EXPLORING TOURIST LOYALTY IN METROPOLITAN CITY OF INDONESIA

This study investigates the relationship between tourist satisfaction, destination image, and tourist loyalty. A descriptive correlational study was used as the research methodology, with destination image as the independent variable, tourist satisfaction as the mediating variable, and tourist loyalty as the dependent variable. The data was taken from domestic tourists visiting Jakarta, with a total sample of 280 people. Structural Equation Modelling with Smart PLS. was used to analyse the data. The findings revealed a significant positive correlation between city image and tourist loyalty, city image and tourist satisfaction, and tourist satisfaction with tourist loyalty. The relationship between city image and tourist loyalty is also mediated by tourist satisfaction. The higher the value of the city's image, the more satisfied and loyal the tourists to the city. Based on the findings of the study, theoretical and managerial implications are provided, and recommendations for further study are made

www.ieeca.org/journal 581 sustainable development. Cities use branding to get a positive perception in people's minds.
Cities compete with one another as a result to satisfy the demands of their target markets, which can be divided into three categories: residents, investors, and tourists. These groups are all working toward the same goal of achieving a sustainable competitive advantage (Richards & Duif, 2019).
In recent years, there has been an increase of interest in city branding shown by both the academic community and public authority (Oguztimur & Akturan, 2016). Through a city branding strategy, a city tries to promote tangible and intangible attributes that aim to produce a city image (Priporas et al., 2020). On the other hand, a lack of knowledge about the elements that affect city branding and how these elements interact can occasionally lead to city governments and policy makers acting without clear plans and strategies in relation to social issues, investment issues, tourism issues, and other related issues. Therefore, there is a need for further investigation into research on city branding and the factors that influence it.
Tourism comprises various service components, most of which are typically supplied by affiliated organizations (Kozak et al., 2003). Providing services to visitors that fulfil their expectations is the most essential factor in determining their satisfaction with their experience as a whole. It is very important to determine the overall satisfaction of tourists in order to predict their future purchasing behavior. Destination image, which is one of the components of brand equity, not only plays a role in the decision that tourists make regarding which location to visit, but it also plays a role in the tourists' behavior after they have made their decision (Chen & Tsai, 2007). The intention to revisit is one of the characteristics of tourist loyalty, in addition to the desire to recommend these tourist destinations to others. Therefore, in tourism, destination image is more important than tangible resources (Meng et al., 2011).
Indonesia is a country that pays great attention to the development of the tourism sector. Jakarta, a metropolitan city that serves as the capital city of Indonesia, is also one of the urban tourist destinations that always try to develop and be sustainable. City branding is one way of marketing that is done with all the problems. One thing that needs to be researched is how the community responds to the brand equity that the city government is trying to convey. One of the critical brand equities is the city image that is built and how it influences tourist satisfaction and tourist loyalty Taking into account the aforementioned factors, this study examined the relationship between city image, tourist satisfaction, and tourist loyalty. Tourist satisfaction is the mediating variable, city image is the independent variable, and loyalty is the dependent variable. A survey questionnaire created from relevant literature was used to gather respondents' data. Structural equation modelling via Smart PLS was used to analyse the gathered data.

City Brand Image
The total of beliefs, ideas, and impressions that tourists bring back with them after visiting a location is what we refer to as the destination image (Assaker & Hallak, 2013). A tourist destination image is one of the most crucial aspects in determining how effective a tourist destination will be because people place a high value on it when choosing where to travel. The image conveys the character of a location or vacation spot to potential visitors. Consumers can then experience the image described by a city, and tourists can then form perceptions of destinations that will influence their subsequent purchasing behavior. Promoting the most attractive image for a city is difficult because many cities worldwide have attractions and activities that are very similar to one another. At this time, there is intense competition in areas where tourists have the freedom to choose from various available destinations (Tigu, 2012). Therefore, to attract the target market's attention, a specific location needs to distinguish itself from other locations and establish its own identity. Each destination needs its own unique image in order to be positively positioned or advantageously differentiated from its rivals in the thoughts of customers (Qu et al., 2011) The concept of a destination image inspired the development of the notion of a city image. According to the findings of several studies conducted in the past, a city is considered a destination when viewed from the perspective of tourists (Kim & Lee, 2015). Experts (Basaran, 2016;Hussein, 2020)  Several earlier studies have suggested various ways to measure destination image. Destination image, according to Pike (2009), can be broken down into two components: functional, which includes factors like cost, environment, and special events and psychological, which encompasses elements such as friendly locals, landscape beauty or fame, and emotions related to religious or historical sites. According to Enright and Newton (2005), a destination image comprises tangible and intangible aspects, including cognitive, affective, and conative characteristics. Finally, according to Beerli & Martín (2004), the image of a tourist destination depends on the location's cognitive, affective, and distinctive characteristics. This is consistent with what Qu et al. (2011) concluded about the importance of the destination image's cognitive, affective, and distinctive aspects.

