Connect with us

Ways to Travel

The Best Hiking Sandals for Women, Tested and Reviewed

Published

on


A supportive and comfortable pair of hiking sandals is a must-have for any outdoor adventurer’s closet. Ideal for campers, backpackers, and leisurely hikers alike, many hiking sandals are made with thoughtful features for comfort. After doing some serious research, we narrowed our list down to the six most promising options and went into the wilderness to test them ourselves.

We tried out several styles of hiking sandals, including closed-toe and T-strap designs, to test a range of options. The best hiking sandals we tried performed well when it came to comfort, durability, and fit. Our favorite sandals didn’t cause any irritation or discomfort (even right out of the box), and the footwear checked all of our boxes for must-have features like arch support, soft straps, and true-to-size fit.

  • Our top pick, Bedrock Cairn Adventure Sandals, are grippy, comfortable, and adjustable for a snug fit.
  • For hikes in wet conditions, prioritize traction and stability. For hikes with uneven terrain, consider a closed-toe sandal for extra protection.

Credit: Bedrock

Many outdoor enthusiasts consider Bedrock one of the best brands in the footwear business, and we couldn’t agree more. The Cairn Adventure sandals are exceptionally sturdy and comfortable in and out of the water and on all terrains. The nearly weightless sandals are made with Vibram outsoles that are designed to be extra grippy in dry conditions, but we discovered the traction is just as good in the water, too. After five months of testing, we prefer these to flip-flops or less durable sandals when it comes to hiking in warm or wet conditions. The T-shape strap is a little stiff at first, but after several hours of wearing the shoes, the polyester and nylon material loosen up for a comfortable fit. Plus, the straps can be adjusted in three different ways, and the plugless toe post is extra thin and stretchy so you won’t have to worry about any chafing or blisters between the toes. After many trips to the great outdoors, the sandals look good as new, so we feel confident that the durable materials and high-quality construction ensure they have a long life ahead of them.

The Details: Sizes 6-15 | Strap and ladder lock buckle closure | Polyester, rubber | 1 pound per pair

Credit: Amazon

What to Consider

  • The microfiber footbed is difficult to clean, and dirt can stick in the soles of the shoes, so the shoes get dirty easily.

With a generous arch and well-placed straps, the Ecco Yucatan Sport Sandals are superior for foot health and go above and beyond when it comes to comfort and support. You can wear these sandals right out of the box thanks to the soft microfiber-lined footbed and padded straps that prevent any chafing or blistering around the heel, ankle, and top of the foot. Even after five months of wearing these, we found the sandals comfortable and supportive, and the traction and arch support are still really strong. You can adjust the straps in all three places for a customized fit, and we love that the footbed has the perfect balance of cushioning and support for being on your feet all day. With a rubber outsole that offers excellent traction for stability, the shoes are ideal for dry or wet climates, and the moisture-wicking lining prevents any bad odors coming from the shoes. The only issue we ran into is that the microfiber fabric footbed catches dirt, making it look noticeably dirty, so you may want to rinse or spot-clean the shoes as needed.

The Details: Sizes 4/4.5-12/12.5 | Velcro closure | Textile, EVA, rubber | 1.25 pounds per pair

Credit: Amazon

It’s safe to say these sandals could last a lifetime. From the tightly woven polyester straps to the dense rubber sole, the high-quality construction of the Z Cloud Sandal makes them well worth the money. The traction on the outsole and webbing on the footbed helped keep our feet secure without slipping or sliding around when we went hiking in wet conditions. And we found that if the straps get wet, they dry quickly before any chafing can happen between the toes or around the top of the foot. The straps are adjustable around the foot, but we did have some issues getting the right fit at first since the fabric can be stiff and hard to move around. However, once the fabric stretches a bit, it’s easier to adjust the straps to perfectly accommodate your feet. Best of all, Chaco has a repair program so if something does happen to your beloved sandals, you can ship them to the brand and Chaco will give them a second life for a small charge. After five months of wear, we did feel as though these sandals are bulkier than others, but for the right user, these Chacos are a great long-term option.

