The effect of mindfulness, well-being and place attachment on tourist loyalty: A Case study of Chehelsotun palace and Vank cathedral Museums in Isfahan

Document Type : Article extracted From phd dissertation

Authors

Department of Tourism, Faculty of Tourism Sciences, Science and Culture University, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jut.2026.400675.1320

Abstract

A B S T R A C T
Over recent decades, the incorporation of psychological perspectives into tourism studies has drawn increasing scholarly attention to tourists’ well-being in destinations such as museums. Museums, as experiential spaces and among the most frequently visited attractions within cultural tourism, have demonstrated their capacity to generate long-term social impacts and to provide experiences that contribute to enhancing visitors’ well-being. The aim of the present study is to examine the relationships among visitors’ well-being, mindfulness, place attachment, and loyalty, with flow experience considered as a mediating variable. Data were collected through a questionnaire survey administered to visitors at two museums, Chehelsotun Palace and Vank Cathedral, in Isfahan, yielding 290 valid responses in accordance with the sample size guidelines proposed by Hair et al. (2014). The reliability of the measurement instruments was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient in SPSS software, while hypotheses were tested using structural equation modeling based on the partial least squares approach implemented through PLS software. The findings indicate a positive and statistically significant relationship between mindfulness and tourists’ sense of well-being in museum settings. Furthermore, flow experience was found to mediate the relationship between mindfulness and tourists’ sense of well-being. The results also reveal positive and significant relationships between tourists’ sense of well-being and place attachment, as well as between place attachment and loyalty. Overall, the findings may inform museum management practices aimed at enhancing institutional dynamism and promoting the development of well-being-oriented tourism.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
In recent years, tourism scholars have increasingly associated tourist behavior and experiential processes with positive psychological outcomes. Positive psychology focuses on a range of valued experiential states, including well-being, flow, satisfaction, and mindfulness. As a state of mind in which individuals are receptive to novelty and aware of the present, mindfulness is crucial for having satisfying museum experiences. Mindfulness has the potential to enhance the quality and effectiveness of museum experiences, thereby increasing satisfaction and attachment to the museum environment. In leisure and tourism, particularly in the context of museums, mindfulness studies have generally focused on relational factors and the qualities of the learning environment. However, in the context of museum experiences that require a high level of cognitive awareness, there is limited theoretical knowledge of how mindful visits that are novelty-oriented and embrace the present moment without judgment can influence individuals’ well-being experiences. Furthermore, mindfulness has been shown to influence the occurrence and intensity of engrossment experiences, and existing empirical evidence suggests that mindfulness and such experiences are closely related. However, few studies have examined the moderating role of fascination in relation to mindfulness, and no previous research has investigated its mediating effect. Another component influenced by mindfulness is one’s sense of well-being. As current research suggests, hedonic and eudaimonic well-being are related constructs, and some studies in the tourism literature have examined the relationship between hedonic well-being as short-term pleasure and eudaimonic well-being as meaning and self-actualization. Tourism researchers have found that visitors’ hedonic well-being has a positive effect on their eudaimonic well-being. On the other hand, despite this dominant view, other researchers have argued that eudaimonic well-being plays a role in predicting hedonic well-being. Therefore, our knowledge of the simultaneous experience of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being remains unclear. As prior research indicates, current understanding of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being remains limited and fragmented. On the other hand, researchers have commonly employed the PERMA and DRAMMA models to assess tourists’ hedonic and eudaimonic well-being; however, neither international nor domestic studies have applied the DRAMMA model to measure tourists’ sense of well-being. Moreover, only a limited number of studies have examined the effects of eudaimonic well-being on place attachment and tourist loyalty. Nevertheless, no previous study has simultaneously examined the effects of both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being on place attachment and loyalty within a single analytical model. Accordingly, the present study seeks to address these research gaps by answering the following questions:

Does mindfulness influence tourists’ sense of well-being?
Does the state of fascination mediate the relationship between mindfulness and tourists’ sense of well-being?
Does tourists’ sense of well-being influence place attachment?
Does tourists’ place attachment influence their loyalty?

The findings of this research make a theoretical contribution to the leisure, tourism, and museum literature by clarifying the relationships between mindfulness, flow experience, sense of well-being, place attachment, and loyalty. Furthermore, based on the findings of the present study, this research contributes to museum management and marketing practices.
 
