servicescape symbolism - eprints.qut.edu.au · servicescape symbolism a thesis submitted to the...

Servicescape Symbolism

A thesis submitted to the School of Advertising, Marketing and Public Relations,

Queensland University of Technology, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in 2012

by

Yun-Hsin Chou

BSc (Hons) (Mass Communication) Ming Chuan University, Taiwan 1998

MSc (Marketing) University of Stirling, UK 2003

ii

Keywords: Servicescape, Self Theory, Personal Construct Theory, Human Value Theory,

Symbolic Interactionism, Self-Congruity Model, symbolic meanings, cognition, salient

servicescape attribute, values of the self, actual self, ideal self, social self, repertory tests,

laddering technique, hierarchical value map, categorisation, content analysis, servicescape

image, factor analysis, polynomial regression with response surface analysis, moderated

polynomial regression, self-incongruence, preference, Service Profit Chain, in-depth

interview, web-based survey

iii

ABSTRACT

In order to drive sustainable financial profitability, service firms make significant

investments in creating service environments that consumers will prefer over the

environments of their competitors. To date, servicescape research is over-focused on

understanding consumers‘ emotional and physiological responses to servicescape

attributes, rather than taking a holistic view of how consumers cognitively interpret

servicescapes. This thesis argues that consumers will cognitively ascribe symbolic

meanings to servicescapes and then evaluate if those meanings are congruent with their

sense of Self in order to form a preference for a servicescape. Consequently, this thesis

takes a Self Theory approach to servicescape symbolism to address the following broad

research question:

How do ascribed symbolic meanings influence servicescape preference?

Using a three-study, mixed-method approach, this thesis investigates the symbolic

meanings consumers ascribe to servicescapes and empirically tests whether the joint

effects of congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes influence consumers‘ servicescape preference. First, Study One identifies

the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attributes using a combination of

repertory tests and laddering techniques within 19 semi-structured individual depth

interviews. Study Two modifies an existing scale to create a symbolic servicescape

meaning scale in order to measure the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes.

Finally, Study Three utilises the Self-Congruity Model to empirically examine the joint

effects of consumer Self and servicescape on consumers‘ preference for servicescapes.

Using polynomial regression with response surface analysis, 14 joint effect models

demonstrate that both Self-Servicescape incongruity and congruity influence consumers‘

preference for servicescapes. Combined, the findings of three studies suggest that the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes and their (in)congruities with consumers‘

sense of self can be used to predict consumers‘ preferences for servicescapes. These

findings have several key theoretical and practical contributions to services marketing.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 1 1.1 RESEARCH PROBLEM .............................................................................................. 1 1.2 RESEARCH RATIONALE .......................................................................................... 4 1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE ........................................................................................... 8 1.4 RESEARCH PROGRAM ............................................................................................. 9

1.4.1 Study One ................................................................................................................. 9 1.4.2 Study Two................................................................................................................. 9 1.4.3 Study Three ............................................................................................................ 11

1.5 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHY ...................................................................................... 13 1.6 ETHICS CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................... 13 1.7 CONTRIBUTIONS TO MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE................... 14 1.8 OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS ................................................................................. 15 1.9 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 18

2 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................... 19 2.1 EXAMINING SERVICESCAPE RESEARCH ........................................................ 19

2.1.1 Servicescape Frameworks ..................................................................................... 20 2.1.2 Symbolism in Servicescape .................................................................................... 26

2.2 THE SELF .................................................................................................................... 27 2.2.1 Self Theory ............................................................................................................. 28 2.2.2 Self and Symbols .................................................................................................... 29 2.2.3 Personal Construct Theory .................................................................................... 31 2.2.4 The Self and Personality ........................................................................................ 33 2.2.5 Personal Value Theory .......................................................................................... 36

2.3 SELF-CONGRUITY MODEL ................................................................................... 42 2.4 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 44

3 STUDY ONE ......................................................................................................... 45 3.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE ......................................................................................... 45 3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN AND JUSTIFICATION ....................................................... 45

3.2.1 Phase One: Repertory Test Technique .................................................................. 48 3.2.2 Phase Two: Laddering Technique ......................................................................... 49 3.2.3 Justification of a Combination of Repertory Test and Laddering Techniques ...... 50

3.3 RESEARCH PROCEDURE AND JUSTIFICATION ............................................. 51 3.3.1 Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 51 3.3.2 Sample.................................................................................................................... 53 3.3.3 Data Collection ...................................................................................................... 54

3.4 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 56 3.4.1 Sort Data Points .................................................................................................... 57 3.4.2 Categorise and Theme Attributes .......................................................................... 57 3.4.3 Categorise and Theme Consequences and End-Values ......................................... 58 3.4.4 Data Presentation .................................................................................................. 58 3.4.5 Method Summary ................................................................................................... 59

3.5 FINDINGS .................................................................................................................... 59 3.5.1 Tier 1: Salient Attributes ....................................................................................... 60 3.5.2 Tier 2: Consequences ............................................................................................ 65 3.5.3 Tier 3: Values ........................................................................................................ 68

3.6 DEVELOPMENT OF HIERARCHICAL VALUE MAPS ..................................... 69 3.6.1 Staff Behaviour (A8) .............................................................................................. 71 3.6.2 Furnishing (A4) ..................................................................................................... 73 3.6.3 Outdoors (A1) ........................................................................................................ 74 3.6.4 Layout and Space (A6) ........................................................................................... 76 3.6.5 Colour (A2) ............................................................................................................ 79

vi

3.6.6 Consumer Behaviour (A10) ................................................................................... 80 3.6.7 Architectural Design (A3) ..................................................................................... 82 3.6.8 Certification (A7) .................................................................................................. 84 3.6.9 Consumer Appearance (A11) ................................................................................ 85 3.6.10 Staff Appearance (A9) ......................................................................................... 86 3.6.11 Cleanliness (A5) .................................................................................................. 87

3.7 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 88 4 STUDY TWO ........................................................................................................ 91

4.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE ......................................................................................... 91 4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN AND JUSTIFICATION ....................................................... 91 4.3 RESEARCH PROCEDURE ...................................................................................... 94

4.3.1 Stage One: Selecting Stimuli ................................................................................. 94 4.3.2 Stage Two: Developing Items and Selecting the Scaling Format ......................... 95 4.3.3 Stage Three: Finalising Survey Layout and Instructions .................................... 103 4.3.4 Survey Pre-Testing .............................................................................................. 103

4.4 DATA COLLECTION .............................................................................................. 105 4.4.1 Sample Size and Sampling Strategy .................................................................... 105 4.4.2 Survey Administration ......................................................................................... 106

4.5 METHODS FOR DATA ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 107 4.5.1 Factor Analysis ................................................................................................... 107 4.5.2 Method for Factor Extraction ............................................................................. 108 4.5.3 Factor Interpretation ........................................................................................... 109 4.5.4 Missing Data ....................................................................................................... 111 4.5.5 Criteria to Extract Factors .................................................................................. 111 4.5.6 Label Factors ...................................................................................................... 112 4.5.7 Reliability and Validity ........................................................................................ 112

4.6 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................. 114 4.6.1 Sample Characteristics ....................................................................................... 114 4.6.2 Intercorrelations.................................................................................................. 115 4.6.3 Final Scale Structure ........................................................................................... 118 4.6.4 Qualitative Interpretation of the Three-Component Structure ............................ 119 4.6.5 Reliability and Validity of the Measure ............................................................... 120

4.7 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 122 5 STUDY THREE .................................................................................................. 123

5.1 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE AND HYPOTHESES ................................................. 123 5.1.1 Personality of the Self and Servicescape Preference .......................................... 126 5.1.2 Values of the Self and Servicescape Preference .................................................. 128 5.1.3 Moderating Effect of Salient Personality Components on Preference ................ 130 5.1.4 Moderating Effect of the Salient Personal Values on Preference ....................... 131 5.1.5 Summary .............................................................................................................. 132

5.2 RESEARCH DESIGN AND JUSTIFICATION ..................................................... 134 5.3 RESEARCH PROCEDURE .................................................................................... 135

5.3.1 Sample and Data Collection................................................................................ 137 5.4 METHODS FOR DATA ANALYSIS AND JUSTIFICATION ............................ 140

5.4.1 Polynomial Regression ........................................................................................ 141 5.4.2 Response Surface Analysis .................................................................................. 141 5.4.3 Assumptions of the Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Analysis ..... 143 5.4.4 Justification of the Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Analysis ..... 144 5.4.5 Data Analysis Procedure .................................................................................... 146

