Back in 2010, the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) estimated that tourism growth would be positive, contributing to USD 11.15 trillion in earnings, supporting in excess of 330 million jobs. However, these tourism-related figures have been sharply decreased due to the COVID-19 pandemic that began at the close of 2019. Unfortunately, in September of 2020, the WTCC shared a scenario indicating that 121 million tourism jobs and USD 3.4 trillion in tourism earnings could melt away as an adverse impact of COVID-19. Furthermore, in 2020, the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) announced that international tourist arrivals had dropped 70% compared to the first eight months of last year’s records. In April of 2020, Longwoods International reported from the fifth wave of their traveler sentiment study related to the impacts of COVID-19 that approximately half of the participants (48%) had cancelled a trip, 43% decided to decrease their travel plans due to COVID-19, and the majority of them claimed that COVID-19 adversely influenced their decision making about travel [1]. These results reflect tourism’s sensitivity to global pandemics and indicate how individuals’ risk perception and uncertainty may play out regarding travel behavior.

In a report from 25 August 2023, the World Health Organization ([2], p. 1) affirms that «COVID-19 remains a major threat» as the number of reported cases for the last 28-day period (24 July to 20 August 2023) increased globally by 63% to 1.5 million new COVID-19 cases compared to the previous 28 days. In the analyzed period, 2000 COVID-19 deaths were registered.

Keeping in mind that tourism generally depends on the number of arrivals and is influenced by individuals’ reactions [3], several tourism scholars have emphasized the influential risk of catching COVID-19 on individuals’ decisions to select particular destinations, intentions to travel, and, ultimately, their travel behavior ^[1][3][4][5][1,3,4,5]. That said, however, a limited number of studies ^[4][5][6][7][4,5,6,7] (see Kock et al. [4]; Sánchez-Cañizares et al. [5]; Bae and Chang [7]) have focused on perceived risk and individuals’ intention to travel in light of COVID-19 and established travel restrictions. As such, the need exists to undertake research that assesses potential travelers’ intentions to once again engage in tourism, considering the role risk and uncertainty play in such intentions and just how ready individuals are to travel (considering various time horizons). Determining perceived risk and uncertainty are significant determinants in facilitating tourism policy and management decisions, even after the pandemic is controlled [8].

Utilizing a survey of potential US travelers, the main aim of this tstudy is to extend the theory of planned behavior (TPB) model by including perceived risk and perceived uncertainty associated with COVID-19 and determine how the two constructs influence individuals’ attitudes to travel within the US in the near future, and, ultimately, how TPB factors (attitudes about future travel, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control) may influence individuals’ intention to travel within the US in the near future. More specifically, this researchstudy aims to examine the relationship between perceived risk, perceived uncertainty, subjective norms, attitudes about future travel, and perceived behavioral control in explaining individuals’ intentions to travel in the near future. The “near future” is operationalized by considering five time horizons: 30 days, three months, six months, nine months, and one year or more.

2. The COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Impact on Tourism

The global pandemic of COVID-19 hit the hotel and airline industries especially hard, along with the other tourism sectors. Prominent airlines such as Virgin, Flybe, Trans States Airlines, and Compass Airlines have experienced significant financial distress, leading to their collapse. In parallel, the tourism and hospitality industries were grappling with severe financial challenges due to an almost complete decline in demand, which severely affected businesses and employment losses ^{[9][10][11][12][13]}[9,10,11,12,13]. For example, as a result of decreased demand for lodging during the pandemic, by the end of January 2020, China had experienced a 71% decline in hotel occupancy relative to the same time in 2019 [10]. In the United States, most tourism and outdoor recreation sectors suffered a downturn at the outset of COVID-19 and witnessed a decline in employment, with 5,512,000 people experiencing job losses. Tourism businesses suffered a staggering loss of more than USD 500 billion in revenue during the year 2020 ^[14][15][14,15]. Infectious diseases have impacted the travel industry and its affiliated supply chain in the past two decades. Infectious diseases threaten human health and communities’ social and economic well-being [16]. While travel is uncertain during an infectious disease outbreak, an outbreak’s economic consequence can devastate the destination’s economy ^[17][18][17,18]. In 2003, the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) spread across 29 countries and three regions, resulting in a total of 8422 reported cases and 916 deaths. Among the most affected areas were Hong Kong, Taiwan, China, and Singapore [19]. This outbreak had a profound impact on Hong Kong’s tourism industry. As noted by Siu and Wong (2004) [18], during the latter half of March 2003, there was a significant decline of 10.4% in visitor arrivals compared to the previous year. Moreover, the total number of incoming visitors to Hong Kong plummeted by 63% between March and April 2003. China’s net loss impact was estimated to be approximately USD 16.8 billion by the end of 2003. According to Henderson (2004) [17], for Singapore, tourist arrivals declined almost immediately in mid-March, and figures were 61.6% lower than the previous year in April, representing a contraction of 70.7% in May. The health and economic impact of SARS was not only limited to Asia. In early 2014, the Ebola pandemic impacted the health and economy of West Africa. According to the Global Alert and Response (GAR), the origin of the 2014 Ebola virus outbreak was traced back to the Meliandou village of Guinea in December 2013 [19]. The collective repercussions of the Ebola crisis on Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone were evaluated at approximately USD 2.8 billion, with Guinea accounting for USD 600 million, Liberia for USD 300 million, and Sierra Leone for USD 1.9 billion [20]. In 2012, the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) appeared in the Middle East and three years later showed up in Korea. Consequently, infectious diseases have substantially decreased the economies of host communities and countries over the past 20 years. Finally, COVID-19 also adversely influenced the tourism sector in traditional destinations such as Greece, Turkey, Portugal, and Spain ^[21][22][21,22]. For instance, Moreno-Luna et al. [21] investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on different regions and their economies, focusing on tourism. The study in Spain analyzes the relationship between the tourism sector and the pandemic outbreak. As a methodology, they utilized a comparative analysis approach. The aim was to analyze various Spanish regions representing the existing administrative divisions in Spain. This objective guided the data’s organization and presentation, which is reflected through tables, illustrative graphs, and maps. The authors propose a set of policy recommendations to enhance the tourism industry’s resilience, including implementing health and safety protocols, promoting domestic tourism, and financial support for affected businesses. These considerations should be integrated into marketing and communication strategies. Despite the negative effects, the research suggests that domestic tourism within Spain has started to recover, offering a potential opportunity for regions. The study emphasizes the importance of accommodation types in this recovery process and provides insights for tourism recovery efforts. Furthermore, Meramveliotakis and Manioudis [22] discussed the challenges of the common belief that small businesses are the backbone of the economy and argues that Greek economic policy contradicts this notion. The authors aim to empirically validate a policy paradox in Greece concerning small businesses during COVID-19. Despite the vital importance of small businesses to the Greek economy, the limited financial support they receive implies a policy paradox. In other words, the crisis has created a political and economic environment where policies lead to the destruction of the weakest and least efficient sections of capital (i.e., small firms) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