Methodology
This study is applied in nature with respect to its research purpose and adopts a quantitative research approach. The statistical population of the study consisted of all tourists who visited Chehelsotun Palace Museum and Vank Cathedral Museum during the period of data collection. Due to the accessibility of respondents at the study sites, convenience sampling was employed. The required sample size was determined based on the guidelines provided by Hair et al. (2014) for structural equation modeling studies. According to Hair et al. (2014), a minimum sample size of 265 respondents was considered sufficient; however, to enhance the accuracy and robustness of the results, a total of 290 participants were included in the final sample. Accordingly, 290 respondents were surveyed, and all distributed questionnaires were fully completed and deemed usable for analysis.
Data were collected through a combination of documentary review and field survey methods. The documentary review was used to identify relevant theoretical constructs and measurement scales, while the field survey was conducted using a structured questionnaire administered to tourists at the two museum sites. All questionnaire items were measured using a Likert-type scale, allowing respondents to indicate their level of agreement with each statement. Prior to data analysis, the collected data were screened for completeness and suitability.
Data analysis was conducted using structural equation modeling based on the partial least squares (PLS-SEM) approach, which is appropriate for exploratory research and complex models involving mediation relationships. The analysis was implemented using PLS software. The case study of the present research consists of the two museums of Chehelsotun and Vank Church, both of which are among the most prominent cultural and historical attractions in Isfahan. The selection of these two sites was based on their cultural significance and their classification as historical monuments of the city. Moreover, according to statistics from the Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism Organization of Isfahan Province, these museums receive the highest number of visitors annually, making them suitable contexts for examining tourists’ experiences and well-being..
 
Results and discussion
The results of the descriptive analysis show that among the 290 sample respondents, 52.8 percent were visitors to the Chehelsotun Museum Garden and 47.2 percent were visitors to the Vank Museum and Church. The results also show that 62.1 percent of the sample were female and 37.9 percent were male. Furthermore, the data analysis shows that 49.3 percent of the tourists were between 20 and 30 years old. A total of 28.6 percent were between 31 and 40 years old, 15.9 percent were between 41 and 50, and 6.2 percent were aged 50 years and above. The results show that 19.7 percent of respondents held diploma and postgraduate degrees, 50.3 percent held bachelor’s degrees, 24.1 percent held master’s degrees, and 5.9 percent held doctoral degrees, with bachelor’s degree holders constituting the largest educational group.
The research findings indicate a positive and statistically significant relationship between mindfulness and tourists’ sense of well-being in museum settings. The results further demonstrate that flow experience plays a mediating role in the relationship between mindfulness and tourists’ sense of well-being. In addition, a positive and significant relationship was identified between tourists’ sense of well-being and place attachment, as well as between place attachment and loyalty. Collectively, these findings provide practical insights for museum management aimed at enhancing organizational dynamism and supporting the development of well-being-oriented tourism. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test showed that the data were not normally distributed. A sample adequacy test was performed, and the calculated index was 0.92, indicating that the sample size was appropriate. To examine the fit of the measurement models, factor loadings were first assessed, and values above 0.4 confirmed the suitability of the research measurement tool. Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability tests were performed for the items of each variable. Therefore, the results show that the model presented in this study has appropriate reliability, as the value of each test exceeded 0.7.
 
Conclusion
The findings of the study suggest that mindfulness increases visitors’ sense of well-being. These findings support the positive psychology perspective and are consistent with previous studies indicating that mindfulness promotes happiness and enjoyment. According to the findings of the present study, when visitors are curious and receptive to their present-moment experiences, they are more likely to experience hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Furthermore, the current findings suggest that as individuals’ experience of fascination increases, the relationship between mindfulness and the sense of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being becomes stronger. As individuals’ experiences of fascination increase, the state of mindfulness also increases, which in turn enhances the sense of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. On the other hand, fascination also encompasses hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, as it creates and reflects a deep sense of pleasure and focus as a state of consciousness. As a result, as visitors experience flow, awareness and attention to the present moment increase, and thus visitors have more enjoyable, pleasant, and meaningful experiences. Therefore, if the two museums of Chehelsotun and Vank Church improve their physical dimensions (the way works are arranged, interpretive panels, use of technology, lighting, etc.) so that visitors feel present during their visit, this can help create and enhance tourists’ sense of well-being. Also, since the flow experience plays a mediating role in the relationship between mindfulness and sense of well-being, the two museums of Chehelsotun and Vank Church should make every effort to create interactive and participatory programs and activities so that visitors are immersed in the activities. Because when flow is experienced by visitors, mindfulness and a sense of well-being also occur. Among other things, strengthening the knowledge and skills of guides and staff can improve their performance in the museum. Also, the findings provide insight into the relationship between hedonic and eudaimonic well-being and place attachment. Therefore, this study extends previous research in the leisure and tourism literature and enriches knowledge of place attachment. Specifically, the study shows a direct and significant effect of museum visitors’ hedonic and eudaimonic well-being on place attachment. Visitors who experience self-expression, personal development, and enjoyment develop a positive attitude and bond toward the place, which leads to museum attachment and loyalty. The findings of this study indicate that the managers and staff of the two museums, Chehelsotun and Vank Church, should meet tourists’ expectations as much as possible and provide enjoyment, growth, and learning opportunities so that visitors become attached to the museum and are willing to revisit and recommend it.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
Authors contributed equally to the conceptualization and writing of the article. All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work declaration of competing interest none.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to all the scientific consultants of this paper.