5.5 FINDINGS ................................................................................................................. 150 5.5.1 Preliminary Data Preparation ............................................................................ 151 5.5.2 Hypotheses Testing .............................................................................................. 159 5.5.3 Predictive Strength of Personality Components and Personal Values ............... 204 5.5.4 Testing the Moderating Effects............................................................................ 206

vii

5.5.5 Summary of the Findings ..................................................................................... 221 5.6 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 223

6 DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................... 225 6.1 OVERALL RESEARCH PURPOSE ....................................................................... 226 6.2 DISCUSSION OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGS ................................................. 227

6.2.1 Study One: Exploring the Symbolic Meanings Ascribed to Salient Servicescape

Attributes .......................................................................................................................... 227 6.2.2 Study Two: Modifying a Measure to Evaluate the Symbolic Meanings Ascribed to

Servicescapes ................................................................................................................... 229 6.2.3 Study Three: Testing the Joint Effects of Consumer Self and Symbolic Meanings

Ascribed to Servicescapes on Preference......................................................................... 233 6.3 CONTRIBUTIONS TO THEORY .......................................................................... 235

6.3.1 Self Theory ........................................................................................................... 236 6.3.2 Human Value Theory ........................................................................................... 237 6.3.3 Self-Congruity Model ........................................................................................... 238

6.4 CONTRIBUTIONS TO PRACTICE ....................................................................... 239 6.4.1 Implication for Segmentation and Servicescape Design ..................................... 239 6.4.2 Implication for Service Employee Training and Recruitment ............................. 241

6.5 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS ............................. 242 6.6 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 243

APPENDIX A: STUDY ONE INTERVIEW INFORMATION ........................ 245

APPENDIX B: STUDY ONE PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS ............................ 249 APPENDIX C: STUDY TWO SURVEY INFORMATION .............................. 267

APPENDIX D: STUDY THREE SURVEY INFORMATION .......................... 279 APPENDIX E: STUDY THREE RESULTS OF THE PREDICTIVE STRENGTH

COMPARISON MODELS ................................................................................... 289

7 REFERENCE ...................................................................................................... 313

ix

TABLE OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: DIAGRAM TO OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS ....................................................... 16 FIGURE 2: MAPPING BITNER‘S (1992) SERVICESCAPE FRAMEWORK AGAINST

MEHRABIAN AND RUSSELL‘S (1974) S-O-R MODEL ...................................... 21 FIGURE 3: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ATTRIBUTES, CONSEQUENCES, AND END-

VALUES .................................................................................................................... 60 FIGURE 4: STAFF BEHAVIOUR AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND

END-VALUES .......................................................................................................... 71 FIGURE 5: FURNISHING AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND END-

VALUES .................................................................................................................... 73 FIGURE 6: OUTDOORS AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND END-

VALUES .................................................................................................................... 75 FIGURE 7: LAYOUT AND SPACE AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND

END-VALUES .......................................................................................................... 77 FIGURE 8: COLOUR AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND END-

VALUES .................................................................................................................... 79 FIGURE 9: CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES

AND END-VALUES................................................................................................. 81 FIGURE 10: ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH

CONSEQUENCES AND END-VALUES ................................................................ 83 FIGURE 11: CERTIFICATION AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND

END-VALUES .......................................................................................................... 84 FIGURE 12: CONSUMER APPEARANCE AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH

CONSEQUENCES AND END-VALUES ................................................................ 85 FIGURE 13: STAFF APPEARANCE AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES

AND END-VALUES................................................................................................. 86 FIGURE 14: CLEANLINESS AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH CONSEQUENCES AND END-

VALUES .................................................................................................................... 87 FIGURE 15: EMPIRICAL FRAMEWORK OF SYMBOLIC SERVICESCAPE ...................... 125 FIGURE 16: A REPRESENTATION OF POLYNOMIAL REGRESSION WITH RESPONSE

SURFACE PATTERN............................................................................................. 142 FIGURE 17: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

SOCIABILITY OF THE IDEAL SELF & SOCIABILITY ASCRIBED TO

SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ................................................................. 164 FIGURE 18: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

PROFESSIONALISM OF THE IDEAL SELF & PROFESSIONALISM

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ...................................... 165 FIGURE 19: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE IDEAL SELF & STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A

DISCREPANCY ................................................................................................... 166 FIGURE 20: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

SOCIABILITY OF THE ACTUAL SELF & THE SOCIABILITY ASCRIBED TO

SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ................................................................. 167 FIGURE 21: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

PROFESSIONALISM OF THE ACTUAL SELF & THE PROFESSIONALISM

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ......................................... 168 FIGURE 22: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

ACTUAL SELF & STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY

................................................................................................................................. 169 FIGURE 23: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

SOCIABILITY OF THE SOCIAL SELF & THE SOCIABILITY ASCRIBED TO

SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ................................................................. 170

x

FIGURE 24: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

PROFESSIONALISM OF THE SOCIAL SELF & THE PROFESSIONALISM

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ....................................... 170 FIGURE 25: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE SOCIAL SELF & THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A

DISCREPANCY .................................................................................................. 171 FIGURE 26: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE LIFE

ENJOYMENT VALUE OF THE SELF & THE LIFE ENJOYMENT VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ..................................... 172 FIGURE 27: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE PLEASANT

AND PLEASURE VALUE OF THE SELF & THE PLEASANT AND PLEASURE

VALUE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ......................... 173 FIGURE 28: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

RESPONSIBILITY VALUE OF THE SELF & THE RESPONSIBILITY VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ...................................... 173 FIGURE 29: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE SENSE OF

BELONGING VALUE OF THE SELF & SENSE OF BELONGING VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ..................................... 174 FIGURE 30: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE A AS PREDICTED BY THE

RECOGNITION VALUE OF THE SELF & RECOGNITION VALUE ASCRIBED

TO SERVICESCAPE A DISCREPANCY ............................................................. 175 FIGURE 31: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE

SOCIABILITY OF THE IDEAL SELF & THE SOCIABILITY ASCRIBED TO

SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ................................................................. 178 FIGURE 32: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE

PROFESSIONALISM OF THE IDEAL SELF & THE PROFESSIONALISM

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ...................................... 179 FIGURE 33: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE IDEAL SELF & THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B

DISCREPANCY ................................................................................................... 180 FIGURE 34: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE


SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY .................................................................... 181 FIGURE 35: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ...................................... 181 FIGURE 36: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE ACTUAL SELF & THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B

DISCREPANCY .................................................................................................. 182 FIGURE 37: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE


SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY .................................................................... 183 FIGURE 38: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ........................................ 184 FIGURE 39: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE SOCIAL SELF –THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B

DISCREPANCY ..................................................................................................... 184 FIGURE 40: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE LIFE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ...................................... 185 FIGURE 41: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE PLEASANT


VALUE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ....................... 186

xi

FIGURE 42: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ......................................... 187 FIGURE 43: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE SENSE OF

BELONGING VALUE OF THE SELF & THE SENSE OF BELONGING VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ......................................... 188 FIGURE 44: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE B AS PREDICTED BY THE

RECOGNITION VALUE OF THE SELF & THE RECOGNITION VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE B DISCREPANCY ......................................... 189 FIGURE 45: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE

SOCIABILITY OF THE IDEAL SELF & THE SOCIABILITY ASCRIBED TO

SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ................................................................. 191 FIGURE 46: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE

PROFESSIONALISM OF THE IDEAL SELF & THE PROFESSIONALISM

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ...................................... 192 FIGURE 47: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE IDEAL SELF & THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C

DISCREPANCY ...................................................................................................... 192 FIGURE 48: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE


SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ................................................................... 193 FIGURE 49: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ...................................... 194 FIGURE 50: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE ACTUAL SELF & THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C

DISCREPANCY ...................................................................................................... 195 FIGURE 51: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE


SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY .................................................................... 196 FIGURE 52: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ....................................... 196 FIGURE 53: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE STYLE OF

THE SOCIAL SELF & THE STYLE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C

DISCREPANCY ...................................................................................................... 197 FIGURE 54: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE LIFE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ......................................... 198 FIGURE 55: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE PLEASANT


VALUE ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY........................... 199 FIGURE 56: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE


ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ......................................... 199 FIGURE 57: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE SENSE OF

BELONGING VALUE OF THE SELF & THE SENSE OF BELONGING VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ......................................... 200 FIGURE 58: PREFERENCE FOR SERVICESCAPE C AS PREDICTED BY THE

RECOGNITION VALUE OF THE SELF & THE RECOGNITION VALUE

ASCRIBED TO SERVICESCAPE C DISCREPANCY ......................................... 201 FIGURE 59: LOW LEVELS OF THE SALIENT STYLE ON PERSONALITY OF IDEAL SELF

