Indicators of convergent validity and internal consistency scales
| Factor | Standardized coefficients and confidence interval | Individual reliability (R2) and confidence interval |
|---|---|---|
| First-order confirmatory factor model | ||
| Convenience: Composite reliability = 0.90; Variance extracted = 0.57 | ||
| PV1 | 0.69 (0.55; 0.80) p = 0.00 | 0.48 (0.31; 0.65) p = 0.00 |
| PV2 | 0.75 (0.63; 0.85) p = 0.00 | 0.56 (0.40; 0.72) p = 0.00 |
| PV3 | 0.83 (0.76; 0.88) p = 0.00 | 0.69 (0.58; 0.77) p = 0.00 |
| PV4 | 0.85 (0.77; 0.91) p = 0.00 | 0.72 (0.60; 0.82) p = 0.00 |
| PV5 | 0.73 (0.62; 0.82) p = 0.00 | 0.53 (0.39; 0.67) p = 0.00 |
| PV6 | 0.78 (0.69; 0.84) p = 0.00 | 0.60 (0.48; 0.71) p = 0.00 |
| PV7 | 0.66 (0.56; 0.74) p = 0.00 | 0.43 (0.31; 0.55) p = 0.00 |
| Social: Composite reliability = 0.92; Variance extracted = 0.80 | ||
| PV8 | 0.83 (0.69; 0.91) p = 0.00 | 0.68 (0.47; 0.83) p = 0.00 |
| PV9 | 0.97 (0.94; 1) p = 0.00 | 0.95 (0.88; 1) p = 0.00 |
| PV10 | 0.88 (0.82; 0.93) p = 0.00 | 0.78 (0.67; 0.86) p = 0.00 |
| Emotional: Composite reliability = 0.92; Variance extracted = 0.78 | ||
| PV11 | 0.85 (0.78; 0.90) p = 0.00 | 0.72 (0.61; 0.80) p = 0.00 |
| PV12 | 0.87 (0.81; 0.92) p = 0.00 | 0.76 (0.65; 0.84) p = 0.00 |
| PV13 | 0.94 (0.89; 0.97) p = 0.00 | 0.87 (0.79; 0.94) p = 0.00 |
| Epistemic: Composite reliability = 0.91; Variance extracted = 0.72 | ||
| PV14 | 0.85 (0.76; 0.90) p = 0.00 | 0.72 (0.58; 0.80) p = 0.00 |
| PV15 | 0.93 (0.88; 0.96) p = 0.00 | 0.86 (0.77; 0.92) p = 0.00 |
| PV16 | 0.85 (0.78; 0.90) p = 0.00 | 0.72 (0.60; 0.81) p = 0.00 |
| PV17 | 0.76 (0.66; 0.84) p = 0.00 | 0.57 (0.43; 0.70) p = 0.00 |
| Quality of the health information of the destination: Composite reliability = 0.93, Variance extracted = 0.76 | ||
| QUALITY1 | 0.85 (0.77; 0.91) p = 0.00 | 0.72 (0.59; 0.82) p = 0.00 |
| QUALITY2 | 0.83 (0.71; 0.91) p = 0.00 | 0.69 (0.50; 0.83) p = 0.00 |
| QUALITY3 | 0.90 (0.85; 0.94) p = 0.00 | 0.81 (0.72; 0.89) p = 0.00 |
| QUALITY4 | 0.90 (0.84; 0.94) p = 0.00 | 0.80 (0.71; 0.88) p = 0.00 |
| Intention to reuse the OTAs’ services: Composite reliability = 0.92; Variance extracted = 0.80 | ||
| INT1 | 0.79 (0.70; 0.86) p = 0.00 | 0.63 (0.49; 0.75) p = 0.00 |
| INT2 | 0.95 (0.91; 0.97) p = 0.00 | 0.90 (0.82; 0.95) p = 0.00 |
| INT3 | 0.93 (0.88; 0.96) p = 0.00 | 0.87 (0.77; 0.93) p = 0.00 |
| Previous image of the OTA: Composite reliability = 0.97; Variance extracted = 0.90 | ||
| IMAGE1 | 0.99 (0.98; 1) p = 0.00 | 0.98 (0.96; 0.99) p = 0.00 |
| IMAGE2 | 0.98 (0.96; 0.99) p = 0.00 | 0.96 (0.92; 0.98) p = 0.00 |
| IMAGE3 | 0.92 (0.80; 0.98) p = 0.00 | 0.85 (0.63; 0.95) p = 0.00 |
| IMAGE4 | 0.89 (0.77; 0.97) p = 0.00 | 0.79 (0.59; 0.94) p = 0.00 |
| Second-order confirmatory factor model | ||
| Perceived value of OTAs in a health crisis situation: Composite reliability = 0.85; Variance extracted = 0.60 | ||
