Average Differences in Decision Making to Travel Abroad Between Groups by Tour Region

tourists with a place of residence in “Rural” and the group with a place of residence in “Urban”. The Levene test results showed that the Sig F = 0.066> 0.05 and the average T-test showed that Sig (2-tailed) = 0.253 (> 0.05), which was not statistically significant. This shows that there is no difference in the average decision to travel abroad between the tourist groups with a place of residence in “Rural” and the group with a place of residence in “Urban” in this study.

Conduct ANOVA test with the hypothesis Ha - there is a difference in average Travel Motivation between tourist groups classified by living area. The results show that the Sig F coefficient in Levene test is 0.234 and Sig (2-tailed) is 0.971 (>0.05), which is not statistically significant. Therefore, there is no basis to affirm that there is a difference in average Travel Motivation between the tourist group living in rural areas and the group living in urban areas. Hypothesis Ha in this case is rejected.

Differences between destination area groups

Based on the analysis results table (presented in Appendix 6), the mean value column shows that the description of the value of the groups by destination area is different. However, to confirm whether there is a difference or not, it is necessary to base on the coefficient in the Levene test with Sig F = 0.163 and the ANOVA test with Sig (2-tailed) = 0.001 (with a very small value and good statistical significance). Therefore, there is enough basis to confirm that there is a difference in the average of Vietnamese tourists' decision to travel abroad in this study.

To further clarify which group is different from which group, the author conducted a one-factor ANOVA analysis. The results are as shown in the table below:

Table 4.34 Mean Difference in Decision to Travel Abroad Between Groups by Tour Area

(I) Area

(J) Area	Mean difference (IJ)	Standard error	Sig.	95% confidence interval
(J) Area	Mean difference (IJ)	Standard error	Sig.	Bottom border	Upper bound
Asia	Europe	0.18540 *	0.08308	0.026	0.0223	0.3485
	America	0.24959 *	0.08358	0.003	0.0855	0.4137
	Australia	0.29876 *	0.08167	0.000	0.1384	0.4591
	Other	0.25381 *	0.08461	0.003	0.0877	0.4199
Europe	Asia	-0.18540 *	0.08308	0.026	-0.3485	-0.0223
	America	0.06419	0.09884	0.516	-0.1299	0.2582
	Australia	0.11336	0.09724	0.244	-0.0775	0.3042

Maybe you are interested!

Other

0.06841	0.09972	0.493	-0.1274	0.2642
America	Asia	-0.24959 *	0.08358	0.003	-0.4137	-0.0855
	Europe	-0.06419	0.09884	0.516	-0.2582	0.1299
	Australia	0.04917	0.09766	0.615	-0.1426	0.2409
	Other	0.00422	0.10014	0.966	-0.1924	0.2008
Australia	Asia	-0.29876 *	0.08167	0.000	-0.4591	-0.1384
	Europe	-0.11336	0.09724	0.244	-0.3042	0.0775
	America	-0.04917	0.09766	0.615	-0.2409	0.1426
	Other	-0.04495	0.09855	0.648	-0.2384	0.1485
Other	Asia	-0.25381 *	0.08461	0.003	-0.4199	-0.0877
	Europe	-0.06841	0.09972	0.493	-0.2642	0.1274
	America	-0.00422	0.10014	0.966	-0.2008	0.1924
	Australia	0.04495	0.09855	0.648	-0.1485	0.2384

*. Mean difference is significant at 0.05 level

Source: Author's SPSS analysis results

Looking at the multi-group comparison results table, it shows that the Mean Difference (IJ) column coefficient in the row showing the difference between “Asia” and the remaining regions all give positive results and are greater than 0.05. The Sig column in the first row showing the correlations between Asia and the remaining groups are all less than 0.05. The ANOVA in-depth analysis results table above also clearly shows that the variance coefficient between the pairs “Asia” - “Europe”, “Asia” - “America”, “Asia” - “Australia”, “Asia” - “Others” have values of 0.026; 0.003; 0.000; 0.003 respectively and all have Sig values <0.05, which is statistically significant. This shows that the “Asia” group is different from the remaining groups in the average Decision to travel abroad. In other words, the average decision to travel abroad of the “Asian” group is higher than other regions.