3. Perceived Risk and Uncertainty Concerning Travel

Perceived risk is a barrier that makes consumers hesitate to make purchase decisions [23]. Risk researchers assert that people delay travel consumption to avoid risk [24]. Similarly, Sirakaya and Woodside [25] claim that the travel decision making process is risky and uncertain. Perceived risk is the subjective expectation of a potential negative consequence associated with a decision, whereas a degree of probability can be attached to each possible outcome [26]. Risk refers to action with implications but known probabilities [25]. Sönmez and Graefe [27] revealed that perceptions of risk or safety concerns are extremely influential in the decision making process of tourists since they can strongly influence an individual in selecting a destination. Consequently, tourists will consider the perceived risks of a destination before deciding to visit [28]. Examples of events that influence tourist travel intention include Avian flu, SARS, tsunamis, and earthquakes, and the results show lower perceived risk positively influences the intention to travel to the destination of interest ^[7][29][7,29]. Similarly, Hem, Iversen, and Nysveen’s [30] research shows that tourists are more inclined to skip visiting places if they perceive risk. Bouzon and Devillard [31] assert that uncertainty is the impossibility of describing events that have not yet occurred or are inaccessible to measurement. Williams and Balaz [32] define uncertainty as actions with many possible outcomes, whereas the probabilities are unknown. It is a circumstance where anything (both known and unknown) can happen [33]. Research (e.g., ^[34][35][34,35]) provides evidence that consumers will spend less money when there is uncertainty. According to Ghosh [36], rational customers who delay purchases to safeguard themselves during uncertain times are the main cause of the drop in economic activity.

4. Theory of Planned Behavior and Work Surrounding Tourism

The theory of planned behavior (TPB) proposes a direct connection between behavioral intention and actual behavior ^[37][38][37,38]. According to TPB, psychological (attitudes) and social (subject norms) factors along with perceived behavioral control affect individuals’ decisions to act ^[39][40][39,40]. Attitude denotes an individual’s positive or negative sentiment towards a specific action and has been extensively used as a variable in consumer behavior to forecast consumer choices [41]. Subjective norms refer to how an individual perceives society’s impact on their decision to participate in an activity, measuring the importance attributed to a reference group’s endorsements and the willingness to conform to the shared beliefs, attitudes, and choices of these groups, such as preferences for holidays [42]. Perceived behavior control is an individual’s self-assessment of their ability to autonomously choose to undertake or avoid a specific action [43]. It relates to an individual’s perceived ease of performing a behavior [44]. Several studies have used the TPB model to explain tourists’ intention, many of which were most recently published ^{[7][39][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]}[7,39,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53]. For example, Lee and Jan [48] used TPB factors to determine tourists’ ecotourism behavioral intention and found that all factors significantly explained intention. Santos et al. [53] used TPB to assess attitudes as a predictor of environmental behavior in sustainable events. Furthermore, Hsieh et al. [29], Hsu and Huang [52], Park et al. [50], Cao et al. (2020) [45], Sánchez-Cañizares et al. [5], Chen and Tung [46], and Seow et al. [51] used the TPB and found that all three TPB constructs had a substantial impact on visitors’ behavioral intentions. However, some researchers found that two of the three TPB factors were significant predictors of tourists’ intentions. While Meng et al. [49] and Eom and Han [47] explained tourist intentions with subjective norms and attitudes, Quintal et al. [26] and Lam and Hsu [44] explained with subjective norms and perceived behavioral control. Furthermore, Zhang, Moyle, and Jin [54] found that only subjective norms significantly predicted visitors’ pro-environmental behavioral intentions. The TPB model has been extended in tandem with other factors. Those extra factors that have been used in addition to TPB factors (i.e., attitudes, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norms) either directly or indirectly determined tourists’ intentions. For instance, some of the variables that have been added in recent tourism studies include perceived risk [29], distance desire [45], travel constraints and destination image [50], positive and negative anticipated emotions [54], emotional solidarity [55], awareness [56], and destination attachment [47].