1. Introduction
Because spiritual tourism is difficult to define, the terms ‘religious,’ ‘faith’, or ‘pilgrimage’ tourism are often used interchangeably. In truth, most religious sites, monuments, and destinations also draw tourists who may or may not be religious. Some tourists have various motivations for visiting a sacred place, such as religious belief, an affinity to the architecture, relaxation, or curiosity. In a nutshell, spiritual tourism focuses on exploring life factors that lay beyond the individual and contributing to body-mind-spirit balance. These may or may not be religious in nature [
1].
Spiritually motivated tourism is considered by most as the oldest form of human travel [
2]. Thousands of years ago, people travelled miles away from their homes, steered by religious and spiritual motives. Nowadays, religious and spiritual beliefs are rapidly changing. Apart from religious and spiritual beliefs, traditional religious dynamics in many Western countries have been in constant decline, especially among younger generations. For example, more than a third of US Generation Z (those born after 1995) identify as religiously unaffiliated. It is not only a lack of religious affiliation that distinguishes Generation Z from Millennials, Generation X, Baby Boomers, and the Silent generation; they are also far more likely to identify as atheist or agnostic. Case in point, 18% of Gen Z affirmatively identify as either atheist (9%) or agnostic (9%) [
3]. Since there are quite a wide array of motives which can drive tourists to visit religious sites, it must be suspected that these motivations would differ among various generational cohorts as well. Although religious and spiritual travel motivations have been extensively researched in general, less is known about those motivations among the youth, especially among Generation Z [
4].
Many see the high number of tourists worldwide as direct support to help preserve cultural sites and artefacts, foster environmental protection, and promote peace and security. In that sense, it is important to understand the travel motivations of Generation Z as future tourists and prepare tourism offerings accordingly [
5].
Generally, tourist motivations are straightforward and coincide with predicted behaviour in destinations that draw tourists with a dominant attraction, such as a beach or spa [
6]. In other words, understanding spiritual tourist motivations is more challenging, especially in the case of multi-attraction destinations that include historical sites, monuments, museums, art galleries, buildings, and other architectural structures, parks, events, and festivals, night-time entertainment, and a variety of other services that are interconnected with the tourism offerings [
7]. This is the reason the study focuses on Serbia as an example of a multi-attraction destination. Serbia is a country with numerous sacred sites which have great potential to be included in the world’s religious tourism map. At the same time, the country brands itself is a melting pot full of music festivals (from electronic to traditional and folk music), bustling nightlife, and business events, and also presents rich cultural and natural beauties [
6,
8,
9,
10].
Contemporary spiritual travel is influenced by various motivations, including mainstream travel motivation [
11] and increasingly other sorts of niche travel motivations or motivations that are not traditionally associated with sacred sites, such as relaxation [
12]. Thus, to provide more complete tourism offerings for spiritual destinations characteristic of their future visitors (Generation Z), managers of the destinations need to understand what types of tourists constitute the major groups.
To this end, this paper tries to provide an answer to the following two research questions:
RQ1 What are the dimensions of Generation Z’s spiritual travel motivations?
RQ2 Are there differences in terms of respondents’ gender, level of education, urban/rural environment, and questions about religion in relation to the GZSTMS scale?
The contribution of this research is to test and validate a scale for Generation Z spiritual travel motivation, as the scale dives deeper into understanding specific profiles of Generation Z tourists when visiting spiritual destinations. Further, it gives practical recommendations for destination management and marketing based on the characteristics of tourists’ profiles.
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Study Sample Characteristics
The sample consists of 470 respondents within the Gen Z age category. There is a higher number of female respondents in the sample (64.9%), and more respondents come from urban areas. Most of the respondents are in secondary school (40.9%), followed by MSc (26.3%), and then BSc studies (24.3%), which are presented in
Table 2.