Keywords


  1. Allan, B. A., Bott, E. M., & Suh, H. (2015). Connecting mindfulness and meaning in life: Exploring the role of authenticity. Mindfulness, 6(5), 996–1003.https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671- 014-0341-z
  2. Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., & Allen, K. B. (2004). Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Assessment, 11(3), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1073191104268029
  3. Barber, N. A., & Deale, C. (2014). Tapping mindfulness to shape hotel guests’ sustainable behavior. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55(1), 100–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965513496315
  4. Bonaiuto, M., Mao, Y., Roberts, S., Psalti, A., Ariccio, S., Ganucci Cancellieri, U., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2016). Optimal experience and personal growth: Flow and the consolida tion of place identity. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1654. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01654
  5. Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
  6. Chan, E. Y. (2018). Mindfulness promotes sustainable tourism: The case of Uluru. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(13), 1526–1530. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2018.1455647
  7. Chang, J., Okumus, B., Li, Z. W., & Lin, H. H. (2021). What serves as the best bridge in food consumption: Experiential value or place attachment?. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 26(12), 1302–1317. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2021.1983627
  8. Chang, K. C. (2014). Examining the effect of tour guide performance, tourist trust, tourist satis faction and flow experience. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19(2), 219–247. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2012.739189
  9. Chen, I. L., Scott, N., & Benckendorff, P. (2017). Mindful tourist experiences: A Buddhist per spective. Annals of Tourism Research, 64, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.01.013
  10. Chen, I. L., Scott, N., & Benckendorff, P. (2017). Mindful tourist experiences: A Buddhist per spective. Annals of Tourism Research, 64, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.01.013
  11. Crego, A., Yela, J. R., Gomez-Martınez, M. A., & Karim, A. A. (2020). The contribution of meaningfulness and mindfulness to psychological well-being and mental health: A structural equation model. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(8), 2827–2850. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10902-019-00201-y
  12. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
  13. Dekeyser, M., Raes, F., Leijssen, M., Leysen, S., & Dewulf, D. (2008). Mindfulness skills and inter personal behaviour. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(5), 1235–1245. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.paid.2007.11.018
  14. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological bulletin, 95(3), 542. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542
  15. Dutt, C. (2011). The role of mindfulness in tourism: Tourism businesses’ perspectives of mindful ness. 29th EuroCHRIE October 19-22 (pp. 223–236).
  16. Echarri, F., & Urpi, C. (2018). Mindfulness in art contemplation. The story of a Rothko experi ence. Journal of Museum Education, 43(1), 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10598650.2017. 1384977
  17. Filep, S., Moyle, B. D., & Skavronskaya, L. (2022). Tourist wellbeing: Re-thinking hedonic and eudaimonic dimensions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 48(1), 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480221087964
  18. Garc^es, S., Pocinho, M., Jesus, S. N., & Rieber, M. S. (2018). Positive psychology & tourism: A systematic literature review. Tourism & Management Studies, 14(3), 41–51. https://doi.org/10. 18089/tms.2018.14304
  19. Garland, E. L., Farb, N. A., R. Goldin, P., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2015). Mindfulness broadens awareness and builds eudaimonic meaning: A process model of mindful positive emotion regu lation. Psychological Inquiry, 26(4), 293–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2015.1064294
  20. Gordon, T. (2013). Theorizing yoga as a mindfulness skill. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 1224–1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.733.
  21. Hair, JF. Jr., Hult, GTM., Ringle, C,M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications. ISBN: 978-1-4522-1744-4. 307.
  22. Hayes, S. C. (2002). Acceptance, mindfulness, and science. Clinical Psychology, 9(1), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.9.1.101
  23. Hidalgo, M., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment: Conceptual and empirical questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0221
  24. Hong, P. Y., Lishner, D. A., & Han, K. H. (2014). Mindfulness and eating: An experiment exam ining the effect of mindful raisin eating on the enjoyment of sampled food. Mindfulness, 5(1), 80–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0154-x
  25. Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information & Management, 41(7), 853–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.08.014
  26. Huta, V., & Waterman, A. S. (2014). Eudaimonia and its distinction from hedonia: Developing a classification and terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(6), 1425–1456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9485-0
  27. Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulnessbased interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology, 10(2), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bpg016
