View - K-REx - Kansas State University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Abstract This study attempted to develop a multi-item scale that measures restaurant customers’ emotional experiences and has desirable reliability and validity, and to examine the relationships among consumption emotions, customer satisfaction, switching barriers, and revisit intention in the full-service restaurant industry. In the process of developing a consumption emotion measurement scale, this study followed Churchill’s (1979) paradigm during the early stage and confirmatory factor analytic approach suggested by Gerbing and Anderson (1988) and Anderson and Gerbing’s (1988) in the later stage. The scale development process began with a specification of domain of construct, generation of 40 items, and data collection. The collected data were subjected to item refinement (i.e., outlier detection, descriptive and reliability analysis, and exploratory factor analysis). Four underlying dimensions of consumption emotions with 32 refined items were identified from the data. A new sample of data was collected for additional testing (i.e., reliability and validity). A confirmatory factor analysis using the new data indicated that the finalized measure using categorical dimension approach was unidimensional, reliable, and valid. The results of structural equation modeling supported the criterion validity indicating that the finalized measure behaves as expected in relation to additional construct. In study two, a theoretical framework for understanding the relationships among consumption emotions, customer satisfaction, switching barriers, and revisit intention was proposed and tested. A series of modeling comparisons provided a best fit model. A measurement model estimated on the basis of Anderson and Gerbing’s (1988) approach tested validity of measures. The results of structural equation modeling using the data from a webbased survey addressed the effect of consumption emotions on satisfaction and revisit intention. The partial/full mediating impact of satisfaction was verified following Baron and Kenny’s (1986) suggested process. The switching barriers, two positive (i.e., preference and relational investment) and two negative (i.e., switching costs and lack of alternatives), that restaurant customers are likely to perceive were identified through the qualitative approach, using the guidelines suggested by Maxwell (2005). The quantitative approach validated the scale
applicability. The moderating role of switching barriers in forming revisit intention was verified by testing for metric invariances. Grouping was done by using K-means cluster analysis. Measurement invariance tests supported full metric/partial metric invariances. Structural invariance tests and invariance tests for a hypothesized path provided the evidence of moderating effect of switching barriers. Finally, theoretical and managerial implications of the findings were discussed.
Page 1: RESTAURANT CUSTOMERS’ EMOTIONAL E
Page 5 and 6: Abstract This study attempted to de
Page 7 and 8: Table of Contents List of Figures..
Page 9 and 10: Assess Reliability and Validity....
Page 11 and 12: List of Figures Figure 1.1. A conce
Page 13 and 14: Acknowledgements I would like to th
Page 15 and 16: CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION The study
Page 17 and 18: Statement of the Problem Much of pr
Page 19 and 20: Figure 1.1. A conceptual model show
Page 21 and 22: Snodgrass, 1987). Assessing the pot
Page 23 and 24: Homburg, C., & Giering, A. (2001).
Page 25 and 26: Westbrook, R.A., & Oliver, R.L. (19
Page 27 and 28: cognitive processing. Bodily states
Page 29 and 30: quarrelsome or shy). It is based on
Page 31 and 32: distrust. Edell and Burke (1987) de
Page 33 and 34: Table 2.1. A summary of the emotion
Page 35 and 36: While many researchers have support
Page 37 and 38: Although the definitions of custome
Page 39 and 40: On the other hand, for the affectiv
Page 41 and 42: as by the instant impact of in-proc
Page 43 and 44: in the restaurant industry. Satisfi
Page 45 and 46: accumulation) that build credibilit
Page 47 and 48: Table 2.3. Switching barriers ident
Page 49 and 50: While there is a lack of consistenc
Page 51 and 52: experienced any problems (Maxham &
Page 53 and 54:
interpersonal relationships. Altern
Page 55 and 56:
References Aaker, D.A., Stayman, D.
