〈Research Article〉

Visitors at a university festival:

A preliminary case study of visitor satisfaction
Hidekazu Iwamoto, David Williams, Tatsuya Uchiyama

Abstract
Event and festival tourism are growing areas of tourism that are experiencing strong growth in Asia.
In Japan one type of festival tourism, the gakuensai (university festival) serves an important culturaland social function for the locations where the universities and the communities are located. As aform of consumption that is sustainable, visits to gakuensai require loyalty which itself is derived
from festival satisfaction. Using a questionnaire research instrument the current research examines
visitor satisfaction at a university festival. Results suggest that some factors may influence the successof the gakuensai more than others, but that these factors are dependent on the social and cultural (andpossibly economic) environment in which the university is situated.
Keywords: festival, satisfaction, event tourism, gakuensai (university festival)

1．Introduction
In the past 20 years there has been a growing interest in festival tourism, or the travelling by
individuals for periodic, or one-time events to places for personal, cultural, or heritage purposes (Getz,
2008). Festival tourism can be considered a subset of ‘event tourism’ (Formica & Uysal, 1998) whichitself is a division of meetings, incentives, conventions and exhibitions (MICE) tourism. MICE
tourism and, by extension, its festival tourism subset, has seen strong worldwide growth in recent
years (Rogers, 2013) as tourists and visitors seek the cultural authenticity (MacCannell, 1976) such
events and festivals can offer.
In the absence of figures describing the extent of festival tourism it is instructive to consider the
MICE sector as a proxy to current trends in events based tourism. At the global scale, event tourism
growth has been most dynamic in Singapore and South Korea where the staging of major events
increased by some 90% in the 5-year period to 2012 (JNTO, 2013). After the introduction of the 2007
National Tourism Promotion Plan, Japan has also been successful in developing event tourism withthe core Japanese cities of Tokyo, Yokohama, and Nagoya showing steady growth of around 15% in－1－events held over the period 2007-2012 (JNTO, 2013). Growth was even more notable in more
peripheral cities with Fukuoka, Sendai and Sapporo all posting 50% growth or better in the event
tourism market over the same 5-year period. This suggests there may be a trend towards decentralizationof event tourism in Japan with less well-known cities attracting large-scale events – including festivals –to their localities.
Events were not considered to be an integrated part of tourism until 1984 when they were firststrategically used as a tool to combat seasonality (Ritchie & Beliveau, 1984). Broadly speaking event
tourism encompasses a spectrum of events in scale, function and character. These range from global‘Mega events’ such as the FIFA World Cup, or Olympic Games to ‘hallmark events’ such as the
Edinburgh Festival, to the plethora of smaller, regional, and local music, art, culture or sports eventsand festivals that may promote a local area, its culture, tradition, and heritage (McKercher, Mei, & Tse,2006), or may also have a local or regional development agenda (Akiyoshi, 2013). Not only are such
events the fastest growing sector of tourism, but since they cover such a wide range of special
interests they attract a diverse tourist demographic with diverse expectations, needs and experiences(Lee, Lee, & Wicks, 2004). Getz (2008) takes this view even further claiming festivals and events cancontribute to the local economy and nurture relations between the host and the guest. This isespecially pertinent to the study of festivals in Japan since such events may act as a means to reinforce
the way Japanese people see their society and culture (Ashkenazi, 1990).