4.1.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis—Generation Z Spiritual Travel Motivation Scale (GZSTMS)
EFA was performed on the data set of 470 respondents that were randomly selected measuring latent variable on place attachment. The results of EFA (principal component analysis) with Varimax rotation: factor loadings are presented in
Table 3. Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure yielded 0.948, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was 13,179.330 (df = 630,
p < 0.000), showing high significance, and further factor analysis was appropriate. Four factors were extracted explaining at least 61.541% of the total variance. Reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s α) of all relevant variables in the rotated factor matrix ranged from 0.712 to 0.963 (
Table 3), which is above the 0.7 threshold. According to the factor loading scores for each item, four components are interpreted as four different Generation Z Spiritual Travel Motivation factors, which are (Spiritual and Canonical Experiences—SCE, Escapism, Ascetic Life and Social Interactions—EALSI, Natural and Cultural Values—NCV, Religious Events and Active Participation—REAP).
4.1.2. Measurement Model Validity for Gen Z Spiritual Travel Motivation Scale (GZSTMS)—Confirmatory Factor Analysis
The latent factors measurement model was estimated to check for construct validity and reliability using CFA. Initial model fit indices showed moderate results and moderate fit indices, which were below or above the threshold (Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.899 (>0.95), Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.892 (>0.95), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.141 (<0.08), Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = 0.115 (<0.08), Degrees of freedom (df) = 630,
p < 0.000), thus revealing potential problems associated with the model; therefore, the modification indices needed to be used. Several items with high residual were excluded (SCE5, SCE10, SCE11, SCE15, EALSI4, EALSI5, EALSI7, EALSI8, EALSI9, NCV2, NCV3, NCV4, REAP2, REAP3) thus defining the model with satisfactory fit (CFI = 0.974, TLI = 0.970, RMSEA = 0.080, SRMR = 0.051, df = 231,
p < 0.000). Final scale for spiritual travel motivation factors included four latent factors with 22 items in total (
Table 4).
Scale reliability was assessed through Composite reliability (CR) and Average variance extracted (AVE) indices. The convergent validity of each dimension was examined by calculating the score of the average variance extracted (AVE) [
35]. A substantial convergent validity is achieved when all item-to-factor loadings are significant, the AVE score is higher than 0.50, and (CR) is higher than 0.60 within each dimension [
35,
36]. Results showed that all dimensions had AVE higher than 0.50 and CR higher than 0.60 (
Table 5), which indicates good convergent validity.
Discriminant validity was then checked by comparing the square root of each average variance extracted (AVEs) with the correlation coefficients for each latent construct. Fornell and Larcker [
35] noted that the discriminant validity is guaranteed when the square root of each AVE is greater than the correlation coefficients estimate.
The square roots of AVE values were all higher than the correlation values of constructs compared to all other constructs; thus, results confirm that all dimensions have sufficient discriminant validity [
35,
37], which is shown in
Table 6.
4.2. Inferential Statistics Z Spiritual Travel Motivation Dimensions
The discriminativeness of the scale was tested regarding participants (gender, level of education, urban/rural environment, and questions about religion in relation to the GZSTMS scale. Independent t-test showed certain differences among gender, rural/urban environment, and do you practice religious rituals (
Table 7). Males are more motivated by the NCV factor than females (t = 3.098,
p = 0.002). Respondents from rural areas are more motivated by the SCE factor (t = −2.604,
p = 0.01), EALSI factor (t = −3.085,
p = 0.002) and REAP factor (t = −2.771,
p = 0.006), then those who live in urban areas. Respondents who practice religious rituals are more motivated by the SCE factor (t = −17.885,
p = 0.000), EALSI factor (t = −13.501,
p = 0.000), NCV factor (t = −4.867,
p = 0.000), REAP factor (t = −11.380,
p = 0.000), then those who do not practice. Respondents who attended some religious courses during their education are more motivated by the SCE factor (t = −2.271,
p = 0.024) and EALSI factor (t = −2.504,
p = 0.013) than those who did not attend any of the religious courses during their education.
