03090569610105762.pdf
TRANSCRIPT
European Journal of MarketingSERVQUAL: review, critique, research agendaFrancis Buttle
Article information:To cite this document:Francis Buttle, (1996),"SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 1 pp. 8 -32Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090569610105762
Downloaded on: 22 December 2015, At: 19:54 (PT)References: this document contains references to 81 other documents.To copy this document: [email protected] fulltext of this document has been downloaded 22984 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Albert Caruana, (2002),"Service loyalty: The effects of service quality and the mediating role of customer satisfaction",European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Iss 7/8 pp. 811-828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560210430818Mik Wisniewski, (2001),"Using SERVQUAL to assess customer satisfaction with public sector services", Managing ServiceQuality: An International Journal, Vol. 11 Iss 6 pp. 380-388 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006279G.S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R.N. Anantharaman, (2002),"The relationship between service qualityand customer satisfaction – a factor specific approach", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 16 Iss 4 pp. 363-379 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08876040210433248
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:402246 []
For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors serviceinformation about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Pleasevisit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio ofmore than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of onlineproducts and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on PublicationEthics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
8
SERVQUAL: review, critique,research agenda
Francis ButtleManchester Business School, Manchester, UK
SERVQUAL: a primerSERVQUAL provides a technology for measuring and managing servicequality (SQ). Since 1985, when the technology was first published, itsinnovators Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, have further developed,promulgated and promoted the technology through a series of publications(Parasuraman et al., 1985; 1986; 1988; 1990; 1991a; 1991b; 1993; 1994; Zeithamlet al., 1990; 1991; 1992; 1993).
The ABI/Inform database “Global edition”, (September 1994) reports thatservice quality has been a keyword in some 1,447 articles published in theperiod January 1992 to April 1994. By contrast SERVQUAL has been a keywordin just 41 publications. These publications incorporate both theoreticaldiscussions and applications of SERVQUAL in a variety of industrial,commercial and not-for-profit settings. Published studies include tyre retailing(Carman, 1990) dental services (Carman, 1990), hotels (Saleh and Ryan, 1992)travel and tourism (Fick and Ritchie, 1991), car servicing (Bouman and van derWiele, 1992), business schools (Rigotti and Pitt, 1992), higher education (Ford etal., 1993; McElwee and Redman, 1993), hospitality ( Johns, 1993), business-to-business channel partners (Kong and Mayo, 1993), accounting firms (Freemanand Dart, 1993), architectural services (Baker and Lamb, 1993), recreationalservices (Taylor et al., 1993), hospitals (Babakus and Mangold, 1992; Mangoldand Babakus, 1991; Reidenbach and Sandifer-Smallwood, 1990; Soliman, 1992;Vandamme and Leunis, 1993; Walbridge and Delene, 1993), airline catering(Babakus et al., 1993a), banking (Kwon and Lee, 1994; Wong and Perry, 1991)apparel retailing (Gagliano and Hathcote, 1994) and local government (Scottand Shieff, 1993). There have also been many unpublished SERVQUAL studies.In the last two years alone, the author has been associated with a number ofsectoral and corporate SERVQUAL studies: computer services, construction,mental health services, hospitality, recreational services, ophthalmologicalservices, and retail services. In addition, a number of organizations, such as theMidland and Abbey National banks have adopted it.
Service quality (SQ) has become an important research topic because of itsapparent relationship to costs (Crosby, 1979), profitability (Buzzell and Gale,1987; Rust and Zahorik, 1993; Zahorik and Rust, 1992), customer satisfaction(Bolton and Drew, 1991; Boulding et al., 1993), customer retention (Reichheldand Sasser, 1990), and positive word of mouth. SQ is widely regarded as a driverof corporate marketing and financial performance.
European Journal of Marketing,Vol. 30 No. 1, 1996, pp. 8-32.© MCB University Press, 0309-0566
Received October 1994Revised April 1995
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
9
SERVQUAL is founded on the view that the customer’s assessment of SQ isparamount. This assessment is conceptualized as a gap between what thecustomer expects by way of SQ from a class of service providers (say, allopticians), and their evaluations of the performance of a particular serviceprovider (say a single Specsavers store). SQ is presented as a multidimensionalconstruct. In their original formulation Parasuraman et al. (1985) identified tencomponents of SQ:
(1) reliability;
(2) responsiveness;
(3) competence;
(4) access;
(5) courtesy;
(6) communication;
(7) credibility;
(8) security;
(9) understanding/knowing the customer;
(10) tangibles.
(See Appendix for definitions and examples.) In their 1988 work thesecomponents were collapsed into five dimensions: reliability, assurance,tangibles, empathy, responsiveness, as defined in Table I. Reliability, tangiblesand responsiveness remained distinct, but the remaining seven componentscollapsed into two aggregate dimensions, assurance and empathy[1].Parasuraman et al. developed a 22-item instrument with which to measurecustomers’ expectations and perceptions (E and P) of the five RATERdimensions. Four or five numbered items are used to measure each dimension.The instrument is administered twice in different forms, first to measureexpectations and second to measure perceptions.
Dimensions Definition Items in scale
Reliability The ability to perform the promised 4service dependably and accurately
Assurance The knowledge and courtesy of employees and 5their ability to convey trust and confidence
Tangibles The appearance of physical facilities, equipment, 4personnel and communication materials
Empathy The provision of caring, individualized attention 5to customers
Responsiveness The willingness to help customers and to provide 4prompt service
Table I.SERVQUAL dimensions
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
10
In 1991, Parasuraman et al. published a follow-up study which refined theirprevious work (1991b). Wording of all expectations items changed. The 1988version had attempted to capture respondents’ normative expectations. Forexample, one 1988 expectations item read: “Companies offering ––––––––services should keep their records accurately”. The revised wording focused onwhat customers would expect from “excellent service companies”. The sampleitem was revised thus: “Excellent companies offering –––––––– services willinsist on error-free records”. Detailed wording of many perceptions items alsochanged. Two new items, one each for tangibles and assurance, weresubstituted for two original items. The tangibles item referred to theappearance of communication materials. The assurance item referred to theknowledge of employees. Both references had been omitted in the 1988 version.
Analysis of SERVQUAL data can take several forms: item-by-item analysis(e.g. P1 – E1, P2 – E2); dimension-by-dimension analysis (e.g. (P1 + P2 + P3+ P4/4) – (E1 + E2 + E3 + E4/4), where P1 to P4, and E1 to E4, represent thefour perception and expectation statements relating to a single dimension); andcomputation of the single measure of service quality ((P1 + P2 + P3 …+ P22/22) – (E1 + E2 + E3 + … + E22/22)), the so-called SERVQUAL gap.
Without question, SERVQUAL has been widely applied and is highly valued.Any critique of SERVQUAL, therefore, must be seen within this broader contextof strong endorsement. What follows is a discussion of several criticisms whichhave been levelled at SERVQUAL elsewhere or have been experienced in theapplication of the technology by this author.
Criticisms of SERVQUALNotwithstanding its growing popularity and widespread application,SERVQUAL has been subjected to a number of theoretical and operationalcriticisms which are detailed below:
(1) Theoretical:• Paradigmatic objections: SERVQUAL is based on a
disconfirmation paradigm rather than an attitudinal paradigm;and SERVQUAL fails to draw on established economic, statisticaland psychological theory.
• Gaps model: there is little evidence that customers assess servicequality in terms of P – E gaps.
• Process orientation: SERVQUAL focuses on the process of servicedelivery, not the outcomes of the service encounter.
• Dimensionality: SERVQUAL’s five dimensions are not universals;the number of dimensions comprising SQ is contextualized; items donot always load on to the factors which one would a priori expect;and there is a high degree of intercorrelation between the fiveRATER dimensions.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
11
(2) Operational:• Expectations: the term expectation is polysemic; consumers use
standards other than expectations to evaluate SQ; and SERVQUALfails to measure absolute SQ expectations.
• Item composition: four or five items can not capture the variabilitywithin each SQ dimension.
• Moments of truth (MOT): customers’ assessments of SQ may varyfrom MOT to MOT.
• Polarity: the reversed polarity of items in the scale causes respondenterror.
• Scale points: the seven-point Likert scale is flawed.• Two administrations: two administrations of the instrument causes
boredom and confusion.• Variance extracted: the over SERVQUAL score accounts for a
disappointing proportion of item variances.Each of the criticisms will be examined below.
TheoreticalParadigmatic objections. Two major criticisms have been raised. First,SERVQUAL has been inappropriately based on an expectations-disconfirmation model rather than an attitudinal model of SQ. Second, it doesnot build on extant knowledge in economics, statistics and psychology.
SERVQUAL is based on the disconfirmation model widely adopted in thecustomer satisfaction literature. In this literature, customer satisfaction (CSat)is operationalized in terms of the relationship between expectations (E) andoutcomes (O). If O matches E, customer satisfaction is predicted. If O exceeds E,then customer delight may be produced. If E exceeds O, then customerdissatisfaction is indicated.
According to Cronin and Taylor (1992; 1994) SERVQUAL is paradigmatically flawed because of its ill-judged adoption of this disconfirmation model.“Perceived quality”, they claim, “is best conceptualized as an attitude”. Theycriticize Parasuraman et al. for their hesitancy to define perceived SQ inattitudinal terms, even though Parasuraman et al. (1988) had earlier claimedthat SQ was “similar in many ways to an attitude”. Cronin and Taylor observe:
Researchers have attempted to differentiate service quality from consumer satisfaction, evenwhile using the disconfirmation format to measure perceptions of service quality… thisapproach is not consistent with the differentiation expressed between these constructs in thesatisfaction and attitude literatures.
Iacobucci et al.’s (1994) review of the debate surrounding the conceptual andoperational differences between SQ and CSat concludes that the constructs“have not been consistently defined and differentiated from each other in theliterature”. She suggests that the two constructs may be connected in a numberof ways. First, they may be both different operationalizations of the sameconstruct, “evaluation”. Second, they may be orthogonally related, i.e. they may
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
12
be entirely different constructs. Third, they may be conceptual cousins. Theirfamily connections may be dependent on a number of other considerations,including for example, the duration of the evaluation. Parasuraman et al. (1985)have described satisfaction as more situation- or encounter-specific, and qualityas more holistic, developed over a longer period of time, although they offer noempirical evidence to support this contention. SQ and CSat may also be relatedby time order. The predominant belief is that SQ is the logical predecessor toCSat, but this remains unproven. Cronin and Taylor’s critique draws supportfrom Oliver’s (1980) research which suggests that SQ and CSat are distinctconstructs but are related in that satisfaction mediates the effect of prior-periodperceptions of SQ and causes revised SQ perceptions to be formed. SQ and CSatmay also be differentiated by virtue of their content. Whereas SQ may bethought of as high in cognitive content, CSat may be more heavily loaded withaffect (Oliver, 1993).
Cronin and Taylor suggest that the adequacy-importance model of attitudemeasurement should be adopted for SQ research. Iacobucci et al. (1994) add theobservation that “in some general psychological sense, it is not clear whatshort-term evaluations of quality and satistaction are if not attitudes”. In turn,Parasuraman et al. (1994) have vigorously defended their position, claimingthat critics seem “to discount prior conceptual work in the SQ literature”, andsuggest that Cronin and Taylor’s work “does not justify their claim” that thedisconfirmation paradigm is flawed.
In other work, Cronin and Taylor (1994) comment that:Recent conceptual advances suggest that the disconfirmation-based SERVQUAL scale ismeasuring neither service quality nor consumer satisfaction. Rather, the SERVQUAL scaleappears at best an operationalization of only one of the many forms of expectancy-disconfirmation.
A different concern has been raised by Andersson (1992). He objects toSERVQUAL’s failure to draw on previous social science research, particularlyeconomic theory, statistics, and psychological theory. Parasuraman et al.’s workis highly inductive in that it moves from historically situated observation togeneral theory. Andersson (1992) claims that Parasuraman et al. “abandon theprinciple of scientific continuity and deduction”. Among specific criticisms arethe following:
First, Parasuraman et al.’s management technology takes no account of thecosts of improving service quality. It is naïve in assuming that the marginalrevenue of SQ improvement always exceeds the marginal cost. (Aubrey andZimbler (1983), Crosby (1979), Juran (1951) and Masser (1957) have addressedthe issue of the costs/benefits of quality improvement in service settings.)
Second, Parasuraman et al. collect SQ data using ordinal scale methods(Likert scales) yet perform analyses with methods suited to interval-level data(factor analysis).
Third, Parasuraman et al. are at the “absolute end of the street regardingpossibilities to use statistical methods”. Ordinal scales do not allow for
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
13
investigations of common product-moment correlations. Interdependenciesamong the dimensions of quality are difficult to describe. SERVQUAL studiescannot answer questions such as: Are there elasticities among the qualitydimensions? Is the customer value of improvements a linear or non-linearfunction?
Fourth, Parasuraman et al. fail to draw on the large literature on thepsychology of perception.
Gaps model. A related set of criticisms refer to the value and meaning of gapsidentified in the disconfirmation model.
Babakus and Boller (1992) found the use of a “gap” approach to SQmeasurement “intuitively appealing” but suspected that the “difference scoresdo not provide any additional information beyond that already contained in theperceptions component of the SERVQUAL scale”. They found that thedominant contributor to the gap score was the perceptions score because of ageneralized response tendency to rate expectations high.
Churchill and Surprenant (1982), in their work on CSat, also ponder whethergap measurements contribute anything new or of value given that the gap is adirect function of E and P. It has also been noted that:
while conceptually, difference scores might be sensible, they are problematic in that they arenotoriously unreliable, even when the measures from which the difference scores are derivedare themselves highly reliable (Iacobucci et al., 1994).
Also, in the context of CSat, Oliver (1980) has pondered whether it might bepreferable to consider the P – E scores as raw differences or as ratios. No workhas been reported using a ratio approach to measure SQ.
Iacobucci et al. (1994) take a different tack on the incorporation of E-measures. They suggest that expectations might not exist or be formed clearlyenough to serve as a standard for evaluation of a service experience.Expectations may be formed simultaneously with service consumption.Kahneman and Miller (1986) have also proposed that consumers may form“experience-based norms” after service experiences, rather than expectationsbefore.
A further issue raised by Babakus and Inhofe (1991) is that expectations mayattract a social desirability response bias. Respondents may feel motivated toadhere to an “I-have-high-expectations” social norm. Indeed, Parasuraman et al.report that in their testing of the 1988 version the majority of expectationsscores were above six on the seven-point scale. The overall mean expectationwas 6.22 (Parasuraman et al., 1991b).
Teas (1993a; 1993b; 1994) has pondered the meaning of identified gaps. Forexample, there are six ways of producing P – E gaps of –1 (P = 1, E = 2; P = 2,E = 3; P = 3, E = 4; P = 4, E = 5; P = 5, E = 6; P = 6, E = 7). Do these tied gapsmean equal perceived SQ? He also notes that SERVQUAL research thus far hasnot established that all service providers within a consideration or choice set,e.g. all car-hire firms do, in fact, share the same expectations ratings across allitems and dimensions.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
14
A further criticism is that SERVQUAL fails to capture the dynamics ofchanging expectations. Consumers learn from experiences. The inference inmuch of Parasuraman et al.’s work is that expectations rise over time. An E-score of seven in 1986 may not necessarily mean the same as an E-score in 1996.Expectations may also fall over time (e.g. in the health service setting). Grönroos(1993) recognizes this weakness in our understanding of SQ, and has called fora new phase of service quality research to focus on the dynamics of servicequality evaluation. Wotruba and Tyagi (1991) agree that more work is neededon how expectations are formed and changed over time.
Implicit in SERVQUAL is the assumption that positive and negativedisconfirmation are symmetrically valent. However, from the customer’sperspective, failure to meet expectations often seems a more significantoutcome than success in meeting or exceeding expectations (Hardie et al., 1992).Customers will often criticize poor service performance and not praiseexceptional performance.
Recently, Cronin and Taylor (1992) have tested a performance-based measureof SQ, dubbed SERVPERF, in four industries (banking, pest control, drycleaning and fast food). They found that this measure explained more of thevariance in an overall measure of SQ than did SERVQUAL. SERVPERF iscomposed of the 22 perception items in the SERVQUAL scale, and thereforeexcludes any consideration of expectations. In a later defence of their argumentfor a perceptions-only measure of SQ, Cronin and Taylor (1994) acknowledgethat it is possible for researchers to infer consumers’ disconfirmation througharithmetic means (the P – E gap) but that “consumer perceptions, notcalculations, govern behavior”. Finally, a team of researchers, includingZeithaml herself (Boulding et al., 1993), has recently rejected the value of anexpectations-based, or gap-based model in finding that service quality was onlyinfluenced by perceptions.
Process orientation. SERVQUAL has been criticized for focusing on theprocess of service delivery rather than outcomes of the service encounter.
Grönroos (1982) identified three components of SQ: technical, functional andreputational quality. Technical quality is concerned with the outcome of theservice encounter, e.g. have the dry cleaners got rid of the stain? Functionalquality is concerned with the process of service delivery, e.g. were the drycleaner’s counter staff courteous? Reputational quality is a reflection of thecorporate image of the service organization.
Whereas technical quality focuses on what, functional quality focuses on howand involves consideration of issues such as the behaviour of customer contactstaff, and the speed of service.
Critics have argued that outcome quality is missing from Parasuraman et al.’sformulation of SQ (Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Mangold and Babakus, 1991;Richard and Allaway, 1993).