(SISTYLE) ............................................................................................................... 209 FIGURE 60: HIGH LEVELS OF THE SALIENT STYLE ON PERSONALITY OF IDEAL

SELF (SISTYLE) ................................................................................................... 210

xii

FIGURE 61: LOW LEVELS OF THE SALIENT STYLE ON PERSONALITY OF ACTUAL

SELF (SISTYLE) ................................................................................................... 211 FIGURE 62: HIGH LEVELS OF THE SALIENT STYLE ON PERSONALITY OF ACTUAL

SELF (SISTYLE) .................................................................................................... 211 FIGURE 63: LOW LEVELS OF THE SALIENT STYLE ON PERSONALITY OF SOCIAL

SELF (SISTYLE) ................................................................................................... 212 FIGURE 64: HIGH LEVELS OF THE SALIENT STYLE ON PERSONALITY OF SOCIAL

SELF (SISTYLE) .................................................................................................... 213 FIGURE 65: LOW LEVELS OF THE SALIENT RESPONSIBILITY ON VALUES OF THE

SELF (SIRESPON) ................................................................................................. 215 FIGURE 66: HIGH LEVELS OF THE SALIENT RESPONSIBILITY ON VALUES OF THE

SELF (SIRESPON) ................................................................................................. 216 FIGURE 67: LOW LEVELS OF THE SALIENT PROFESSIONALISM ON ACTUAL SELF

(SIPROMAN) .......................................................................................................... 218 FIGURE 68: HIGH LEVELS OF THE SALIENT PROFESSIONALISM ON ACTUAL SELF

(SIPROMAN) .......................................................................................................... 219

xiii

TABLE OF TABLES

TABLE 1: OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH PROGRAM ................................................................ 12 TABLE 2: SERVICESCAPE DIMENSIONS AND RELATED ATTRIBUTES IN EXISTING

LITERATURE ........................................................................................................... 23 TABLE 3: SYMBOLIC MEANINGS AND THEIR CORRESPONDENCE TO PERSONAL

VALUES .................................................................................................................... 40 TABLE 4: PRESENTATION OF THE SET OF TRIADS USING BALANCED INCOMPLETE

BLOCK DESIGN ...................................................................................................... 52 TABLE 5: EMPLOYMENT, GENDER AND AGE OF THE INFORMANTS OF STUDY ONE

................................................................................................................................... 54 TABLE 6: EMERGENT THEMES DERIVED FROM SALIENT ATTRIBUTES ...................... 64 TABLE 7: CONSEQUENCE AND THE THEMES ..................................................................... 66 TABLE 8: VALUES AND THEIR THEMES IN CORRESPONDING TO SCHWARTZ‘S (1992)

VALUE TYPES ......................................................................................................... 69 TABLE 9: THEMES AND THEMED CODES FOR ATTRIBUTES, CONSEQUENCES AND

END-VALUES .......................................................................................................... 70 TABLE 10: THREE REPRESENTATIVE SERVICESCAPE IMAGES...................................... 95 TABLE 11: SERVICESCAPE IMAGES AND THEIR CORRESPONDING PERSONALITY

DESCRIPTORS AND SELF-RELEVANT VALUES .............................................. 98 TABLE 12: A COMPARISON BETWEEN 28 PERSONALITY DESCRIPTORS AND

MALHOTRA‘S (1981) 15 PAIRS OF SELF-CONCEPT ITEMS............................ 99 TABLE 13: BIPOLAR PERSONALITY DESCRIPTORS ......................................................... 100 TABLE 14: SEVEN-POINT SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL SYMBOLIC SERVICESCAPE

MEANING SCALE ................................................................................................. 102 TABLE 15: OVERVIEW OF TWO SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS OF PARTICIPANTS ... 115 TABLE 16: INTER-ITEM CORRECTIONS AND MSA VALUES BETWEEN VARIABLES117 TABLE 17: KMO AND BARTLETT'S TEST ACROSS THREE VERSIONS OF SURVEYS 118 TABLE 18: FINAL THREE-COMPONENT EFA STRUCTURE FOR SYMBOLIC

SERVICESCAPE MEANING SCALE ................................................................... 119 TABLE 19: SERVICESCAPE PERSONALITY DESCRIPTORS, THE EXTRACTED

FACTORS AND THE CORRESPONDING SELF-RELEVANT VALUES ......... 120 TABLE 20: CFA MODEL FIT (N=250) ..................................................................................... 121 TABLE 21: REGRESSION WEIGHTS (N=250) ........................................................................ 121 TABLE 22: CORRELATIONS, SQUARED CORRELATIONS AND VE OF CFA MODEL

(N=250) .................................................................................................................... 122 TABLE 23: SUMMARY OF HYPOTHESES FOR STUDY THREE ........................................ 133 TABLE 24: SURVEY MEASURES ............................................................................................ 136 TABLE 25: OVERVIEW OF SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS FOR STUDY THREE ............ 139 TABLE 26: MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, INTERCORRELATION AND ALPHA

COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN PERSONALITY COMPONENTS VARIABLES

(VERSION 1: SERVICESCAPE A) ....................................................................... 153 TABLE 27: MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, INTERCORRELATION AND ALPHA

COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN PERSONAL VALUES VARIABLES (VERSION 1:

SERVICESCAPE A) ............................................................................................... 154 TABLE 28: MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, INTERCORRELATION AND ALPHA


(VERSION 2: SERVICESCAPE B) ........................................................................ 155 TABLE 29: MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, INTERCORRELATION AND ALPHA


SERVICESCAPE B) ............................................................................................... 156 TABLE 30: MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, INTERCORRELATION AND ALPHA


(VERSION 3: SERVICESCAPE C) ........................................................................ 157

xiv

TABLE 31:MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION, INTERCORRELATION AND ALPHA


SERVICESCAPE C) ............................................................................................... 158 TABLE 32: RESULTS OF HYPOTHESES TESTING FOR CONGRUENCE AND

MODERATING EFFECTS..................................................................................... 160 TABLE 33: VERSION 1-HYPOTHESES 1A-3C: PREDICTING PREFERENCE

SERVICESCAPE A FROM PERSONALITY OF THE SELF-SERVICESCAPE A

CONGRUENCE ...................................................................................................... 163 TABLE 34: VERSION 1-HYPOTHESES 4A-4E: PREDICTING PREFERENCE FOR

SERVICESCAPE A FROM VALUES OF THE SELF-SERVICESCAPE A

CONGRUENCE ...................................................................................................... 163 TABLE 35: VERSION 2-HYPOTHESES 1A-3C: PREDICTING PREFERENCE FOR

SERVICESCAPE B FROM PERSONALITY OF THE SELF-SERVICESCAPE B


SERVICESCAPE B FROM VALUES OF THE SELF-SERVICESCAPE B

CONGRUENCE ...................................................................................................... 177 TABLE 37: VERSION 3-HYPOTHESES 1A-3C: PREDICTING PREFERENCE FOR

SERVICESCAPE C FROM PERSONALITY OF THE SELF-SERVICESCAPE C


SERVICESCAPE C FROM VALUES OF THE SELF-SERVICESCAPE C

CONGRUENCE ...................................................................................................... 190 TABLE 39: RESULTS OF HYPOTHESES TESTING FOR CONGRUENCE AND

INCONGRUENCE EFFECTS ................................................................................ 203 TABLE 40: OVERVIEW OF THE PREDICTIVE STRENGTH COMPARISON OF

PERSONALITY COMPONENTS AND PERSONAL VALUES .......................... 205 TABLE 41: COMPARISONS ON R

2 BETWEEN POLYNOMIAL REGRESSIONS AND

MODERATED POLYNOMIAL REGRESSION MODELS (SERVICESCAPE A)

................................................................................................................................. 207 TABLE 42: MEAN AND SD OF VARIABLE AT HIGH AND LOW LEVELS OF THE

SALIENT STYLE PERSONALITY (SISTYLE) (SERVICESCAPE A) ............... 208 TABLE 43: COMPARISONS ON R

2 BETWEEN POLYNOMIAL REGRESSION AND

MODERATED POLYNOMIAL REGRESSION MODELS (SERVICESCAPE B)


SALIENT RESPONSIBILITY VALUE (SIRESPON) (SERVICESCAPE B) ...... 215 TABLE 45: COMPARISONS ON R

S BETWEEN POLYNOMIAL REGRESSION AND

MODERATED POLYNOMIAL REGRESSION MODELS (SERVICESCAPE C)


SALIENT PROFESSIONALISM PERSONALITY (SIPROMAN)

(SERVICESCAPE C) .............................................................................................. 218 TABLE 47: SUMMARY OF HYPOTHESES TESTING FOR THE MODERATING EFFECTS

................................................................................................................................. 220

xv

GLOSSARY

Term Definition (Source)

General Term

Cognition Process by which a living creature obtains knowledge of some

object or becomes aware of its environment (perception, discovery,

recognition, imagining, judging, memorizing, learning, thinking);

knowing, as distinct from volitional or emotional processes; the

product of cognizing or knowing (Eysenck, Arnold & Meili, 1982).