Tourist Satisfaction
According to Guntoro & Hui, (2013), tourist satisfaction is the assessment of a location or destination made by tourists in light of their expectations. The past experiences of tourists are an important factor that influences their intention to revisit a destination. If a customer has a good experience, they are likely to be satisfied, and if they have a bad experience, they will be dissatisfied (Reisinger & Turner, 2012;Surya & Efrianto, 2022).
When conducting research on tourist behavior, satisfaction is an essential factor to consider because it influences the selection of a location, the acquisition of goods and services, and the choice of whether or not to come back (Jang and Feng, 2007). According to Alexandris et al. (2006), customer satisfaction influences a company's profitability by fostering brand loyalty among visitors to particular tourist destinations. The study found that a visitor's level of contentment plays a big role in deciding whether they will return to a place and recommend it to others (Yoon and Uysal, 2005). Therefore, measuring visitor satisfaction can assist destination managers in improving their services and comparing their destinations to competitors. Yoon and Uysal (2005) found that satisfied travelers are more inclined to recommend their travels to friends and family. This outcome is in line with that of Tsaur et al. (2002), who identified a strong relationship between satisfaction with hotel service features and tourist loyalty. Additionally, Tsaur et al. (2002) revealed a direct link between customer loyalty and satisfaction with hotel service features.

Tourist Loyalty
According to Chen & Tsai (2007), tourist loyalty comprises two components: the intention to return to a destination and the willingness to recommend it to others. According to the findings of some researchers, positive travel experiences, such as quality services, products, and resources, can lead to favorable word-of-mouth recommendations and subsequent visits (Yoon & Uysal, 2005;Chi & Qu, 2008). In addition, it has been found that tourists' levels of contentment affect their plans and actions for the future (Chen & Tsai, 2007;Chi & Qu, 2008;Prayag & Ryan, 2012). Furthermore, according to research conducted by Chen &Tsai, 2007 andTasci &Gartner, 2007, the perception of destination image can also affect the level of tourist loyalty. Therefore, it is essential for destination marketing to maintain the loyalty of tourists because retaining current visitors is more cost-effective than trying to draw in new ones (Loureiro & Gonzalez, 2008;Bhat & Darzi, 2018;Purwaningwulan & Ramdan, 2022).

METHODOLOGY
This study employs a quantitative correlational research method using a questionnaire instrument with sophisticated partial least squares regression. Participants in this study were people from Indonesia who had travelled to Jakarta, the capital city of Indonesia. According to Hair (2017), the minimum sample size is calculated by multiplying the total number of indicators by a factor ranging from five to ten. In light of these provisions, the number of samples utilized in this investigation is calculated as the number of initial 28 indicators times ten; consequently, the number of samples equals 280 respondents. The sampling was conducted using a purposive sampling technique. The sample comprises www.ieeca.org/journal 583 tourists who have been to Jakarta within the past five years.
For this study's primary data, a Google formbased questionnaire that was disseminated online was used. Two parts made up the questionnaire. The demographics of the respondents are covered in the first part. The second section focuses on construct variables, such as city image, respondents' satisfaction, loyalty. The questionnaire's validity and reliability test were completed, and a total of 17 final indicators were used (see Table 1), with a Likert measure of 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).

