, B. (1992). Some correlates of leisure identity salience: three exploratory studies. Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 301-323.
Simpson, P.M., & Siguaw, J.A. (2008). Destination word of mouth: the role of traveler type, residents, and identity salience. Journal of Travel Research, 47, 167-182.

Snelgrove, R., & Havitz, M.E. (2010). Looking back in time: the pitfalls and potential of retrospective methods in leisure studies. Leisure Sciences, 32, 337-351.
Snelgrove, R., Taks, M., Chalip, L., & Green, B.C. (2008). How visitors and locals at a sport event differ in motives and identity. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 13, 165-180.
Stryker, S. (1968). Identity salience and role performance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 4, 558−564558-564.
Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: a social structural version. Menlo Park, CA: BenjaminCummings.
Stryker, S. (2008). From Mead to a structural symbolic interactionism and beyond. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 15-31.
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, 121−142121-142.
Trail, G.T., Anderson, D.F., & Fink, J.S. (2005). Consumer satisfaction and identity theory: a model of sport spectator conative loyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 14, 98-111.
Webber, D. (2004). Understanding charity fundraising events. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 9, 122-134.
Wharf Higgins, J., & Hodgins, A. (2008). The grape escape - a FUNdraising bike tour for the Multiple Sclerosis Society. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 19(2), 49-67.
Wharf Higgins, J., & Lauzon, L. (2003). Finding the funds in fun runs: exploring physical activity events as fundraising tools in the nonprofit sector. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 8, 363-377.
Wineman, N.M. (1990). Adaptation to multiple sclerosis: the role of social support, functional disability, and perceived uncertainty. Nursing Research, 39, 294-299.
Wood, L., Snelgrove, R., & Danylchuk, K. (2010). Segmenting volunteer fundraisers at a charity sport event. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 22(1), 38-54.
Wymer, W.W. (1997). Segmenting volunteers using values, self-esteem, empathy, and facilitation as determinant variables. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 5(2), 3-28.
Yoon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and satisfaction on destination loyalty: a structural model. Tourism Management, 26, 45-56.

Copyright of Journal of Sport & Tourism is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.