Servicescape Terms

Servicescape is the physical environment and service staff qualities that

characterise the context which houses the service encounter, which

elicits internal reactions from consumers leading to the display of

approach or avoidance behaviours (Harris & Ezeh, 2008, p. 392).

Servicescape

attributes Relate to (1) the physical and intangible environment (e.g., Mattila

& Wirtz, 2001), and (2) service staff quality (e.g., Harris & Ezeh,

2008; Nguyen, 2006), and (3) consumer interactions (Tombs &

McColl-Kennedy, 2003) that influence consumers‘ internal

responses (i.e., their cognition, emotion and physiology) that in turn

influence their approach or avoidance behaviours (Bitner, 1992).

Self-Related Terms

Self One‘s thoughts and feelings, having reference to her/himself as an

object as well as an agent to construe surrounding objects

(Rosenberg, 1979; Kelly, 1955).

Self-concept The cognitive beliefs that an individual holds and learns about

him/herself (Avila & Purkey, 1972).

Actual self What an individual really believes he/she is (Epstein, 1973; Huber,

Vollhardt, Matthes, & Vogel, 2010).

Ideal self How an individual aspires to be (Aaker, 1999; Belk, 1988; Huber, et

al., 2010).

Social self What an individual believes others think of him/her and how they

think they are perceived (Malhotra, 1988).

Values of the self General goals and end states that are the basis of much of our feeling

of authenticity. Being true to one‘s values and principles is being

true to oneself in a fundamental way (Gecas, 2000, p. 102).

Self-Congruity The match between consumers‘ self-concepts and the user image (or

the corresponding self-relevant personality descriptors) of a given

product, brand, store, etc (Kressmann et al., 2006, p. 955).

Self-servicescape

congruence The match between consumer Self (i.e., personality of the Ideal Self,

Actual Self, and Social Self, as well as personal value of the Self)

and the symbolic meanings ascribed to a given servicescape.

Self Theory Asserts that people perceive the world not in isolation but in relation

to one‘s Self; people are motivated to pursue experiences that are

consistent with their concept of Self and avoid experiences that are

inconsistent (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Markus & Wurf, 1987; Purkey,

1970; Rosenberg, 1979).

xvi

Term Definition (Source)

Symbolic Interactionism Terms

Symbol

Subjective, complex sets of abstract beliefs associated with an object

or action that represent an entity extrinsic to the physical and/or

intangible forms of objects, events, relationships, thoughts, and

feelings (Allen & Ng, 1999, p. 11).

Symbolic exchange The mutual transfer of psychological, social, or other intangible

entities between two or more parties (Bagozzi, 1975, p. 36).

Symbolic meanings Is defined by social consensus, which is derived from direct social

transactions and through social institutions (Belk, 1988; Dittmar,

1992; Leigh & Gabel, 1992 ; Rochberg-Halton, 1984; Solomon,

1983; Thompson & Hirschman, 1995).

Symbolic

Interactionism Claims that consumers‘ responses to environmental stimuli is not

based on sensory input; rather, the response is based on the

cognition of the environmental stimuli in relation to the Self (Herek,

1986; Hewitt, 2007; Solomon, 1983).

Personal Construct Terms

Construct A construct is an element of knowledge (Cervone & Pervin, 2010, p.

391).

Personal construct A concept used to interpret, or construe the world (Cervone &

Pervin, 2010, p. 391).

Personal Construct

Theory Asserts that individuals construe their environment using their

construct meaning structure, which is formed from their experience

(Bannister, 2003; Butt, 2008; Kelly 2003). An individual‘s meaning

structure reflects his/her existence (Rowe, 1996).

Value Terms

Values Refers to interests, pleasures, likes, preferences, duties, moral

obligations, desires, wants, goals, needs, aversions and attraction,

and many other kinds of selective orientations (Rokeach, 1979). The

core phenomenon of values is the presence of criteria of preference

(Rokeach, 1979, p. 16).

Personal values Abstract structures that involve the beliefs that people hold about

desirable ways of behaving or about desirable end states (Feather,

1995, p. 1).

Human Value Theory Asserts that values are cognitive beliefs by which an individual

orientates him/herself in the environment (Rokeach, 1973; Wade-

Benzoni, et al., 2002).

xvii

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet the

requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the best of

my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written

by another person except when due reference is made.

_____________________________

Yun-Hsin Chou

on 27 June 2012

xix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This thesis would not appear in its present form without the guidance and support of

many people. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people who have

contributed to the final result in many different ways. Firstly, I would like to express my

heartiest gratitude and appreciation to my excellent supervisory team. To my principle

supervisor, Professor Ian Lings, a big ‗THANK YOU‘ to you for keeping me on the right

track with your constant advice and giving me the confidence to achieve above and

beyond. Your insights and tireless support have enabled me to excel and achieve what I

previously thought was impossible. To my associate supervisor, Dr Dominique Greer, I

am truly and deeply grateful for your wise, encouragement and patience to guide me to

overcome the academic writing difficulty. To my associate supervisor, Dr Ursula

Bougoure, thank you for reading my documents and providing me valuable comments.

And for that I owe the debt of gratitude to you all.

My sincerest thanks are extended to Dr Stephen Cox, for your suggestions and inspiration

which have provided good and smooth methodology basis for my thesis. I would like to

stress the importance of the participants in this study, and thanks your for collaborating

with me and lending your time, knowledge and expertise to be a part of this research

study. The interviews required a great deal of audacity, and I want to thank each one of

you for your willingness to participate. Without you this study would have not been

possible. I also acknowledge the research student officers, Trina Robbie, Carol O‘Brien

and Dennis O'Connell and the language advisors, Jenna Brady and Jonathan Bader for

your advices and assistance throughout this journey.

Thanks to many of my Brisbane friends, whose friendship and support have made this

city more than a temporary place of study. I would especially like to thank Angela

McCabe, Sharine Ling, Marvin Huang, Lucia Drago, Thidi Khai, Pak Damrongsak,

Saysana Sisourth, Ying Zhou, Yuna An, Euejung Hwang, Saranya Labsomboonsiri,

Carlin Guo, Robbie Kivits, Tom Chen, Hani Hamdan, Samantha Murdy, Gabrielle Jess

and Emmy Nozu for your lovely friendship and moral support, as well as Dr Sukanlaya

Sawang for your professional advice and never fading optimism.

Thanks also to my friends in Taiwan with whom I have shared experiences in life. The

warm support of them has enabled me to complete this thesis and to have a wonderful

xx

time along the way. A special thank to Oscar Kerkenaar for your caring presence, sense

of humour, constant encouragement and love I have relied upon during the writing stage

of this thesis.

Thanks to my sisters, Maggie, Sylvia, and Amanda for all of your understanding and for

making this long journey away from home bearable. Lastly, and most importantly, this

thesis is dedicated to my parents, who have always supported and encouraged me to do

my best through all the life changing events that eventually led me back to school. Thanks

to my mum for being my rock and keeping me in touch with reality throughout my

studies. Thanks to my dad for encouraging and inspiring me to reach my dreams. Without

you both, none of this would have even been possible.

1

1 Introduction

To drive sustainable financial profitability (Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser Jr, &

Schlesinger, 1994), service firms devote significant effort and investment to creating

a service environment that consumers prefer over the environment of their

competitors. Research on service environments has identified various stimuli that

arouse consumers‘ positive internal affective, physiological and cognitive responses,

which result in approach behaviour (e.g., Bitner, 1992; Harris & Ezeh, 2008:

Rosenbaum, 2005). However, little empirical study has investigated the mediating

role of cognition in the study of the servicescape‘s influence preference. This thesis

argues that consumers cognitively interpret the symbolic meanings present in service

environments, and then evaluate if those meanings are congruent with their sense of

Self, in order to form a preference for the service environment (McGrath, 1998;

Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011; Sherry, 2000, 1998b; Solomon, 1998). Consequently,

the formation of consumers‘ preference for service environments may be determined

by the congruence between consumers‘ sense of Self and the symbolic meanings

ascribed to service environments. Understanding these antecedents of preference is

the focus of this thesis.

