Table 1:
Festival studies - researched works by theme (own elaboration)
Table 2:
Transformational festivals theoretical support – main works by theme (own elaboration)

Figure 1:
Research scheme (own elaboration)

Figure 2:
H1 – Participation abroad by TF participation (own elaboration)

Figure 3:
H1 – TF participation by external participation (own elaboration)

Figure 4:
H2 – Brand rejection by TF participation (own elaboration)

Figure 5:
H2 – Brand rejection by TF participation (own elaboration)

Figure 6:
H3 – Venue preference by TF participation (own elaboration)

Figure 7:
H3 – Venue preference by TF participation (own elaboration)

Figure 8:
H4 – Electronic music preference by TF participation (own elaboration)

Figure 9:
Participation in TF by stereotype identification (own elaboration)

Figure 10:
H6 – Transformational festivals CSF (own elaboration)
Table 3:
Spiritualists’ critical success factors (own elaboration)
| CSF | S - NS | Chi-square (X2 (1)) | p | Mdn (S - NS) | Mann-Whitney (U) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alternatives to new experiences/alternative activities | 4.3%–0.0% | 11.349 | 0.001 | 162.14–155.5 | 5962.5 | 0.001 |
| Outdoor space – welcoming | 4.3%–0.4% | 6.304 | 0.012 | 161.64–155.59 | 5986 | 0.012 |
| Food conditions | ||||||
| Party | ||||||
| Personal taste | ||||||
| Organisation image | ||||||
| Informality | ||||||
| Message that transmits | 2.1%–0.0% | 5.656 | 0.017 | 159.32–156 | 6095 | 0.018 |
| Where one feels at home | ||||||
| Temporal period | ||||||
| Performers | ||||||
| Being outside the box | ||||||
| Show type | ||||||
| Costs | 4.3%–0.8% | 3.865 | 0.049 | 161.14–155.68 | 6009.5 | 0.05 |
Table 4:
Hippies’ critical success factors (own elaboration)
| CSF | H – NH | Chi-square (X2 (1)) | p | Mdn (H – NH) | Mann-Whitney (U) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food conditions | ||||||
| Festival philosophy | ||||||
| Festival ideology | ||||||
| Rural location | 7.1%–0.0% | 21.354 | 0.000 | 167.14–156.05 | 1937 | 0.000 |
| Option of preference at the moment | ||||||
| Local sustainability | ||||||
| Accessibility Musicians | 7.1%–0.3% | 9.729 | 0.002 | 166.64–156.02 | 1944 | 0.002 |
| Toilet conditions | 7.1%–0.7% | 5.881 | 0.015 | 166.14–156.05 | 1951 | 0.015 |
| Music/musical offer | 35.7%–14.8% | 4.433 | 0.035 | 187.71–155.03 | 1649 | 0.036 |
| Conditions | 7.1%–1.0% | 3.978 | 0.046 | 165.64–156.07 | 1958 | 0.046 |
Table 5:
Artistics’ critical success factors (own elaboration)
| CSF | A - NA | Chi-square (X2 (1)) | p | Mdn (A - NA) | Mann-Whitney (U) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alternatives to new experiences/alternative activities | ||||||
| Overnight stay/accommodation conditions | 3.4%–0.0% | 8.815 | 0.003 | 160.88–155.5 | 7112 | 0.003 |
| Event quality | ||||||
| Value | ||||||
| Spirit | ||||||
| Festival philosophy | ||||||
| Festival ideology | ||||||
| Environmental logistics | ||||||
| Message that transmits | 1.7%–0.0% | 4.393 | 0.036 | 158.69–156 | 7239 | 0.036 |
| Cultural offer | ||||||
| Temporal period | ||||||
| Beach | ||||||
| Noise |
Table 6:
Ravers’ critical success factors (own elaboration)
| CSF | R - NR | Chi-square (X2 (1)) | p | Mdn (R - NR) | Mann-Whitney (U) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The option of preference at the moment | 7.1%–0.0% | 21.354 | 0.000 | 167.14–156 | 1937 | 0.000 |
| Organisation | 7.1%–0.7% | 5.881 | 0.015 | 166.14–156.05 | 1951 | 0.015 |
Table 7:
Generation X’s critical success factors (own elaboration)
| CSF | X - NX | Chi-square (X2 (1)) | p | Mdn (X - NX) | Mann-Whitney (U) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Venue commodities | ||||||
| Fewer people than big festivals | ||||||
| Offer | 5.9%–0.0% | 17.409 | 0.000 | 165.18–156 | 2360 | 0.000 |
| Possibility to see all the artists and not simultaneously | ||||||
| Show type | ||||||
| Availability | ||||||
| Landscape | 5.9%–0.3% | 7.755 | 0.005 | 164.68–156.03 | 2368.5 | 0.005 |
| Musicians | ||||||
| Organisation | 5.9%–0.7% | 4.572 | 0.033 | 164.18–156.06 | 2377 | 0.033 |