Richard and Allaway (1993) tested an augmented SERVQUAL model whichthey claim incorporates both process and outcome components, and commentthat “the challenge is to determine which process and outcome quality
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
15
attributes of SQ have the greatest impact on choice”[2]. Their research intoDomino Pizza’s process and outcome quality employed the 22 Parasuraman etal. (1988) items, modified to suit context, and the following six outcome items:
(1) Domino’s has delicious home-delivery pizza.(2) Domino’s has nutritious home-delivery pizza.(3) Domino’s home-delivery pizza has flavourful sauce.(4) Domino’s provides a generous amount of toppings for its home-delivery
pizza.(5) Domino’s home-delivery pizza is made with superior ingredients.(6) Domino’s prepared its home-delivery pizza crust exactly the way I like it.
These researchers found that the process-only items borrowed and adaptedfrom SERVQUAL accounted for only 45 per cent of the variance in customerchoice; the full inventory, inclusive of the six outcome items, accounted for 71.5per cent of variance in choice. The difference between the two is significant atthe 0.001 level. They conclude that process-and-outcome is a better predictor ofconsumer choice than process, or outcome, alone.
In defence of SERVQUAL, Higgins et al. (1991) have argued that outcomequality is already contained within these dimensions: reliability, competenceand security.
Dimensionality. Critics have raised a number of significant and relatedquestions about the dimensionality of the SERVQUAL scale. The most seriousare concerned with the number of dimensions, and their stability from contextto context.
There seems to be general agreement that SQ is a second-order construct,that is, it is factorially complex, being composed of several first-ordervariables[3]. SERVQUAL is composed of the five RATER factors. There arehowever, several alternative conceptualizations of SQ. As already noted,Grönroos (1984) identified three components – technical, functional andreputational quality; Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1982) also identify threecomponents – interactive, physical and corporate quality; Hedvall andPaltschik (1989) identify two dimensions – willingness and ability to serve, andphysical and psychological access; Leblanc and Nguyen (1988) list fivecomponents – corporate image, internal organization, physical support of theservice producing system, staff/customer interaction, and the level of customersatisfaction.
Parasuraman et al. (1988) have claimed that SERVQUAL:provides a basic skeleton through its expectations/perceptions format encompassingstatements for each of the five service quality dimensions. The skeleton, when necessary, canbe adapted or supplemented to fit the characteristics or specific research needs of a particularorganization.
In their 1988 paper, Parasuraman et al. also claimed that “the final 22-item scaleand its five dimensions have sound and stable psychometric properties”. In the
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
16
1991b revision, Parasuraman et al. found evidence of “consistent factorstructure … across five independent samples” (emphases added). In otherwords, they make claims that the five dimensions are generic across servicecontexts. Indeed, in 1991, Parasuraman et al. claimed that “SERVQUAL’sdimensions and items represent core evaluation criteria that transcend specificcompanies and industries” (1991b)[4].
Number of dimensions. When the SERVQUAL instrument has beenemployed in modified form, up to nine distinct dimensions of SQ have beenrevealed, the number varying according to the service sector underinvestigation. One study has even produced a single-factor solution.
Nine factors accounted for 71 per cent of SQ variance in Carman’s (1990)hospital research: admission service, tangible accommodations, tangible food,tangible privacy, nursing care, explanation of treatment, access and courtesyafforded visitors, discharge planning, and patient accounting (billing)[5].
Five factors were distinguished in Saleh and Ryan’s (1992) work in the hotelindustry – conviviality, tangibles, reassurance, avoid sarcasm, and empathy.The first of these, conviviality, accounted for 62.8 per cent of the overallvariance; the second factor, tangibles, accounted for a further 6.9 per cent; thefive factors together accounted for 78.6 per cent. This is strongly suggestive ofa two-factor solution in the hospitality industry. The researchers had “initiallyassumed that the factor analysis would confirm the [SERVQUAL] dimensionsbut this failed to be the case”.
Four factors were extracted in Gagliano and Hathcote’s (1994) investigationof SQ in the retail clothing sector – personal attention, reliability, tangibles andconvenience. Two of these have no correspondence in SERVQUAL. Theyconclude “the [original SERVQUAL scale] does not perform as well asexpected” in apparel speciality retailing.
Three factors were identified in Bouman and van der Wiele’s (1992) researchinto car servicing – customer kindness, tangibles and faith[6]. The authors“were not able to find the same dimensions for judging service quality as didBerry et al.”.
One factor was recognized in Babakus et al.’s (1993b) survey of 635 utilitycompany customers. Analysis “essentially produced a single-factor model” ofSQ which accounted for 66.3 per cent of the variance. The authors advanceseveral possible explanations for this unidimensional result including thenature of the service, (which they describe as a low-involvement service with anongoing consumption experience), non-response bias and the use of a singleexpectations/perceptions gap scale. These researchers concluded: “With theexception of findings reported by Parasuraman and his colleagues, empiricalevidence does not support a five-dimensional concept of service quality”.
In summary, Babakus and Boller (1992) commented that “the domain ofservice quality may be factorially complex in some industries and very simpleand unidimensional in others”. In effect, they claim that the number of SQdimensions is dependent on the particular service being offered.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
17
In their revised version, Parasuraman et al. (1991b) suggest two reasons forthese anomalies. First, they may be the product of differences in data collectionand analysis procedures. A “more plausible explanation” is that “differencesamong empirically derived factors across replications may be primarily due toacross-dimension similarities and/or within dimension differences in customers’evaluations of a specific company involved in each setting”.
Spreng and Singh (1993) have commented on the lack of discriminationbetween several of the dimensions. In their research, the correlation betweenAssurance and Responsiveness constructs was 0.97, indicating that they werenot separable constructs. They also found a high correlation between thecombined Assurance-Responsiveness construct and the Empathy construct(0.87). Parasuraman et al. (1991b) had earlier found that Assurance andResponsiveness items loaded on a single factor, and in their 1988 work hadfound average intercorrelations among the five dimensions of 0.23 to 0.35.
In testing their revised version (Parasuraman et al., 1991b), Parasuraman andcolleagues found that the four items under Tangibles broke into two distinctdimensions, one pertaining to equipment and physical facilities, the other toemployees and communication materials. They also found that Responsivenessand Assurance dimensions showed considerable overlap, and loaded on thesame factor. They suggested that this was a product of imposing a five-factorconstraint on the analyses. Indeed, the additional degrees of freedom allowedby a subsequent six-factor solution generated distinct Assurance andResponsiveness factors.
Parasuraman et al. (1991a) have now accepted that the “five SERVQUALdimensions are interrelated as evidenced by the need for oblique rotations offactor solutions…to obtain the most interpretable factor patterns. One fruitfularea for future research”, they conclude, “is to explore the nature and causes ofthese interrelationships”.
It therefore does appear that both contextual circumstances and analyticalprocesses have some bearing on the number of dimensions of SQ.
Contextual stabil ity. Carman (1990) tested the generic qualities of theSERVQUAL instrument in three service settings – a tyre retailer, a businessschool placement centre and a dental school patient clinic. FollowingParasuraman et al.’s suggestion, he modified and augmented the items in theoriginal ten-factor SERVQUAL scale to suit the three contexts. His factoranalysis identified between five and seven underlying dimensions.
According to Carman, customers are at least partly context-specific in thedimensions they employ to evaluate SQ. In all three cases, Tangibles, Reliabilityand Security were present[7]. Responsiveness, a major component in theRATER scale, was relatively weak in the dental clinic context. Carman alsocommented: “Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry combined their originalUnderstanding and Access dimensions into Empathy… our results did not findthis to be an appropriate combination”. In particular he found that if adimension is very important to customers they are likely to be decomposed intoa number of sub-dimensions. This happened for the placement centre where
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
18
Responsiveness, Personal attention, Access and Convenience were all identifiedas separate factors. According to Carman, this indicates that researchers shouldwork with the original ten dimensions, rather than adopt the revised five-factorParasuraman et al. (1988) model.
There is also an indication from one piece of cross-cultural research that thescale may not always travel well. Ford et al. (1993) computed alphas for aSERVQUAL application in the higher education contexts of New Zealand andthe USA markets which the authors describe as “intuitively” similar. Table IIdisplays the results.
These results challenge Zeithaml’s (1988) claim that consumers form higherlevel abstractions of SQ that are generalized across contexts.
Item loadings. In some studies (e.g. Carman, 1990), items have not loaded onthe factors to which they were expected to belong. Two items from the Empathybattery of the Parasuraman et al. (1988) instrument loaded heavily on theTangibles factor in a study of dental clinic SQ. In the tyre retail study, aTangibles item loaded on to Security; in the placement centre a Reliability itemloaded on to Tangibles. An item concerning the ease of making appointmentsloaded on to Reliability in the dental clinic context, but Security in the tyre storecontext. He also found that only two-thirds of the items loaded in the same wayon the expectations battery as they did in the perceptions battery. Carmansupplies other examples of the same phenomena, and suggests that theunexpected results indicate both a face validity and a construct validityproblem. In other words, he warns against importing SERVQUAL into servicesetting contexts without modification and validity checks.
Among his specific recommendations is the following: “We recommend thatitems on Courtesy and Access be retained and that items on some dimensionssuch as Responsiveness and Access be expanded where it is believed that thesedimensions are of particular importance”. He also reports specific Courtesy andAccess items which performed well in terms of nomological and constructvalidity.
Carman (1990) further suggested that the factors, Personal attention, Accessor Convenience should be retained and further contextualized research work bedone to identify their significance and meaning.
Cronbach alphaDimensions USA New Zealand
Tangibles 0.7049 0.6833
Reliability 0.8883 0.8514
Responsiveness 0.8378 0.8063
Assurance 0.8229 0.7217
Empathy 0.8099 0.7734
Table II.SERVQUAL alphas inNew Zealand and theUSA
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
19
Item intercorrelations. Convergent validity and discriminant validity areimportant considerations in the measurement of second-order constructs suchas SERVQUAL. One would associate a high level of convergent validity with ahigh level of intercorrelations between the items selected to measure a singleRATER factor. Discriminant validity is indicated if the factors and theircomponent items are independent of each other (i.e. the items load heavily onone factor only)[8]. Following their modified replication of Parasuraman et al.’swork, Babakus and Boller (1992) conclude that rules for convergence anddiscrimination do not indicate the existence of the five RATER dimensions.
The best scales have a high level of intercorrelation between itemscomprising a dimension (convergent validity). In their development work infour sectors (banking, credit-card company, repair and maintenance company,and long-distance telecommunications company) Parasuraman et al. (1988)found inter-item reliability coefficients (alphas) varying from 0.52 to 0.84.Babakus and Boller (1992) report alphas which are broadly consistent withthose of Parasuraman, varying from 0.67 to 0.83 (see Table III). In their 1991bversion, Parasuraman et al. report alphas from 0.60 to 0.93, and observe that“every alpha value obtained for each dimension in the final study is higher thanthe corresponding values in the…original study”. They attribute thisimprovement to their rewording of the 22 scale items.
Spreng and Singh (1993), and Brown et al. (1993) are highly critical of thequestionable application of alphas to difference scores. They evaluate thereliability of SERVQUAL using a measure specifically designed for differencescores (Lord, 1963). Spreng and Singh conclude that “there is not a great deal ofdifference between the reliabilities correctly calculated and the more common[alpha] calculation”, an observation with which Parasuraman et al. (1993)concurred when they wrote: “The collective conceptual and empirical evidenceneither demonstrates clear superiority for the non-difference score format norwarrants abandoning the difference score format”.
OperationalExpectations. Notwithstanding the more fundamental criticism that expectationsplay no significant role in the conceptualization of service quality, some criticshave raised a number of other concerns about the operationalization of E inSERVQUAL.
In their 1988 work, Parasuraman et al. defined expectations as “desires orwants of consumers, i.e. what they feel a service provider should offer rather thanwould offer” (emphasis added). The expectations component was designed tomeasure “customers’ normative expectations” (Parasuraman et al., 1990), and is“similar to the ideal standard in the customer satisfaction/dissatisfactionliterature” (Zeithaml et al., 1991). Teas (1993a) found these explanations“somewhat vague” and has questioned respondents’ interpretation of theexpectations battery in the SERVQUAL instrument. He believes thatrespondents may be using any one of six interpretations (Teas, 1993b):
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
(1) Service attribute importance. Customers may respond by rating theexpectations statements according to the importance of each.
(2) Forecasted performance. Customers may respond by using the scale topredict the performance they would expect.
(3) Ideal performance. The optimal performance; what performance “canbe”.
(4) Deserved performance. The performance level customers, in the light oftheir investments, feel performance should be.
(5) Equitable performance. The level of performance customers feel theyought to receive given a perceived set of costs.
(6) Minimum tolerable performance. What performance “must be”.
Each of these interpretations is somewhat different, and Teas contends that aconsiderable percentage of the variance of the SERVQUAL expectationsmeasure can be explained by the difference in respondents’ interpretations.
Parasuraman et al. (1988) Babakus and Boller (1992)Coefficient Item-to-total Coefficient Item-to-total
Factor Item alpha correlations alpha correlations
Tangibles Q1 0.72 0.69 0.67 0.38Q2 0.68 0.59Q3 0.64 0.31Q4 0.51 0.54
Reliability Q5 0.83 0.75 0.82 0.66Q6 0.63 0.58Q7 0.71 0.59Q8 0.75 0.75Q9 0.50 0.49
Responsiveness Q10 0.82 0.51 0.68 0.44Q11 0.77 0.44Q12 0.66 0.45Q13 0.86 0.52
Assurance Q14 0.81 0.38 0.83 0.64Q15 0.72 0.77Q16 0.80 0.65Q17 0.45 0.58
Empathy Q18 0.86 0.78 0.71 0.46Q19 0.81 0.46Q20 0.59 0.48Q21 0.71 0.45Q22 0.68 0.47
Table III.Reliability ofSERVQUAL
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
20
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
21
Accordingly, the expectations component of the model lacks discriminantvalidity. Parasuraman et al. (1991b; 1994) have responded to these criticisms byredefining expectations as the service customers would expect from “excellentservice organizations”, rather than “normative” expectations of serviceproviders, and by vigorously defending their inclusion in SQ research.
Iacobucci et al. (1994) want to drop the term “expectations” from the SQvocabulary. They prefer the generic label “standard”, and believe that severalstandards may operate simultaneously; among them “ideals”, “my most desiredcombination of attributes”, the “industry standard” of a nominal averagecompetitor, “deserved” SQ, and brand standards based on past experienceswith the brand.
Some critics have questioned SERVQUAL’s failure to access customerevaluations based on absolute standards of SQ. The instrument asksrespondents to report their expectations of excellent service providers within aclass (i.e. the measures are relative rather than absolute). It has been argued that SERVQUAL predicts that:
customers will evaluate a service favourably as long as their expectations are met or exceeded,regardless of whether their prior expectations were high or low, and regardless of whether theabsolute goodness of the [service] performance is high or low. This unyielding prediction isillogical. We argue that “absolute” levels (e.g. the prior standards) certainly must enter into acustomer’s evaluation (Iacobucci et al., 1994).
Put another way, SERVQUAL assumes that an E-score of six for Joe’s GreasySpoon Diner is equivalent to an E-score of six for Michel Roux’s Le LapinFrench restaurant. In absolute terms, clearly they are not. Grönroos (1993) refersto a similar oddity, which he calls the bad-service paradox. A customer mayhave low expectations based on previous experience with the service provider;if those expectations are met there is no gap and SQ is deemed satisfactory.
Since Zeithaml et al. (1991) have themselves identified two comparison normsfor SQ assessment (“desired service”, the level of service a customer believes canand should be delivered; “adequate service”, the level of service the customerconsiders acceptable) it seems unlikely that the debate about the meaning ofexpectations is over.
Item composition. Each factor in the 1988 and 1991 SERVQUAL scales iscomposed of four or five items. It has become clear that this is often inadequate tocapture the variance within, or the context-specific meaning of, each dimension.Carman’s (1990) study of hospital services employed 40 items. Bouman and vander Wiele (1992) used 48 items in their car service research, Saleh and Ryan (1992)33 items in their hospitality industry research, Fort (1993) 31 items in his analysisof software house service quality and Babakus and Mangold (1992) 15 items intheir hospital research. Parasuraman et al. (1991b) acknowledge that context-specific items can be used to supplement SERVQUAL, but caution that “the newitems should be similar in form to the existing SERVQUAL items”.
Moments of truth. Many services are delivered over several moments of truth orencounters between service staff and customer: hotel and hospital services for
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
22
example. Carman (1990) found evidence that customers evaluate SQ by referenceto these multiple encounters. For example, in his hospital research he listed thethree items below:
(1) My discharge from the hospital was prompt.(2) Nurses responded promptly when I called.(3) My admission to the hospital was prompt.
These items did not load heavily on a single Responsiveness factor as might beexpected; instead they loaded on factors which represented a particular hospitalfunction, or moment of truth. Parasuraman et al., in contrast, have declared the SQis a more global construct, not directly connected to particular incidents.
Polarity. Of the 22 items in the 1988 SERVQUAL scale, 13 statement pairs arepositively worded, and nine pairs are negatively worded. The negatives are thefull set of Responsiveness and Empathy statements. Parasuramanet al.’s goal wasto reduce systematic response bias caused by yea-saying and nay-saying. This isaccepted as good normative research practice (Churchill, 1979), yet hasconsequences for respondents who make more comprehension errors, and takemore time to read items (Wason and Johnson-Laird, 1972).
In factor analysis of SERVQUAL data, Babakus and Boller (1992) found that allnegatively-worded items loaded heavily on one factor while all positively-wordeditems loaded on another. They also found a significant difference between theaverage P, E and gap scores of positively and negatively-worded items. Theyconclude that the wording of the items produces a “method factor”: “Item wordingmay be responsible for producing factors that are method artifacts rather thanconceptually meaningful dimensions of service quality”. Item wording createsdata quality problems, and calls into question the dimensionality and validity ofthe instrument. Babakus and Mangold (1992), in their application of SERVQUALto a hospital setting, therefore decided to employ only positively-wordedstatements. Parasuraman et al. (1991b) have responded to these criticisms byrewording all negatively-worded items positively.