This chapter introduces the idea that the congruence between consumer Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to service environments may be used to predict

consumers‘ preference for a service environment. The chapter outlines the research

problem, rationale, objectives, program, philosophy, ethical considerations, and

contributions to marketing theory and practice presented in this thesis. The overall

structure of the thesis is presented in the final section of the chapter.

1.1 Research Problem

According to Heskett and colleagues (1994), a service firm‘s profitability is driven

by consumers‘ perceptions of the performance of operational inputs, their overall

evaluation of and behavioural intention towards the service, and resulting behaviours.

The Service Profit Chain reinforces the importance of a service firm‘s operational

investment, including physical, technological and human factors, in service quality.

Consumers perceive and evaluate service quality to guide their behaviour, including

patronage duration (Bolton, 1998), repurchase behaviour (Mittal & Kamakura, 2001),

2

duration of stay, and cross-purchasing (Loveman, 1998). These behaviours will

ultimately be associated with consumer retention (Ittner & Larcker, 1998) and

revenue creation (Rucci, Kirn, & Quinn, 1998). Thus, the operational investments

service firms make will directly impact their profitability and growth (Heskett, et al.,

1994).

One operational investment that has a significant impact on consumer attitude and

behaviour is the design of the service environment (e.g., Harris & Ezeh, 2008;

Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011). In the absence of a physical product, consumers

evaluate the service environment with which they interact to form attitudes towards

the service (Hightower, Brady, & Baker, 2002; Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011).

Service environments are typically referred to as servicescapes. A servicescape is

defined as ―the physical environment and service staff qualities that characterise the

context which houses the service encounter, which elicits internal reactions from

consumers leading to the display of approach or avoidance behaviours‖ (Harris &

Ezeh, 2008, p. 392).

Servicescapes comprise a variety of environmental stimuli. These stimuli are known

as the attributes of the environment (e.g., music, scent, and seating). Typically, these

attributes relate to (1) the physical and intangible environment (e.g., Mattila & Wirtz,

2001), and (2) service staff quality (e.g., Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Nguyen, 2006), and (3)

consumer interactions (e.g., Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003). These three

dimensions of the servicescape are thought to influence consumers‘ internal

responses (i.e., their cognition, emotion and physiology) that in turn influence their

approach or avoidance behaviours.

The effect of servicescape attributes on consumers‘ internal responses and

subsequent behaviour has been investigated using several holistic servicescape

models. Bitner (1992) initially proposed a framework that focused on the impact of

the physical attributes of the servicescape (discussed in detail in Chapter Two).

Tombs and McColl-Kennedy (2003) later suggested an extension of this framework

by adding social attributes as an impactful dimension. Harris and Ezeh (2008) later

empirically tested these holistic models (Bitner, 1992; Tombs & McColl-Kennedy,

2003) and confirmed that physical and social attributes simultaneously influence

consumers‘ attitudes and behaviours.

3

Although researchers have devoted considerable attention to developing and testing

holistic models of servicescape (e.g., Bitner, 1992, Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Rosenbaum

& Massiah, 2011; Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003), which are discussed in Chapter

Two, the existing literature mainly focuses on how servicescape attributes arouse

consumers‘ emotional and physiological responses and, in turn, influence their

behaviours. What remains under-investigated (for notable exceptions, see

Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011; Sherry, 1998b; Thang & Tan, 2003) is how consumers

cognitively interpret and respond to servicescape attributes, which in turn drive their

attitudes to servicescapes, particularly preference for a servicescape.

Consumers‘ cognitive interpretations to servicescapes are worthy of investigation

because servicescapes are not just perceived as a collection of attributes; they are

interpreted holistically as a constellation of attributes that are symbolically

meaningful to consumers‘ sense of Self (McGrath, 1998; Rosenbaum & Massiah,

2011; Sherry, 2000, 1998b; Solomon, 1998). Drawing on Self Theory (Avila &

Purkey, 1972; Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979), this thesis

proposes that it is the congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings

consumers ascribe to servicescapes that drive preference for a specific servicescape.

Self Theory (Avila & Purkey, 1972; Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg,

1979) asserts that environmental attributes are not perceived in isolation; they are

perceived in relation to consumers‘ Self. Further, consumers‘ desire for congruence

between themselves and their environment is so strong, it often takes precedence

over their physiological comfort. Consequently, this thesis proposes that the

congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to

servicescapes is the best determinant of consumer preference for a servicescape.

Thus, the creation of consumer Self-oriented servicescapes may be the most strategic

investment that service managers can make to improve the financial performance of

their organisation.

Prior to investigating the congruence between consumers‘ Self and the symbolic

meanings that consumers ascribe to servicescapes, it is critical to understand which

servicescape attributes are salient to consumers because consumers only ascribe

symbolic meaning to limited attributes at one time. Very little research has identified

salient servicescape attributes, let alone the symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to

4

them. Understanding the symbolic meanings that consumers ascribe to salient

servicescapes attributes is critical for service firms because the servicescape (which

includes the physical and intangible environment, as well as service staff quality) is

one of the few operational inputs that firms can directly manipulate in order to have a

desirable effect on consumer attitudes (particularly preference) and subsequent

behaviours.

Consequently, this thesis seeks to expand our understanding of servicescapes by

achieving three outcomes. The first outcome is to identify what symbolic meanings

are ascribed to salient servicescape attributes. The second outcome is to ascertain

how those symbolic meanings can be measured. The third outcome is to understand

how the congruence between consumers‘ Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to

a servicescape affect preference for the servicescape. These three outcomes drive the

three studies of this thesis.

1.2 Research Rationale

In early marketing literature, consumers were thought to engage in exchange for

utilitarian reasons. This form of exchange is predicated on the economic value of a

product‘s functional utility and the willingness of consumers to purchase the product

to attain that utility (Bettman, Johnson, & Payne, 1991; Fishburn, 1970). Consumers‘

desires are satisfied in this form of exchange when they perceive that their sacrifice

(e.g., the amount of money they pay, the travel time they spend or the risk they take)

is compensated by the expected or unexpected outcomes of the product‘s functional

utility (Fishburn, 1970). For example, a runner will be satisfied when the pair of

sneakers he/she bought meets his/her expectation of comfort while running and thus

they are worth the price paid. Positive attitudes towards a product are a function of

the evaluation of expected utility and anticipated costs.

More recently, however, marketers have discovered that consumers can engage in

exchange for symbolic purposes. Symbols are defined as ―subjective, complex sets of

abstract beliefs associated with an object or action that represent an entity extrinsic to

the physical and/or intangible forms of objects, events, relationships, thoughts, and

feelings‖ (Allen & Ng, 1999, p. 11). Symbolic Interactionism posits that products are

symbols to which consumers respond (Solomon, 1983). From a Symbolic

5

Interactionist perspective, exchange involving a product is not merely for fulfilling

basic physiological needs (i.e., hunger, thirst or physiological comfort). Rather,

exchange revolves around the ascribed symbolic meanings of a product (in a non-

economic sense) that satisfy consumers‘ psychological desires for Self demonstration

(Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011; Solomon, 1983). For example, wearing sneakers with

a Nike logo is an expression of Self as well as an admission of group membership,

which surpasses merely feeling comfortable (Bhat & Reddy, 1998). This notion of

symbolic exchange can be defined as ―the mutual transfer of psychological, social, or

other intangible entities between two or more parties‖ (Bagozzi, 1975, p. 36).

A symbol is ascribed its symbolic meaning through a socialisation process.

Socialisation occurs when meaning is created and perpetuated by continuous social

interactions; therefore, symbolic meanings possess a high degree of consensual

validity in society (Leigh & Gabel, 1992; Solomon, 1983). On an individual basis,

these socially agreed meanings are learned and then embedded in the cognitive

structure that underpins the beliefs of Self (Goizueta, 2004; Leigh & Gabel, 1992;

Solomon, 1983). Consequently, this thesis argues that consumers interpret

environmental stimuli, ascribe them symbolic meanings based on their cognitive

beliefs of Self, and respond to the holistic environment accordingly (Everett, Pieters,

& Titus, 1994; Rapoport, 1990; Solomon, 1983).

Research on symbolic consumption behaviour has reinforced the view that product

attributes, and their ascribed symbolic meanings, influence consumers‘ attitudes and

decision-making (e.g., Allen, 2002; Solomon, 1983). A consumer‘s evaluation of a

product is often affected by attributes such as appearance, taste, texture, smell or

packaging. These attributes combine to ascribe the product with a clearly defined

image, giving rise to ―personalities‖ that are created for brands (Aaker, 1997).