2．Previous Research
Events of all types have both a demand (the event audience) and a supply side (the event organizer)
and need to provide a level of benefit, or satisfaction to visitors in order to be successful. It istherefore perhaps inevitable that research into event tourism has taken a marketing approach throughstudies of event tourism motivation (Crompton & McKay, 1997; Mohr et al., 1993; Nicolson &Pearce, 2001; Saleh & Ryan, 1993; Scott, 1996); consideration of satisfaction (Baker & Crompton,
2000; Yoon, Lee, & Lee, 2010); and examination of the economic and other benefits that can accrue(Bos, 1994; Byrd, Beedle, & Cardenas, 2014; Formica & Uysal, 1998; Kim, Ahn, & Wicks, 2014; Lee,
Arcodia, & Lee, 2012).
2. 1 motivation
Regarding motivation the evidence suggests that there is no one, single, over-arching motivation to
explain why individuals attend festivals (Mohr et al, 1993; Nicolson & Pearce, 2001), instead it ispostulated that motives are different according to the type of festival that is being attended. In thissense we can say there may be as many different motivations as there are types of festival, and－2－perhaps even more given that each festival attendee has his/her own individual motivation. However,research does indicate a framework from which researchers may be able to consider festival
motivation. For example, Crompton & McKay (1997) and Saleh & Ryan (1993) both suggest thatsociability is key in much festival and event tourism decision-making. At the same time, cultural
exploration - including the sampling of new gastronomy and encountering new culture - has beenhighlighted by a number of researchers including Crompton & McKay (1997) and Blesic et al. (2013).
A further motive of “curiosity” proposed by Scott (1998) is highly relevant to the current research
since education and culture are stated objectives of the festival agenda.
2. 2 satisfaction
Satisfaction is a key term in determining the success of any event since it is satisfaction that willlead to an increase in visits to an event, and to an increase in the likelihood of repeat visits and wordof mouth promotion. However, since satisfaction is dependent on a given visitor’s psychological stateboth prior to visitation and after ‘consumption’ of the event, satisfaction will be different for each
visitor (Oliver, 1981). In this sense satisfaction is a difficult concept to measure. These arguments
notwithstanding Baker & Crompton (2000) have shown the value of emphasizing “quality” indetermining satisfaction including factors such as the quality of performances, food, activities andexperiences during the event. Meanwhile, Yoon, Lee, & Lee (2010) examined quality in tandem with
its relationship to value, satisfaction, and loyalty. Their onsite festival survey discovered that quality
was dependent on elements as varied as information services, food, festival facilities and previous
visits to the festival (i.e. festival loyalty) that in turn led to satisfaction amongst visitors. Equally, Kim,
Ahn, & Wicks (2014) found that supply based factors such as festival program content, festivalorganization, and advertising were key in determining visitors overall level of satisfaction.
2. 3 economic and other benefits
With the emergence of the event tourism management in the 1980s literature the understanding that
there were both benefits (and costs) to event tourism came to the fore (Getz, 2008). Limited research
into the economic effects of local cultural events has been conducted (Formica & Uysal, 1998), butsince the economic priming effect of such festivals may in relative terms be as effective as those forwell known larger ‘mega’ or ‘hallmark’ events, more research is necessary (Bos, 1994). Indeed, Kim,
Ahn, & Wicks (2014) indicate that local festivals can act as a “vehicle” for introducing local traditions
and culture to visitors and, as a result, bring beneficial economic effect. At the same time, Lee,
Arcodia, & Lee (2012) through their study of multiculturalism, general festivals, and cultural andcommunity festivals discovered that festivals can make a significant “social contribution” byincreasing local social capital (i.e. social cohesion), developing local community networks while－3－raising community identity and civic pride. As a result of these positive benefits Minamizono et al.
(2013), even suggest that festivals held in rural areas can be a positive stimulus for mental healthwellness.
2. 4 paucity in research
The vast majority of international studies on events and festivals have been conducted by scholars
in Australia, Canada and the United States, and published in journals such as Event Management - ajournal dedicated to the study of event tourism. Significant contributions to the field have also been
made by researchers at Kyunghee University in South Korea and the School of Hotel and Tourism
Management in Hong Kong. It is notable, and significant to the current research however, that despite
this large and expanding body of research (Getz, 2008) only one piece of internationally publishedresearch into event tourism has been conducted in Japan and published in English (Nogawa,Yamaguchi, & Hagi, 1996).
At the same time, Japan based scholars have explored several elements of domestic festival tourism
but these have either been limited to theoretical discussion (Morishita, 2014), or have tended to lookexclusively at economic benefits (Akiyoshi, 2013). Exceptions include empirical studies of festival
participants in Okinawa (Niori, 2012) and a study of the mental health benefits of festivals in rural
locations (Minamizono et al. 2013). Significantly, no studies in Japan have used the university festival
as the focus of research. In this sense the current research offers a departure from previous studies byreporting on an investigation into a university festival in a decentralized location.