Scale points. The use of seven-point Likert scales has been criticized on severalgrounds. Although none of these are specific to SERVQUAL applications, theybear repeating here. Lewis (1993) has criticized the scale for its lack of verballabelling for points two to six. She believes this may cause respondents to overusethe extreme ends of the scale and suggests this could be avoided by labelling eachpoint. Another issue is the respondents’ interpretation of the meaning of themidpoint of the scale (e.g. is it a “don’t know”, “do not feel strongly in eitherdirection” or a “do not understand the statement” response?) Lewis is alsoconcerned about responses which suggest there is no gap when in fact a gap doesexist. For instance a respondent may have expectations of 5.4 and perceptions of4.6 (a gap of 0.8) but when completing SERVQUAL may rate each as 5, the nearestpossible response in each case. This is an example of a Type II error.
Babakus and Mangold (1992) opted to use five-point Likert scales on thegrounds that it would reduce the “frustration level” of patient respondents,increase response rate and response quality.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
23
Two administrations. Respondents appear to be bored, and sometimes confusedby the administration of E and P versions of SERVQUAL (Bouman and van derWiele, 1992). Boredom and confusion imperil data quality.
Carman (1990) also comments on the timing of the two administrations. He iscritical of Parasuraman et al. for asking respondents to complete the twoquestionnaires at a single sitting. In Parasuraman et al.’s 1988 work respondentswere asked to report their expectations and perceptions, based on what they hadexperienced in the last three months. All self-reports were entirely ex post, apractice also criticized by Grönroos (1993). Carman also observed that it wasimpractical to expect customers to complete an expectations inventory prior to aservice encounter and a perceptions inventory immediately afterwards. Hissolution was to collect data on the expectations-perceptions difference with asingle question at a single administration, for example: “The visual appeal ofXYZ’s physical facilities is (much better, better, about the same, worse, muchworse) than I expected”. Lewis (1993) refers to work undertaken by Orledge whohas also experimented with an alternative method of combining perceptions andexpectations. He combined the two elements as in the following example:
Indicate on the scale using a “P” how well dressed the staff of company XYZ are. On the samescale indicate using an “E” how well dressed you expect the staff of companies in this industryto be.
smart____:____:__E_:____:____:__P_:____untidy
Bouman and van der Wiele (1992) also comment on the same problem. Babakusand Boller (1992), and Babakus et al. (1993b) solved the problem by employing asingle seven-point scale to collect gap data. Recommended earlier by Carman(1990), the scale ranges from 7 = “greatly exceeds my expectations” to 1 = “greatlyfalls short of my expectations”.
Clow and Vorhies (1993) argue: When expectations and experience evaluations are measured simultaneously, respondents willindicate that their expectations are greater than they actually were before the service encounter.
They contend that expectations must be measured prior to receipt of servicesotherwise responses will be biased. Specifically, Clow and Vorhies found that:
Customers who had a negative experience with the service tend to overstate their expectations,creating a larger gap; customers who had a positive experience tend to understate theirexpectations, resulting in smaller gaps.
Variance extracted. Fornell and Larcker (1981) have suggested that “varianceextracted” should be stringently employed as a measure of construct validity.Parasuraman et al. (1988) reported that the total amount of variance extracted bythe five RATER factors in the bank, credit-card, repair and maintenance, andlong-distance telephone samples was 56.0 per cent, 57.5 per cent, 61.6 per cent and56.2 per cent respectively. Parasuraman et al. (1991a) report variance explained ina telephone company, insurance company 1, insurance company 2, bank 1 andbank 2 at 67.2 per cent, 68.3 per cent, 70.9 per cent, 71.6 per cent and 66.9 per cent,respectively. When the samples are combined, variance explained is 67.9 per cent.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
24
Babakus and Boller’s (1992) utility-sector replication reported 58.3 per cent.Carman’s (1990) modified replication in the hospital sector, tyre store, businessschool placement centre and dental clinic reported 71 per cent, 61 per cent, 75 percent and 71 per cent respectively. Saleh and Ryan’s (1992) modified replication inthe hotel sector reported 78.6 per cent. Bouman and van der Wiele’s (1992)modified replication in car servicing reported 40.7 per cent only. Generally, themodified scales tended to produce higher levels of variance extracted. The higherthe variance extracted, the more valid is the measure.
ConclusionSERVQUAL has undoubtedly had a major impact on the business and academiccommunities.
This review has identified a number of theoretical and operational issues whichshould concern users of the instrument. Since the most serious of these areconcerned with face validity and construct validity, this conclusion briefly reviewsthe nature and significance of validity.
Face validity is concerned with the extent to which a scale appears to measurewhat it purports to measure.
Construct validity generally:is used to refer to the vertical correspondence between a construct which is at an unobservable,conceptual level and a purported measure of it which is at an operational level. In an ideal sense,the term means that a measure assesses the magnitude and direction of (1) all of the characteristicsand (2) only the characteristics of the construct it is purported to assess (Peter, 1981, emphasesadded).
In particular, the concerns about the adoption of an inappropriate paradigm, thegaps model, SERVQUAL’s process orientation, and SERVQUAL’s dimensionality(the four theoretical criticisms as listed earlier) are construct validity issues.
Critical face and construct validity questions which SERVQUAL researchersface are: Do consumers actually evaluate SQ in terms of expectations andperceptions? Do the five RATER dimensions incorporate the full range of SQattributes? Do consumers incorporate “outcome” evaluations into theirassessments of SQ?
Construct validity is itself a composite of several forms of validity: nomologicalvalidity, convergent validity and discriminant validity.
Nomological validity is the extent to which a measure correlates in theoreticallypredictable ways with measures of different but related constructs. SQ is one of anumber of apparently interrelated constructs whose precise alignment has yet tobe explored. Included in the nomological net are customer (dis)satisfaction,customer retention and defection, behavioural intention, attitude to serviceprovider or organization, and service provider or organization choice. Someresearch into these questions has been published (Parasuraman et al., 1991b;Richard and Allaway, 1993) but the relationships have yet to be explored fully.
Convergent validity is the extent to which a scale correlates with othermeasures of the same construct. A high level of intercorrelation between itemscomprising each RATER dimension would indicate high convergent validity
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
25
internal to SERVQUAL. A high level of correlation between SERVQUAL scoresand a different, reliable and valid measure of SQ, would indicate a high level ofexternal convergent validity. Discriminant validity is the extent to which ameasure does not correlate with other measures from which it is purported todiffer. If SQ evaluations were composed of five distinct RATER dimensions, onewould expect little correlation between the five factors. SERVQUAL’sdimensionality would be regarded as more stable if individual items loaded on tothe dimensions to which they belong.
Issues of face and construct validity are of overriding importance in thedevelopment of instruments such as SERVQUAL. The operational criticisms areevidently less significant than the theoretical criticisms, and pose less of a threatto validity. The theoretical criticisms raised in this article are of such moment thatthe validity of the instrument must be called into question.
Despite these shortcomings, SERVQUAL seems to be moving rapidly towardsinstitutionalized status. As Rust and Zahorik (1993) have observed, “the generalSERVQUAL dimensions … should probably be put on any first pass as a list ofattributes of service”.
These criticisms indicate that there is still a need for fundamental research.There are still doubts about whether customers routinely assess SQ in terms ofExpectations and Perceptions; there are doubts about the utility andappropriateness of the disconfirmation paradigm; there are doubts about thedimensionality of SQ; there are doubts about the universality of the five RATERdimensions. These are serious concerns which are not only significant for users ofSERVQUAL but for all those who wish to understand better the concept of SQ.
Directions for future researchThis review has raised several conceptual and operational difficultiessurrounding SERVQUAL which are yet to be resolved. The following representa set of questions which SQ researchers should address:
(1) Do consumers always evaluate SQ in terms of expectations andperceptions? What other forms of SQ evaluation are there?
(2) What form do customer expectations take and how best, if at all, are theymeasured? Are expectations common across a class of service providers?
(3) Do attitude-based measures of SQ perform better than the disconfirmationmodel? Which attitudinal measure is most useful?
(4) Is it advantageous to integrate outcome evaluations into SQ measurementand how best can this be done?
(5) Is the predictive validity of P measures of service quality better than thatof P – E measures?
(6) What are the relationships between SQ, customer satisfaction,behavioural intention, purchase behaviour, market share, word-of-mouthand customer retention?
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
26
(7) What is the role of context in determining E and P evaluations? Whatcontext-markers do consumers employ?
(8) Are analytical context markers such as tangibility and consumerinvolvement helpful in advancing SQ theory?
• Do evaluative criteria in intangible-dominant services (e.g. consulting)differ from those in tangible-dominant services (e.g. hotels)?
• How does involvement influence the evaluation of SQ?
(9) How do customers integrate transaction-specific or MOT-specificevaluations of SQ? To what extent are some MOTs more influential in thefinal evaluation than others?
(10) What are the relationships between the five RATER factors? How stableare those relationships across context?
(11) What is the most appropriate scale format for collecting valid and reliableSQ data?
(12) To what extent can customers correctly classify items into their a prioridimensions?
Answers to questions such as these would help improve our understanding of theservice quality construct and assess the value of the SERVQUAL instrument.Even in its present state SERVQUAL is a helpful operationalization of a somewhatnebulous construct.
Many of these questions require contextually sensitive qualitative research. Thefirst question, “Do consumers always evaluate SQ in terms of expectations andperceptions?”, is perhaps best approached through in-depth case analyses ofparticular service encounters. The formation of expectations implies a consumerwho accumulates and processes information about a class of service providers.This would appear to make prima facie sense for high-cost, high-risk services, e.g.if purchasing a weekend break to celebrate 25 years of wedded bliss. Is it as likelythat expectations high in cognitive content would be formed for a low-cost, low-risk service such as a hot drink from a coffee shop? The role of context appears tohave been repressed or subjugated in the present body of SERVQUAL research.Context needs to be recovered.
Other questions lend themselves to multisectoral comparative analyses. Forexample, the question, “Is the predictive validity of P-measures of SQ better thanthat of P – E measures?”, is perhaps best approached in multi-sectoral studywhich thoroughly tests the predictive performance of P and P – E SQ measures.
Pursuit of this research agenda would surely strengthen our understanding ofthe meaning, measurement and management of service quality. Parasuraman,Zeithaml and Berry have undoubtedly done a splendid job of marketingSERVQUAL’s measurement and management technologies. It remains to be seenwhether its dominance will remain unchallenged.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
27
Notes1. The mnemonic RATER is a helpful aide mèmoire, where R = reliability, A = assurance,
T = tangibles, E = empathy and R = responsiveness. 2. Richard and Allaway’s (1993) research was largely focused on testing SERVQUAL’s
predictive validity. Parasuraman et al. (1991b) have also tested the predictive validity of themodified SERVQUAL scale. Customers in five samples were asked three questions: Haveyou recently had a service problem with the company? If you have experienced a problem,was it resolved to your satisfaction? Would you recommend the service firm to a friend? Itwas hypothesized that positive answers to these questions would be correlated negatively,positively and positively, respectively, with higher perceived SQ scores. All results werestatistically significant in the hypothesized direction, lending support to the predictivevalidity of the instrument.
3. Babakus and Boller (1992) have expressed concern that it is unclear whether SERVQUALis measuring a number of distinct constructs or a single, global, more abstract variable.
4. Cronin and Taylor (1992), following a test of SERVQUAL in four classes of service firm,conclude in stark contrast that “the five-component structure proposed by Parasuraman,Zeithaml and Berry (1988) for their SERVQUAL scale is not confirmed”.
5. Babakus and Mangold’s (1992) research into hospital SQ identified three factors within theexpectations data, accounting for 56.2 per cent of the variance in the item scores, twofactors within the perceptions data (70.6 per cent) and “no meaningful factor structure”within the difference or gaps data.
6. Customer kindness, that is “the front office personnel’s approach to the customer and hisproblems, regardless of the service delivered”, was the only factor to have a significantrelationship with future car servicing intentions, future car purchase intentions, and word-of-mouth recommendation.
7. Carman’s Security factor is composed of Credibility, Security and Competence.Parasuraman et al. (1988) had incorporated these three components, together withCommunication and Courtesy, into the factor Assurance.
8. For a discussion of construct, convergent and discriminant validity see Churchill (1979)and Peter (1981).
References and further readingAndersson, T.D. (1992), “Another model of service quality: a model of causes and effects of service
quality tested on a case within the restaurant industry”, in Kunst, P. and Lemmink, J. (Eds),Quality Management in Service, van Gorcum, The Netherlands, pp. 41-58.
Aubry, C.A. and Zimbler, D.A. (1983), “The banking industry: quality costs and improvement”,Quality Progress, December, pp. 16-20.
Babakus, E. and Boller, G.W. (1992), “An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale”, Journalof Business Research, Vol. 24, pp. 253-68.
Babakus, E. and Inhofe, M. (1991), “The role of expectations and attribute importance in themeasurement of service quality”, in Gilly, M.C. et al. (Eds), Proceedings of the SummerEducators’ Conference, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 142-4.
Babakus, E. and Mangold, W.G. (1992), “Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: anempirical investigation”, Health Services Research, Vol. 26 No. 2, February, pp. 767-86.
Babakus, E., Pedrick, D.L. and Inhofe, M. (1993b), “Empirical examination of a direct measure ofperceived service quality using SERVQUAL items”, unpublished manuscript, Memphis StateUniversity, TN.
Babakus, E., Pedrick, D.L. and Richardson, A. (1993a), “Measuring perceived service qualitywithin the airline catering service industry”, unpublished manuscript, Memphis StateUniversity, TN.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
28
Baker, J.A. and Lamb, C.W. Jr (1993), “Managing architectural design service quality”, Journal ofProfessional Services Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 89-106.
Bolton, R.N. and Drew, J.H. (1991), “A multistage model of customers’ assessment of servicequality and value”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17, March, pp. 375-84.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1993), “A dynamic process model of servicequality: from expectations to behavioral intentions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30,February, pp. 7-27.
Bouman, M. and van der Wiele, T. (1992), “Measuring service quality in the car service industry:building and testing an instrument”, International Journal of Service Industry Management,Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 4-16.
Brown, T.J., Churchill, G.A. and Peter, J.P. (1993), “Improving the measurement of service quality”,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 69 No. 1, Spring, pp. 127-39.
Buzzell, R.D. and Gale, B.T. (1987), The PIMS Principles, Free Press, New York, NY.Carman, J.M. (1990), “Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL
dimensions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 1, Spring, pp. 33-5.Churchill, G.A. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19, February, pp. 64-73.Churchill, G.A. and Surprenant, C. (1982), “An investigation into the determinants of customer
satisfaction”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19, pp. 491-504.Clow, K.E. and Vorhies, D.E. (1993), “Building a competitive advantage for service firms”, Journal
of Services Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 22-3.Cronin, J.J. Jr and Taylor, S.A. (1992), “Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, July, pp. 55-68.Cronin, J.J. Jr and Taylor, S.A. (1994), “SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: reconciling performance-
based and perceptions-minus expectations measurement of service quality”, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 58, January, pp. 125-31.
Crosby, P.B. (1979), Quality Is Free, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.Fick, G.R. and Ritchie, J.R.B. (1991), “Measuring service quality in the travel and tourism
industry”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, Autumn, pp. 2-9.Ford, J.W., Joseph, M. and Joseph, B. (1993), “Service quality in higher education: a comparison of
universities in the United States and New Zealand using SERVQUAL”, unpublishedmanuscript, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA.
Fornell, C. and Larcker D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, February, pp. 39-50.
Fort, M. (1993), “Customer defined attributes of service quality in the IBM mid-range computersoftware industry”, unpublished MBA dissertation, Manchester Business School, Manchester.
Freeman, K.D. and Dart, J. (1993), “Measuring the perceived quality of professional businessservices, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 27-47.
Gagliano, K.B. and Hathcote, J. (1994), “Customer expectations and perceptions of service qualityin apparel retailing”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 60-9.
Grönroos, C. (1982), Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector, Swedish Schoolof Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki.
Grönroos, C. (1984), “A service quality model and its marketing implications”, European Journalof Marketing, Vol. 18, pp. 36-44.
Grönroos, C. (1993), “Toward a third phase in service quality research: challenges and futuredirections”, in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E. and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advances in ServicesMarketing and Management, Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 49-64.
Hardie, B.G.S., Johnson, E.J. and Fader, P.S. (1992), “Modelling loss aversion and referencedependence effects on brand choice”, working paper, Wharton School, University ofPennsylvania, PA.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
29
Hedvall, M.-B. and Paltschik, M. (1989), “An investigation in, and generation of, service qualityconcepts”, in Avlonitis, G.J. et al. (Eds), Marketing Thought and Practice in the 1990s,European Marketing Academy, Athens, pp. 473-83.
Higgins, L.F., Ferguson, J.M. and Winston, J.M. (1991), “Understanding and assessing servicequality in health maintenance organizations”, Health Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 9, Nos 1-2, pp. 5-20.
Iacobucci, D., Grayson, K.A. and Omstrom, A.L. (1994), “The calculus of service quality andcustomer satisfaction: theoretical and empirical differentiation and integration”, in Swartz,T.A., Bowen, D.E. and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advances in Services Marketing and Management,Vol. 3, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 1-68.
Johns, N. (1993), “Quality management in the hospitality industry, part 3: recent developments”,International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 10-15.
