View - K-REx - Kansas State University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Patterson & Smith (2003) Ranaweera & Prabhu (2003) Search costs Setup costs Functional risk Attractiveness of alternatives Switching costs (Psychological costs, effort, and financial costs) Patterson (2004) Search costs (Setup costs) Explain preference (Setup costs) Risk perceptions (Psychological costs) Balabanis, Reynolds, & Simintiras (2005) Tsai, Huang, Jaw, & Chen (2006) Vasudevan, Gaur, & Shinde (2006) Vazquez-Carrasco & Foxall (2006) Yanamandram & White (2006) Convenience barriers (Perceived hassle) Economic barriers (Financial costs-inferiority of alternative) Parity barriers (Comparability) Familiarity (Procedural costs) Unawareness (Procedural costs-search costs) Continuance commitment (Lack of options, physical costs, lock in, and unfamiliarity) Switching costs (Psychological, physical, and economic costs) Availability and attractiveness of other providers’ offers Impact of alternative providers Switching costs Inertia (Laziness and passiveness) Other barriers (Sales leads, reciprocal arrangement, legal issues, and back up option) Loss of social bonds Loss of special treatment benefits Loss of relationship (Interpersonal relationship) Special privileges (Special treatment) Emotional barriers (Relational costs) Speed barriers (Delivery time) Relational switching barriers (Interpersonal relationship) Relational benefits (Social benefits, confidence benefits, and special treatment benefits) Interpersonal relationship Service recovery Other barriers (Better price, patriotism, good quality core product, recognition by service provider, and recognition by provider) 34 Travel agencies Medical services Hairdressers Fixed line telephone industry Dry cleaning agents Hairdressing Auto services On-line retailing stores On-line retailing store Manufacturing industry Hairdressers Business-to-business services context
While there is a lack of consistency and clarity regarding their appropriate conceptualization (Jones et al., 2000), researchers generally agree that switching costs involve both monetary and non-monetary costs (i.e., time, effort, and psychological costs) (Balabanis et al., 2006; Dick & Basu, 1994; Holloway, 2003; Patterson, 2004; Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Sharma & Patterson, 2000). Monetary costs, which also are described as economic/financial costs in the literature (e.g., Balabanis et al., 2006; Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Sharma & Patterson, 2000), can be regarded as a sunk cost that appears when customers switch their service provider (i.e., actual financial expenses and loss of financial benefits) (Aydin, Ozer, & Arasil, 2005; Klemperer, 1987). Non-monetary costs involve time/effort costs (e.g., search/setup costs and other physical costs) and psychological costs that can also be described as a perceived risk. A perceived risk is the consumers’ perception of the unfamiliarity, uncertainty or undesirable consequences that attend buying a new product/service from an alternative (Dowling & Staelin, 1994). Changing from the current service provider to a new service provider requires an investment of time/effort and monetary expenses as well as a high degree of perceived risk (psychological costs) (Balabanis et al., 2006; Dick & Basu, 1994; Holloway, 2003; Patterson, 2004; Ranaweera & Prabhu, 2003; Sharma & Patterson, 2000). Thus, switching costs act as a significant switching barrier, preventing customers from leaving the current relationship (Colgate & Lang, 2001). Lack of Attractive Alternatives Previous research also indicated that a lack of attractive alternatives, as perceived by customers, is an essential component of switching barriers (Colgate & Lang, 2001; Holloway, 2003; Jones et al., 2000; Patterson & Smith, 2003; Vazquez-Carrasco & Foxall, 2006; Yanamandram & White, 2006). Jones et al. (2000) conceptualized attractiveness of alternatives as “customer perceptions regarding the extent to which viable competing alternatives are available in the marketplace” (p 262). In a similar manner, a lack of attractive alternatives can be described as the customers’ perception of the magnitude of the lack of comparable/superior alternatives in the marketplace. When customers perceive a lack of superior alternatives or indifferent alternatives, the probability of terminating an existing relationship decreases (Bendapudi & Berry, 1997; Dube & Maute, 1998; Sharma & Patterson, 2000). Thus, a lack of attractive alternative offerings in the marketplace can be favorable by protecting a firm’s customers from competitors (Ping, 1993). 35
Page 1 and 2: RESTAURANT CUSTOMERS’ EMOTIONAL E
Page 3 and 4: applicability. The moderating role
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: Table 2.3. Switching barriers ident
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?