3．Festivals and Japanese Universities
Each year all manner of cultural festivals are held throughout Japan that have a strong link toregional or local characteristics such as the local cuisine, dress, customs or other traditions. One such
cultural festival is the university festival (gakuensai), an event held once a year at universities, often
in the autumn and is a chance for students to plan, prepare, and hold a university-wide event that isopen to the public. Largely unknown outside Japan, the university festival is mandated by theJapanese Ministry of Education and is seen by the State as a means to “improve (student) motivation”.
In practical terms the university festival has a main stage where performances, given by students
and in some cases by local musicians, artists or players, are held. Food stalls are also an importantelement of the festival atmosphere with groups of students (such as a sports team or dance troupe)
preparing a small dish or snack and selling these to other students or members of the public. No
entrance fee is charged and the money earned from the sale of food is usually only sufficient to cover
costs. Students are generally unsupervised as they prepare the festival timetable and events, and for－4－those students in the festival organizing committee this preparation often takes priority over studies
for the 2 months before the gakusensai and the period (1-3 days) while the festival is held.
For universities the gakuensai is an opportunity to introduce to a wider audience the institute’s
education and research activities through student presentations, exhibitions and performances. In
recent years the gakuensai has also become an important a part of recruiting new students, and withlarger numbers of foreign students now studying at Japanese universities, the university festival canoffer local communities an opportunity to interact with global culture.
From all aspects, the gakuensai is thus an important event in the academic calendar of all
universities in Japan and is, moreover, a unique opportunity for the university to open its doors to the
local community it serves.

4．Research Question
How successful is the university festival as an event tourism attraction? Who attends the university
festival? Are those who attend satisfied with the experience they make? Are these events sustainable?
Using empirical data from a questionnaire survey administered to participants at Josai International
University, Faculty of Tourism Wellness Koryu Day (festival), the current research aims to answer
these questions and in doing so help to create a better understanding of the, processes, successes andfailures of the university festival (gakuensai).

5．Methodology
5. 1 Koryu Day and the Faculty of Tourism
Data collection for the current study was conducted in October 2014 at Josai International
University Faculty of Tourism annual festival, known as Koryu Day (literally ‘exchange day’). The
Faculty of Tourism campus is located in Kamogawa - a small year-round Pacific coast short stay
tourist destination located in the southern part of Chiba prefecture. As a campus dedicated to tourism
studies, and since the event includes a relatively large number of overseas students, Koryu Day aims
to emphasize tourism, research and internationality. Moreover, since Koryu Day is a part of the local
community events calendar, there is a need to offer events that appeal to a wide visitor demographic.
The one-day festival in 2014 was themed as an event to "make the world smile" and a programmeof activities was planned by Faculty of Tourism students with the goal of achieving this aim. Main
events were held on an open-air stage surrounded by various student-run stalls selling food and snacks.
In addition to the main stage which held performances and speeches, exhibition rooms, displays andpresentations were offered inside the campus building to give visitors a chance to experience the－5－academic and research aspects of the university.
5. 2 data collection
Based on previous empirical research into festival motivation and satisfaction by Yoon, Lee, & Lee(2010), a 25-item questionnaire instrument was developed to gather primary data from attendants at
Koryu Day. This instrument was administered using a convenience sampling technique and, in order
to elicit the views of both Japanese and non-Japanese festival participants, was produced in both
Japanese and English language formats. In addition to demographic data, questionnaire items included
those relating to motivation to attend Koryu Day, and satisfaction with, and promotion of, the festival.
Both 5-point Likert type items and open-ended response items were presented. A 6th “no experience”
point was added to the Likert scale to allow respondents to indicate activities they had not participated in.
Researchers distributed a total of 126 Japanese and 85 English questionnaires directly to the
respondents during Koryu Day. Respondents were instructed to return completed questionnaires to
one of two designated locations. A total of 121 Japanese and 31 English questionnaires were deemedsuitable for inclusion in the analysis. Reasons for elimination from the analysis included insufficiently
completed questionnaires, or where respondents had given multiple responses.