Juran, J.M. (1951), Quality Control Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.Kahneman, D. and Miller, D.T. (1986), “Norm theory: comparing reality to its alternatives”,
Psychological Review, Vol. 93, pp. 136-53.Kong, R. and Mayo, M.C. (1993), “Measuring service quality in the business-to-business context”,
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 5-15.Kwon, W. and Lee, T.J. (1994), “Measuring service quality in Singapore retail banking”, Singapore
Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, July, pp. 1-24.Leblanc, G. and Nguyen, N. (1988), “Customers’ perceptions of service quality in financial
institutions”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 7-18.Lehtinen, J.R. and Lehtinen, O. (1982), “Service quality: a study of quality dimensions”,
unpublished working paper, Service Management Institute, Helsinki.Lewis, B.R. (1993), “Service quality measurement”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 11
No. 4, pp. 4-12.Lord, F.M. (1963), “Elementary models for measuring change”, in Harris, C.W. (Ed.), Problems in
Measuring Change, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, pp. 22-38.McElwee, G. and Redman, T. (1993), “Upward appraisal in practice: an illustrative example using
the QUALED scale”, Education and Training, Vol. 35 No. 2, December, pp. 27-31.Mangold, G.W. and Babakus, E. (1991), “Service quality: the front-stage perspective vs the back
stage perspective”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 4, Autumn, pp. 59-70.Masser, W.J. (1957), “The quality manager and quality costs”, Industrial Quality Control, Vol. 14,
pp. 5-8.Oliver, R.L. (1980), “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction
decisions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, November, pp. 460-9.Oliver, R.L. (1993), “A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction: compatible
goals, different concepts”, in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E. and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advances inServices Marketing and Management, Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 65-85.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1990), An Empirical Examination ofRelationships in an Extended Service Quality Model, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge,MA.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1991a), “Perceived service quality as a customer-based performance measure: an empirical examination of organizational barriers using anextended service quality model”, Human Resource Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, Autumn,pp. 335-64.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality andits implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, Autumn, pp. 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1986), “SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale formeasuring customer perceptions of service quality”, Report No. 86-108, Marketing ScienceInstitute, Cambridge, MA.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
30
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale formeasuring consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, Spring, pp. 12-40.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1991b), “Refinement and reassessment of theSERVQUAL scale”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 420-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1993), “Research note: more on improving servicequality measurement”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 69 No. 1, Spring, pp. 140-7.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L.L. (1994), “Reassessment of expectations as acomparison standard in measuring service quality: implications for future research”, Journalof Marketing, Vol. 58, January, pp. 111-24.
Peter, J.P. (1981), “Construct validity: a review of basic issues and marketing practices”, Journal ofMarketing Research, Vol. 18, May, pp. 133-45.
Reichheld, F.F. and Sasser, W.E. Jr (1990), “Zero defections: quality comes to service”, HarvardBusiness Review, September-October, pp. 105-11.
Reidenbach, R.E. and Sandifer-Smallwood, B. (1990), “Exploring perceptions of hospitaloperations by a modified SERVQUAL approach”, Journal of Health Care Marketing, Vol. 10No. 4, December, pp. 47-55.
Richard, M.D. and Allaway, A.W. (1993), “Service quality attributes and choice behavior”, Journalof Service Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 59-68.
Rigotti, S. and Pitt, L. (1992), “SERVQUAL as a measuring instrument for service provider gapsin business schools”, Management Research News, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 9-17.
Rust, R.T. and Zahorik, A.J. (1993), “Customer satisfaction, customer retention and market share”,Journal of Retailing, Vol. 69 No. 2, Summer, pp. 193-215.
Saleh, F. and Ryan, C. (1992), “Analysing service quality in the hospitality industry using theSERVQUAL model”, Services Industries Journal, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 324-43.
Scott, D. and Shieff, D. (1993), “Service quality components and group criteria in localgovernment”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 42-53.
Soliman, A.A. (1992), “Assessing the quality of health care”, Health Care Marketing, Vol. 10Nos 1-2, pp. 121-41.
Spreng, R.A. and Singh, A.K. (1993), “An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale and therelationship between service quality and satisfaction”, unpublished manuscript, MichiganState University, TN.
Taylor, S.A., Sharland, A., Cronin, A.A. Jr and Bullard, W. (1993), “Recreational quality in theinternational setting”, International Journal of Service Industries Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 68-88.
Teas, K.R. (1993a), “Expectations, performance evaluation and consumers’ perceptions ofquality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 4, pp. 18-24.
Teas, K.R. (1993b), “Consumer expectations and the measurement of perceived service quality”,Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 33-53.
Teas, K.R. (1994), “Expectations as a comparison standard in measuring service quality: anassessment of a reassessment”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, January, pp. 132-9.
Vandamme, R. and Leunis, J. (1993), “Development of a multiple-item scale for measuring hospitalservice quality”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 30-49.
Walbridge, S.W. and Delene, L.M. (1993), “Measuring physician attitudes of service quality”,Journal of Health Care Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 4, Winter, pp. 6-15.
Wason, P.J. and Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1972), Psychology of Reasoning; Structure and Content, B.T.Batsford, London.
Woodruff, R.B., Cadotte, E.R. and Jenkins, R.L. (1983), “Modeling consumer satisfaction processesusing experience-based norms”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 20, pp. 296-304.
Wong, S.M. and Perry, C. (1991), “Customer service strategies in financial retailing”, InternationalJournal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 11-16.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
SERVQUAL:review, critique,research agenda
31
Wotruba, T.R. and Tyagi, P.K. (1991), “Met expectations and turnover in direct selling”, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 55, pp. 24-35.
Zahorik, A.J. and Rust R.T. (1992), “Modeling the impact of service quality of profitability: areview”, in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E. and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advances in Services Marketingand Management, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 49-64.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means-end model andsynthesis of evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52, July, pp. 2-22.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1991), “The nature and determinants ofcustomer expectations of service”, working paper 91-113, Marketing Science Institute,Cambridge, MA.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1993), “The nature and determinants ofcustomer expectation of service”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 21 No. 1,pp. 1-12.
Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Berry, L.L. (1990), Delivering Quality Service: BalancingCustomer Perceptions and Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.
Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Berry, L.L. (1992), “Strategic positioning on the dimensionsof service quality”, in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E. and Brown, S.W. (Eds), Advances in ServicesMarketing and Management, Vol. 2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 207-28.
Appendix. Ten components of service quality
(1) Reliability involves consistency of performance and dependability. It also means that thefirm performs the service right first time and honours its promises. Specifically, it mayinvolve:• accuracy in billing;• performing the service at the designated time.
(2) Responsiveness concerns the willingness or readiness of employees to provide service. Itmay involve:• mailing a transaction slip immediately;• calling the customer back quickly;• giving prompt service (e.g. setting up appointments quickly).
(3) Competence means possession of the required skills and knowledge to perform theservice. It involves:• knowledge and skill of the contact personnel;• knowledge and skill of operational support personnel;• research capability of the organization.
(4) Access involves approachability and ease of contact. It may mean:• the service is easily accessible by telephone;• waiting time to receive service is not extensive;• convenient hours of operation and convenient location of service facility.
(5) Courtesy involves politeness, respect, consideration, and friendliness of contact personnel(including receptionists, telephone operators, etc.). It includes:• consideration for the consumers property;• clean and neat appearance of public contact personnel.
(6) Communication means keeping customers informed in language they can understand,and listening to them. It may mean that the company has to adjust its language fordifferent customers. It may involve:• explaining the service itself and how much the service will cost;• explaining the trade-offs between service and cost; • assuring the consumer that a problem will be handled.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
EuropeanJournal of Marketing30,1
32
(7) Credibil ity involves trustworthiness, believability, honesty. It involves having thecustomer’s best interests at heart. Contributing to credibility are:• company name and reputation;• personal characteristics of the contact personnel;• the degree of hard sell involved in interactions with the customer.
(8) Security is the freedom from danger, risk, or doubt. It may involve:• physical safety;• financial security and confidentiality.
(9) Understanding/knowing the customer involves making the effort to understand thecustomer’s needs. It involves:• learning the customer’s specific requirements;• providing individualized attention.
(10) Tangibles include the physical evidence of the service:• physical facilities and appearance of personnel;• tools or equipment used to provide the service;• physical representations of the service, such as a plastic credit card.
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
This article has been cited by:
1. David A Hensher. 2015. Customer service quality and benchmarking in public transport contracts. International Journal ofQuality Innovation 1. . [CrossRef]
2. George I. Kassinis, Andreas C. Soteriou. 2015. Environmental and quality practices: using a video method to explore theirrelationship with customer satisfaction in the hotel industry. Operations Management Research 8, 142-156. [CrossRef]
3. Ana Brochado, Paulo Rita, Carlos Gameiro. 2015. Exploring backpackers’ perceptions of the hostel service quality.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 27:8, 1839-1855. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Muhammad Ali, Syed Ali Raza. 2015. Service quality perception and customer satisfaction in Islamic banks of Pakistan: themodified SERVQUAL model. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1-19. [CrossRef]
5. Hung-Che Wu, Chi-Han Ai, Lei-Jiao Yang, Tao Li. 2015. A Study of Revisit Intentions, Customer Satisfaction, CorporateImage, Emotions and Service Quality in the Hot Spring Industry. Journal of China Tourism Research 11, 371-401. [CrossRef]
6. Sung Ho Han, Bang Nguyen, Timothy J. Lee. 2015. Consumer-based chain restaurant brand equity, brand reputation, andbrand trust. International Journal of Hospitality Management 50, 84-93. [CrossRef]
7. Sooyoung Yoo, Kee-Hyuck Lee, Hyunyoung Baek, Borim Ryu, Eunja Chung, Kidong Kim, Jay Chaeyong Yi, Soo Beom Park,Hee Hwang. 2015. Development and User Research of a Smart Bedside Station System toward Patient-Centered HealthcareSystem. Journal of Medical Systems 39. . [CrossRef]
8. Sonali Jain, Sanjay K. Jain. 2015. Does outcome quality matter? An investigation in the context of banking services in anemerging market. Journal of Consumer Marketing 32:5, 341-355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
9. Alok Kumar Singh. 2015. Modeling passengers’ future behavioral intentions in airline industry using SEM. Journal of Advancesin Management Research 12:2, 107-127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Ping Wang, Kuo-Ming Chao, Chi-Chun Lo. 2015. Satisfaction-based Web service discovery and selection scheme utilizingvague sets theory. Information Systems Frontiers 17, 827-844. [CrossRef]
11. Gjoko Stamenkov, Zamir Dika. 2015. A sustainable e-service quality model. Journal of Service Theory and Practice 25:4,414-442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
12. Neale J. Slack, Gurmeet Singh. 2015. Public Sector Reforms and Service Quality Issues From the Perspective of the SmallIsland Developing States in the Pacific: A Case of Fiji. International Journal of Public Administration 1-12. [CrossRef]
13. Carmen Tabernero, Esther Cuadrado, Bárbara Luque, Elisabetta Signoria, Roberto Prota. 2015. The importance of achievinga high customer satisfaction with recycling services in communities. Environment, Development and Sustainability . [CrossRef]
14. I Gede Mahatma Yuda Bakti, Sik Sumaedi. 2015. P-TRANSQUAL: a service quality model of public land transport services.International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32:6, 534-558. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Asad Mohsin, Jorge Lengler. 2015. Service experience through the eyes of budget hotel guests: Do factors of importanceinfluence performance dimensions?. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 23, 23-34. [CrossRef]
16. Veljko Marinkovic, Vladimir Obradovic. 2015. Customers’ emotional reactions in the banking industry. International Journalof Bank Marketing 33:3, 243-260. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Vinaysing Ramessur, Dinesh Kumar Hurreeram, Kaylasson Maistry. 2015. Service quality framework for clinical laboratories.International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 28:4, 367-381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
18. Durdana Ozretic-Dosen, Ines Zizak. 2015. Measuring the quality of banking services targeting student population. EuroMedJournal of Business 10:1, 98-117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
19. Faizan Ali, Bidit Lal Dey, Raffaele Filieri. 2015. An assessment of service quality and resulting customer satisfaction in PakistanInternational Airlines. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32:5, 486-502. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
20. Gajewska Teresa, Grigoroudis EvangelosImportance of logistics services attributes influencing customer satisfaction 53-58.[CrossRef]
21. Eva Sramkova, Eduard Niko, Petr Kolar, James HunakDecision-making factors leading to customers' satisfaction in containertransportation 105-110. [CrossRef]
22. Ana Lúcia Martins, José Crespo de Carvalho, Tânia Ramos, Joana Fael. 2015. Assessing Obstetrics Perceived Service Qualityat a Public Hospital. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 181, 414-422. [CrossRef]
23. Yung-Tai Tang, James O. Stanworth, Wei-Ting Chen, Siao-Wei Huang, Hsin-Hung Wu. 2015. Toward a measure ofChinese hypermarket retail service quality. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 26, 327-338. [CrossRef]
24. Cristian Roberto Santos, Ana María Contreras, Cesar Faúndez, Gonzalo Francisco Palomo-Vélez. 2015. Adapting theSERVQUAL model to a physical activity break satisfaction scale. International Journal of Workplace Health Management 8:1,34-45. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
25. Hasan Albeshr, Syed Zamberi Ahmad. 2015. Service innovation by Dubai International Airport: the battle to remaincompetitive. Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies 5:1, 1-23. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
26. Ernest Emeka Izogo, Ike-Elechi Ogba. 2015. Service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in automobile repair servicessector. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 32:3, 250-269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
27. Eugenia Y. Huang, Sheng-Wei Lin, Ya-Chu Fan. 2015. M-S-QUAL: Mobile service quality measurement. ElectronicCommerce Research and Applications 14, 126-142. [CrossRef]
28. Katerina Berezina, Anil Bilgihan, Cihan Cobanoglu, Fevzi Okumus. 2015. Understanding Satisfied and Dissatisfied HotelCustomers: Text Mining of Online Hotel Reviews. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 150227092510002.[CrossRef]
29. Dennis A Rauch, Michael Dwain Collins, Robert D Nale, Peter B. Barr. 2015. Measuring service quality in mid-scale hotels.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 27:1, 87-106. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
30. Saeid Saeida Ardakani, Majid Nejatian, Mohammad Ali Farhangnejad, Mehran Nejati. 2015. A fuzzy approach to servicequality diagnosis. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 33:1, 103-119. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
31. Munmun Koley, Subhranil Saha, Jogendra Singh Arya, Gurudev Choubey, Aloke Ghosh, Kaushik Deb Das, SubhasishGanguly, Samit Dey, Shubhamoy Ghosh, Goutam Nag, Swaif Ali, Sangita Saha, Kajal Bhattacharyya, Rakesh Singh. 2015.Patient evaluation of service quality in government homeopathic hospitals in West Bengal, India: a cross-sectional survey.Focus on Alternative and Complementary Therapies n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
32. Chaminda Jayasundara. 2015. Business Domains for Boosting Customer Satisfaction in Academic Libraries. The Journal ofAcademic Librarianship . [CrossRef]
33. Barbara R. LewisService Quality 1-3. [CrossRef]34. In Jae Cho, You Jin Kim, Choonjong Kwak. 2015. Application of SERVQUAL and fuzzy quality function deployment
to service improvement in service centres of electronics companies. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1-14.[CrossRef]
35. Huey-Kuo Chen. 2015. The Structural Interrelationships of Group Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction and BehavioralIntention for Bus Passengers. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 150106050212006. [CrossRef]
36. Jeri L. Jones, Mahmood Shandiz. 2015. Service Quality Expectations: Exploring the Importance of SERVQUAL Dimensionsfrom Different Nonprofit Constituent Groups. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing 27, 48-69. [CrossRef]
37. Yongyoon Suh, Jeonghwan Jeon. 2015. Do integrated products and services increase customer satisfaction? The case of themobile industry in Korea. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 1. [CrossRef]
38. Amitava MitraPremium for Service Contracts for Damage Protection 73-87. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]39. Wei-Tsong Wang, Wen-Hung Chang. 2014. A study of virtual product consumption from the expectancy disconfirmation
and symbolic consumption perspectives. Information Systems Frontiers 16, 887-908. [CrossRef]40. Cigdem Basfirinci, Amitava Mitra. 2014. A cross cultural investigation of airlines service quality through integration of
Servqual and the Kano model. Journal of Air Transport Management . [CrossRef]41. Seyedvahid Najafi, Saber Saati, Madjid Tavana. 2014. Data envelopment analysis in service quality evaluation: an empirical
study. Journal of Industrial Engineering International . [CrossRef]42. Satyakama Paul, Bhekisipho Twala, Tshilidzi MarwalaModeling after sales customer satisfaction using multinomial logistic
regression insights from a South African car company 900-905. [CrossRef]43. Felix Arion, Iulia Muresan. 2014. Research Tool for Estimating the Tourism Quality for Sustainable Development.