Consumers purchase specific products because they like the image or because they

feel the image corresponds with their sense of Self (Belk, 1988; Epstein, 1973; Sirgy,

1982).

In general, the higher the degree of perceived congruity between an individual‘s

sense of self and the product, the greater their purchase intentions (Sirgy, 1979, 1982;

Wheeler, Petty, & Bizer, 2005). Hence, consumption is not motivated merely by

acquiring a product, it is rather about satisfying a desire for demonstrating Self

6

through the meaning and symbolism (i.e., personalities) ascribed to product attributes

(Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Piacentini & Mailer, 2004; Sirgy, Grewal, &

Mangleburg, 2000). In this way, a product becomes a socially-defined symbol

associated with certain meanings that consumers use to satisfy higher psychological

desires for self-authenticity (i.e., self-enhancement, self-protection, self-maintenance

or self-extension) due to the social consensus of meanings (Belk, 1988; Epstein,

1985; Huber, et al., 2010).

While significant emphasis has been placed on the symbolic meanings ascribed to

specific products, the symbolic meanings ascribed to services have been long

ignored in the marketing literature (Baker, 1998; Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011).

Service environment literature asserts that servicescapes play a significant role in

arousing consumers‘ preference (Bitner, 1992; Turley & Milliman, 2000). Yet, little

research has considered whether the ascribed symbolic meanings of a servicescape

may have a symbolic effect on consumer preference for the servicescape.

This thesis uses Symbolic Interactionist approach to explore the role of servicescape

symbolism and its influence on consumer preference for servicescapes. This

approach particularly considers the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes and

their relationship with consumer Self. The Self refers to one‘s thoughts and feelings,

having reference to her/himself as an object as well as an agent to construe

surrounding objects (Rosenberg, 1979; Kelly, 1955).

Consumer preferences can be explained using three theoretical assertions. First, Self

Theory (Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979) asserts that the desires of the Self typically

take precedence over the desires of the physical body; thus, maintaining, protecting

and enhancing the Self become the dominant motive for all behaviour. Second,

Personal Construct Theory (PCT) (Kelly, 1955, 1991) asserts that the way consumers

construe a servicescape is parallel to the way they would describe themselves. Thus,

consumers will describe servicescapes using personality descriptors. Finally, the

Symbolic Interactionist perspective (Solomon, 1983, 1998) asserts that consumers

can enhance, maintain, and extend their Self through the use and/or possession of

objects (i.e., products and services) because the symbolic meanings ascribed to those

objects are defined by social consensus and thus widely understood (Hewitt, 2007).

7

In light of these assertions, servicescapes can satisfy consumers‘ desires to enhance,

maintain or extend the Self.

Servicescape symbolism is further underpinned by the predictive capacity of the

Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1979, 1982). This model proposes that congruence

between the Self and a chosen object is an effective predictor of consumers‘ attitudes

and behaviours (e.g., Kressmann, et al., 2006). In general, the higher the degree of

congruity between Self and the personality ascribed to an object, the more likely

consumers will be to have a positive attitude towards the object (Wheeler, et al.,

2005).

The Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1979, 1982) has been widely applied in the

marketing literature, yet the findings of these studies are fragmented and diffuse.

Although researchers often use personality descriptors to test the congruence

between Self and the personality ascribed to an object, these descriptors appear to

have a limited ability to predict attitudes (Ekinci & Riley, 2003; Huber, et al., 2010;

Ibrahim & Najjar, 2008). In light of Gecas‘s (2000) view that values underpin

consumer Self (also see Hitlin, 2003; Wojciszke, 1989), particularly universal

Human Values (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994), this thesis uses Human Value Theory

(Schwartz, 1992) to test congruence effects between values of consumer Self and the

ascribed values of servicescapes to address the limitation of personality descriptors.

Given there is a long debate on the predictive strength between personality

descriptors and personal values (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994; Hitlin, 2003), a test of the

predictive strength of both values of the Self and personality of the Self is critical for

this thesis to gain insights into how consumers‘ servicescape preferences are formed.

In summary, this research underscores the importance of the congruence between

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes in determining

preference for servicescapes (e.g., Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Baker, 1998; Sherry,

1998). In order to investigate the congruence effect between consumer Self and the

symbolic meanings consumers cognitively ascribe to servicescapes, Chapter Two

proposes a theoretical framework from a Symbolic Interactionist perspective

(Solomon, 1983) that draws from several existing theories—Self Theory (Epstein,

1973; Rosenberg, 1979; Purkey, 1970), Personal Construct Theory (Kelly, 1955,

1991), Human Value Theory (Rokeach, 1974; Schwartz, 1992), and Self-Congruity

8

Model (Sirgy, 1982)—to guide further research about how the congruence between

consumers Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes forms

preference. Prior to empirically testing this framework, Study One (presented in

Chapter Three) identifies which services attributes are salient, and Study Two

(presented in Chapter Four) ascertains how to measure the symbolic meanings

ascribed to those attributes. Chapter Five then empirically investigates how

(in)congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes drive preference using the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982).

1.3 Research Objective

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the effect of congruence between

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes on preference

for servicescapes. Thus, this thesis will address the following broad research question:


Researchers are currently unaware of which servicescape attributes are salient to

consumers, what symbolic meanings are ascribed to these salient attributes, how

these symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes can be measured, and how

ascribed symbolic meanings influence servicescape preferences. While researchers

posit that congruence between consumer Self and ascribed symbolic meanings will

influence servicescape preference, this has yet to be fully explored and empirically

demonstrated. To address these gaps in knowledge, this research program will

answer the following research questions:

RQ1: What symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes?

RQ2: How can the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes be measured?

RQ3: How does the congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic

meanings ascribed to servicescapes influence preference for servicescapes?

By investigating the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes and how they

interact with consumer Self, this thesis answers the call for further study to

9

understand how servicescapes are cognitively interpreted and to empirically

demonstrate the effects of person-place relationships (Harris & Ezeh, 2008;

Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011).

1.4 Research Program

To answer the research questions presented above, a research program comprised

three progressive studies. These studies used a mixed methods research approach

whereby both qualitative and quantitative methods were triangulated to address the

research questions.

1.4.1 Study One

In order to understand what symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to servicescapes,

salient servicescape attributes must first be identified. To do this, Study One was

designed. Nineteen semi-structured, individual depth interviews were conducted.

Both repertory tests (Kelly, 1955; 1991) and laddering techniques (Reynolds &

Gutman, 1988) using 15 servicescape images were employed. This combination of

methods first identified the salient servicescape attributes and then the symbolic

meanings that consumers ascribe to them.

The data were manually analysed using a categorisation strategy (Fishbein, 1963)

and content analysis. The categorisation strategy was first used to categorise salient

attributes, consequences, and end-values. Content analysis was then adopted in light

of Schwartz‘s (1992) Human Values to better validate whether the end-values

ascribed to salient attributes correspond to personal values.

Finally, hierarchical value mapping was used to present the relationship pattern

between salient servicescape attributes, their consequences and their end-values.

Overall, Study One aimed to develop a better understanding of which servicescape

attributes are salient to consumers, and what symbolic meanings are ascribed to these

attributes (answering RQ1).

1.4.2 Study Two

In order to investigate whether the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient

servicescapes attributes (as explored in the Study One) can be measured, Study Two

10

was conducted. Prior to collecting survey data, Study Two required the development

of a set of servicescape stimuli as well as the modification of an existing measure to

capture those ascribed symbolic meanings.

First, a set of stimuli (i.e., servicescape images) were developed. The stimuli were

chosen from the bank of 15 stimuli used in the Study One. By analysing the results

presented in the Hierarchical Value Maps, the three most representative servicescape

images were identified in light of their subtle distinctions of salient attributes and

their ascribed symbolic meanings.

Next, an existing Self-Concept scale (Malhotra, 1981) was modified to developed a

valid and reliable symbolic servicescape meaning scale. Study Two adopted an

integrated scale modification procedure (Churchill, 1979; Lee & Lings, 2008) to

develop a servicescape scale that comprised personality descriptors that captured the

symbolic meanings that consumers ascribed to servicescape images.

To develop the semantic differential symbolic servicescape meaning scale, 28

servicescape symbolic meanings (i.e., personality descriptors) were identified and

their opposing descriptor was created. The selection of semantic pairs to include in

the final scale was determined based on their suitability to describe both the

consumer Self and servicescapes.