The Details: Sizes 5-12 | Strap and ladder lock buckle closure | Polyester, polyurethane, rubber materials | 1.3 pounds per pair

Travel + Leisure


Credit: Amazon

If you’re in search of an adventure shoe, the Keen Newport sandals are versatile for tons of outdoor activities. Because a thick rubber coating surrounds the toe-piece, the shoes offer better protection than a standard pair of hiking sandals. The rubber outsoles have excellent traction thanks to the intricate lug pattern, and the shoes can easily go in and out of the water. With the bungee in the front of the shoes, the tightness can be adjusted by pulling on the cord to get the right amount of pressure to keep the foot stable while hiking. The shoes have cutout panels around the sides and top of the foot that help with breathability, but we had some rocks and dirt get into the shoes, making them uncomfortable at times. However, these sandals are excellent for water activities, especially in lakes or rivers where you may run into rocks or debris in the water and will need extra toe protection.

The Details: Sizes 5-11 | Bungee lace closure | Polyester, rubber | 1.5 pounds per pair

Travel + Leisure


Credit: DSW

Many sandals don’t have great arch support, so they can be a tricky form of footwear for anyone who doesn’t like a completely flat shoe. Fortunately, Teva’s Aliciela Sandal has excellent support from toe to heel. During testing, we found that these sandals were comfortable from the moment we put them on—no break-in period required. The straps allowed us to adjust each sandal however we wanted, and the cushioned soles formed a bit around our feet to minimize slipping. We wore these while walking on various surfaces, including concrete, gravel, dirt, and in the water on a rocky beach, and had no issues with hot spots, pinching, or blisters. Most importantly, our feet weren’t tired or sore after extended use. We’re confident these high-quality sandals will last for a long time.

The Details: Sizes 5-11 | Hook-and-loop closure | EVA, nylon, rubber | 1.12 pounds per pair

Other Hiking Sandals We Liked

The sandals below performed well, but we ran into slight issues with comfort and fit that had them ranking slightly lower than our winners.

Chaco Z/Cloud 2 Sandal: These sandals feel very high-quality and durable, and they are ideal for being in and out of the water, but we prefer the version without the toe strap.

Our Testing Process

We tried 10 pairs of hiking sandals from trusted footwear brands that are designed for rigorous outdoor activities. We carefully picked sandal styles that offer helpful features for hikers like padded or lined straps, thick outsoles for traction, and arch support and cushioning for comfort.

Testing each pair of sandals for at least two hikes that lasted over an hour, we examined and took notes on the comfort, durability, fit, and overall performance of the hiking sandals. From New York to Washington state, we tested the sandals in a variety of climates and terrains to get a wide range of testing insights from our outdoor enthusiasts. In the end, our favorite hiking sandals had a small break-in period (or none at all), offered the perfect balance of support and cushioning, and ran true to size with adjustable straps for added comfort.

Travel + Leisure


Tips for Buying Women’s Hiking Sandals

Consider the climate and terrain

The climate and terrain will help determine the best hiking footwear for your trip. If you’re hiking in and out of the water, you’ll want a hiking sandal that has excellent traction and stability for slick conditions. For hikes with uneven terrain, opt for a pair of hiking sandals with a closed toe for extra protection. Additionally, adjustable straps can help you tighten or loosen the fit for a variety of variables, like if your feet swell from heat or if the straps stretch a bit when they’re wet.

Opt for sufficient traction

Traction in any pair of hiking shoes is extremely important for securing your foot to the ground while hiking. The outsole of the shoe should have an intricate pattern and deep lugs to secure the foot to the ground so it doesn’t slip and slide around. The midsole and footbed shouldn’t be completely smooth either and should have some sort of grip or cradle to help the foot stay secure in the shoe.

Look for comfortable features

Since you’ll likely be on your feet for multiple hours while hiking, consider a pair of hiking sandals with arch support, midsole cushioning, and padding around the straps for extra comfort. A comfortable footbed should have the right balance of arch support to soft cushioning, and the straps shouldn’t dig into the skin or cause irritation. The straps should also be adjustable in multiple places so you can customize the fit of the sandal around your feet for stability and comfort.

Travel + Leisure


Frequently Asked Questions

  • How should hiking sandals fit?