6．Results
6. 1 demographic characteristics of respondents
The overall questionnaire response rate for both languages was 72% with a considerably high rate
for the Japanese language format (96%) than the English one (36%). This high response rate in thecase of the Japanese questionnaire may have been the result of the distribution method in which
respondents were directly handed the questionnaire by the research team rather than receiving it froma third party or picking it up anonymously. The lower rate for the English language format, thoughtypical for this type of survey approach, may have been the result of the questionnaire’s untimely
distribution.
The demographic profiles of the respondents are presented in Table 1. The gender composition of
the respondents in this study was 67% female and 33% male. The majority of participants (62%) werein the 20-29 age range. Notably, a significant number of respondents were 60 years old or over.
Reflecting the internationality of the event 60% of respondents were from abroad, with the largest
number being from the Peoples Republic of China (33%), students from Hungary, Poland and Norway
made up a further 15% combined. In total, respondents from 11 different countries completed thequestionnaire. Electronic media (university homepage, Facebook etc.) was the most common method
for respondents to receive information about Koryu Day (37%) but was highest in the 20-29 age group－6－

(53%). A second important means for finding out about Koryu Day was by poster or leaflet (20%).
For those of age 40 or above attendance at other events, and posters or leaflets were significant ways
to be informed of the festival (38% of those in this age range).
Table 1. Demographic profiles of respondents
Characteristics

Frequency (n)Percent (%)

Female

102

67.1

Male

50

32.9

10-19

15

9.9

20-29

94

61.8

30-39

6

3.9

40-49

10

6.6

50-59

7

4.6

60 and over

20

13.1

Japan

61

40.1

China

50

32.9

Other Asia (South Korea, Taiwan)

5

3.3

Hungary, Poland

16

10.5

Norway7

4.6

Other (Canada, Philippines, Spain, USA)7

4.6

No data6

3.9

University Student

91

59.9

Unemployed

18

11.8

High School Student

12

7.9

Company Employee

8

5.3

Part-time Employee

8

5.3

Self-employed/Freelance

7

4.6

No data8

5.3

GenderAge

Nationality

Occupation－7－

Characteristics

Frequency (n)Percent (%)

One (first time)

104

68.4

Two (second time)

24

15.8

Three or more

24

15.8

Chartered Bus (incl. 3 by local bus)

74

48.7

Car

49

32.2

Train

17

11.2

Bicycle

7

4.6

Other

2

1.3

No data3

1.9

University Homepage

47

30.9

Poster/Leaflet

30

19.7

Seminar or Event

13

8.5

Faculty of Tourism Homepage

7

4.6

Faculty of Tourism facebook page

3

2.0

Other

44

28.9

No data8

5.3

Number of Visits to Koryu Day

Means of Transportation

Information source

Concerning the occupation of participants, the majority (60%) classified themselves as ‘university
students’. ‘Employees’ of companies and ‘self employed’ made up an additional 10%, while 8% of
survey respondents were ‘high school students’. A surprise in the data was the relatively large numberof respondents who classified themselves as ‘unemployed’ (12%). However, by cross-referencing
with respondents’ age we can find that the majority of these ‘unemployed’ persons were over 60 years
old. It is likely these respondents selected ‘unemployed’ in the absence of a ‘retired’ option being
available.
Regarding the number of visits to Koryu Day, 68% indicated the visit in October 2014 was theirfirst. A further 15% (48 persons) were making either their second or third visit. Looking at these 48
people in more detail, the data reveals that repeaters tended to be female (60% of all repeaters), wereJapanese (67%), and were mostly in the 20-29 age group (35%), or in the over 60 age range (38%).
Thus amongst repeaters the ratio of over 60s with Japanese nationality was found to bedisproportionately high in comparison to the rate for all 152 respondents. The majority of respondents
travelled to Koryu Day by bus (47%), or by car (32%), a smaller number of respondents (11%) arrived
by train.
－8－