Finally, three web-based surveys were developed to test the ascribed symbolic

meanings to three servicescape images. Each survey asked the participants to

evaluate the ascribed symbolic meanings (i.e., personality descriptors) of a

servicescape (represented by a one of the three images). The scale was analysed

using exploratory factor analysis to ensure factorability. Confirmatory factor analysis

was then used to ascertain the psychometric properties of the scale and to test

whether the scale adequately captured the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes. Overall, Study Two aimed to ascertain whether the symbolic

meanings ascribed to servicescapes that were identified in Study One can be

measured (answering RQ2).

11

1.4.3 Study Three

Study Three used the modified scale developed in Study Two to test how congruence

between consumer Self and the symbolic meaning ascribed to the servicescape

influence preference for the servicescape. Polynomial regression with response

surface analysis was used to test the hypotheses. This study was designed to test

whether (in)congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed

to the servicescape influences preference (answering RQ3).

Polynomial regression with response surface analysis is an appropriate analytical

technique because it provides persuasive evidence from two perspectives. First, it

demonstrates the effect of congruence between the consumer Self and the ascribed

symbolic meanings of servicescapes on consumer preference. Second, the

explanatory power of the polynomial regression with response surface analysis

provides new insights into incongruence effects. It advances an explanation as to

why self-congruity studies produce inconsistent results when attempting to predict

consumer attitudes and behaviour. An overview of the research program is presented

in Table 1.

12

Table 1: Overview of Research Program

Study Name Objective Research Design Sample Size Method of Analysis Justification

RQ1: What symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape attributes?

Study One

Qualitative

To explore salient

servicescape attributes and

the symbolic meanings

ascribed to those salient

attributes

Repertory Test

Technique Laddering

Technique

Convenience

sampling (n=19)

Fishbein‘s (1963)

categorisation Content analysis

Hierarchical Value

Map (HVM)

Interviews will explore consumers‘ cognition

of what servicescape attributes are salient to

them and how they interpret servicescapes

Analysis of HVM will reveal what meanings

consumers ascribe to salient servicescape

attributes and how those meanings relate to the

Self

RQ2: How can the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attributes be measured?

Study Two

Quantitative

To modify an existing

scale to develop a

symbolic servicescape

meaning scale

Expert judges Online consumers

surveys

Expert judges

(n=3) (n=53)

Consumer panel

(n=430) (n=251)

Exploratory factor

analysis Confirmatory

factor analysis

Surveys will ascertain whether the symbolic

meanings ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes (identified in Study One) can be

measured

Surveys will investigate the psychometric

properties of the servicescape meaning scale

RQ3: How does the congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes influence preference for servicescapes?

Study Three

Quantitative

To investigate the effect of

congruence between

consumer Self and the

symbolic meanings

ascribed to servicescapes

on consumer preference

Online consumer

surveys

Consumer panel (n=203) (n=218) (n=203)

Polynomial

regression with

response surface

analysis

Surveys will demonstrate the joint effect of

Self and ascribed symbolic meanings on

consumer preference for servicescapes

Surveys will validate the research assumption

that the symbolic meanings consumer ascribes

to servicescapes correspond to their Self

13

1.5 Research Philosophy

This thesis was conducted within the post-positivist paradigm (Brown, 1995; Guba &

Lincoln, 2008). This paradigm critically evaluates existing bodies of knowledge

using the epistemology of critical realism (Guba & Lincoln, 2008). Critical realism

posits that consumers‘ perceptions provide a window to reality, albeit imperfectly

apprehensible (Healy & Perry, 2000. To pursue the approximate truth about how

servicescape preferences are formed (Hunt, 1992), this thesis uses critical realism to

probe unobservable phenomena that are under-investigated in the existing marketing

literature.

Given that epistemological orientations determine methodological approaches and

shape the research process (Guba & Lincoln, 2008), the critical realism paradigm

sets the stage for blending qualitative and quantitative methods to investigate the

nature of servicescape symbolism (Holstein & Gubrium, 2000). The initial

qualitative approach will illuminate latent constructs and their relationships through

detailed description (Creswell, 2003; Creswell & Clark, 2007), which allows Self

Theory to be used to develop a conceptual servicescape symbolism model. The

subsequent quantitative studies ensure that the proposed model is not merely an

artefact of measurement but a sound interpretation of the phenomena (Creswell, 2003;

Creswell & Clark, 2007). This mix of methods ensures that the research program is

both insightful and rigorous.

1.6 Ethics Considerations

The three studies of this thesis conform to standard ethical procedures. The research

activities presented no risk to participants. No risk indicates that there was no harm

or discomfort for participants anticipated in the research in comparison with those

ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of routine physical or

psychological examinations or tests. Ethics clearance was obtained from the

Queensland University of Technology Human Research Ethics Committee prior to

the commencement of each study. Two reference numbers were issued for

conducting studies; they are no. 1000000190 for Study One and no. 1100000391 for

Study Two and Study Three.

14

With respect to the Study One, consent to participate was provided by informants

prior to the interviews via email as well as before the commencement of the

interviews with the signing of the consent form. Issues relevant to research aims,

interview procedure and the guarantee of confidentiality and anonymity were

explained to interviewees before the interviews. To ensure that there was no harm to

informants in self-disclosure (Cieurzo & Keitel, 1999), the interviews were

conducted in secure and private areas. Data were de-identified after each interview.

All analysis was grounded in informants‘ statements and conclusions were drawn

from general (e.g., personality descriptors) rather than at a personal level.

With respect to the Study Two and the Study Three, each survey began with a

participant information sheet that explained the research purpose, merits of the

research and assured anonymity and confidentiality. Participants‘ submission of the

online questionnaire was considered to constitute their consent to participate in the

survey. Participants were informed that they could withdraw their participation any

time before the submission of the survey. In addition, the information sheet

reinforces that there is no conflict of interest with participation and their relationship

with the university. Physical copies of the pretested survey are stored under lock and

key in the university and soft copies for the Study Two and the Study Three are kept

on secure network drives that can only be accessed by the principal researcher. The

information sheet and survey for each study is attached in Appendix A and C.

1.7 Contributions to Marketing Theory and Practice

The findings of this thesis significantly contribute to both marketing theory and

practice. Study One makes three major theoretical contributions to the field: (1) it

illuminates the phenomenon of servicescape symbolism by explaining the

hierarchical relationships between salient attributes and their ascribed symbolic

meanings in relation to the Self; (2) it evidences that socio-servicescape attributes

were as important as physical servicescape attributes because both are ascribed

symbolic meanings by consumers; and (3) it provides an alternative categorisation

structure for salient servicescape attributes based on the symbolic meanings ascribed

to them (rather than their basic characteristics).

15

Study Two makes two major theoretical contributions to the field: (1) it modifies an

existing scale to create a 27-item semantic differential scale that measures the

symbolic meaning ascribed to servicescapes, and (2) it identifies three personality

components (i.e., sociability, professionalism and style) and five self-relevant values

(i.e., life enjoyment, pleasant and pleasure, sense of belonging, responsibility and

recognition) that can be used to examine the joint effects of consumers‘ Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes.

Study Three makes three major theoretical contributions to the field: (1) it

empirically demonstrates the appropriateness of using Self Theory to explain how

consumer servicescape preference is formed; (2) it explains why prior studies that

used the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) to test self-product congruence had

ambiguous and inconsistent results, as they failed to account for incongruence effects

when forming preference; and (3) it demonstrates that salient personality components

and values moderate Self-Servicescape congruence effects on servicescape

preference.

These findings provide a better understanding of how consumer preference for

servicescapes is developed by taking a Self Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1989; Purkey,

1970; Rosenberg, 1979) approach. The findings also have practical implications for

both servicescape design and service employee training and recruitment (Kamakura,

Mittal, De Rosa, & Mazzon, 2002; Schlesinger & Heskett, 1991).

1.8 Overview of the Thesis

This thesis comprises six chapters that develop a comprehensive research program to

address the three research questions. The five remaining chapters are briefly

summarised below (also shown in Figure 1).