International Journal of Sustainable Economies Management 1:10.4018/IJSEM.20121001, 1-9. [CrossRef]44. Rahim Hussain, Amjad Al Nasser, Yomna K. Hussain. 2014. Service quality and customer satisfaction of a UAE-based airline:
An empirical investigation. Journal of Air Transport Management . [CrossRef]45. Jin-Soo Lee, Choong-Ki Lee, Chang-Kyu Park. 2014. Developing and validating a multidimensional quality scale for mega-
events. International Journal of Hospitality Management 43, 121-131. [CrossRef]46. Ye Ren, Desmond Lam. 2014. An investigation into the link between service quality dimensionality and positive word-of-
mouth intention in Mainland China. Journal of Marketing Communications 1-11. [CrossRef]47. Daniel Rareş Obadă. 2014. Online Flow Experience and Perceived Quality of a Brand Website: InPascani.ro Case Study.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 149, 673-679. [CrossRef]48. Edwin N. Torres. 2014. Deconstructing Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction: Challenges and Directions for Future
Research. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 23, 652-677. [CrossRef]49. Ismail Bakan, Tuba Buyukbese, Burcu Ersahan. 2014. The impact of total quality service (TQS) on healthcare and patient
satisfaction: An empirical study of Turkish private and public hospitals. The International Journal of Health Planning andManagement 29:10.1002/hpm.v29.3, 292-315. [CrossRef]
50. Yong Li. 2014. Service Quality Measurement Using Fuzzy AHP-Based Approach. Journal of Computers 9. . [CrossRef]51. Tony Schellinck, Mary R. Brooks. 2014. Improving port effectiveness through determinance/performance gap analysis.
Maritime Policy & Management 41, 328-345. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
52. Alan Edward Baldwin. 2014. Service quality in an Australian private dental network. The TQM Journal 26:4, 360-367.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
53. Hakyeon Lee, Chulhyun Kim. 2014. Benchmarking of service quality with data envelopment analysis. Expert Systems withApplications 41, 3761-3768. [CrossRef]
54. Gurel Cetin, Fusun Istanbullu Dincer. 2014. Influence of customer experience on loyalty and word-of-mouth in hospitalityoperations. Anatolia 25, 181-194. [CrossRef]
55. Gyan Prakash. 2014. QoS in the internal supply chain: the next lever of competitive advantage and organisational performance.Production Planning & Control 25, 572-591. [CrossRef]
56. Michiharu KudoOperational Work Pattern Discovery Based on Human Behavior Analysis 90-97. [CrossRef]57. Hadi Teimouri, Shirin Rafiei Samani, Soroosh Emami, Shiva HamidipourStudying the Key indicators of e-service quality
in success of e-commerce 1-8. [CrossRef]58. Stefan Cronholm, Nicklas Salomonson. 2014. Measures that matters: service quality in IT service management. International
Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 6:1, 60-76. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]59. Amran Rasli, Fakhri Baghirov, Bandar AlHerthey, Nadhirah Norhalim, Mohammad AliPerception of service quality and
satisfaction in higher education 559-565. [CrossRef]60. Suleyman M. Yildiz. 2014. Service quality evaluation in the school of physical education and sports: An empirical investigation
of students' perceptions. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 25, 80-94. [CrossRef]61. P.P. Wang, X.G. Ming, Z.Y. Wu, M.K. Zheng, Z.T. Xu. 2014. Research on industrial product–service configuration driven
by value demands based on ontology modeling. Computers in Industry 65, 247-257. [CrossRef]62. Costel Iliuţă Negricea, Tudor Edu, Emanuela Maria Avram. 2014. Establishing Influence of Specific Academic Quality on
Student Satisfaction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 116, 4430-4435. [CrossRef]63. Mu-Chen Chen, Chia-Lin Hsu, Chih-Ming Hsu, Ying-Yi Lee. 2014. Ensuring the quality of e-shopping specialty foods
through efficient logistics service. Trends in Food Science & Technology 35, 69-82. [CrossRef]64. Obadă Daniel Rareş. 2014. Measuring Perceived Service Quality Offline vs. Online: A New PeSQ Conceptual Model. Procedia
Economics and Finance 15, 538-551. [CrossRef]65. Yong Li, Zhikun ZhangApplication of FAHP Approach to Assess Service Quality 475-480. [CrossRef]66. G.N. Akhade, S.B. Jaju, R.R. LakheA Review on Healthcare Service Quality Dimensions 126-127. [CrossRef]67. M Mustapha, A Jalil, F Basri, Z MohiService quality dimension of low cost airline in Malaysia 193-197. [CrossRef]68. Joona Keränen, Anne Jalkala. 2013. Towards a framework of customer value assessment in B2B markets: An exploratory
study. Industrial Marketing Management 42, 1307-1317. [CrossRef]69. Shih-Chang Tseng, Shiu-Wan Hung. 2013. A framework identifying the gaps between customers' expectations and their
perceptions in green products. Journal of Cleaner Production 59, 174-184. [CrossRef]70. Cristina Calvo-Porral, Jean-Pierre Lévy-Mangin, Isabel Novo-Corti. 2013. Perceived quality in higher education: an empirical
study. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 31:6, 601-619. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]71. Anestis K. Fotiadis, Chris A. Vassiliadis. 2013. The effects of a transfer to new premises on patients' perceptions of service
quality in a general hospital in Greece. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 24, 1022-1034. [CrossRef]72. Hyun-Suk Choi, Sea-Hya Ann. 2013. Service Quality of Rural Tourism Accommodation in South Korea. The Journal of
International Trade & Commerce 9, 241-253. [CrossRef]73. Prabha Ramseook-Munhurrun, Pushpa Nundlall. 2013. Service quality measurement for secondary school setting. Quality
Assurance in Education 21:4, 387-401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]74. A. Scott Rood, Joanna Dziadkowiec. 2013. Cross Cultural Service Gap Analysis: Comparing SERVQUAL Customers and
IPA Mystery Shoppers. Journal of Foodservice Business Research 16, 359-377. [CrossRef]75. Sung-Tai Hong, 김김김, 김김김, Woonbong Na. 2013. A study on the development of Service Brand Equity Model: Focused on
the comparison Service Brand Equity Model to SERVQUAL Model. Journal of Consumption Culture 16, 189-214. [CrossRef]76. Philemon Oyewole. 2013. The role of frequency of patronage and service quality of all-you-can-eat buffet restaurant: A
perspective of socio-economic and demographic characteristics of African American consumers. International Journal ofHospitality Management 34, 202-213. [CrossRef]
77. Sharaf Alkibsi, Mary Lind. 2013. Service Quality Dimensions Within Technology-Based Banking Services. InternationalJournal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications 2:10.4018/jsita.20110701, 36-83. [CrossRef]
78. Prodromos Chatzoglou, Dimitrios Chatzoudes, Eftichia Vraimaki, Anastasios Diamantidis. 2013. Service quality in the publicsector: the case of the Citizen's Service Centers (CSCs) of Greece. International Journal of Productivity and PerformanceManagement 62:6, 583-605. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
79. Dennis C.S. Law. 2013. Initial assessment of two questionnaires for measuring service quality in the Hong Kong post‐secondary education context. Quality Assurance in Education 21:3, 231-246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
80. Nien-Te Kuo, Kuo-Chien Chang, Yi-Sung Cheng, Chia-Hui Lai. 2013. Investigating the Effect of Service Quality onCustomer Loyalty in the Hotel Industry: The Mediating Role of Customer Satisfaction and the Moderating Roles of ServiceRecovery and Perceived Value. Journal of China Tourism Research 9, 257-276. [CrossRef]
81. Hung-Che Wu, Yong Jae Ko. 2013. Assessment of Service Quality in the Hotel Industry. Journal of Quality Assurance inHospitality & Tourism 14, 218-244. [CrossRef]
82. Mehdi Zaibaf, Fariz Taherikia, Meysam Fakharian. 2013. Effect of Perceived Service Quality on Customer Satisfaction inHospitality Industry: Gronroos’ Service Quality Model Development. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 22,490-504. [CrossRef]
83. Martin Williams, Francis Buttle. 2013. Managing Word-of-Mouth: A Nonprofit Case Study. Journal of Nonprofit & PublicSector Marketing 25, 284-308. [CrossRef]
84. Yogesh P. Pai, Satyanarayana T. Chary. 2013. Dimensions of hospital service quality: a critical review. International Journalof Health Care Quality Assurance 26:4, 308-340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
85. Arnoud Mouwen, Piet Rietveld. 2013. Does competitive tendering improve customer satisfaction with public transport? Acase study for the Netherlands. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 51, 29-45. [CrossRef]
86. Aleksandra Grobelna, Barbara Marciszewska. 2013. Measurement of Service Quality in the Hotel Sector: The Case ofNorthern Poland. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 22, 313-332. [CrossRef]
87. Veljko Marinković, Vladimir Senić, Milan Kocić, Srđan Šapić. 2013. Investigating the Impact of SERVQUAL Dimensionson Customer Satisfaction: The Lessons Learnt from Serbian Travel Agencies. International Journal of Tourism Research 15,184-196. [CrossRef]
88. Mong-Yuan Chang, Kuanchin Chen, Chuan Pang, Chien-Min Chen, David C. Yen. 2013. A study on the effects of serviceconvenience and service quality on maintenance revisit intentions. Computer Standards & Interfaces 35, 187-194. [CrossRef]
89. Muhammad Usman Awan, Khalid Mahmood. 2013. Development of a service quality model for academic libraries. Quality& Quantity 47, 1093-1103. [CrossRef]
90. Parves Sultan, Ho Yin Wong. 2013. Antecedents and consequences of service quality in a higher education context. QualityAssurance in Education 21:1, 70-95. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
91. Hussein M. Al‐Borie, Amal M. Sheikh Damanhouri. 2013. Patients' satisfaction of service quality in Saudi hospitals: aSERVQUAL analysis. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 26:1, 20-30. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
92. Ada Lo, Henry Tsai, Catherine Cheung. 2013. Service Quality of Casinos in Macau: From the Mainland Chinese Perspective.Journal of China Tourism Research 9, 94-114. [CrossRef]
93. Alet C. Erasmus, Andrea Grabowski. 2013. Female customers' expectation of the service offering and their perception of theservice quality in an emerging clothing market. International Journal of Consumer Studies 37:10.1111/ijcs.2013.37.issue-1,2-12. [CrossRef]
94. Akiko Ueno. 2013. Are Performance Appraisals and Reward Really a Contributory Factor to Service Quality?. ServicesMarketing Quarterly 34, 34-48. [CrossRef]
95. Hung-Che Wu, Ching-Chan Cheng. 2013. A hierarchical model of service quality in the airline industry. Journal of Hospitalityand Tourism Management 20, 13-22. [CrossRef]
96. Tsan-Ming Choi, Pui-Sze Chow, Bowood Kwok, Shuk-Ching Liu, Bin Shen. 2013. Service Quality of Online ShoppingPlatforms: A Case-Based Empirical and Analytical Study. Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2013, 1-9. [CrossRef]
97. Mu-Chen Chen, Chia-Lin Hsu, Ying-Yi LeeApplying quality function development to develop the home delivery servicemodel for specialty foods in traditional market 1741-1745. [CrossRef]
98. Don Jyh-Fu Jeng, Sky Fang-Wen Kuo. 2012. Internal service quality within the different Chinese subcultures: a comparisonbetween Taiwan, China, and Singapore. Service Business 6, 425-458. [CrossRef]
99. Serkan Altuntas, Türkay Dereli, Mustafa Kemal Yilmaz. 2012. Multi-criteria decision making methods based weightedSERVQUAL scales to measure perceived service quality in hospitals: a case study from Turkey. Total Quality Management& Business Excellence 23, 1379-1395. [CrossRef]
100. Veljko Marinković, Vladimir Senić. 2012. Loyalty patterns in corporate banking: insights gained from analysing willingnessto recommend and share of wallet concepts. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 23, 1465-1478. [CrossRef]
101. Girish Keshav Palshikar, Mohammed Mudassar, Harrick M. Vin, Maitreya NatuStreamlining Service Levels for ITInfrastructure Support 309-316. [CrossRef]
102. Fatma Pakdil, Feride Bahar Işın, Hande Genç. 2012. A quality function deployment application using qualitative andquantitative analysis in after sales services. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 23, 1397-1411. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
103. Miguel Morales, Riadh Ladhari, Javier Reynoso, Rosario Toro, Cesar Sepulveda. 2012. An independent assessment of theunidimensionality, reliability, validity and factor structure of the LibQUAL+™ scale. The Service Industries Journal 32,2585-2605. [CrossRef]
104. Hossein Dadfar, Staffan Brege. 2012. Differentiation by improving quality of services at the last touch point. InternationalJournal of Quality and Service Sciences 4:4, 345-363. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
105. Elisa Martinelli, Bernardo Balboni. 2012. Retail service quality as a key activator of grocery store loyalty. The Service IndustriesJournal 32, 2233-2247. [CrossRef]
106. Don Jyh‐Fu Jeng, Thomas Bailey. 2012. Assessing customer retention strategies in mobile telecommunications. ManagementDecision 50:9, 1570-1595. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
107. Ann Marie Ryan, Robert E. PloyhartCustomer Service Behavior . [CrossRef]108. Salih Turan Katircioglu, Salime Mehtap‐Smadi, Ceyhun Kilinç, Doğan Ünlücan. 2012. Service quality and university students'
satisfaction on the travel agencies. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 4:3, 299-311. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]
109. Ching-Fu Chen, Lee-Ting Cheng. 2012. A study on mobile phone service loyalty in Taiwan. Total Quality Management& Business Excellence 23, 807-819. [CrossRef]
110. Soudabe Saraei, Amir M. Amini. 2012. A study of service quality in rural ICT renters of Iran by SERVQUAL.Telecommunications Policy 36, 571-578. [CrossRef]
111. H. M. Tuihedur Rahman, Shrabanti Rani Shil. 2012. Measuring service satisfaction of young tourists: a case study ofLawachara National Park, Bangladesh. Anatolia 23, 196-206. [CrossRef]
112. Christer Strandberg, Olof Wahlberg, Peter Öhman. 2012. Challenges in serving the mass affluent segment: bank customerperceptions of service quality. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 22:4, 359-385. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
113. Wai-Ching Poon, Christina Kwai-Choi Lee. 2012. E-Service Quality: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Asia-PacificBusiness 13, 229-262. [CrossRef]
114. Jotham Mbiito Byarugaba, Aihie Osarenkhoe. 2012. Service Quality Perceptions: A Case of Ugandan Telephony Users.Journal of Relationship Marketing 11, 149-171. [CrossRef]
115. K. Kiran, S. Diljit. 2012. Modeling Web-based library service quality. Library & Information Science Research 34, 184-196.[CrossRef]
116. Aayushi Gupta, Santosh Dev. 2012. Client satisfaction in Indian banks: an empirical study. Management Research Review35:7, 617-636. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
117. Riadh Ladhari. 2012. The lodging quality index: an independent assessment of validity and dimensions. International Journalof Contemporary Hospitality Management 24:4, 628-652. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
118. Arun Sondhi, Ed Day. 2012. An assessment of SERVQUAL as a measure of service quality in English male prisons:Perceptions and expectations of the Integrated Drug Treatment System (IDTS). Drugs: Education, Prevention, and Policy19, 171-180. [CrossRef]
119. Darryl, Y. BandungDesigning evaluation system for virtual class service in limited network capacity using SERVQUALmethodology 1-5. [CrossRef]
120. Philipp “Phil” Klaus, Stan Maklan. 2012. EXQ: a multiple‐item scale for assessing service experience. Journal of ServiceManagement 23:1, 5-33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
121. Lesley White, Christiane Klinner. 2012. Service quality in community pharmacy: An exploration of determinants. Researchin Social and Administrative Pharmacy 8, 122-132. [CrossRef]
122. Alexandra Ganglmair-Wooliscroft, Rob Lawson. 2012. Subjective Wellbeing and its Influence on Consumer SentimentTowards Marketing: A New Zealand Example. Journal of Happiness Studies 13, 149-166. [CrossRef]
123. IpKin Anthony Wong, Veronica Hoi In Fong. 2012. Development and validation of the casino service quality scale: CASERV.International Journal of Hospitality Management 31, 209-217. [CrossRef]
124. Hassan Al‐Zubaidi, Dalal Al‐Asousi. 2012. Service quality assessment in central blood bank: blood donors’ perspective.Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences 28:1, 28-38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
125. Slavko Ažman, Boštjan Gomišček. 2012. Asymmetric and Nonlinear Impact of Attribute-Level Performance on OverallCustomer Satisfaction in the Context of Car Servicing of Four European Automotive Brands in Slovenia. Organizacija 45. .[CrossRef]
126. Minsoo Jung, Myung-Sun Hong. 2012. Positioning Patient-Perceived Medical Services to Develop a Marketing Strategy.The Health Care Manager 31, 52-61. [CrossRef]
127. Hakyeon Lee, Chulhyun Kim. 2012. A DEA-SERVQUAL Approach to Measurement and Benchmarking of Service Quality.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 40, 756-762. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
128. Ming-Lang Tseng. 2011. Using hybrid MCDM to evaluate the service quality expectation in linguistic preference. AppliedSoft Computing 11, 4551-4562. [CrossRef]
129. Andreas P. Kakouris, Elina Meliou. 2011. New Public Management: Promote the Public Sector Modernization ThroughService Quality. Current Experiences and Future Challenges. Public Organization Review 11, 351-369. [CrossRef]
130. Sangeeta Sahney. 2011. Delighting customers of management education in India: a student perspective, part I. The TQMJournal 23:6, 644-658. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
131. Lesley Ledden, Stavros P. Kalafatis, Alex Mathioudakis. 2011. The idiosyncratic behaviour of service quality, value,satisfaction, and intention to recommend in higher education: An empirical examination. Journal of Marketing Management27, 1232-1260. [CrossRef]
132. Manshor Amat Taap, Siong Choy Chong, Mukesh Kumar, Tat Kee Fong. 2011. Measuring service quality of conventional andIslamic banks: a comparative analysis. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 28:8, 822-840. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]
133. Mina Beigi, Melika Shirmohammadi. 2011. Effects of an emotional intelligence training program on service quality of bankbranches. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 21:5, 552-567. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
134. Jasmine Yeap Ai Leen, T. Ramayah. 2011. Validation of the RSQS in apparel specialty stores. Measuring Business Excellence15:3, 16-18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
135. Gyan Prakash. 2011. Service quality in supply chain: empirical evidence from Indian automotive industry. Supply ChainManagement: An International Journal 16:5, 362-378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
136. Gülçin Büyüközkan, Gizem Çifçi, Sezin Güleryüz. 2011. Strategic analysis of healthcare service quality using fuzzy AHPmethodology. Expert Systems with Applications 38, 9407-9424. [CrossRef]
137. Isaac Wasswa Katono. 2011. Student evaluation of e‐service quality criteria in Uganda: the case of automatic teller machines.International Journal of Emerging Markets 6:3, 200-216. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
138. Michael Guiry, David G. Vequist. 2011. Traveling Abroad for Medical Care: U.S. Medical Tourists' Expectations andPerceptions of Service Quality. Health Marketing Quarterly 28, 253-269. [CrossRef]
139. Janghyeon Nam, Yuksel Ekinci, Georgina Whyatt. 2011. Brand equity, brand loyalty and consumer satisfaction. Annals ofTourism Research 38, 1009-1030. [CrossRef]
140. Emma K. Macdonald, Hugh Wilson, Veronica Martinez, Amir Toossi. 2011. Assessing value-in-use: A conceptual frameworkand exploratory study. Industrial Marketing Management 40, 671-682. [CrossRef]
141. Magriet Holder, Adele Berndt. 2011. The effect of changes in servicescape and service quality perceptions in a maternityunit. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 24:5, 389-405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
142. Ramakrishnan Ramanathan, Harika Karpuzcu. 2011. Comparing perceived and expected service using an AHP model: anapplication to measure service quality of a company engaged in pharmaceutical distribution. OPSEARCH 48, 136-152.[CrossRef]
143. Martin Williams, Francis Buttle. 2011. The Eight Pillars of WOM management: Lessons from a multiple case study.Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ) 19, 85-92. [CrossRef]
144. Xi Y. Leung, Fang Wang, Bihu Wu, James A. Busser. 2011. Park users' quality evaluation: applying an analytical hierarchyprocess for managers. Managing Leisure 16, 142-160. [CrossRef]
145. Christoph Bode, Eckhard Lindemann, Stephan M. Wagner. 2011. Driving Trucks and Driving Sales? The Impact of DeliveryPersonnel on Customer Purchase Behavior. Journal of Business Logistics 32:10.1111/jbl.2011.32.issue-1, 99-114. [CrossRef]
146. Anshu N. JainEvolution of Service Quality and Some Implications on Computer Science Research 588-596. [CrossRef]147. Asil Oztekin. 2011. A decision support system for usability evaluation of web-based information systems. Expert Systems with
Applications 38, 2110-2118. [CrossRef]148. Ahmadreza Shekarchizadeh, Amran Rasli, Huam Hon‐Tat. 2011. SERVQUAL in Malaysian universities: perspectives of
international students. Business Process Management Journal 17:1, 67-81. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]149. Elizabeth Vaughan, Helen Woodruffe‐Burton. 2011. The disabled student experience: does the SERVQUAL scale measure
up?. Quality Assurance in Education 19:1, 28-49. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]150. Mahmood Nekoei‐Moghadam, Mohammadreza Amiresmaili. 2011. Hospital services quality assessment. International
Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 24:1, 57-66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]151. Sabri T. Erdil, Oğuz Yıldız. 2011. Measuring service quality and a comparative analysis in the passenger carriage of airline
industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 24, 1232-1242. [CrossRef]152. Ronald Sukwadi. 2011. Towards an Identification and Classification of Service Quality Attributes in Higher Education.