  28. Kabat-Zinn, J. (2015). Mindfulness. Mindfulness, 6(6), 1481–1483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671- 015-0456-x
  29. Kanagasapapathy, G. (2017). Understanding The Flow Experiences of Heritage Tourists. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Bournemouth University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
  30. Karagöz, D., Kama, S., & Uysal, M. (2024). Examining the relationships between mindfulness, eudaimonic and hedonic experiences, place attachment, loyalty: the moderating role of flow. Journal of Leisure Research, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2024.2305782
  31. Karasakal, S., & Albayrak, T. (2022). How to create flow experience during travel: The role of destination attributes. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 28(3), 303-318. https://doi.org/10.1177/13567667211053386
  32. Kim Lian Chan, J. (2009). The consumption of museum service experiences: Benefits and value of museum experiences. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2-3), 173–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368620802590239
  33. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2003). An examination of the relationship between leisure activity involvement and place attachment among hikers along the Appalachian Trail. Journal of Leisure Research, 35(3), 249–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00222216.2003.11949993
  34. Laumakis, S. J. (Ed.). (2008). An introduction to Buddhist philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
  35. Lee, J., Kyle, G., & Scott, D. (2012). The mediating effect of place attachment on the relationship between festival satisfaction and loyalty to the festival hosting destination. Journal of Travel Research, 51(6), 754–767. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287512437859
  36. Lee, S., Chua, B.-L., Kim, H.-C., & Han, H. (2017). Shaping and enhancing airport lounge experi ences: The application of brand personality and image congruity theories. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(11), 2901–2920. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM- 12-2015-0672
  37. Lee, T. H., & Shen, Y. L. (2013). The influence of leisure involvement and place attachment on destination loyalty: Evidence from recreationists walking their dogs in urban parks. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.11.002
  38. Lee, W., & Jeong, C. (2020). Beyond the correlation between tourist eudaimonic and hedonic experiences: necessary condition analysis. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(17), 2182–2194. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2019.1611747
  39. Lee, W., & Jeong, C. (2021). Distinctive roles of tourist eudaimonic and hedonic experiences on satisfaction and place attachment: Combined use of SEM and necessary condition analysis. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 47, 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2021. 02.012
  40. Lengyel, A. (2015). Mindfulness and sustainability: Utilizing the tourism context. Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(9), 35. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v8n9p35
  41. Loureiro, S. M. C., Breazeale, M., & Radic, A. (2019). Happiness with rural experience: Exploring the role of tourist mindfulness as a moderator. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 25(3), 279–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766719849975
  42. Loureiro, S. M. C., Stylos, N., & Miranda, F. J. (2019). Exploring how mindfulness may enhance perceived value of travel experience. The Service Industries Journal, 40(11-12), 800–824. https:// doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2019.1600672
  43. Manwa, H., Boemah-Dlamini, D., & Coetzee, E. (2017). Mindfulness in cultural and wildlife tour ism in Southern Africa. Internatıonal Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 12(8), 1913–1923.
  44. Matteucci, X., & Filep, S. (2017). Eudaimonic tourist experiences: The case of flamenco. Leisure Studies, 36(1), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2015.1085590
  45. Moore, A., & Malinowski, P. (2009). Meditation, mindfulness and cognitive flexibility. Consciousness and Cognition, 18(1), 176–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2008.12.008
  46. Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitors: Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 376–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(95)00068-2
  47. Moscardo, G. (2009). Understanding tourist experience through mindfulness theory. In M. Kozak & A. Decrop (Eds.), Handbook of tourist behavior (pp. 99–115). Routledge.
  48. Noor, S. M. D., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Jaafar, M., & Ganesan, V. (2014). What influences visitor mindfulness at world heritage sites?. Tourism Culture & Communication, 14(3), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.3727/109830415X14213698267271
  49. Nusair, K., & Parsa, H. G. (2011). Introducing flow theory to explain the interactive online shop ping experience in a travel context. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 12(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2011.540974
  50. Patwardhan, V., Ribeiro, M. A., Payini, V., Woosnam, K. M., Mallya, J., & Gopalakrishnan, P. (2020). Visitors’ place attachment and destination loyalty: Examining the roles of emotional solidarity and perceived safety. Journal of Travel Research, 59(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0047287518824157
  51. Pearce, P. L., & Stringer, P. F. (1991). Psychology and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(1), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(91)90044-C