| Convenience | 0.73 (0.56; 0.84) p = 0.00 | 0.53 (0.31; 0.71) p = 0.00 |
| Social | 0.48 (0.28; 0.64) p = 0.00 | 0.23 (0.08; 0.40) p = 0.00 |
| Emotional | 0.89 (0.80; 0.96) p = 0.00 | 0.80 (0.65; 0.92) p = 0.00 |
| Epistemic | 0.92 (0.83; 0.99) p = 0.00 | 0.85 (0.69; 0.98) p = 0.00 |
| Factor | Standardized coefficients and confidence interval | Individual reliability ( |
|---|---|---|
| First-order confirmatory factor model | ||
| Convenience: Composite reliability = 0.90; Variance extracted = 0.57 | ||
| PV1 | 0.69 (0.55; 0.80) | 0.48 (0.31; 0.65) |
| PV2 | 0.75 (0.63; 0.85) | 0.56 (0.40; 0.72) |
| PV3 | 0.83 (0.76; 0.88) | 0.69 (0.58; 0.77) |
| PV4 | 0.85 (0.77; 0.91) | 0.72 (0.60; 0.82) |
| PV5 | 0.73 (0.62; 0.82) | 0.53 (0.39; 0.67) |
| PV6 | 0.78 (0.69; 0.84) | 0.60 (0.48; 0.71) |
| PV7 | 0.66 (0.56; 0.74) | 0.43 (0.31; 0.55) |
| Social: Composite reliability = 0.92; Variance extracted = 0.80 | ||
| PV8 | 0.83 (0.69; 0.91) | 0.68 (0.47; 0.83) |
| PV9 | 0.97 (0.94; 1) | 0.95 (0.88; 1) |
| PV10 | 0.88 (0.82; 0.93) | 0.78 (0.67; 0.86) |
| Emotional: Composite reliability = 0.92; Variance extracted = 0.78 | ||
| PV11 | 0.85 (0.78; 0.90) | 0.72 (0.61; 0.80) |
| PV12 | 0.87 (0.81; 0.92) | 0.76 (0.65; 0.84) |
| PV13 | 0.94 (0.89; 0.97) | 0.87 (0.79; 0.94) |
| Epistemic: Composite reliability = 0.91; Variance extracted = 0.72 | ||
| PV14 | 0.85 (0.76; 0.90) | 0.72 (0.58; 0.80) |
| PV15 | 0.93 (0.88; 0.96) | 0.86 (0.77; 0.92) |
| PV16 | 0.85 (0.78; 0.90) | 0.72 (0.60; 0.81) |
| PV17 | 0.76 (0.66; 0.84) | 0.57 (0.43; 0.70) |
| Quality of the health information of the destination: Composite reliability = 0.93, Variance extracted = 0.76 | ||
| QUALITY1 | 0.85 (0.77; 0.91) | 0.72 (0.59; 0.82) |
| QUALITY2 | 0.83 (0.71; 0.91) | 0.69 (0.50; 0.83) |
| QUALITY3 | 0.90 (0.85; 0.94) | 0.81 (0.72; 0.89) |
| QUALITY4 | 0.90 (0.84; 0.94) | 0.80 (0.71; 0.88) |
| Intention to reuse the OTAs’ services: Composite reliability = 0.92; Variance extracted = 0.80 | ||
| INT1 | 0.79 (0.70; 0.86) | 0.63 (0.49; 0.75) |
| INT2 | 0.95 (0.91; 0.97) | 0.90 (0.82; 0.95) |
| INT3 | 0.93 (0.88; 0.96) | 0.87 (0.77; 0.93) |
| Previous image of the OTA: Composite reliability = 0.97; Variance extracted = 0.90 | ||
| IMAGE1 | 0.99 (0.98; 1) | 0.98 (0.96; 0.99) |
| IMAGE2 | 0.98 (0.96; 0.99) | 0.96 (0.92; 0.98) |
| IMAGE3 | 0.92 (0.80; 0.98) | 0.85 (0.63; 0.95) |
| IMAGE4 | 0.89 (0.77; 0.97) | 0.79 (0.59; 0.94) |
| Second-order confirmatory factor model | ||
| Perceived value of OTAs in a health crisis situation: Composite reliability = 0.85; Variance extracted = 0.60 | ||
| Convenience | 0.73 (0.56; 0.84) | 0.53 (0.31; 0.71) |
| Social | 0.48 (0.28; 0.64) | 0.23 (0.08; 0.40) |
| Emotional | 0.89 (0.80; 0.96) | 0.80 (0.65; 0.92) |
| Epistemic | 0.92 (0.83; 0.99) | 0.85 (0.69; 0.98) |
Source(s): The authors
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.