{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015728056823947234, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0045662100456621, 'mean_word_length': 5.030581039755352, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Investigating the Image of the Bihor Tourist Destination among Romanians in the Context of Increasing Economic Indicators of Tourist Activity

The concept of tourism destination image is closely related to the brand image of the destination. A good public image of a certain location is the first step in establishing or enhancing the branding of that destination. The image of the destination can be a primary, secondary or global one, the latter incorporating the first two. The sustainability of a positive image of the destination is based on both positive secondary image and positive global image. The purpose of this research is to separately analyze the two types of images for a given tourist destination (Bihor, Romania) that has registered, in recent years, a remarkable increase in the number of visitors. The increase in the number of visitors was accompanied by a substantial increase in tourism revenues, which drew attention, both for the policy makers and researchers, to investigate how the image of this popular place is perceived. The research is based on a questionnaire-based survey applied on a sample of 607 persons, residents in Romania. The research method used was the questionnaire-based survey, which was applied between May and June 2020 on online city groups. The collected data were processed with IBM Statistical package for social sciences version 25 and the results show significant differences between the two types of images (secondary image and global image), a dangerous situation in the medium and long term for destination management. The nuances in the perception of the image of a destination based on the two types of respondents (who experienced and who did not experience the destination) can be explained by the aggressive strategy of promoting the tourist destination, but this is an inefficient strategy for younger age groups. The study allows us to formulate conclusions and to propose measures to correct the situation.