6. 2 Measurement of visitors' satisfaction to the university festival
Following the analysis of Yoon, Lee and Lee (2010), table 2 presents the descriptive analysis of the
20 items used to measure Koryu Day (KD) visitors' satisfaction for five factors of festival satisfaction;“information services”, “program”, “food”, “facilities”, and “festival value and loyalty”. Each item
was measured on a five-point Likert scale with 1 representing respondents’ ‘strong disagreement’, and5 representing ‘strong agreement’; 3 represented the mid point value. All items obtained a mean scoreabove this mid point with the number of respondents between 121 and 147 according to item.
Regarding “information service”, the item with the highest value was 'student staff were good
guides' (M = 3.92). Other items 'on campus signage was helpful', 'pamphlets were well prepared', and'I had good knowledge about KD before today' received mean scores (M) of 3.72, 3.67, and 3.26
respectively. The low mean score of ‘I had good knowledge …’ is borne out by histogram analysis
showing that more than half of those who responded to the item were either neutral or negative intheir evaluation and is highlighted by the high standard deviation value (σ = 1.06).
In terms of “program”, the highest ranked item was 'events on the main stage were good' (M =3.94); this item was also the highest ranked of any of the 20 items. Other highly evaluated program
items produced mean scores of between 3.82 and 3.70 with 'overall, KD was creative' (M = 3.82),'overall, exhibits were good' (M = 3.74), 'overall, KD was well organized' (M = 3.74), 'overall, KD
offered a wide-range of activities' (M = 3.71), and 'overall, presentations were good' (M = 3.70). In
the case of ‘events on the main stage …’ and ‘overall, presentations …’ the low SD values (σ = 0.69
and σ = 0 .72 respectively) are indicative that negative evaluations for these two items can beconsidered as negligible.
For “food” the three items 'overall the booth food was good', 'overall, the price of the booth food
was reasonable', and 'overall, festival booths were unique' received mean satisfaction scores (M) of
3.81, 3.68 and 3.65 respectively. The relatively low SD values relating to the first and third of these
items suggest that in general food was positively evaluated by KD visitors.
The one “facility” factor investigated in the current research, 'sufficient places to sit were provided'(M = 3.50) ranked in the lower half of all items examined indicating that there was a relative lack ofsatisfaction with the provision of seating. The large SD (σ = 1.13) for this item does suggest howeverthat in addition to those that were less satisfied there were also significant numbers of festival
participants who felt the arrangements made by festival staff for seating were sufficient.
Concerning the factor of “festival value and loyalty”, the highest evaluated item was 'I would liketo attend KD next year' (M = 3.90). 'I will recommend KD to my friends and neighbors' (M = 3.72)
was also rated and these two items together suggest that KD gave value and encouraged loyalty.
However, at the same time the (M) value of 3.37 for 'KD offered more fun than other school festivals
I've attended' suggests that the opposite conclusion might be drawn, although the large SD value (σ－9－=1.02) for this item is indicative of a broad range of responses. The other “festival value and loyalty”
items, 'overall, KD was good beyond expectation', 'I understood about the Faculty of Tourism throughKD', 'I plan to inform others about KD via Facebook or other SNS' exhibited mean scores (M)between the two extremes.
Table 2. Measurement of visitors' satisfaction to the university festival
Question item

N

Mean

SD

(2dp)

(2dp)

Factor 1: Information service
I had good knowledge about KD before today

121

3.26

1.06

On campus signage was helpful

143

3.72

0.82

Pamphlets were well prepared

134

3.67

0.84

Students staff were good guides

145

3.92

0.82

Overall, KD was creative

146

3.82

0.86

Overall, KD offered a wide-range of activities

148

3.71

0.86

Overall, KD was well organized

146

3.74

0.79

Events on the main stage were good

146

3.94

0.69

Overall, exhibits were good

147

3.74

0.80

Overall, presentations were good

138

3.70

0.72

Overall, the price of the booth food was reasonable

147

3.68

0.95

Overall, the booth food was good

141

3.81

0.78

Overall, festival booths were unique

145

3.65

0.84

147

3.50

1.13

Overall, KD was good beyond expectation

147

3.56

0.85

I understood about Faculty of Tourism through KD

142

3.49

0.98

KD offered more fun than other school festivals

131

3.37

1.02

I plan to inform others about KD via facebook or other SNS

144

3.48

0.94

I will recommend KD to my friends and neighbors

147

3.72

0.87

I would like to attend KD next year

147

3.90

0.93

Factor 2: Program

Factor 3: Food

Factor 4: Facility
Sufficient places to sit were provided
Factor 5: Festival value and loyalty