    There should be enough room in the front of the toes so the shoes can be a barrier against rocks, sticks, or other obstacles that could hurt the foot. Similar to hiking boots, the fit of the sandals should be snug without feeling too tight or too loose. If the straps are too loose, you may slip around and injure yourself, but if the straps are too tight, they could dig into the skin and irritate it. Be sure to keep adjusting the straps throughout a hike as needed, especially during the first time you wear them when there could be some breaking-in happening.

  • When should I wear hiking sandals versus hiking boots?

    Hiking boots and shoes generally offer more protection than hiking sandals, so if you’re going on a long hike, sandals might not be the best option. If you’re partaking in outdoor activities in which you may be in and out of the water, hiking sandals are a great option instead since they can get wet while still offering a solid amount of protection and support. While it’s ultimately a personal preference, hiking sandals are best for more leisurely hiking in warmer weather.

Other Sandals We’ve Written About

Travel shoes are our bread and butter at Travel + Leisure, so we’ve tried a lot of sandals ranging from outdoor to dressier styles. Whether you’re hitting the trails, the beach, or the city, here are some of our favorite sandals that we’ve tested.

Teva Women’s Original Universal Sandals: These sandals offer superior cushioning and comfort, and we love that the cross-foot straps are fully adjustable to go as tight or loose as needed.

Reef Cushion Vera Cruz Slide: Stylish, lightweight, and supportive, these sandals require no breaking-in period to feel comfortable. We never experienced any chafing or rubbing during testing, making these the perfect slides for women.

Vivaia Arch Pro AdaptAll Sandals: Don’t be fooled by the stylish design: these sandals are the most comfortable we’ve tested, offering padded soles, stretchy strap fabric, and generous arch support.

Why Trust Travel + Leisure

T+L associate editor Anna Popp reviews travel products and writes almost all of the team’s tested content. She participates in nearly every travel test, including this one, where she tested hiking footwear. Anna grew up in Central Oregon where she spent her summers hiking and backpacking through the Cascade mountains.

Love a great deal? Sign up for our T+L Recommends newsletter and we’ll send you our favorite travel products each week.



Source link

Continue Reading

Ways to Travel

Pursuit of entertainment or self-expression? Research on adventure tourism

Published

on


Data collection

The study focused on domestic and foreign tourists aged 18 and above participating in rafting at Antalya Köprülü Canyon. The questionnaires were applied immediately after rafting in-person, and it was thought that the tourists’ experiences were reflected. In order to accurately measure tourist motivations, the literature was reviewed and scales were selected from the literature. In the process of selecting the scales, previously experienced ready-made scales were used, however, the scales were preferred from ready-made scales with high values in terms of validity and reliability. The aim here is to measure the constructs measured in the study in the most reliable way and in a way that can be distinguished from other constructs. For this purpose, scales with high Cronbach α or composite reliability values and AVE (average variance extracted) values were preferred. Then the convenience sampling method was used as the sampling method because there was no random selection. It is a statistical fact that the convenience sampling method does not represent the whole population because it is not random. However, it is easier to apply than random sampling in terms of reaching individuals with new experiences. In addition, as a result of studies that can be carried out in other countries or regions, although it is not a random sample, new literature becomes more debatable and converges to a scientific reality with the literature obtained with the convenience sampling method together with the developing literature.

Participants voluntarily participated in the survey after the rafting experience. Thus, it can be stated that the participants’ responses to the questionnaire were not influenced by any incentives. This situation causes the participants’ views on the subject to be more sincere. The questionnaires were collected in 2021. From 327 questionnaires, 31 were excluded for incomplete data, leaving 296 for analysis. The demographics included 68.1% Russian, 21.5% EU citizens, 9.5% Turkish, and 1% from other nationalities, reflecting general tourism trends in Turkey as reported by the World Travel and Tourism Council (2021). According to the World Travel and Tourism Council (2021) report, 12% of those who came to Turkey in 2019 were Russian, and 8% were German tourists, while in 2020, this rate was 13% for Russians and 7% for Bulgaria, Germany and Ukraine. In this case, it is predicted that the data and results obtained from the target audience will provide correct inferences. Therefore, bias in the study poses as much risk as bias that can occur in real life.