Continue to consider the Ha hypothesis on the mean difference in Overseas Travel Motivation between groups by tour area. The results show that the Sig F coefficient = 0.601 in Levene's homogeneity of variance test and the Sig (2-tailed) in ANOVA test is 0.844 (>0.05). Thus, the results show that the conditions for supporting the Ha hypothesis are not met, and therefore the Ha hypothesis is rejected. In other words, there is no basis to affirm that there is a mean difference in Travel Motivation between groups by tour area in this study.

Difference between tour length groups

The objective of this analysis is to evaluate the average difference in the decision to travel abroad between groups of tourists classified by trip length. The analysis results below show that the average value of the group of customers participating in the 4-day tour has a higher average value than the other groups. To see this difference, the author uses the results of the analysis of homogeneity of variance test, the result gives the Sig coefficient = 0.086 (level greater than 5%) and meets the conditions for further testing. The results of the ANOVA test show that the Sig coefficient = 0.045 (level <0.05 is statistically significant). Therefore, there is a basis to affirm that there is a difference in the decision to choose a foreign tour between groups classified by tour length.

To determine which group the difference occurs in, the author conducts an in-depth ANOVA analysis by comparing the variance between pairs of groups. Based on the significance level (<5%) to determine. The results table below shows that the group of tours over 9 days has a variance difference compared to the groups of 4 days, 5 days and 6 days respectively of 0.39882; 0.32727 and 0.48908 with Sig coefficients all less than 5%. This shows that between these groups there is the largest difference in the decision to choose an international tour. The coefficient of the Mean Difference (IJ) column in the row over 9 days is negative. Therefore, it can be affirmed that the average decision to travel abroad in the group of tourists participating in tours over 9 days is lower than that of the groups of 4 days, 5 days and 6 days.

In addition, the results table also shows that there is a difference between the group participating in the 6-day tour with an average difference in the decision to travel abroad compared to the 7-day group. The value of the Mean Difference (IJ) column is 0.23217 (>0), or in other words, the average decision to travel abroad of the group of tourists participating in the 6-day tour is larger than the average decision of the 7-day group. The other pairs of groups in the results table all show a coefficient of homogeneity of variance Sig >0.05, which is not statistically significant. Therefore, there is no basis to assert that there is a difference between the remaining groups in this study.

Continue to examine the difference between groups according to the average length of trip and Travel Motivation. The results show that the coefficient of homogeneity of variance in the Levene Sig F test = 0.804. The Sig coefficient in the ANOVA test is 0.767 (>0.05), not statistically significant. The hypothesis Ha that there is a difference between groups according to the average length of trip and Travel Motivation is rejected. In other words, there is no basis to affirm that there is a difference in average Travel Motivation between groups of Vietnamese tourists classified by length of trip in this study.

Table 4.35 Mean Differences in Decisions to Travel Abroad Between Groups by Trip Length