KD = Koryu Day－ 10 －

7．Discussion
The findings here indicate visitor satisfaction with Koryu Day was positive for all 5 factors with“program” and “food” being the highest evaluated. Moreover, since the items ‘students were good
guides’ (M= 3.92) (“information service”), and ‘I would like to attend KD next year’ (M = 3.90)(“value”) received the highest satisfaction scores for any individual item it is clear that the reasonsthat determine the likelihood of visitors returning to KD in subsequent years (i.e. loyalty
determinants) cannot be simply described by the “program” and “food” factors alone.
Previous research has shown the importance of the festival program to create a memorable
experience (Lee et al, 2007) and at KD this was achieved by holding a number of varied events on amain stage. In Japan where collective experience is seen as a social preference, a well planned seriesof events on a main stage may be a means to enable some trickle down of satisfaction to other festival
activities and consequently achievement of high levels of overall festival satisfaction. The main stage
program was complemented by academic presentations and other activities inside the campus offeredby local groups (including an NPO and a local hospital). In doing so KD enabled local community
input and representation within the student festival program. This has clear benefits for the integrationof the university to the community and in particular for those universities that are located in rural
areas and/or where they serve community functions as well as academic ones.
Food is an integral part of the overall experience offered by the university festival in Japan, and has
been shown to be important in the decision making for attending festivals in general (Sparks, 2007).
At KD this importance was increased by the large number of foreign students who were offering foodthat was representative of their own country including places as diverse as China, Hungary, South
Korea and the Czech Republic. By offering authentically produced international food, KD was able toprovide visitors with a unique experience and thus raise their evaluation of the festival as a truly
international event. This is important as most visitors to KD from the immediate vicinity of theuniversity have limited opportunities to experience international culture; thus such festivals can servea social function. This multicultural aspect to KD was added to by Japanese students who also
produced regionally representative food. As MacCannell (1976) points out such authenticity can be
instrumental in attracting visitors to a festival and even to the surrounding area as tourist visitors.
Loyalty is a key goal to the success of any consumption activity, and is a direct result of thesatisfaction of consumers. Koryu Day showed a repeat visitor rate of some 31% and thus to a certain
extent can be considered successful in achieving this goal of loyalty and repeat visitation. This loyalty
is not only beneficial to the festival through increased consumption of food or other tangible elements
but is also of benefit to the community. Through such loyalty rural communities - such as the areasurrounding Josai International University Faculty of Tourism - can receive economic trickle down,－ 11 －

increased social capital through increased cultural intercourse and can lay foundations for revitalizing
local areas where there is a need for fresh input and ideas. Such input was provided by the large
number of non Japanese student visitors to KD who not only produced authentic food but also gave
performances typical of their respective countries. This last point is particularly relevant to JIU and
Kamogawa city which both have an international agenda in respect of tourism studies and therevitalization of the local area. In this sense satisfaction with the festival by local residents can
feedback to become an increase in local community satisfaction due to the festival itself. Such a
positive feedback loop can be a policy level raison d’etre for holding similar festivals in rural
locations such as Kamogawa.
Despite these positive aspects of satisfaction, according to the current research three areas that canhave a detrimental effect on the levels of satisfaction are a lack of prior knowledge of the festival ('I
had good knowledge about KD before today'), the issue of places to sit (‘Sufficient places to sit were
provided’) and the ‘fun’ provided by the festival (‘KD offered more fun than other school festivals’).
In the current research, the relatively low satisfaction score for “I had good knowledge …” may be
explained by the fact that many student participants - including foreign students - came from acampus 2 hours distant and anecdotal evidence suggests that they had accompanied a friend rather
than having had a specific personal desire to attend the festival itself. This particular item garnered thelowest N value (N =121) of any item in the questionnaire (see table 2). This suggests there may havebeen a conceptual problem in understanding or answering the question itself that needs to beaddressed by future research.
In discussing the issue of ‘sufficient places to sit’ we need to consider that a feature particular to
KD was the large number of festival visitors from the local community who were over 60 years of age(18%). There is no comparable data for other university festivals however it is clear that if universities
are to promote their activities to the local community including festivals like KD they need toconsider the demographic composition of that community and make plans and contingencies
accordingly. Age considerations may also be a prime reason for the relatively low numbers of KD
visitors who stated they would share their experience through SNS or other electronic means. Finally,
since this research was explorative rather than comparative the item eliciting KD ‘fun’ in comparison
to other school festivals was beyond the scope of the current investigation. It would be instructive
however to examine this concept in similar future research as it may lead to a better understanding of
the meaning of school festival loyalty.