Although 50% of the participants have visited Antalya before, the rate of those who have visited Köprülü Canyon before is 24.3%. In this case, it can be said that individuals who have visited before have returned home without rafting in Köprülü Canyon. The rate of those who have rafted before is 29.7%. The fact that the rates of those who have visited Köprülü Canyon and those who have rafted are close may indicate that individuals tend to do it again after the first experience. While 62.4% of the participants were female, 37.6% were male. In this case, it can be stated that women are more oriented towards adventure tourism. 12.2% of the participants are high school graduates, 21.3% are associate degree graduates, 57.4% are bachelor’s degree graduates, and 9.1% are master’s and doctorate graduates. The average age of the participants was 33.36, while the median was 33.

Measures

Five-point Likert-type scales assessed all constructs. The scales covered “experiencing nature” (Perić et al., 2019), “escape” (Carvache-Franco et al., 2019), and “joy” (Pestana et al., 2020). The “WOM” influence (Sirakaya-Turk et al., 2015) and “self-image congruence” (Sirgy et al., 1997) were also measured, along with “revisit intention” (Zhang et al., 2018).

Data analysis and results

The data analysis validated the measurement model and evaluated relationships between the constructs.

Measurement model

The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated a satisfactory fit, with chi-square/df at 2.81, CFI at 0.92, SRMR at 0.059, and RMSEA at 0.078 (Hu and Bentler, 1999), as detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 Confirmatory factor analysis results.

Construct validity was confirmed, with convergent and discriminant validity assessed and meeting established thresholds (Hair et al., 2014) as shown in Table 2.

Table 2 The results of the inter-construct correlations and AVE value.

According to Tables 1 and 2, the AVE values are greater than 0.50 and the correlation between the variables. Therefore, convergent and discriminant validity is provided. After this stage of the analysis, common method bias (CMB) or common method variance (CMV) was examined. According to Podsakoff et al. (2003), CMB analysis refers to the bias that emerges from external factors on the data set and occurs when the majority of the variance is explained by a single factor (Podsakoff et al., 2003; Gaskin and Lim, 2016). To measure whether the majority of the variance was gathered under a single factor, the single factor Harman test was performed, and the explained variance rate was calculated as 43%. Since the single factor Harman test is a weak analysis, CMB was re-examined using the Controlling for the effects of an unmeasured latent methods factor analysis suggested by Podsakoff et al. (2003), and each regression path was calculated as 0.64, and the explained variance rate was found to be 41%. Since CMB does not exceed 50% (Eichhorn, 2014: p. 8), it can be said that CMB does not exist or is insignificant (Büyükdağ and Kitapci, 2021).

Structural model

The structural model’s evaluation produced the following results: chi-square/df value at 2.81, CFI value at 0.92, SRMR value at 0.059, and RMSEA value at 0.078. These indices satisfy the criteria set by Hu and Bentler (1999), indicating a good fit between the theoretical model and the observed data.

Table 3 shows that push factors significantly and positively influence self-image congruence (β = 0.66), WOM (β = 0.55), and revisit intention (β = 0.32). Self-image congruity also significantly enhances WOM (β = 0.35) and revisit intention (β = 0.30), while WOM positively impacts revisit intention (β = 0.28). The model explains 44% of the variance in self-image congruity, 68% in WOM, and 66% in revisit intention (Fig. 2).

Table 3 Result of the SEM.
Fig. 2: Structural model with standardized path coefficients.

This figure shows the tested structural model with standardized regression weights, reflecting direct and indirect effects among variables. This figure illustrates the structural model with standardized path coefficients, examining the relationships between push factors, self-image congruity, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth. The push factors are measured through three dimensions: experience nature, escape, and joy. The arrows represent the hypothesized paths, and the numerical values indicate the standardized regression weights. The model shows that push factors significantly influence self-image congruity, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth, both directly and indirectly.