Using One-way ANOVA and Post Hoc LSD Test, further differences were found in regard to age, level of education, and in regard to the questions: are you a believing person and how often do you visit religious objects (
Table 8).
Respondents that are 18 and 25 years old are the most motivated, while respondents who are 19, 22, and 24 years old are moderately motivated, and respondents that are 20, 21, and 23 years old are least motivated by SCE (F = 2.818, p = 0.007), while respondents who are 19 and 20 are least motivated, respondents who are 18, 21, 22, 23, and 24 are moderately motivated and respondents who are 25 years old are most motivated by NCV (F = 2.151, p = 0.037). Respondents in high school are least motivated by the NCV factor, followed by bachelor’s level students with a moderate level of motivation, while PhD students are most motivated (F = 2.961, p = 0.032). Respondents who hold beliefs are highly motivated by SCE (F = 172.200, p = 0.000), EALSI (F = 100.094, p = 0.000), NCV (F = 18.215, p = 0.000) and REAP (F = 37.099, p = 0.000) factors, followed with moderate motivation with people who are not sure, while least motivated are atheists. Respondents who visit religious objects several times a week, once a week, several times in a month, and once a month are highly motivated by SCE (F = 29.988, p = 0.000), EALSI (F = 17.381, p = 0.000), NCV (F = 9.191, p = 0.000) and REAP (F = 18.584, p = 0.000) factors, while respondents who visit several times per year are moderately motivated, and least motivated are respondents who visit religious objects once a year or do not visit them at all.
5. Discussion
The major objective of this study is to develop a new scale for Generation Z’s spiritual travel motivation, namely, what drives them to visit spiritual places and religious destinations. Factor analysis identified four groups of factors (
Table 2), resulting in the creation of a four-dimensional Generation Z Spiritual Travel Motivation Scale (GZSTMS). The first dimension is called Spiritual and Canonical Experiences (SCE), and it consists of 16 items. SCE refers to personal contact with something higher (sacred) [
23,
24], healing, both mentally and physically [
14,
26], praying and confessions [
23,
25,
27,
28], but also leaving monetary contributions in religious buildings [
26] or washing with consecrated water [
31]. The SCE dimension is mostly spiritual in nature and highly personal.
The second dimension is called Escapism, Ascetic Life, and Social Interactions (EALSI), and it consists of nine (9) items. EALSI is connected to religious places and objects in terms of travelling [
29] and spending time in sacral places, gaining new knowledge and experiences [
23], escaping from urban environments [
32] and travelling with friends [
22], further suggesting the monk’s way of life, feeling their hospitality [
31] and getting acquainted with the rules of the monastery [
27]. The EALSI dimension is more connected to social aspects of spirituality and learning about religious objects and people.
The third dimension is called Natural and Cultural Values (NCV), and it consists of five (5) items. NCV describes secular travel motivations connected to the historical [
31], architectural values [
22], natural surroundings of the monastery/religious place [
29], exploring interesting legends/stories about the spiritual place [
24], or learning about some historical figures that are connected to the religious place [
23]. The NCV dimension is secular in nature and is more connected to historical and cultural aspects of religious objects.
The fourth dimension is called Religious Events and Active Participation (REAP) and consists of six (6) items. REAP is more connected to some skills and competencies, such as learning how to paint frescoes [
27] and sing or chant [
24], to some modern trends [
24] like buying souvenirs and local religious products [
23], participating in some events or volunteering [
22]. The REAP dimension is also secular in nature and is focused on religious events, religious products and following some modern trends.
The findings are consistent with Keeling’s [
17] study, which describes the motivations of spiritual travellers not only as religious motivations, such as praying and worshipping but also as an underlying secular part of the motivation that, in most cases, overlaps with religious motivations. Richards [
19] defined four dimensions of religious tourism, describing it as a spectrum ranging from pilgrimage/religious motives to secular motives manifested through cultural tourism, also known as an inner-to-outer journey. What is interesting is that the majority of the motives derived are, in essence, sustainable and can positively influence behaviour change and perception during travel. They can instil spiritual values, a sense of pride fuelled by knowledge of history, architecture, or some significant historical figures and legends, and thus contribute to the preservation of cultural/religious heritage.