  52. Rahmani, K., Gnoth, J., & Mather, D. (2018). Hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: A psycholin guistic view. Tourism Management, 69, 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.06.008
  53. Richter, N., & Hunecke, M. (2021). The mindful hedonist? Relationships between well-being orientations, mindfulness and well-being experiences. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(7), 3111–3135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-021-00358-5
  54. Ruggeri, K., Garcia-Garzon, E., Maguire, Á., Matz, S., & Huppert, F. A. (2020). Well-being is more than happiness and life satisfaction: a multidimensional analysis of 21 countries. Health and quality of life outcomes, 18, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01423-y
  55. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On hapiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic Well-being. Annual Review Psychology,52, 141–166.http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141
  56. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166. https://doi. org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141
  57. Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 139–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902- 006-9023-4
  58. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(6), 1069. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069
  59. Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An introduction. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 279–298). Springer.
  60. Smith, M.K., & Diekmann, A. (2017). Tourism and wellbeing. Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2017.05.006
  61. Stebbins, R. A. (2018). Leisure and the positive psychological states. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13(1), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2017.1374444
  62. Šveb Dragija, M., & Jelinčić, D. A. (2022). Can museums help visitors thrive? Review of studies on psychological wellbeing in museums. Behavioral Sciences, 12(11), 458.  https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12110458
  63. Šveb Dragija, M., van Zomeren, M., & Hansen, N. (2024). Designing museum experiences for eudaimonic or hedonic well-being: insights from interviews with museum visitors. Museum management and curatorship, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09647775.2024.2408239
  64. Trevino, L. K., & Webster, J. (1992). Flow in Computer mediated Communication. Communication Research, 19 (5), 539-573.
  65. Tsai, S. P. (2020). Driving destination loyalty via separate impact of hedonia and eudaimonia. Current Issues in Tourism, 24(8), 1048–1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1763267
  66. Unsworth, S., Palicki, S. K., & Lustig, J. (2016). The impact of mindful meditation in nature on self-nature interconnectedness. Mindfulness, 7(5), 1052–1060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671- 016-0542-8
  67. Vada, S., Prentice, C., & Hsiao, A. (2019). The influence of tourism experience and well-being on place attachment. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 47, 322–330. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.jretconser.2018.12.007
  68. Van Winkle, C. M., & Backman, K. (2008). Examining visitor mindfulness at a cultural event. Event Management, 12(3), 163–169. https://doi.org/10.3727/152599509789659731
  69. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 678– 691. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.678
  70. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 678– 691. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.678
  71. Wolsko, C., & Lindberg, K. (2013). Experiencing connection with nature: The matrix of psycho logical well-being, mindfulness, and outdoor recreation. Ecopsychology, 5(2), 80–91. https://doi. org/10.1089/eco.2013.0008
  72. Wright, J. J., Sadlo, G., & Stew, G. (2007). Further explorations into the conundrum of flow pro cess. Journal of Occupational Science, 14(3), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2007. 9686594
  73. Wu,JJ.Chang. YS. (2005). Towards understanding members’ interactivity, trust, and flow in online travel community. Industrial Management & Data Systems,105(7): 937–954.https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570510616120
  74. Ying, T., Tan, X., Ye, S., Ka, X., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Examining tourist mindfulness in museums: The roles of familiarity and motivation. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(9), 981– 996. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1819835
  75. Yuksel, A., Yuksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer satisfac tion and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management, 31(2), 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.007
  76. Zhang, S.-N., Li, Y.-Q., Liu, C.-H., & Ruan, W.-N. (2019). How does authenticity enhance flow experience through perceived value and involvement: The moderating roles of innovation and cultural identity. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36(6), 710–728. https://doi.org/10. 1080/10548408.2019.1625846
  77. Faridi Foshtomi, A., Salaripour, A. A, & Hesam, M. (2022). Evaluating the level of loyalty, attachment and satisfaction of tourists to urban tourism destinations the case study of Rasht City. Journal of Urban Tourism, 9 (3), 1-13. http://doi.org/10.22059/JUT.2022.333994.979. [in persian]
  78. Sarikhani, A., Rezaei, M.R., Pashapoor, H., & Rahimi, A. (2024). Analyzing the effect of brand equity of a tourism destination on the loyalty of its tourists with the mediating role of نمانام experience: the Case study of Sarein city. Journal of Urban Tourism, 11 (2), 35-56. http://doi.org/10.22059/jut.2024.352264.1094. [in persian]