Multi-group structural equation modeling (SEM) and analysis results

Multi-group structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to compare the regression paths between two variables based on socio-demographic and field-specific characteristics. Various studies have utilized this approach: Yada et al. (2018) to understand teachers’ attitudes and self-efficacy, Al-Swidi and Al Yahya (2017) to examine educational intention and work behavior differences by gender, and Babin et al. (2016), Huang and Ge (2019), Murray et al. (2017), and Aka and Buyukdag (2021) to analyze factors such as culture, household characteristics, store design, and marital status. In this study, multi-group SEM was applied to explore the effects of rafting experience (first-time vs. repeated) and gender (female vs. male model).

According to the multi-group SEM related to rafting experience, the model showed good fit indices with a chi-square/df value of 2.19, a CFI of 0.90, an RMSEA of 0.064, a GFI of 0.79, and an AGFI of 0.73. The comparative analysis between unconstrained and constrained models revealed a chi-square difference of 35.06 and a df difference of 25, indicating no significant variation between the effects of rafting experiences (p = 0.087). Consequently, the research model is applicable to both first-time and repeated rafters. The significance of each path’s rafting experience was further analyzed and is detailed in Table 4.

Table 4 Multi-group SEM results.

According to the multi-group structural equation modeling focused on gender, the model demonstrated good fit indices with a chi-square/df value of 2.17, a CFI of 0.90, an RMSEA of 0.063, a GFI of 0.79, and an AGFI of 0.73. This suggests that the multi-group SEM adequately represents the gender-based differences in the data. Comparative analysis between unconstrained and constrained models showed a chi-square difference of 24.83 and a df difference of 25, indicating no significant variance in gender effects (p = 0.472). Therefore, the research model is equally applicable to both female and male categories. Further analysis was conducted to determine if significant differences exist in local paths based on gender, with detailed results presented in Table 4.

Table 4 shows that push factors affect self-congruence differently for first-time versus repeated rafters. Rafting experience moderates how these factors influence self-image congruence, with a more pronounced effect on first-timers. While push factors significantly impact WOM for both groups, the effect is stronger for newcomers, but rafting experience doesn’t moderate this relationship. Similarly, push factors notably influence revisit intention for first-time rafters, but less so for experienced rafters, where experience doesn’t act as a moderator (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3: Multi-group comparison by visit frequency and gender.

This figure illustrates differences in structural paths across first-time and repeat visitors, as well as male and female participants, using varying line styles. This figure presents the multi-group analysis results based on visit frequency (first-time vs. repeated) and gender (female vs. male). The structural paths between push factors, self-image congruity, revisit intention, and word-of-mouth are illustrated with different line styles. Solid lines represent first-time visitors, dotted lines indicate repeat visitors, dash-dot lines show female participants, and dashed lines represent male participants. Path coefficients are shown along each arrow. The figure highlights how these variables interact differently across groups, revealing variations in motivational and behavioral responses based on experience and gender.

The influence of self-congruence on WOM is significant for both novice and seasoned rafters, more so for the latter. This suggests that rafters with prior experience, and with higher self-image congruity, are likelier to share their experiences. Self-congruence significantly affects intention to revisit among experienced rafters, but not for newcomers. However, rafting experience does not moderate these relationships in either case.

The impact of WOM on revisit intention was significant for first-time rafters but not for repeat rafters, with rafting experience not moderating this relationship. Table 4 shows variance differences between these groups. For first-timers, the explained variance is 51%, while only 26.9% for repeat rafters. For WOM, the variance is 70.5% for first-time users and 66.5% for repeat rafters. Regarding revisit intention, the variance is 65.3% for novices and slightly higher at 66.1% for experienced rafters.

The model showed no significant gender-based moderating effects, but coefficients highlight important relationship nuances. Both genders experience a positive, significant effect of push factors on self-image congruence, with males showing a higher coefficient. The impact of push factors on WOM is significant for both, yet stronger for males. Females, however, demonstrate a greater influence of push factors on revisit intention. The effects of self-congruence on WOM are similar across genders. Males exhibit a more substantial influence of self-image congruence on revisit intention. WOM’s impact on revisit intention is marginally higher in males. While gender doesn’t significantly moderate these paths, the data suggest males typically have higher values in consumer experiences involving adventure and risk-taking.