The role of spirituality is increasingly seen as an important agent of behavioural change that will trigger more sustainable development [
20]. In that sense, the COVID-19 pandemic has paved the way for more alternative ways of sustainable development [
38], including those that favour so-called companionate tourism that relay on more mindful tourists [
39].
Gen Z has high values such as a sense of community, a collaborative economy, entrepreneurship based on the sum of many (crowdfunding), and a strong concern for the environment, and they are also viewed as digital natives [
40]. In terms of travel, Gen Z is usually the most open to it, and they feel most at ease in multicultural settings [
41,
42]. Generation Z uses social media and considers their peers’ opinions, gather information about the destination, plan their own trip, and enjoy interacting with the local population [
43]. What is more, Gen Z is familiar with solidarity tourism [
44]. The majority of previous findings describing Gen Z can be linked to the dimensions defined by this study.
6. Concluding Remarks
To answer RQ1, this paper identified the main Generation Z spiritual travel motivation dimensions: Spiritual and Canonical Experiences, Escapism, Ascetic Life, Social Interactions, Natural and Cultural Values, Religious Events, and Active Participation. Independent t-tests showed certain differences among gender, rural/urban environment, the question “do you practice religious rituals?” and One-way ANOVA and Post Hoc LSD Test found differences in regard to the level of education. Considering the following questions, “Are you a believing person?” and “How often do you visit religious objects?” provided the answer to RQ2.
In order to provide long-term economic and social advantages, spiritual forms of tourism should contribute to sustainable development by providing high levels of tourist satisfaction combined with meaningful and distinctive experiences [
45,
46]. This research has shown that Gen Z, as a less religious generation than others, has a broad set of motives that drives them to visit spiritual places. This must be acknowledged when visiting spiritual attractions. The current study has various theoretical and practical benefits. From a theoretical point of view, it adds to the existing research on spiritual travel motivation, making it possible to learn about different Gen Z tourists and how they are different from other tourists in important ways. The current study focused on four separate Gen Z dimensions: Spiritual and Canonical Experiences, Escapism, Ascetic Life and Social Interactions, Natural and Cultural Values, Religious Events and Active Participation. There are no other studies the authors are aware of that study the spiritual travel motives of Gen Z in the Serbian region.
The findings have important implications for destination management and marketing. A conventional tourism campaign, for example, could be focused on more secular Gen Z visitors, who can be targeted by mainstream marketing tactics. Other more spiritual efforts could be directed at more spiritual ones at the same time. To that end, presenting multiple sides of spiritual destinations could be a successful strategy for addressing Gen Z.
In addition to the benefits discussed, the current study contains certain drawbacks. Longitudinal studies, for example, are required because they provide a clearer picture of defined features. Additionally, the scale for spiritual travel motivation was tested and found to be accurate for Gen Z in Serbia. However, the use of convenience sampling limited the generalizability of the results. As a result, future research should endeavour to use more nationally representative samples. Furthermore, desirability and recollection biases contribute to the distortion of self-reported data. There were more women in the sample than men and a large number of highly educated visitors, which could have affected the results of the study.
Although this study provides insights into Gen Z spiritual travel motivation factors in Serbia, the findings demand more investigation. Spiritual sites in Serbia do not have as much information for visitors as spiritual sites in Europe that receive significant traffic and are familiar, promoted, and understood by visitors.
This study shows that more research is needed in different situations to fill in the missing tourist characteristics. In real-life scenarios, how do tourists motivated by various triggers differ? Dimensions identified in Serbian spiritual places are applicable in other spiritual destinations. This is needed so that very specific and useful suggestions can be made for destination management and marketing in a multitude of different situations.