Respondents' Characteristics
The characteristics of the 285 respondents were summarized using descriptive statistics. There were more female than male respondents, although the difference in numbers was not that great, namely 55.8% and 44.2%. Most respondents were from Java Island (63.5%), while from outside Java was 36.5%. Respondents from Java were dominated by those from West Java, followed by Banten. This is not surprising because the location of Jakarta is close to the regions of West Java and Banten. The majority of respondents' occupations are private and professional employees, followed by students and civil servants. Most respondents were over 50 years of age at 25.2%, followed by the age range of 15-20 years at 19.6%. Educational background is dominated by Master's degrees at 33.7%, followed by undergraduates at 26.3%. This is in accordance with the majority age and occupation of the respondents. Regarding marital status, 63.9% of respondents were married, and the rest were single or divorced. The total income of the respondents was spread almost evenly from the lowest below 2 million rupiahs to the highest above 15 million rupiahs. It is estimated that those with the lowest income are the respondents with student status, while those with the highest income are from the private sector or self-employed employees. Meanwhile, the frequency of visits to Jakarta was dominated by respondents who had visited more than 10 times (42.8%), so it could be interpreted that respondents already knew Jakarta well because, on average, they had visited Jakarta more than once.

Measurement Model
The results presented in Table 1 show that AVE has a value greater than 0.5 (Hair et al., 2017), and all loading factor values are greater than 0.6. Table 3 also shows that Cronbach's Alpha (CA) and composite reliability (CR) values are more than 0.7, indicating that the construct is reliable (Hair et al., 2017). • If someone invites me to go on vacation to Jakarta, I will be happy to accept the invitation (TLOY4) 0,866 Source: Authors' finding The Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) test is conducted in this research to determine discriminant validity. The results showed that every value is less than the threshold value of 0.90, which indicates that the measurement model had discriminant validity.