－ 12 －

8．Limitations and Future Research
The factor analysis employed in the current research to examine the determinants of satisfaction ata university festival was effective in revealing some key factors, however it is unclear whether such
results can be generalized to all types of university festival. Further research examining university
festivals in city locations, or those with different student demographies also needs to be carried out
before we can make any such generalizations. As stated above, the 'no experience' option added toquestionnaire items may have introduced some ambiguity for respondents, and based on the results
generated here future research may need to consider amendments to questionnaire design andformulation. A second methodological issue - inherent in questionnaire research in Japan - is thetendency for Japanese respondents to indicate the middle value in a 5-point Likert scale more thanother nationalities. Brinton (2003) has highlighted this issue when dealing with Japanese survey
respondents and unfortunately the current research was unable to minimize any similar effects.
Alternatives such as open-ended responses might offer richer data but would present the researcher
with a more complex analysis task.
It is hoped that the current research will introduce researchers to the importance of the Japanese
university festival and the measurement of its satisfaction through the people who visit them as a newarea of event and festival research interest. This can be of benefit not only to the field of event tourism
but also to the universities and the local communities around them.

References
Akiyoshi, I. (2013). Research on the economic effect caused by sightseeing consumption at the 5th Himejiinternational short film festival, 2012. Journal of the University of Hyogo, 65(1), 25-40.
Ashkenazi, M. (1990). Festival management and the corporate analysis of Japanese society. In E. Ben Ari et al.
(eds.). Unwrapping Japan. Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 205-20.
Baker, D. A., & Crompton, J. L. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of Tourism
Research, 27(3), 785-804.
Blešić, I., Pivac, T., Stamenković, I., & Besermenji, S. (2013). Motives of visits to ethno music festivals withregard to gender and age structure of visitors. Event Management, 17(2), 145-154.
Bos, H. (1994). The importance of mega-events in the development of tourism demand. Festival Managementand Event Tourism, 2(1), 55-58.
Brinton, M.C. (2003). Fact-rich, data-poor: Japan as sociologists’ heaven and hell. In T.C Bestor et al. (eds.).
Doing fieldwork in Japan. Honolulu: university of Hawaii Press, pp.195-213.
Byrd, R. T., Beedle, J., & Cardenas, D. A. (2014). Repeat visitation and visitor spending at events: Hogs and－ 13 －