Page 57 and 58:
Dick, A.S., & Basu, K. (1994). Cust
Page 59 and 60:
Holbrook, M.B. (1986). Emotion in t
Page 61 and 62:
Mano, H. (1990). Emotional states a
Page 63 and 64:
Ranaweera, C., & Prabhu, J. (2003).
Page 65 and 66:
Yang, Z., & Peterson, R.T. (2004).
Page 67 and 68:
Figure 3.1. Procedures to develop a
Page 69 and 70:
Step 3: Data Collection 1 An on-lin
Page 71 and 72:
eason why you revisited the restaur
Page 73 and 74:
evisit intention were added because
Page 75 and 76:
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatha
Page 77 and 78:
CHAPTER 4 - A CONSUMPTION EMOTION M
Page 79 and 80:
validity remains uncertain since th
Page 81 and 82:
ongoing thought (Izard, 1977). Howe
Page 83 and 84:
dimension from sleep to frantic exc
Page 85 and 86:
CES in some contexts, suggesting th
Page 87 and 88:
Many studies adopting the categoric
Page 89 and 90:
the emotional (or affective) respon
Page 91 and 92:
excluded (guilty). Item-to-total co
Page 93 and 94:
72.08% of the total variance. This
Page 95 and 96:
Discussion The objectives of this s
Page 97 and 98:
staff communication and response st
Page 99 and 100:
References Aaker, D.A., Stayman, D.
Page 101 and 102:
affect in consumer behavior: Emergi
Page 103 and 104:
Ortony, A., & Turner, T.J. (1990).
Page 105 and 106:
Table 4.1. A Summary of the Emotion
Page 107 and 108:
Table 4.2. Exploratory Factor Analy
Page 109 and 110:
Table 4.4. Confirmatory Factor Anal
Page 111 and 112:
Excited Surprised Amazed Curious So
Page 113 and 114:
Introduction For many years, resear
Page 115 and 116:
Theoretical Background and Hypothes
Page 117 and 118:
experiences (Havlena & Holbrook, 19
Page 119 and 120:
Mediating Effect of Customer Satisf
Page 121 and 122:
intention diminishes as the perceiv
Page 123 and 124:
included managers of full-service r
Page 125 and 126:
structural model was used to assess
Page 127 and 128:
Accordingly, the Fisher test, which
Page 129 and 130:
used in further analyses. As Table
Page 131 and 132:
study results revealed that both po
Page 133 and 134:
customers’ post-purchase behavior
Page 135 and 136:
References Allen, C.T., Machleit, K
Page 137 and 138:
Evrard, Y., & Aurier, P. (1994). Th
Page 139 and 140:
Keaveney, S.M. (1995). Customer swi
Page 141 and 142:
Rust, R.T., Zahorik, A.J., & Keinin
Page 143 and 144:
Table 5.1. Measure Correlations, th
Page 145 and 146:
Table 5.2. Standardized Maximum-Lik
Page 147 and 148:
Table 5.4. Structural Invariance St
Page 149 and 150:
CHAPTER 6 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Page 151 and 152:
variance. Coefficient Alphas for th
Page 153 and 154:
The results of the SEM showed that
Page 155 and 156:
satisfaction, and 2) the reasons fo
Page 157 and 158:
Limitations and Suggestions for Fut
Page 159 and 160:
• Treating all customers special
Page 161 and 162:
Evrard, Y., & Aurier, P. (1994). Th
Page 163 and 164:
Ranaweera, C., & Prabhu, J. (2003).
Page 165 and 166:
Greetings Restaurant-goers! Do you
Page 167 and 168:
RESTAURANT CUSTOMERS' EMOTIONAL EXP
Page 169 and 170:
4.8 Contented 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4.9 Cur
Page 171 and 172:
SECTION 3: INFORMATION ABOUT YOURSE
Page 173 and 174:
Dear Participants: We are conductin
Page 175 and 176:
Restaurant Lovers Survey II Questio
Page 177 and 178:
Question 6 ** required ** Please in
Page 179:
Question 14 ** required ** Area of
show all

View - K-REx - Kansas State University

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?