International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning . [CrossRef]153. Girish Keshav Palshikar, Harrick M. Vin, Mohammed Mudassar, Maitreya NatuDomain-Driven Data Mining for IT
Infrastructure Support 959-966. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
154. Salim Moussa, Mourad Touzani. 2010. A literature review of service research since 1993. Journal of Service Science 2, 173-212.[CrossRef]
155. B. Yan, P. A. McLarenMeasuring after-sales service quality in automobile retails: An application of the SERVQUALinstruments 2090-2094. [CrossRef]
156. Alistair Brandon‐Jones, Rhian Silvestro. 2010. Measuring internal service quality: comparing the gap‐based and perceptions‐only approaches. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 30:12, 1291-1318. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]
157. Riadh Ladhari. 2010. Developing e-service quality scales: A literature review. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 17,464-477. [CrossRef]
158. Prabha Ramseook‐Munhurrun, Perunjodi Naidoo, Pushpa Nundlall. 2010. A proposed model for measuring service qualityin secondary education. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 2:3, 335-351. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
159. Dennis Chung Sea Law. 2010. Quality assurance in post‐secondary education: the student experience. Quality Assurance inEducation 18:4, 250-270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
160. Hua Yang, Nigel Coates. 2010. Internal marketing: service quality in leisure services. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 28:6,754-769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
161. Johanna Gummerus. 2010. E‐services as resources in customer value creation. Managing Service Quality: An InternationalJournal 20:5, 425-439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
162. Mohsin Muhammad Butt, Ernest Cyril de Run. 2010. Private healthcare quality: applying a SERVQUAL model. InternationalJournal of Health Care Quality Assurance 23:7, 658-673. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
163. Shirshendu Ganguli, Sanjit Kumar Roy. 2010. Service quality dimensions of hybrid services. Managing Service Quality: AnInternational Journal 20:5, 404-424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
164. Hsiu‐Yuan Hu, Yu‐Cheng Lee, Tieh‐Min Yen. 2010. Service quality gaps analysis based on Fuzzy linguistic SERVQUALwith a case study in hospital out‐patient services. The TQM Journal 22:5, 499-515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
165. Subhash Lonial, Dennis Menezes, Mehves Tarim, Ekrem Tatoglu, Selim Zaim. 2010. An evaluation of SERVQUAL andpatient loyalty in an emerging country context. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 21, 813-827. [CrossRef]
166. Angelos Pantouvakis. 2010. The relative importance of service features in explaining customer satisfaction. Managing ServiceQuality: An International Journal 20:4, 366-387. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
167. Clive Helm, Richard Jones. 2010. Extending the value chain – A conceptual framework for managing the governance of co-created brand equity. Journal of Brand Management 17, 579-589. [CrossRef]
168. Ebi Marandi, John Harris. 2010. The impact of perceived service provider empathy on customer loyalty: some observationsfrom the health and fitness sector. Managing Leisure 15, 214-227. [CrossRef]
169. Norizan Mohd Kassim, Mohamed Zain. 2010. Service Quality: Gaps in the College of Business. Services Marketing Quarterly31, 235-252. [CrossRef]
170. Manoj Edward, Babu P. George, Sudipta Kiran Sarkar. 2010. The Impact of Switching Costs Upon the Service Quality–Perceived Value–Customer Satisfaction–Service Loyalty Chain: A Study in the Context of Cellular Services in India. ServicesMarketing Quarterly 31, 151-173. [CrossRef]
171. Pao‐Tiao Chuang. 2010. Incorporating disservice analysis to enhance perceived service quality. Industrial Management &Data Systems 110:3, 368-391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
172. Alberto A. López-Toro, Rocío Díaz-Muñoz, Salvador Pérez-Moreno. 2010. An assessment of the quality of a touristdestination: The case of Nerja, Spain. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 21, 269-289. [CrossRef]
173. E. Regaira Martínez, M. Sola Iriarte, R. Goñi Viguria, M. Del Barrio Linares, M.A. Margall Coscojuela, M.C. Asiain Erro.2010. La calidad asistencial en cuidados intensivos evaluada por los pacientes mediante la escala SERVQUAL. EnfermeríaIntensiva 21, 3-10. [CrossRef]
174. Fumiyo N. Kondo, Jiro Hirata, Shahriar AkterThe Impact of Mobile Amusement Information on Use Behavior, Satisfaction,and Loyalty 190-197. [CrossRef]
175. Ibrahim Yilmaz. 2010. Do hotel customers use a multi-expectation framework in the evaluation of services? A study inCappadocia, Turkey. Tourism and Hospitality Research 10, 59-69. [CrossRef]
176. Kathrin Knautz, Simone Soubusta, Wolfgang G. StockTag Clusters as Information Retrieval Interfaces 1-10. [CrossRef]177. Jose A. Martínez, Laura Martínez. 2010. Some insights on conceptualizing and measuring service quality. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services 17, 29-42. [CrossRef]178. Jose Antonio Martínez García, Laura Martínez Caro. 2010. Rethinking perceived service quality: An alternative to hierarchical
and multidimensional models. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 21, 93-118. [CrossRef]179. Musa Pinar, Zeliha Eser, Sandy Strasser. 2009. Using Mystery Shopping to Compare the Service Quality of Banks in Turkey.
Services Marketing Quarterly 31, 1-26. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
180. IBRAHIM YILMAZ. 2009. Measurement of Service Quality in the Hotel Industry. Anatolia 20, 375-386. [CrossRef]181. Asil Oztekin, Alexander Nikov, Selim Zaim. 2009. UWIS: An assessment methodology for usability of web-based information
systems. Journal of Systems and Software 82, 2038-2050. [CrossRef]182. José M. Barrutia, Jon Charterina, Ainhize Gilsanz. 2009. E-service quality: an internal, multichannel and pure service
perspective. The Service Industries Journal 29, 1707-1721. [CrossRef]183. Niall Piercy, Nick Rich. 2009. High quality and low cost: the lean service centre. European Journal of Marketing 43:11/12,
1477-1497. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]184. Hugh Wilkins, Bill Merrilees, Carmel Herington. 2009. The Determinants of Loyalty in Hotels. Journal of Hospitality
Marketing & Management 19, 1-21. [CrossRef]185. Julie E. Francis. 2009. Category‐specific RECIPEs for internet retailing quality. Journal of Services Marketing 23:7, 450-461.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]186. Eric S.W. Chan, Louisa Lam. 2009. Understanding attributes affecting selection of private kitchens. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management 21:7, 854-875. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]187. Črtomir Rozman, Majda Potočnik, Karmen Pažek, Andreja Borec, Darja Majkovič, Marko Bohanec. 2009. A multi-criteria
assessment of tourist farm service quality. Tourism Management 30, 629-637. [CrossRef]188. Florian Johannsen, Susanne Leist. 2009. A Six Sigma approach for integrated solutions. Managing Service Quality: An
International Journal 19:5, 558-580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]189. Jessica L. Hurst, Linda S. Niehm, Mary A. Littrell. 2009. Retail service dynamics in a rural tourism community. Managing
Service Quality: An International Journal 19:5, 511-540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]190. Luís Kalb Roses, Norberto Hoppen, Jorge Luiz Henrique. 2009. Management of perceptions of information technology
service quality. Journal of Business Research 62, 876-882. [CrossRef]191. Riadh Ladhari. 2009. A review of twenty years of SERVQUAL research. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences
1:2, 172-198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]192. Robert M. Brown, Timothy William Mazzarol. 2009. The importance of institutional image to student satisfaction and
loyalty within higher education. Higher Education 58, 81-95. [CrossRef]193. Yen-Ku Kuo, Kung-Don Ye. 2009. The causal relationship between service quality, corporate image and adults' learning
satisfaction and loyalty: A study of professional training programmes in a Taiwanese vocational institute. Total QualityManagement & Business Excellence 20, 749-762. [CrossRef]
194. Aditi Naidu. 2009. Factors affecting patient satisfaction and healthcare quality. International Journal of Health Care QualityAssurance 22:4, 366-381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
195. Panagiotis Trivellas, Dimitra Dargenidou. 2009. Organisational culture, job satisfaction and higher education service quality.The TQM Journal 21:4, 382-399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
196. Yoonseo Park, Seungin Lee, In Choi. 2009. 김김김김김김김김 김김김김김김 김김김김김김김김 김김김김 김김김김김김김 김김 김김김김김 김김 김김김 김김 김김. Journalof Global Academy of Marketing Science 19, 53-67. [CrossRef]
197. Riadh Ladhari. 2009. Assessment of the psychometric properties of SERVQUAL in the Canadian banking industry. Journalof Financial Services Marketing 14, 70-82. [CrossRef]
198. Audrey Gilmore, Rosalind McMullan. 2009. Scales in services marketing research: a critique and way forward. EuropeanJournal of Marketing 43:5/6, 640-651. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
199. Elaine Wallace, Leslie de Chernatony. 2009. Exploring brand sabotage in retail banking. Journal of Product & BrandManagement 18:3, 198-211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
200. Sami Kärnä, Juha‐Matti Junnonen, Veli‐Matti Sorvala. 2009. Modelling structure of customer satisfaction with construction.Journal of Facilities Management 7:2, 111-127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
201. Julie Paquette, Jean-François Cordeau, Gilbert Laporte. 2009. Quality of service in dial-a-ride operations. Computers &Industrial Engineering 56, 1721-1734. [CrossRef]
202. Ana Brochado. 2009. Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education. Quality Assurancein Education 17:2, 174-190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
203. Panchapakesan Padma, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, L. Prakash Sai. 2009. A conceptual framework of service quality inhealthcare. Benchmarking: An International Journal 16:2, 157-191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
204. Niaz Ahmad, Muhammad Usman Awan, Abdul Raouf, Leigh Sparks. 2009. Development of a service quality scale forpharmaceutical supply chains. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing 3:1, 26-45. [Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]
205. Ahmad Jamal, Kyriaki Anastasiadou. 2009. Investigating the effects of service quality dimensions and expertise on loyalty.European Journal of Marketing 43:3/4, 398-420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
206. James O. Stanworth. 2009. Developers and terminators in hypermarkets' relationships with Chinese customers. Asia PacificJournal of Marketing and Logistics 21:2, 280-293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
207. Norizan Mohd Kassim, Salaheldin Ismail. 2009. Investigating the complex drivers of loyalty in e‐commerce settings. MeasuringBusiness Excellence 13:1, 56-71. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
208. S.M. Zabed Ahmed, Md. Zahid Hossain Shoeb. 2009. Measuring service quality of a public university library in Bangladeshusing SERVQUAL. Performance Measurement and Metrics 10:1, 17-32. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
209. Eleonora Karassavidou, Niki Glaveli, Chrissoleon T. Papadopoulos. 2009. Quality in NHS hospitals: no one knows betterthan patients. Measuring Business Excellence 13:1, 34-46. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
210. Hong Qin, Victor R. Prybutok. 2009. Service quality, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in fast‐food restaurants.International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences 1:1, 78-95. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
211. Mehran Nejati, Mostafa Nejati, Azadeh Shafaei. 2009. Ranking airlines' service quality factors using a fuzzy approach: studyof the Iranian society. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 26:3, 247-260. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
212. Bharath M. Josiam, Tai‐Yi Huang, Daniel L. Spears, Lisa Kennon, Gauri A. Bahulkar. 2009. Understanding Ethnic ChineseTravelers on North American Cruise Tours: Motivations, Perceptions, and Satisfaction of Cruisers. Journal of China TourismResearch 5, 77-101. [CrossRef]
213. Rudolf O. Large, Tatjana König. 2009. A gap model of purchasing's internal service quality: Concept, case study and internalsurvey. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 15, 24-32. [CrossRef]
214. Charles Blankson, Ogenyi Ejye Omar, Julian Ming-Sung Cheng. 2009. Retail bank selection in developed and developingcountries: A cross-national study of students' bank-selection criteria. Thunderbird International Business Review 51:10.1002/tie.v51:2, 183-198. [CrossRef]
215. Michael Morgan, Jörgen Elbe, Javier de Esteban Curiel. 2009. Has the experience economy arrived? The views ofdestination managers in three visitor-dependent areas. International Journal of Tourism Research 11:10.1002/jtr.v11:2,201-216. [CrossRef]
216. Birgit Leisen Pollack. 2009. Linking the hierarchical service quality model to customer satisfaction and loyalty. Journal ofServices Marketing 23:1, 42-50. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
217. Michel Rod, Nicholas J. Ashill, Jinyi Shao, Janet Carruthers. 2009. An examination of the relationship between servicequality dimensions, overall internet banking service quality and customer satisfaction. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 27:1,103-126. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
218. Hsin-Hui (Sunny) Hu, Jay Kandampully, Thanika Devi Juwaheer. 2009. Relationships and impacts of service quality,perceived value, customer satisfaction, and image: an empirical study. The Service Industries Journal 29, 111-125. [CrossRef]
219. Ilias Santouridis, Panagiotis Trivellas, Panagiotis Reklitis. 2009. Internet service quality and customer satisfaction: Examininginternet banking in Greece. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 20, 223-239. [CrossRef]
220. Vinh Sum Chau, Yu‐Ying Kao. 2009. Bridge over troubled water or long and winding road?. Managing Service Quality: AnInternational Journal 19:1, 106-134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
221. Peter Mason, Marcjanna Augustyn, Arthur Seakhoa-King. 2009. Exploratory study in tourism: designing an initial, qualitativephase of sequenced, mixed methods research. International Journal of Tourism Research n/a-n/a. [CrossRef]
222. Ivana Blesic, Jovan Romelic, Vuk Garaca. 2009. An investigation of the expectations and perceptions of consumers about thequality of services in the spa hotels of West Morava region. Glasnik srpskog geografskog dru?tva 89, 103-114. [CrossRef]
223. Mark Davies. 2009. Service quality tolerance in creative business service relationships. The Service Industries Journal 29,91-110. [CrossRef]
224. Waiho Wong, Joseph G. DavisEffective Knowledge Sharing in Service Systems 498-501. [CrossRef]225. Ali Asghar Anvary Rostamy. 2009. Toward understanding conflicts between customers and employees’ perceptions and
expectations: Evidence of Iranian bank. Journal of Business Economics and Management 10, 241-254. [CrossRef]226. Kwame Ampofo‐Boateng. 2009. Satisfaction with Recreational Sports Facilities and Services in Malaysia: Demographic
influences. Annals of Leisure Research 12, 22-46. [CrossRef]227. Zeynep Turk, Mutlu Yuksel Avcilar. 2009. The Effects of Perceived Service Quality of Audit Firms on Satisfaction
and Behavioural Intentions: A Research on the Istanbul Stock Exchange Listed Companies. Research Journal of BusinessManagement 3, 36-46. [CrossRef]
228. Kee-Kuo Chen, Ching-Ter Chang, Cheng-Sheng Lai. 2009. Service quality gaps of business customers in the shippingindustry. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 45, 222-237. [CrossRef]
229. Angelos Pantouvakis, Konstantinos Lymperopoulos. 2008. Customer satisfaction and loyalty in the eyes of new and repeatcustomers. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 18:6, 623-643. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
230. Birgit Leisen Pollack. 2008. The nature of the service quality and satisfaction relationship. Managing Service Quality: AnInternational Journal 18:6, 537-558. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
231. Akiko Ueno. 2008. Is empowerment really a contributory factor to service quality?. The Service Industries Journal 28,1321-1337. [CrossRef]
232. Mary Loonam, Deirdre O'Loughlin. 2008. Exploring e‐service quality: a study of Irish online banking. Marketing Intelligence& Planning 26:7, 759-780. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
233. Cheryl Ganesan‐Lim, Rebekah Russell‐Bennett, Tracey Dagger. 2008. The impact of service contact type and demographiccharacteristics on service quality perceptions. Journal of Services Marketing 22:7, 550-561. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
234. Vinh V. Thai. 2008. Service quality in maritime transport: conceptual model and empirical evidence. Asia Pacific Journal ofMarketing and Logistics 20:4, 493-518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
235. Stephen Graham Saunders. 2008. Measuring and applying the PAKSERV service quality construct. Managing Service Quality:An International Journal 18:5, 442-456. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
236. Gyan Prakash, Kripa ShankerAchieving competitive advantage and organisational performance through service qualityinitiatives in the supply chain 1104-1109. [CrossRef]
237. P. L. Rika Fatimah, J. Abdul Aziz, K. Ibrahim. 2008. Women–Family in Quality Perspective. Social Indicators Research 88,355-364. [CrossRef]
238. Laura Martínez Caro, Jose Antonio Martínez García. 2008. Developing a multidimensional and hierarchical service qualitymodel for the travel agency industry. Tourism Management 29, 706-720. [CrossRef]
239. Evangelos Tsoukatos. 2008. Applying importance‐performance analysis to assess service delivery performance. EuroMedJournal of Business 3:2, 144-162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
240. Coskun Bakar, H. Seval Akgün, A.F. Al Assaf. 2008. The role of expectations in patients' hospital assessments. InternationalJournal of Health Care Quality Assurance 21:5, 503-516. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
241. Dong-frog Zhang, Qi-sheng Gao, Zhao-frog LiCritical quality chain analysis and evaluation based on quality loss in serviceindustry 1588-1592. [CrossRef]
242. Akiko Ueno. 2008. Which management practices are contributory to service quality?. International Journal of Quality &Reliability Management 25:6, 585-603. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
243. Coskun Bakar, H. Seval Akgün, A.F. Al Assaf. 2008. The role of expectations in patient assessments of hospital care.International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance 21:4, 343-355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
244. Bruce R. Klemz, Christo Boshoff, Noxolo-Eileen Mazibuko. 2008. Fighting off the big guys: comparing competitive retailservices strategies in industrialized and developing world settings. Service Business 2, 127-145. [CrossRef]
245. V. Kumar, P.A. Smart, H. Maddern, R.S. Maull. 2008. Alternative perspectives on service quality and customer satisfaction:the role of BPM. International Journal of Service Industry Management 19:2, 176-187. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
246. Michael Morgan, Pamela Watson, Nigel Hemmington. 2008. Drama in the dining room: theatrical perspectives on thefoodservice encounter. Journal of Foodservice 19:10.1111/fri.2008.19.issue-2, 111-118. [CrossRef]
247. Darren Lee‐Ross. 2008. An exploratory study of the contextual stability of SERVQUAL amongst three retail clusters in farNorth Queensland. Journal of Place Management and Development 1:1, 46-61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
248. M. Sadiq Sohail, Nassar M. Shaikh. 2008. Internet banking and quality of service. Online Information Review 32:1, 58-72.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
249. Riadh Ladhari. 2008. Alternative measures of service quality: a review. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal18:1, 65-86. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
250. Mohamed Fawzy AfifyQuality management 295-338. [CrossRef]251. Hugh Wilkins, Bill Merrilees, Carmel Herington. 2007. Towards an understanding of total service quality in hotels.