(I) Length

(J) Length	Mean difference (IJ)	Standard error	Sig.	95% approximately	believe	rely
(J) Length	Mean difference (IJ)	Standard error	Sig.	Bottom border	Upper bound
4 days	5 days	0.07155	0.09575	0.455	-0.1164	0.2595
	6 days	-0.09025	0.10846	0.406	-0.3032	0.1227
	7 days	0.14192	0.10042	0.158	-0.0552	0.3391
	8 days	0.17777	0.14904	0.233	-0.1148	0.4704
	9 days	0.11919	0.13291	0.370	-0.1417	0.3801
	over 9 days	0.39882 *	0.17654	0.024	0.0523	0.7454
5 days	4 days	-0.07155	0.09575	0.455	-0.2595	0.1164
	6 days	-0.16180	0.08490	0.057	-0.3285	0.0049
	7 days	0.07037	0.07435	0.344	-0.0756	0.2163
	8 days	0.10622	0.13287	0.424	-0.1546	0.3671
	9 days	0.04764	0.11449	0.677	-0.1771	0.2724
	over 9 days	0.32727 *	0.16312	0.045	0.0070	0.6475
6 days	4 days	0.09025	0.10846	0.406	-0.1227	0.3032
	5 days	0.16180	0.08490	0.057	-0.0049	0.3285
	7 days	0.23217 *	0.09013	0.010	0.0552	0.4091
	8 days	0.26802	0.14231	0.060	-0.0113	0.5474
	9 days	0.20945	0.12531	0.095	-0.0366	0.4555
	over 9 days	0.48908 *	0.17090	0.004	0.1536	0.8246
7 days	4 days	-0.14192	0.10042	0.158	-0.3391	0.0552
	5 days	-0.07037	0.07435	0.344	-0.2163	0.0756
	6 days	-0.23217 *	0.09013	0.010	-0.4091	-0.0552
	8 days	0.03585	0.13628	0.793	-0.2317	0.3034
	9 days	-0.02272	0.11842	0.848	-0.2552	0.2098
	over 9 days	0.25691	0.16591	0.122	-0.0688	0.5826
8 days	4 days	-0.17777	0.14904	0.233	-0.4704	0.1148
	5 days	-0.10622	0.13287	0.424	-0.3671	0.1546
	6 days	-0.26802	0.14231	0.060	-0.5474	0.0113
	7 days	-0.03585	0.13628	0.793	-0.3034	0.2317
	9 days	-0.05858	0.16171	0.717	-0.3760	0.2589
	over 9 days	0.22105	0.19913	0.267	-0.1699	0.6120
9 days	4 days	-0.11919	0.13291	0.370	-0.3801	0.1417
	5 days	-0.04764	0.11449	0.677	-0.2724	0.1771
	6 days	-0.20945	0.12531	0.095	-0.4555	0.0366
	7 days	0.02272	0.11842	0.848	-0.2098	0.2552
	8 days	0.05858	0.16171	0.717	-0.2589	0.3760
	over 9 days	0.27963	0.18737	0.136	-0.0882	0.6475
over 9 days	4 days	-0.39882 *	0.17654	0.024	-0.7454	-0.0523
	5 days	-0.32727 *	0.16312	0.045	-0.6475	-0.0070
	6 days	-0.48908 *	0.17090	0.004	-0.8246	-0.1536
	7 days	-0.25691	0.16591	0.122	-0.5826	0.0688
	8 days	-0.22105	0.19913	0.267	-0.6120	0.1699
	9 days	-0.27963	0.18737	0.136	-0.6475	0.0882

*. Mean difference is significant at 0.05 level

Source: Author's synthesis

Differences between travel groups

The results of the ANOVA analysis on the average difference in the Decision to travel abroad between groups of Vietnamese tourists according to their accompanying person are reflected in the Sig coefficient of the homogeneity of variance test showing that the Sig coefficient F = 0.229 is greater than 5%. However, the results of the ANOVA test show that the Sig coefficient = 0.563 (greater than 5%) is therefore not statistically significant. In other words, there is no basis to affirm that there is an average difference in the Decision to travel abroad between groups of tourists classified by their accompanying person.

In addition, the ANOVA analysis results on the mean difference in Travel Motivation between groups according to accompanying people are reflected through the Sig coefficient of the homogeneity variance test showing that the Sig coefficient F = 0.65 and the Sig coefficient in the ANOVA test gives the result Sig = 0.731 (greater than 5%) so there is no statistical significance. Therefore, there is no basis to affirm that there is a mean difference in Foreign Travel Motivation between groups of tourists classified by accompanying people in this study.

In summary, based on the results of the analysis of each control variable above, there is a difference between the average Decision to travel abroad and Travel motivation of Vietnamese tourist groups shown in the table below:

Table 4.36 Total mean differences in Travel Motivation and Mean Outbound Travel Decision between control variable groups

Control variables

Inspection	Average Travel Motive	Average Decision to Travel Abroad
Sex	T-test	Are not	Are not
Age	ANOVA	There is a difference	There is a difference
Marital status	ANOVA	There is a difference	Are not
Education level	ANOVA	Are not	There is a difference
Foreign language knowledge	ANOVA	Are not	Are not
Job area	Welch	There is a difference	Are not
Income	ANOVA	Are not	There is a difference
Living area	T-test	Are not	Are not
Tour area	ANOVA	Are not	There is a difference
Trip length	ANOVA	Are not	There is a difference
Companion	ANOVA	Are not	Are not

Source: Author synthesized from research results

CHAPTER 4 SUMMARY

In this Chapter 4, the author has conducted in-depth research and presented the research results including: Descriptive statistics of collected data, presenting the results of frequency statistics, descriptive statistics in the form of interpretation and tables to show the most general view of the collected survey data. At the same time, the author conducts statistics of observed variables to prepare for the analysis in the next step. The author also presents the results of assessing the reliability of the scale by Cronbach's Alpha analysis, EFA exploratory factor analysis and presents the results for each group of factors. Compare the evaluation criteria mentioned in Chapter 3 of the thesis to serve as a basis for retaining or eliminating inappropriate variables.