Self-congruence significantly influences WOM for both first-time and repeat rafters, more so for the latter. This suggests experienced rafters, likely with higher self-image congruity, are more prone to sharing their experiences. Self-congruence also impacts revisit intention significantly among experienced rafters, but less for novices. In both cases, rafting experience does not moderate these relationships.

The study shows gender differences in variance rates for self-image congruity, WOM, and revisit intention. Self-image congruity explains 49.3% of the variance in males and 38% in females. For WOM, the variance is 81.6% in males and 57.7% in females. Regarding revisit intention, males have a variance rate of 68.1% compared to 65.7% in females. These results imply that self-image congruence is more prominent in male first-time rafters, who also tend to discuss their adventurous experiences more, indicating higher communication about risk-taking and adventure among males.

Study 2

A multiple correspondence analysis examined relationships between push factors, self-image congruence, and demographics in adventure tourism for greater insight into consumer behavior dynamics.

Multiple correspondence analysis

Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) is a robust multivariate technique used to examine relationships among nominal data. This method allows researchers to analyze data, interpret findings, and develop perceptual maps, facilitating a deeper understanding of the data structure (Hair et al., 2010; Hair et al., 2014). In this study, MCA was employed to analyze the relationships between individuals’ perceptions of push factors, self-image congruence, WOM, and revisit intentions, alongside demographic or social factors such as gender, nationality, rafting experience, and visiting status. The objective was to conduct in-depth research and derive meaningful inferences. The graphical representation from the Multiple Correspondence Analysis is provided in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4: Joint plot of category points from correspondence analysis.

This plot visualizes the associations between categorical variables, such as nationality, gender, experience, loyalty, and satisfaction. Spatial proximity indicates stronger relationships. This joint plot of category points illustrates the relationships among categorical variables based on their positions along two dimensions extracted through correspondence analysis. The plot visualizes associations between destination-related experiences (e.g., visit status, experiential satisfaction, loyalty), demographic variables (e.g., nationality, gender), and motivational/behavioral outcomes (e.g., push/pull factors, revisit intention, WOM). For example, high revisit intention, high congruity, and high WOM cluster on the right side of Dimension 1, while variables like low satisfaction and low loyalty appear on the left. The spatial proximity between categories indicates stronger associations.

According to the multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) results, repeat visitors to Köprülü Canyon are predominantly Turkish, male, and have prior visits to Antalya and rafting experience. These individuals are notably influenced by push and pull factors and demonstrate high self-image congruity, WOM, loyalty, and satisfaction, indicating a strong intention to revisit. Conversely, first-time visitors to Antalya and Köprülü Canyon are primarily Russian and female tourists, characterized by their pursuit of excitement, unique experiences, and experiential pleasure in adventure and risk-taking activities. Despite showing a high intention to revisit, the likelihood of Russian and female tourists returning is relatively low. This pattern suggests that while tourists enjoy adventure tourism as part of their sea, sun, and sand vacation, it is not the primary purpose of their visit. The findings imply that although tourists have significant rafting experiences and entertainment, they are more inclined to explore different geographical regions rather than revisit the same location. Consequently, it is expected that these tourists will likely choose alternative destinations for their next vacation.

Therefore, emphasizing promotions targeting first-time visitors in rafting or adventure tourism is anticipated to yield significant benefits. Consequently, catering to the preferences of Russian and female tourists with diverse adventure and risk-taking tourism options is projected to create a vital market segment. However, the analysis indicates that European tourists exhibit lower levels of self-image congruity, WOM, revisit intention, and satisfaction with push and pull factors related to rafting. As such, understanding the specific expectations of tourists from the European Union and offering varied tourism alternatives could become a significant source of revenue. Addressing these preferences may lead to enhanced tourist experiences and increased revisit rates.



Source link

Continue Reading

Ways to Travel

Departure Lounge: Take a small-ship trip to Antarctica – Irish Examiner

Published

on



Departure Lounge: Take a small-ship trip to Antarctica  Irish Examiner



Source link

Continue Reading

Ways to Travel

Make your travels a real adventure – nrtoday.com

Published

on



Make your travels a real adventure  nrtoday.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 AISTORIZ. For enquiries email at prompt@travelstoriz.com