International Journal of Hospitality Management 26, 840-853. [CrossRef]252. Karen Kueh, Boo Ho Voon. 2007. Culture and service quality expectations. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal
17:6, 656-680. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]253. Philipp Klaus, Stan Maklan. 2007. The role of brands in a service-dominated world. Journal of Brand Management 15,
115-122. [CrossRef]254. Dong Kyoon Yoo, Jeong Ah Park. 2007. Perceived service quality. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
24:9, 908-926. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]255. José Carlos Pinho, Isabel Maria Macedo, Albertina Paula Monteiro. 2007. The impact of online SERVQUAL dimensions
on certified accountant satisfaction. EuroMed Journal of Business 2:2, 154-172. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]256. Anastasios Zopiatis, Jovana Pribic. 2007. College students' dining expectations in Cyprus. British Food Journal 109:10,
765-776. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]257. Øystein Jensen, Kai Victor Hansen. 2007. Consumer values among restaurant customers. International Journal of Hospitality
Management 26, 603-622. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
258. L.S. van Velsen, M.F. Steehouder, M.D.T. de Jong. 2007. Evaluation of User Support: Factors That Affect User SatisfactionWith Helpdesks and Helplines. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 50, 219-231. [CrossRef]
259. Irene Hau-siu Chow, Victor P. Lau, Thamis Wing-chun Lo, Zhenquan Sha, He Yun. 2007. Service quality in restaurantoperations in China: Decision- and experiential-oriented perspectives. International Journal of Hospitality Management 26,698-710. [CrossRef]
260. Harry Maddern, Roger Maull, Andi Smart, Paul Baker. 2007. Customer satisfaction and service quality in UK financialservices. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 27:9, 999-1019. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
261. Philemon Oyewole. 2007. Fast Food Marketing and the African American Consumers. Journal of International ConsumerMarketing 19, 75-108. [CrossRef]
262. Gareth Smith, Alison Smith, Alison Clarke. 2007. Evaluating service quality in universities: a service department perspective.Quality Assurance in Education 15:3, 334-351. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
263. Eugenia Petridou, Charalambos Spathis, Niki Glaveli, Chris Liassides. 2007. Bank service quality: empirical evidence fromGreek and Bulgarian retail customers. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 24:6, 568-585. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]
264. Girish Prayag. 2007. Assessing international tourists' perceptions of service quality at Air Mauritius. International Journal ofQuality & Reliability Management 24:5, 492-514. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
265. Eduard Cristobal, Carlos Flavián, Miguel Guinalíu. 2007. Perceived e‐service quality (PeSQ). Managing Service Quality: AnInternational Journal 17:3, 317-340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
266. Julie E. Francis. 2007. Internet retailing quality: one size does not fit all. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal17:3, 341-355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
267. Mi Aie Lee, Young-Hee Yom. 2007. A comparative study of patients’ and nurses’ perceptions of the quality of nursing services,satisfaction and intent to revisit the hospital: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies 44, 545-555.[CrossRef]
268. Manuel Sánchez Pérez, Juan Carlos Gázquez Abad, Gema María Marín Carrillo, Raquel Sánchez Fernández. 2007. Effectsof service quality dimensions on behavioural purchase intentions. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 17:2,134-151. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
269. Chris Baumann, Suzan Burton, Gregory Elliott, Hugo M. Kehr. 2007. Prediction of attitude and behavioural intentions inretail banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing 25:2, 102-116. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
270. Per Skålén, Martin Fougère. 2007. Be(com)ing normal – not excellent. Journal of Organizational Change Management 20:1,109-125. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
271. Christopher L. Carr. 2007. The FAIRSERV Model: Consumer Reactions to Services Based on a Multidimensional Evaluationof Service Fairness. Decision Sciences 38:10.1111/deci.2007.38.issue-1, 107-130. [CrossRef]
272. Gary Howat, Gary Crilley. 2007. Customer Service Quality, Satisfaction, and Operational Performance: A proposed modelfor Australian public aquatic centres. Annals of Leisure Research 10, 168-195. [CrossRef]
273. Carlos A. Albacete-Sáez, M. Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, F. Javier Lloréns-Montes. 2007. Service quality measurement in ruralaccommodation. Annals of Tourism Research 34, 45-65. [CrossRef]
274. Laura Martínez Caro, Jose Antonio Martínez García. 2007. Measuring perceived service quality in urgent transport service.Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 14, 60-72. [CrossRef]
275. Benjamin Osayawe Ehigie. 2006. Correlates of customer loyalty to their bank: a case study in Nigeria. International Journalof Bank Marketing 24:7, 494-508. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
276. Firdaus Abdullah. 2006. The development of HEdPERF: a new measuring instrument of service quality for the highereducation sector. International Journal of Consumer Studies 30:10.1111/ijc.2006.30.issue-6, 569-581. [CrossRef]
277. Steve Greenland, John Coshall, Ian Combe. 2006. Evaluating service quality and consumer satisfaction in emerging markets.International Journal of Consumer Studies 30:10.1111/ijc.2006.30.issue-6, 582-590. [CrossRef]
278. Stefan Lagrosen, Göran Svensson. 2006. A seminal framework of marketing schools: revisited and updated. Journal ofManagement History 12:4, 369-384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
279. Carol Atkinson, Peter Cuthbert. 2006. Does one size fit all?. International Journal of Manpower 27:7, 647-665. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]
280. Chong-yan Gao, Jian-min Jia, Ping ZhaoService Quality and Attribute-Based Performance of Chinese Retail Banks1305-1309. [CrossRef]
281. Michael Morgan. 2006. Making space for experiences. Journal of Retail and Leisure Property 5, 305-313. [CrossRef]282. Brent McKenzie. 2006. Retail service quality success factors in Estonia: a qualitative approach. Baltic Journal of Management
1:3, 352-369. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
283. Evangelos Tsoukatos, Graham K. Rand. 2006. Path analysis of perceived service quality, satisfaction and loyalty in Greekinsurance. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 16:5, 501-519. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
284. Michael W Pass. 2006. Western US college students: Banking preferences and marketplace performance. Journal of FinancialServices Marketing 11, 49-63. [CrossRef]
285. Jacqueline Douglas, Alex Douglas, Barry Barnes. 2006. Measuring student satisfaction at a UK university. Quality Assurancein Education 14:3, 251-267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
286. Atilla Akbaba. 2006. Measuring service quality in the hotel industry: A study in a business hotel in Turkey. InternationalJournal of Hospitality Management 25, 170-192. [CrossRef]
287. Göran Svensson. 2006. The interactive interface of service quality. European Business Review 18:3, 243-257. [Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]
288. Göran Svensson. 2006. New aspects of research into service encounters and service quality. International Journal of ServiceIndustry Management 17:3, 245-257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
289. Ismet Anitsal, Rosalind C. Paige. 2006. An Exploratory Study on Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality in Technology-Based Self-Service. Services Marketing Quarterly 27, 53-67. [CrossRef]
290. Babu P. George. 2006. Wine tourist motivation and the perceived importance of servicescape: A study conducted in Goa,India. Tourism Review 61:3, 15-19. [Abstract] [PDF]
291. Peter Schofield, Nicole KaticsSwedish Hotel Service Quality and Loyalty Dimensions 123-157. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF][PDF]
292. Kathryn Waite. 2006. Task scenario effects on bank web site expectations. Internet Research 16:1, 7-22. [Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]
293. Mike Donnelly, Neil J. Kerr, Russell Rimmer, Edward M. Shiu. 2006. Assessing the quality of police services usingSERVQUAL. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 29:1, 92-105. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
294. Nitin Seth, S.G. Deshmukh, Prem Vrat. 2006. A framework for measurement of quality of service in supply chains. SupplyChain Management: An International Journal 11:1, 82-94. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
295. Gi‐Du Kang. 2006. The hierarchical structure of service quality: integration of technical and functional quality. ManagingService Quality: An International Journal 16:1, 37-50. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
296. Huseyin Arasli, Salih Turan Katircioglu, Salime Mehtap‐Smadi. 2005. A comparison of service quality in the bankingindustry. International Journal of Bank Marketing 23:7, 508-526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
297. Nitin Seth, S.G. Deshmukh, Prem Vrat. 2005. Service quality models: a review. International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement 22:9, 913-949. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
298. Firdaus Abdullah. 2005. HEdPERF versus SERVPERF. Quality Assurance in Education 13:4, 305-328. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]
299. Mohamed M. Mostafa. 2005. An empirical study of patients' expectations and satisfactions in Egyptian hospitals. InternationalJournal of Health Care Quality Assurance 18:7, 516-532. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
300. Ma Concepción López Fernández, Ana Ma Serrano Bedia. 2005. Applying SERVQUAL to Diagnose Hotel Sector in a TouristDestination. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism 6, 9-24. [CrossRef]
301. Ka-shing Woo, Christine T. Ennew. 2005. Measuring business-to-business professional service quality and its consequences.Journal of Business Research 58, 1178-1185. [CrossRef]
302. Jose Peiro, Vicente Martinez-Tur, Jose Ramos. 2005. Employees' overestimation of functional and relational service quality:A gap analysis. The Service Industries Journal 25, 773-788. [CrossRef]
303. Veerapong Malai, Mark Speece. 2005. Cultural Impact on the Relationship Among Perceived Service Quality, Brand NameValue, and Customer Loyalty. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 17, 7-39. [CrossRef]
304. Anja Reimer, Richard Kuehn. 2005. The impact of servicescape on quality perception. European Journal of Marketing 39:7/8,785-808. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
305. Clare Chua Chow, Peter Luk. 2005. A strategic service quality approach using analytic hierarchy process. Managing ServiceQuality: An International Journal 15:3, 278-289. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
306. Darren Lee‐Ross, Josephine Pryce. 2005. A preliminary study of service predispositions amongst hospitality workers inAustralia. Journal of Management Development 24:5, 410-420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
307. Waymond Rodgers, Solomon Negash, Kwanho Suk. 2005. The moderating effect of on-line experience on the antecedentsand consequences of on-line satisfaction. Psychology and Marketing 22:10.1002/mar.v22:4, 313-331. [CrossRef]
308. Ken Simpson, Phil Bretherton, Gina de Vere. 2005. Lifestyle Market Segmentation, Small Business Entrepreneurs, and theNew Zealand Wine Tourism Industry. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism 5, 157-188. [CrossRef]
309. Teck‐Yong Eng, Outi Niininen. 2005. An integrative approach to diagnosing service quality of public parks. Journal of ServicesMarketing 19:2, 70-80. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
310. Melih Madanoglu. 2005. Validating Restaurant Service Quality Dimensions. Journal of Foodservice Business Research 7, 127-147.[CrossRef]
311. Huseyin Arasli, Salime Mehtap‐Smadi, Salih Turan Katircioglu. 2005. Customer service quality in the Greek Cypriot bankingindustry. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 15:1, 41-56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
312. Ramzi Nasser and, Kamal Abouchedid. 2005. Graduates' perception of university training in light of occupational attainmentand university type. Education + Training 47:2, 124-133. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
313. Jungki Lee. 2005. Measuring Service Quality in a Medical Setting in a Developing Country. Services Marketing Quarterly27, 1-14. [CrossRef]
314. John R. Olson, Kenneth K. Boyer. 2005. Internet ticketing in a not‐for‐profit, service organization. International Journal ofOperations & Production Management 25:1, 74-92. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
315. Marcjanna M. Augustyn, Arthur Seakhoa-KingIS THE SERVQUAL SCALE AN ADEQUATE MEASURE OFQUALITY IN LEISURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY? 3-24. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [PDF]
316. Bronwyn Higgs, Michael Jay Polonsky, Mary Hollick. 2005. Measuring expectations: forecast vs. ideal expectations. Does itreally matter?. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 12, 49-64. [CrossRef]
317. Charilaos Kouthouris, Konstantinos Alexandris. 2005. Can service quality predict customer satisfaction and behavioralintentions in the sport tourism industry? An application of the SERVQUAL model in an outdoors setting. Journal of Sport& Tourism 10, 101-111. [CrossRef]
318. Peter Sifkus, Gary Howat, Gary Crilley. 2005. Service Quality Attributes Specific to the Performance of Officials (umpiresand referees) at an Australian Recreation Center. World Leisure Journal 47, 52-64. [CrossRef]
319. Yanchun Shen, Pengde Tao, Yonggui Wang, Ning XuHow service quality drives customer asset: a customer behavior-basedperspective 157-162 Vol. 1. [CrossRef]
320. Desmond Doran, Peter Smith. 2004. Measuring service quality provision within an eating disorders context. InternationalJournal of Health Care Quality Assurance 17:7, 377-388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
321. Lianxi Zhou. 2004. A dimension‐specific analysis of performance‐only measurement of service quality and satisfaction inChina's retail banking. Journal of Services Marketing 18:7, 534-546. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
322. Göran Svensson. 2004. A customized construct of sequential service quality in service encounter chains: time, context, andperformance threshold. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 14:6, 468-475. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
323. M. Concepción López Fernández, Ana M. Serrano Bedia. 2004. Is the hotel classification system a good indicator of hotelquality?. Tourism Management 25, 771-775. [CrossRef]
324. Jos van Iwaarden, Ton van der Wiele, Leslie Ball, Robert Millen. 2004. Perceptions about the quality of web sites: a surveyamongst students at Northeastern University and Erasmus University. Information & Management 41, 947-959. [CrossRef]
325. Haruki Nagata, Yoshinori Satoh, Sarah Gerrard, Päivi Kytömäki. 2004. The dimensions that construct the evaluation ofservice quality in academic libraries. Performance Measurement and Metrics 5:2, 53-65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
326. Gi‐Du Kang, Jeffrey James. 2004. Service quality dimensions: an examination of Grönroos’s service quality model. ManagingService Quality: An International Journal 14:4, 266-277. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
327. Antonio J Verdú Jover, Francisco Javier Lloréns Montes, Marı́a del Mar Fuentes Fuentes. 2004. Measuring perceptions ofquality in food products: the case of red wine. Food Quality and Preference 15, 453-469. [CrossRef]
328. Gamini Gunawardane. 2004. Measuring reliability of service systems using failure rates: variations and extensions. InternationalJournal of Quality & Reliability Management 21:5, 578-590. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
329. Sherriff Ting-Kwong Luk, Roger Layton. 2004. Managing both Outcome and Process Quality is Critical to Quality of HotelService. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 15, 259-278. [CrossRef]
330. Nick Johns, Turgay Avcí, Osman M. Karatepe. 2004. Measuring service quality of travel agents: evidence from NorthernCyprus. The Service Industries Journal 24, 82-100. [CrossRef]
331. Osman M. Karatepe, Turgay Avci, Huseyin Arasli. 2004. Effects of Job Standardization and Job Satisfaction on ServiceQuality. Services Marketing Quarterly 25, 1-17. [CrossRef]
332. Konstantinos Alexandris, Panagiotis Zahariadis, Charalambos Tsorbatzoudis, George Grouios. 2004. An empiricalinvestigation of the relationships among service quality, customer satisfaction and psychological commitment in a health clubcontext. European Sport Management Quarterly 4, 36-52. [CrossRef]
333. Charalambos Spathis, Eugenia Petridou, Niki Glaveli. 2004. Managing service quality in banks: customers’ gender effects.Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 14:1, 90-102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