Structural Model
The output display in Figure 1 indicated that the highest coefficient value for the city image variable with an affective indicator is AFFEC2, which is equal to 0.801.  Meanwhile, AFFEC1, namely Jakarta is a busy place to have fun, has the lowest correlation value in the affective construct to form city image indicators. For cognitive, the construct with the highest score is COGN1 (0.733), namely Jakarta has attractive building infrastructure and architecture, followed by COGN 4 of 0.707, namely money spent for a vacation in Jakarta worth the value received. Meanwhile, for uniqueness, the highest score in forming city image is indicator UNIQ2 (0.809), namely Jakarta has historical sites and unique communities, followed by UNIQ1 regarding cultural diversity with 0.797, and UNIQUE 4 regarding the uniqueness of local food with 0.767. Overall, the highest Indicator of city image is uniqueness, followed by affective and cognitive. The mean value of the city image on the whole is 3.72 on scale 5 (see Table 1).
Regarding the second variable, namely tourist satisfaction, the strongest construct is TSAT2, namely satisfaction with the decision to travel to Jakarta, of 0.910, while the weakest construct is TSAT1 of 0.819, namely visits to Jakarta according to the needs of the respondents. The mean value of tourist satisfaction on the whole is 3.70 on scale 5 (see Table 1).
The third variable, namely tourist loyalty, has four constructs. The highest score is at TLOY3 of 0.917; namely respondents will recommend Jakarta to friends/relatives, while the lowest score is at TLOY2 of 0.858, namely Jakarta will be the first choice for a vacation in the city. The mean value of tourist loyalty, on the whole, is 3.44 on a scale 5 (see Table 1). In addition, the R Square value of tourist loyalty and tourist satisfaction is shown in Table 2. Based on Table 2, The adjusted R-Square coefficient for tourist loyalty equals 0.586, indicating that the study variable influences 58.6% of the changes in tourist loyalty. The remaining changes are due to factors not included in the present study. Therefore, the effect of all exogenous constructs of city image and tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty is moderate because the adjusted R Square is more than 33% but less than 67%. Similarly, the influence of city image on tourist satisfaction has an R Square value of 0.615, with an adjusted R Square value of 0.613, equivalent to 61.3% and categorized as moderate because it is more than 33% but less than 67%. The summary of the results of hypothesis testing is shown in Table 3. 3, the findings of the study indicate that the tstatistic for the test is 3.631 and the beta coefficient value of city image on tourist loyalty is 0.266. The t-statistic is significant because it is greater than 1.96 and has a p-value of 0.00 (<0.05).
The first hypothesis has therefore been supported. These results are in line with those of earlier studies, which show a substantive positive relationship between the image of a destination and its visitors' loyalty (Tran et al., 2019;Kashif et al., 2015;Aliman 2014). In this study, destination image uses three indicators: affective, cognitive, and uniqueness. Of the three indicators, the highest score is uniqueness, with the highest construct being historical sites and unique communities. Historic places such as various museums and historic buildings in the Jakarta old city area seem to form the highest image of the city. Other constructs that have a positive value in shaping the city image are unique cultural diversity, local food, crowds, preference for tourist attractions, attractive infrastructure and architectural buildings, and money spent on vacations in accordance with the value received. Regarding tourist loyalty, the four constructs used in the questionnaire proved to be valid and reliable, with the highest coefficient value being the tourist's desire to recommend Jakarta to friends/relatives, followed by the intention to revisit, being the first choice for a vacation in the city, and fulfilling invitations to have a vacation in Jakarta.
The second hypothesis tests whether there is an effect of city image on tourist satisfaction. The test results showed a positive beta coefficient of 0.784 and a t statistic of 28,200> 1.96 and a p value of 0.000 <0.05 so that the second hypothesis was accepted. According to earlier study by Suhail Ahmad Bhat & Darzi, (2018) destination image has a favourable impact on tourist satisfaction. Nevertheless, R2 statistics show that 34% of the variance in tourist satisfaction is explained by the destination image, whereas this study's R2 value demonstrates 61.5% of the variance in satisfaction. The finding also supports the evidence from a prior study that heritage tourists' perception of destination image has a favourable impact on their satisfaction and desire to return (Hashemi et al., 2019;Smykova, 2015). On the contrary, the results of this study contradict the results of the previous study by Permana (2018), which revealed no impact between destination image and tourist satisfaction.
The third hypothesis tests whether tourist satisfaction positively affects tourist loyalty. The test results show a positive beta coefficient with a value of 0.542, a t-statistic value of 7.803 > 1.96, and a significant p-value of 0.000 <0.05. The hypothesis is accepted. This demonstrates that providing excellent customer service leads to increased customer loyalty. When guests have a better experience, their commitment to the destination increases. This research's findings are consistent with several earlier studies that found a strong, positive relationship between tourist satisfaction and loyalty (Çoban, 2012;Hashemi et al., 2019). The impact of tourist satisfaction on tourist loyalty is greater than the impact of city image on tourist loyalty.
The fourth hypothesis regards the function of tourist satisfaction as a mediator of the relationship between city image and tourist loyalty. Table 6 shows that the t-statistic value of the impact of city image on tourist loyalty through tourist satisfaction is higher than the t table (1.96), which is equal to 7.628 with a Beta index of 0.425 and a p-value of 0.000 <0.05. The positive and significant impact of city image on tourist satisfaction and loyalty can therefore be drawn. Furthermore, the existence of this mediating variable is proven to have a more significant effect on city image on tourist loyalty compared to the direct effect (3.632). The mediating variable between city image and loyalty has also been studied by Lee (2017), who uses brand identity as a mediator. The results of his research demonstrate that brand identity, like the role of visitor satisfaction in this study as a mediator, significantly mediates the impact of city image on visitor loyalty CONCLUSION According to the findings, a significantly positive relationship exists between the city image of Jakarta and tourists' loyalty, as well as between city image and tourists' satisfaction, and between tourists' satisfaction and their loyalty. Tourist satisfaction also acts as a mediator between the relationship between a city image and tourists' loyalty. This suggests that the image of the city influences the satisfaction and loyalty of tourists. When tourists place a higher value on the city image, their level of contentment and commitment to the location will be higher. For this reason, establishing a destination image by the government or the city manager is necessary to www.ieeca.org/journal 587 attract satisfied and loyal tourists, which will increase the likelihood that they will return and recommend the destination to others.
One of the limitations of this study is that it only focuses on one location, namely the city of Jakarta; as a result, it is challenging to generalize the findings of this research to other locations. Therefore, comparative analysis elsewhere needs to be raised in future research. In addition, the respondents to this study were only domestic tourists, so the study's results could not represent groups other than domestic tourists. Therefore, further research is needed on different groups of tourists, such as foreign tourists, who may have different attitudes and behaviors from domestic tourists.