In the published article, Suryani, W., Muafi, M., & Johan, A. (2025). From satisfaction to revisit: The nexus of tourist attitude with cultural image.
In the ‘Introduction’ paragraph 1, instead of:
The allure of cultural heritage lies not only in its ability to showcase the uniqueness of a destination but also its potential to foster deeper connections with the past and local communities (Lestari et al., 2013; Mai et al., 2019; Saufi et al., 2014).
It should be:
The allure of cultural heritage lies not only in its ability to showcase the uniqueness of a destination but also in its potential to foster deeper connections with the past and local communities (Lestari et al., 2023; Mai et al., 2019; Saufi et al., 2014).
In the ‘Literature review’ section on page 2, instead of:
The CI that exists in a destination must be maintained as an identity that can be a competitive advantage in retaining tourists and boosting its attractiveness (Abbasi et al., 2019; Carr, 2008; Mckercher & Du Cros, 2012).
It should be:
The CI that exists in a destination must be maintained as an identity that can be a competitive advantage in retaining tourists and boosting its attractiveness (Abbasi et al., 2021; Carr, 2008; Mckercher & Du Cros, 2012).
In the ‘Literature review’ section on page 3, instead of:
This connection enhances their evaluation of the cultural aspects, leading to a stronger intention to revisit (Abbasi et al., 2022; Choe et al., 2018).
It should be:
This connection enhances their evaluation of the cultural aspects, leading to a stronger intention to revisit (Abbasi et al., 2021; Choe et al., 2018).
The authors apologise for this error. The correction does not change the study’s findings, its significance or overall interpretation of the study’s results or the scientific conclusions of the article in any way.