334. Hanqin Q. Zhang, Ivy Chow. 2004. Application of importance-performance model in tour guides’ performance: evidencefrom mainland Chinese outbound visitors in Hong Kong. Tourism Management 25, 81-91. [CrossRef]
335. M. Sadiq Sohail, Nassar M. Shaikh. 2004. Quest for excellence in business education: a study of student impressions of servicequality. International Journal of Educational Management 18:1, 58-65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
336. A. OkunoyeIncrease in computing capability and its influence on service provision 9 pp.. [CrossRef]337. Jessica Santos, Jonathan Boote. 2003. A theoretical exploration and model of consumer expectations, post-purchase affective
states and affective behaviour. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 3:10.1002/cb.v3:2, 142-156. [CrossRef]338. Jos van Iwaarden, Ton van der Wiele, Leslie Ball, Robert Millen. 2003. Applying SERVQUAL to Web sites: an exploratory
study. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 20:8, 919-935. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]339. George Issac, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R. N. Anantharaman. 2003. Determinants of software quality: Customer's
perspective. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 14, 1053-1070. [CrossRef]340. Eda Atilgan, Serkan Akinci, Safak Aksoy. 2003. Mapping service quality in the tourism industry. Managing Service Quality:
An International Journal 13:5, 412-422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]341. G.S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R.N. Anantharaman. 2003. Customer perceptions of service quality in the
banking sector of a developing economy: a critical analysis. International Journal of Bank Marketing 21:5, 233-242. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]
342. Spiros P. Gounaris, Vlassis Stathakopoulos, Antreas D. Athanassopoulos. 2003. Antecedents to perceived service quality: anexploratory study in the banking industry. International Journal of Bank Marketing 21:4, 168-190. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]
343. Mahn Hee Yoon, Jaebeom Suh. 2003. Organizational citizenship behaviors and service quality as external effectiveness ofcontact employees. Journal of Business Research 56, 597-611. [CrossRef]
344. M. Sadiq Sohail, Jegatheesan Rajadurai, Nor Azlin Abdul Rahman. 2003. Managing quality in higher education: a Malaysiancase study. International Journal of Educational Management 17:4, 141-146. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
345. Adrian Palmer, Martin O’Neill. 2003. The effects of perceptual processes on the measurement of service quality. Journal ofServices Marketing 17:3, 254-274. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
346. M. Sadiq Sohail. 2003. Service quality in hospitals: more favourable than you might think. Managing Service Quality: AnInternational Journal 13:3, 197-206. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
347. Nicholas Theodorakis, Dimitris Goulimaris, Dimitris Gargalianos. 2003. The relationship between service quality andbehavioural intentions for spectators at traditional dance performances in Greece. World Leisure Journal 45, 53-61. [CrossRef]
348. Emir Mangan, Alan Collins. 2002. Threats to brand integrity in the hospitality sector: evidence from a tourist brand.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 14:6, 286-293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
349. Gi‐Du Kang, Jeffrey Jame, Kostas Alexandris. 2002. Measurement of internal service quality: application of the SERVQUALbattery to internal service quality. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 12:5, 278-291. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]
350. Ravi S. Behara, Warren W. Fisher, Jos G.A.M. Lemmink. 2002. Modelling and evaluating service quality measurement usingneural networks. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 22:10, 1162-1185. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]
351. Abdullah H. Aldlaigan, Francis A. Buttle. 2002. SYSTRA‐SQ: a new measure of bank service quality. International Journalof Service Industry Management 13:4, 362-381. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
352. Jo Ann Duffy, Michael Duffy, William E. Kilbourne. 2002. A Comparative Study of Resident, Family, and AdministratorExpectations for Service Quality in Nursing Homes. Health Care Management Review 26, 75-85. [CrossRef]
353. Konstantinos Alexandris, Nikos Dimitriadis, Dimitra Markata. 2002. Can perceptions of service quality predict behavioralintentions? An exploratory study in the hotel sector in Greece. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 12:4,224-231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
354. Martin O’Neill, Adrian Palmer, Steven Charters. 2002. Wine production as a service experience – the effects of service qualityon wine sales. Journal of Services Marketing 16:4, 342-362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
355. G.S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R.N. Anantharaman. 2002. The relationship between service quality andcustomer satisfaction – a factor specific approach. Journal of Services Marketing 16:4, 363-379. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
356. OSMAN M. KARATEPE, TURGAY AVCI. 2002. Measuring Service Quality in the Hotel Industry: Evidences fromNorthern Cyprus. Anatolia 13, 19-32. [CrossRef]
357. Duncan Murray, Gary Howat. 2002. The Relationships among Service Quality, Value, Satisfaction, and Future Intentions ofCustomers at an Australian Sports and Leisure Centre. Sport Management Review 5, 25-43. [CrossRef]
358. Russell F. Waugh. 2002. Academic staff perceptions of administrative quality at universities. Journal of EducationalAdministration 40:2, 172-188. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
359. Colin Jevons, John Pidgeon. 2002. Service Quality Measures in Vietnam and Australia. Journal of Transnational ManagementDevelopment 6, 85-100. [CrossRef]
360. Gary Howat, Duncan Murray. 2002. The role of critical incidents to complement service quality information for a sports andleisure centre. European Sport Management Quarterly 2, 23-46. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
361. G.S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R.N. Anantharaman. 2002. Determinants of customer‐perceived servicequality: a confirmatory factor analysis approach. Journal of Services Marketing 16:1, 9-34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
362. G. S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R. N. Anantharaman. 2002. The relationship between management'sperception of total quality service and customer perceptions of service quality. Total Quality Management 13, 69-88. [CrossRef]
363. George Philip, Shirley‐Ann Hazlett. 2001. Evaluating the service quality of information services using a new “P‐C‐P”attributes model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 18:9, 900-916. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
364. Chester Kin‐man To, Chun‐sun Leung. 2001. Service‐enhanced manufacturing: a study of perceived service quality of apparelmanufacturers. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 5:4, 313-323. [Abstract] [PDF]
365. Mik Wisniewski. 2001. Using SERVQUAL to assess customer satisfaction with public sector services. Managing ServiceQuality: An International Journal 11:6, 380-388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
366. Jamie Burton, Christopher Easingwood, John Murphy. 2001. Using qualitative research to refine service quality models.Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 4:4, 217-223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
367. J.Enrique Bigné, M.Isabel Sánchez, Javier Sánchez. 2001. Tourism image, evaluation variables and after purchase behaviour:inter-relationship. Tourism Management 22, 607-616. [CrossRef]
368. Konstantinos Alexandris, Nikos Dimitriadis, Anastasia Kasiara. 2001. The behavioural consequences of perceived servicequality: An exploratory study in the context of private fitness clubs in Greece. European Sport Management Quarterly 1,280-299. [CrossRef]
369. Mik Wisniewski. 2001. Assessing customer satisfaction with local authority services using SERVQUAL. Total QualityManagement 12, 995-1002. [CrossRef]
370. Yuksel Ekinci. 2001. The validation of the generic service quality dimensions: an alternative approach. Journal of Retailingand Consumer Services 8, 311-324. [CrossRef]
371. Atila Yuksel, Fisun Yuksel. 2001. Measurement and Management Issues in Customer Satisfaction Research: Review, Critiqueand Research Agenda: Part One. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 10, 47-80. [CrossRef]
372. Birgit Leisen, Charles Vance. 2001. Cross‐national assessment of service quality in the telecommunication industry: evidencefrom the USA and Germany. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 11:5, 307-317. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
373. Stewart Black, Senga Briggs, William Keogh. 2001. Service quality performance measurement in public/private sectors.Managerial Auditing Journal 16:7, 400-405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
374. Jessica Santos, Brian P. Mathews. 2001. Quality in religious services. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary SectorMarketing 6:10.1002/nvsm.v6:3, 278-288. [CrossRef]
375. Karin Weber, Wesley S. Roehl. 2001. Service Quality Issues for Convention and Visitor Bureaus. Journal of Convention &Exhibition Management 3, 1-19. [CrossRef]
376. Karin Newman. 2001. Interrogating SERVQUAL: a critical assessment of service quality measurement in a high street retailbank. International Journal of Bank Marketing 19:3, 126-139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
377. Antreas Athanassopoulos, Spiros Gounaris, Vlassis Stathakopoulos. 2001. Behavioural responses to customer satisfaction: anempirical study. European Journal of Marketing 35:5/6, 687-707. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
378. G. S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, R. N. Anantharaman. 2001. A Conceptual model for total qualitymanagement in service organizations. Total Quality Management 12, 343-363. [CrossRef]
379. Liz Vaughan, Edward Shiu. 2001. ARCHSECRET: a multi-item scale to measure service quality within the voluntary sector.International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 6:10.1002/nvsm.v6:2, 131-144. [CrossRef]
380. Rodolfo Vázquez, Ignacio A Rodrı́guez-Del Bosque, Ana Ma Dı́az, Agustı́n V Ruiz. 2001. Service quality in supermarketretailing: identifying critical service experiences. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 8, 1-14. [CrossRef]
381. Javier Gimeno Zuera, M. Carmen Ruiz-Olalla Corcuera. 2001. Utilidad de los Cuestionarios Como Indicadores Para laMedición de la Calidad del Servicio: Un Análisis Empírico. Spanish Journal of Finance and Accounting / Revista Española deFinanciación y Contabilidad 30, 1137-1166. [CrossRef]
382. G. S. Sureshchandar, Chandrasekharan Rajendran, T. J. Kamalanabhan. 2001. Customer perceptions of service quality: Acritique. Total Quality Management 12, 111-124. [CrossRef]
383. Yuksel Ekinci, Michael Riley. 2001. Validating quality dimensions. Annals of Tourism Research 28, 202-223. [CrossRef]384. Russell Imrie, Alan Fyall. 2000. Customer Retention and Loyalty in the Independent Mid-Market Hotel Sector. Journal of
Hospitality & Leisure Marketing 7, 39-54. [CrossRef]385. Brenda M. Oldfield, Steve Baron. 2000. Student perceptions of service quality in a UK university business and management
faculty. Quality Assurance in Education 8:2, 85-95. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]386. 김 김김, 김 김김, 김 김김. 2000. 김김김 김김김 김김김 김김김 김김김 김김김 김김김 김김김김 김김김 김김. Journal of Global Academy of Marketing Science 5,
103-124. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
387. Kamilia Bahia, Jacques Nantel. 2000. A reliable and valid measurement scale for the perceived service quality of banks.International Journal of Bank Marketing 18:2, 84-91. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
388. Mark Gabbott, Gillian Hogg. 2000. An empirical investigation of the impact of non‐verbal communication on serviceevaluation. European Journal of Marketing 34:3/4, 384-398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
389. Yuksel Ekinci, Michael Riley. 2000. The Application of the Guttman Scaling Procedure in the Measurement of ConsumerBehaviour: A Marketing Myopia. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 8, 25-42. [CrossRef]
390. Ian N. Lings. 2000. Internal marketing and supply chain management. Journal of Services Marketing 14:1, 27-43. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]
391. Deborah Cunnell, Richard Prentice. 2000. Tourists’ Recollections of Quality in Museums: A Servicescape Without People?.Museum Management and Curatorship 18, 369-390. [CrossRef]
392. Fred Hewitt, Marlene Clayton. 1999. Quality and complexity – lessons from English higher education. International Journalof Quality & Reliability Management 16:9, 838-858. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
393. Miguel Morales Espinoza. 1999. Assessing the cross‐cultural applicability of a service quality measure A comparative studybetween Quebec and Peru. International Journal of Service Industry Management 10:5, 449-468. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
394. Des Thwaites. 1999. Closing the gaps: service quality in sport tourism. Journal of Services Marketing 13:6, 500-516. [Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]
395. Yuksel Ekinci, Michael Riley. 1999. Measuring hotel quality: back to basics. International Journal of Contemporary HospitalityManagement 11:6, 287-294. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
396. Michael K. Hussey. 1999. Using the Concept of Loss: An Alternative SERVQUAL Measure. The Service Industries Journal19, 89-101. [CrossRef]
397. Ron Garland, David Tweed, Neil Davis. 1999. Service Quality in the New Zealand Market for Construction Hardware. Journalof Marketing Theory and Practice 7, 70-80. [CrossRef]
398. Clara Martínez Fuentes. 1999. Measuring hospital service quality: a methodological study. Managing Service Quality: AnInternational Journal 9:4, 230-240. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
399. Ian N Lings. 1999. Managing Service Quality with Internal Marketing Schematics. Long Range Planning 32, 452-463.[CrossRef]
400. Jillian Dawes, Jennifer Rowley. 1999. Negative evaluations of service quality ‐ a framework for identification and response.Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science 5:2, 46-55. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
401. Susan Auty, George Long. 1999. “Tribal warfare” and gaps affecting internal service quality. International Journal of ServiceIndustry Management 10:1, 7-22. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
402. Paula Roberts. 1999. The development of NEdSERV: quantitative instrumentation to measure service quality in nurseeducation. Nurse Education Today 19, 396-407. [CrossRef]
403. Barry Davies, Steve Baron, Tony Gear, Martin Read. 1999. Measuring and managing service quality. Marketing Intelligence& Planning 17:1, 33-40. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
404. Stewart Robinson. 1999. Measuring service quality: current thinking and future requirements. Marketing Intelligence &Planning 17:1, 21-32. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
405. Susan Aldridge, Jennifer Rowley. 1998. Measuring customer satisfaction in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education6:4, 197-204. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
406. Jillian Dawes, Jennifer Rowley. 1998. Enhancing the customer experience: contributions from information technology.Management Decision 36:5, 350-357. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
407. Yuksel Ekinci, Michael Riley, Chris Fife‐Schaw. 1998. Which school of thought? The dimensions of resort hotel quality.International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 10:2, 63-67. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
408. Janet R. McColl‐Kennedy, Tina White. 1997. Service provider training programs at odds with customer requirements infive‐star hotels. Journal of Services Marketing 11:4, 249-264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
409. Audrey Gilmore, David Carson. 1996. “Integrative” qualitative methods in a services context. Marketing Intelligence & Planning14:6, 21-26. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
410. Mohamed Hegazy, Rasha HamdyThe Role of Computer-Mediated Communication Modes in Enhancing Audit Quality77-93. [CrossRef]
411. Service Quality Dimensions Within Technology-Based Banking Services 198-248. [CrossRef]412. Parves Sultan, Ho Yin WongCultural Influence on Global Assessment of Higher Education Service Quality: 1637-1657.
[CrossRef]413. Luís Kalb RosesAlignment of Perceptions in Information Technology Service Quality 260-273. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)
414. Gyaneshwar Singh Kushwaha, Shiv Ratan AgrawalCustomer Satisfaction via Service Quality Dimensions: 1829-1846.[CrossRef]
415. Amritesh, Subhas C. Misra, Jayanta ChatterjeeApplying Gap Model for Bringing Effectiveness to e-Government Services:1292-1306. [CrossRef]
416. Sue CongerService Quality 537-566. [CrossRef]417. Nabeel Farouq Al-Mushasha, Shahizan HassanA Model for Mobile Learning Service Quality in University Environment
287-309. [CrossRef]
Dow
nloa
ded
by Y
UA
N Z
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y A
t 19:
54 2
2 D
ecem
ber
2015
(PT
)