影響運動觀光客目的地選擇與參與意圖量表編製之研究

本研究目的局在編製影響運動觀光客目的地選擇與參與意圖之因素量表，並檢驗量表之鑑別度、效度及信度。研究方法以台灣地區一年內曾參與運動觀光活動者為研究對象（探索性因素分析N=350／驗證性因素分析N=520），研究工具參酌的運動觀光參與行為相關研究編修而成，問卷測試從2014年1月5日至4月15日在台灣地區進行調查，所得資料經項目分析、探索因素分析、信度檢驗及驗證性因素分析，研究結果如下：（一）每一問卷項目的CR值與總分相關值均達顯著水準，顯示本研究所建構之量表其有鑑別度。（二）探索性因素分析結果顯示，運動觀光客特質量表產生「意義追求」與「投入行為」二因素，累積總解釋變異量為71.61%；運動觀光客動機量表產生「拉力」與「推力」二因素，累積總解釋變異量為72.64%；運動觀光客體驗量表產生「互動體驗」與「活動體驗」二因素，累積總解釋變異量為77.50%；運動觀光客風險認知量表產生「人身風險」與「社會風險」二因素，累積總解釋變異量為79.90%；運動觀光客目的地選擇量表產生「專業性」、「挑戰性」與「熟悉性」三因素，累積總解釋變異量為77.01%；運動觀光客參與意圖量表產生「訊息注意」與「參與意願」二因素，累積總解釋變異量為82.26%，顯示各構面均其有建構效度。信度分析結果顯示各量表Cronbach's alpha係數均超過.90以上，顯示各構面均具有可接受的內部一致性。（三）驗證性因素分析結果顯示，修正後模式適配度χ2/df為3.30、GFI為.96、AGFI為.92、RMR為.04、SRMR為.02、RMSEA為. 07;NFl為.98、RFI為.97、NNFI 為.98、IFI為.99、CFI為.99;PGFI為.48、PCFI為.58、PNFI為.58；標準化路徑皆大於.50、各構面平均變異數抽取量皆大於.50且組合信度均大於.79，表示各構面均其有收斂效度；各構面間相關係數的信賴區間未包含1，表示構面之間其有區別效度。綜合結論：本研究所編製影響運動觀光客目的地選擇與參與意圖之因素量表其有良好的鑑別度、效度及信度，可適用於衡量影響運動觀光客目的地選擇與參與意圖之因素評價與看法。

關鍵字

運動觀光客；目的地選擇；參與意圖

並列摘要

The purpose of this study was to develop the impact of destination choice and participation intention scale for sport tourists, and to examine its discrimination, reliability, and validity. The method of this study, which participants of the study was potential sport tourists who had participated in sport tourism within the previous year in the Taiwan area; a total of valid questionnaires were collected (exploratory factor analysis N=350/confirmatory factor analysis N=520). The scale was modified from the research and literature concerning sport tourism participation behavior. The questionnaires were distributed in the Taiwan area from the 5th January to 15th April 2014. The statistical analyses included item analysis, exploratory factor analysis, reliability test and confirmatory factor analysis. The results revealed that (1) the critical ratio values and total correlation coefficients for each item reached a significant level, showing construction of the scale has discrimination. (2) Factor analysis showed that the sport tourist trait scale generated two factors: ＂meaning pursuit＂ and ＂involvement act,＂ with a total cumulative explained variance of 71.61%; the sport tourist motivation scale generated two factors: ＂pull＂ and “push,＂ with a total cumulative explained variance of 72.64%; the sport tourist experience scale produced two factors: ＂interactive experience＂ and ＂activity experience,＂ with a total cumulative explained variance of 77.50%; the sports tourist risk perception scale generated two factors: ＂personal risk＂ and ＂social risk,＂ with a total cumulative explained variance of 79.90%; the sports tourist destination choice scale generated three factors: ＂professional,＂＂challenging,＂ and ＂familiarity,＂ with a total cumulative explained variance of 77.01%; the sports tourist participation intention scale generated two factors: ＂message concern,＂ and ＂participation willingness,＂ with a total cumulative explained variance of 82.26%. The above shows all research instruments had construct validity. Reliability analysis showed that each scale Cronbach's alpha coefficients were above .93, suggesting that the internal consistency was acceptable for each factor. (3) the revised model fit the data appropriately (χ^2/df=3.30,GFI=.96, AGFI=.92, RMR=.04, SRMR=.02, RMSEA=.07, NFI=.98, RFI=.97, NNFI=.98, IFI=.99, CFI=.99, PGFI=.48, PCFI=.58, PNFI=.58; The standardized path coefficients (factor loadings) were all above .50, all average variance extracted scores were above .50, and all construct reliability values were above .79, suggesting that each factor demonstrated appropriate discriminate validity; The confident interval of the bivariate correlations between factors did not include 1, suggesting that each factor demonstrated appropriate convergent validity. In conclusion, based on the results, the scale demonstrated sound discrimination, validity, and reliability; the scale is suited to measure sport tourists' opinions regarding future destination choices and participation intentions.