muscle cars. Event Management, 18(2), 101-110.
Crompton, J., & McKay, S. (1997). Motives of visitors attending festival events. Annals of Tourism Research,
24(2), 425-439.
Cronin Jr, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer
satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2),193-218.
Formica, S., & Uysal, M. (1998). Market segmentation of an international cultural-historical event in Italy.
Journal of Travel Research, 36(4), 16-24.
Getz, D. (2008). Event tourism: Definition, evolution, and research. Tourism Management, 29, 403-428.
JNTO, Japan National Tourism Organisation. (2013). Statistics on conventions and meetings. Retrieved from,<http://mice.jnto.go.jp/data/stats/pdf/cv_tokei_2012_2shou.pdf>
Kim, N., Ahn, Y-J., & Wicks, B. E. (2014). Local festival quality and the application of a revised
importance–performance analysis: The case of the Jirisan Cheon-Wang Festival. Event Management, 18(2),89-100.
Lee, I. S., Arcodia, C., & Lee, T. J. (2012). Key characteristics of multicultural festivals: A critical review of theliterature. Event Management, 16(1), 93-101.
Lee, Y.K., Lee, C.K., Lee, S.K., & Babin, B.J. (2007). Festivalscapes and patrons’ emotions, satisfaction andloyalty. Journal of Business Research, 61(1), 56-64.
Lee, C-K., Lee, Y-K., & Wicks, B. E. (2004). Segmentation of festival motivation by nationality and satisfaction.
Tourism Management, 25(1), 61-70.
MacCannell, D. (1976). The tourist: A new theory of the leisure class. Schocken books: New York.
McKercher, B., Mei, W. S., & Tse, T. S. (2006). Are short duration cultural festivals tourist attractions? Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 14(1), 55-66.
Minamizono, T., Kaneko, Y., Minamizono, S., & Motohashi, Y. (2013). Association of festival observance withpsychological distress in a rural Japanese community. Open Journal of Preventative Medicine, 3(5), 368-373.
Mohr, K., Backman, K., Gahan, L., & Backman, S. (1993). An investigation of festival motivations and event
satisfaction by visitor type. Festival Management and Event Tourism, 1(3), 89-97.
Morishita, Y. (2014). Research on urban community building in Sapporo: challenges and implications of a local
festival. Hokkaido University Journal of Graduate School of Letters, 9, 29-39.
Nicholson, R., & Pearce, D. (2001). Why do people attend events: A comparative analysis of visitor motivations
at four South Island events. Journal of Travel Research, 39, 449-460.
Niori, N. (2012). Constructing Okinawan Identities: focusing on the surveys of the participants of the 5th
worldwide uchinanchu festival. University of the Ryukyus, Immigration Studies, 8, 1-22.
Nogawa, H., Yamaguchi, Y., & Hagi, Y. (1996). An empirical research study on Japanese sport tourism inSport-for-All events: case studies of a single-night event and a multiple-night event. Journal of Travel－ 14 －

Research, 35, 46-54.
Oliver, R. L. (1981). Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction process in retail setting. Journal of Retailing,57(3), 25-48.
Ritchie, B., & Beliveau, D. (1984). Hallmark events: An evaluation of a strategic response to seasonality in thetravel market. Journal of Travel Research, 14, 14-20.
Rogers, T. (2013). Conferences and conventions: A global industry. Routledge.
Saleh, F., & Ryan, C. (1993). Jazz and knitwear: factors that attract tourists to festivals. Tourism Management,
14(4), 289-297.
Scott, D. (1996). A comparison of visitors’ motivations to attend three urban festivals. Festival Management andEvent Tourism, 3(3), 121-128.
Sparks, B. (2007). Planning a wine vacation? Factors that help to predict tourist behavior intentions. Tourism
Management, 28(5), 1180-1192
Yoon, Y.-S., Lee, J.-S., & Lee, C.-K. (2010). Measuring festival quality and value affecting visitors’ satisfaction
and loyalty using a structural approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(2), 335-342.

－ 15 －

学園祭における訪問者に関する一考察
来訪者における満足度の予備的調査

岩本

英和

・

デイビッド・ウィリアムズ

・

内山

達也

【要旨】
イベント／フェスティバル・ツーリズムは、アジアにおいて目覚ましい成長を遂げている
観光分野である。日本では大学の所在地や地域社会において、フェスティバル・ツーリズムのひとつの形態である学園祭が、重要な文化・社会的機能を果たしている。学園祭への来場は、学園祭への満足度に由来する大学への愛着を前提としている。
本研究では、アンケート調査を用いて、学園祭における訪問者の満足度を調査した。その結果、いくつかの要素が他の学園祭よりも本学部の学園祭の成功に結び付いている可能性がある。しかし、これらの要素は、大学が位置する社会、文化、あるいは経済的影響に左右されるかもしれない。

－ 16 －