Also in this Chapter 4, the author presents the results of confirmatory factor analysis CFA, the basis for conducting analysis according to the linear structural model SEM. The results presented in this chapter include the results confirming the suitability of the model with the collected data. The estimated regression values of the SEM model allow to assess the level of impact of factors on tourists' decision to choose foreign tours.

In addition, the results of variance analysis are presented in this chapter. The techniques of T-test, ANOVA, Welch, analysis of homogeneity of variance or ANOVA test show the basis and evidence of the differences of customer groups in making decisions to choose tours.

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH RESULTS

5.1 Summary of research results

The importance of research on decision-making behavior and factors influencing the decision-making process has always been a topic of primary interest to researchers. Along with the growth of the tourism industry in recent years, the research context has also changed. Contributing significantly to that change is the development of information technology and the popularity of social networking platforms. In that context, assessing the impact of factors on tourists' consumption behavior plays an important role in marketing research, helping businesses to approach and expand their markets more conveniently. From both theoretical and practical perspectives, the application of theoretical models and practical research in the context of the Vietnamese tourism market is of great significance to travel businesses.

The results of the study on the current situation of foreign tourism in Vietnam show that economic conditions and the internationalization environment have promoted the growth of foreign tourism of Vietnamese people in the past decade. The trend of rapid growth in both the number of tourists and the expansion of tourist destinations. The number of Vietnamese tourists traveling abroad in 2016 reached 4.8 million with a growth rate of 9.5% per year (Choong and Wong, 2017), showing that the growth of Vietnam's foreign tourism market is among the leading in Asia (second only to Myanmar). The growth chart of typical foreign tourism markets shows a continuous upward trend over the years. In fact, the supply of foreign tourism market in Vietnam also grew during the period 2010 to 2019. With the results of the current research context in Vietnam, the thesis provides an overview of market supply and demand, socio-economic context and international integration. From the context of changing factors affecting the decision to travel abroad from changes in science and technology.

The general information about the foreign tourism market in this study is the premise for studying the issues of foreign tourism in Vietnam. The information base on the current situation of foreign tourism not only shows the problems in terms of economy, market trends, consumer habits... but also shows the problems arising in terms of society, considering foreign tourism as a phenomenon and inevitable trend of modern society in the environment of international integration. The questions raised from the current context of foreign tourism in Vietnam are: What is the main cause of the current growth of foreign tourism of Vietnamese people? What is the trend of choosing foreign tourism products of Vietnamese people?

The general theoretical model of factors affecting the decision to travel abroad is established based on the theoretical basis and overview of previous studies. In which, the model reflects the relationship between factors representing the group of factors from the external environment (destination image, customer outreach activities, reference groups) that affect the psychological factors within each individual (attitude towards foreign travel, travel motivation) and thereby affect the decision to travel abroad of Vietnamese people. Inheriting from the research model of Ajzen (1991); Um and Crompton (1990); Woodside and MacDonald (1994); Decrop (2006b), the author proposes a model suitable for the research context.

An overview of recent studies also shows the emergence of new factors that have a significant impact on customers' decisions to choose foreign tourist destinations. In the context of the explosion of the global internet, information about destination images is conveyed to tourists more fully (including information, images, and sharing experiences of others). This is a big difference in studies before and after the 2000s of the last century, the time marking the presence of the internet and the popularity of social networks. Therefore, the attractiveness of information about destination images that affects customers' attitudes and travel motivations has also changed compared to the conclusions of many previous studies.

The research results have identified new factors, explaining the trend of the Decision to choose a tour in the current context where there is a great impact of reference information sources from word of mouth (WOM) and especially electronic word of mouth (eWOM). The continuous growth of social networks in recent years has clearly changed the mechanism of impact between factors on the decision to choose tourism products of customers today. Specifically in this case, the decision to travel abroad of Vietnamese people.

The results of qualitative research conducted through in-depth interviews with experts and Vietnamese tourists traveling abroad help confirm the suitability of the proposed theoretical model. At the same time, it also shows the need to adjust the model and scale of factors. Compared with the original theoretical model, the impact of factors from the external environment and individual psychological factors on tourists' decisions is indirect through the Intention factor. However, to be consistent with the theoretical model that needs to be tested, the author based on the results of the expert group discussion to eliminate the Intention factor to focus on testing the direct relationship to customer behavior (decision making). The collected data is designed for the research object, which is tourists who have formed the intention to travel and are preparing to take foreign trips at the airports.

Comment