16

Figure 1: Diagram to Overview of the Thesis

Main contribution:

- Create a symbolic servicescape

meaning scale by modifying an

existing self-concept scale

- Identify three personality descriptors

and five self-relevant values

underpinning consumer Self that are

used to describe servicescapes

Link to Study Three:

- The scale, together with the five

values, will be used to test the joint

effects of consumer Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes on preference

Chapter Chapter Outline

Contribution

Chapter One:

Introduction

- Research problem and rationale

- Research objectives

- Research method

Chapter Two:

Literature Review

Chapter Three:

Study One

Method & Results

Chapter Four:

Study Two

Method & Results

Chapter Five:

Study Three

Method & Results

- Servicescape frameworks

- Self Theory

- Personal Construct Theory

- Human Value Theory

- Self-Congruity Model

- Proposed conceptual framework

- Approach: Qualitative

- Data collection: A combined of

repertory tests and laddering

techniques during depth interviews

using 15 servicescape images

- Data analysis: Categorisation and

content analysis

- Data presentation: Hierarchical

Value Maps

- Approach: Quantitative

- Data collection: Three web-based

surveys collect data to modify an

existing scale in order to develop a

symbolic servicescape meaning

scale

- Data analysis: Exploratory factor

analysis and confirmatory factor

analysis

- Approach: Quantitative

- Data collection: Three web-based

surveys are used to test whether

congruence between consumer Self

and the symbolic meanings ascribed

to servicescapes influence

preference

- Data analysis: Polynomial

regression with response surface

analysis

- Overview of the research purpose

- Discussion of the findings of each

study

- Theoretical contribution

- Practical contribution

- Limitation and future research

suggestion

Critique the existing servicescape

frameworks and the relevant theories

to propose the role of servicescape

symbolism for research program

Main contribution:

- Identifies 37 attributes that are

salient to consumers, which re

ascribed 92 consequences and 28

end-values as symbolic meanings

Link to Study Two:

- The 92 consequences and 28 end-

values (ascribed symbolic

meanings) will be used in Study

Two to modify an existing Self-

Concept scale (Malhotra, 1981)

Main contribution:

- Both incongruence and congruence

between consumer Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes influence consumer

preference for servicescapes

- Evidence that the salience of

personality descriptors and personal

values influence the congruence

effects

Theoretical contribution:

- Further the predictive power of Self

Theory and improve the predictive

ability of Self-Congruity Model

- Evidence that human values

underpin consumers‘ sense of Self,

which can be used to segment

consumers and re-categorise

servicescape attributes

Chapter Six:

Discussion

17

Chapter Two provides a theoretical foundation for the role that servicescape

symbolism plays in forming preference. Existing servicescape frameworks are first

reviewed. These comprehensive frameworks highlight a variety of physical and

socio-servicescape attributes that influence consumers‘ cognitive, emotional, and/or

physiological responses to the service environment (Bitner, 1992). However, this

literature review identifies that consumers‘ cognitive interpretation of servicescapes

is under-investigated.

In order to investigate how consumers interpret servicescapes in relation to Self, this

chapter proposes that the symbolism ascribed to servicescapes plays a role in

consumers‘ preference, in accordance with the Symbolic Interactionist (Hewitt, 2007;

Solomon, 1983; Solomon & Assael, 1987). This argument is underpinned by the

three existing theories—Self Theory (Epstein, 1973; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979),

Personal Construct Theory (Kelly, 1955, 1991) and Human Value Theory (Rokeach,

1979; Schwartz, 1992)—that suggest that the symbolic meanings consumers ascribe

to servicescapes are drawn from self-relevant personality descriptors and self-

relevant values. Finally, the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) is reviewed because

self-congruity is the best predictor of servicescape preference. Overall, this chapter

synthesises theories of the Self, self-congruity, and symbolism to explain

servicescape preference.

Chapter Three reports both the research method and findings of Study One. This

study aims to identify which servicescape attributes are salient to consumers and

what symbolic meanings are ascribed to these attributes. To achieve this aim, a

qualitative approach using individual depth interview is conducted. Chapter Three

provides a detailed method and justification for data collection and data analysis,

followed by a report of the findings of Study One.

Chapter Four reports both the research method and findings of Study Two. This

study aims to develop a symbolic servicescape meaning scale by modifying an

existing self-concept scale. To achieve this aim, a quantitative factor analytic

approach using web-based survey data is conducted. Chapter Four provides a

detailed method and presents the data collection and analysis, followed by a report of

the results of Study Two.

18

Chapter Five reports both the research method and the findings of Study Three. This

study builds on Study One and Two, and aims to investigate the relationship between

the ascribed symbolic meaning of the servicescape, consumer Self, and their

preference for the servicescape. To achieve this aim, Chapter Five first presents an

empirical research model and hypotheses. A quantitative approach for data collection

and analysis is then presented and justified, followed by the findings of Study Three.

Chapter Six concludes the thesis. It reviews the overall research purpose and the key

findings of three studies with regard to the research questions. The contributions of

the research program for both marketing theory and practice are discussed. Finally,

the limitations of this research program are presented, followed by the suggestions

for future research directions.

1.9 Conclusion

This chapter has provided an overview of this thesis, which investigates the role of

servicescape symbolism and its influence on consumer preference for servicescapes.

Specifically, it outlined the research problem, rationale, objectives, program,

philosophy, ethical considerations, and contributions to marketing theory and

practice, and an overview of the structure of the thesis.

19

2 Literature Review

Consumers‘ emotional and physiological responses to servicescapes, and their

subsequent approach or avoidance behaviours, have been well researched across

different service environments (e.g., Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Tombs & McColl-

Kennedy, 2003). Consumers‘ cognitive responses towards servicescapes, however,

are under-investigated. Consumers‘ cognitive responses to servicescapes are worthy

of investigation because consumers cognitively interpret the symbolic meanings

present in service environments, and then evaluate if those meanings are congruent

with their sense of Self, in order to form a preference for the service environment

(Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011).

Consequently, this chapter presents a theoretical foundation of servicescape

symbolism and its relation to the Self. First, the chapter reviews existing

servicescape frameworks to highlight the lack of research into consumers‘ cognitive

interpretations of servicescapes. Second, the chapter takes a Symbolic Interactionist

perspective to argue that servicescape attributes may be ascribed symbolic meanings.

Next, Self Theory (Epstein, 1973; Rosenberg, 1979; Purkey, 1970) is used to explain

that environmental attributes are not perceived in isolation but rather in relation to

consumer Self. Personal Construct Theory (Kelly, 1955; 1991) is then used to

explain how consumers construe servicescapes in relation to personality descriptors

of Self. Given there is significant debate about the predictive ability of personality

descriptors (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994; Hitlin, 2003), this chapter explores whether

Human Value Theory (Schwartz, 1992) can be used to predict preference for

servicescapes. Finally, this chapter proposes that the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy,

1982) best explains how consumer Self drives preference. Overall, consumers‘ needs

for self-congruity with a servicescape is proposed to be the best determinant of


2.1 Examining Servicescape Research

Since the early 1970s, both marketing and environmental psychology researchers

have acknowledged that humans are affected by environmental design (e.g., Baker,

1987; Bitner, 1992; Knez, 2001; Kotler, 1973; Leather, Beale, Santos, Watts, & Lee,

20

2003; Mattila & Wirtz, 2001; Sundstrom, 1986, 1991). For service firms, the design

of the service environment is particularly important because consumers often

experience and evaluate the service delivery and service environment concurrently.

Further, Berry and Clark (1986) suggest that the servicescape may actually serve as a

pre-consumption cue of a service‘s capabilities and quality.

To identify the environmental attributes that contribute to consumers‘ satisfaction

and positive evaluation of a service, extensive academic research has been conducted

(e.g., Baker, 1987; Harris & Ezeh, 2008). Much of this research has developed

frameworks of servicescape effects. The following section presents the development

of these servicescape frameworks.

2.1.1 Servicescape Frameworks

One of most well-developed and well-cited frameworks of environmental

psychology is Mehrabian and Russell‘s (1974) stimuli-organism-response (S-O-R)

model. This model proposes that sensory stimuli, such as colours and sounds, elicit

three emotional states: pleasure-displeasure, arousal and dominance-submissiveness.

These states, in turn, influence consumers‘ approach to the environment, desire to

affiliate with the environment, arousal-seeking tendency, or avoidance of the

environment (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974; Russell & Mehrabian, 1978). For example,

a sunlit healthcare environment decreases patients‘ feelings of anxiety (Lehrner,

Eckersberger, Walla, Pötsch, & Deecke, 2000) and perceptions of stress (Walch et al.,

2005), which causes them to affiliate with the environment.

Building on this model, Bitner (1992) developed a framework of the service

environment, which she referred to as the ―servicescape‖ (Figure 2). The

servicescape was originally defined as ―the total configuration of environmental

dimensions‖ (Bitner, 1992, p. 67). Bitner‘s servicescape model built on the internal

organism reactions of the S-O-R model by adding cognitive responses such as beliefs,

categorisation and symbolic meanings. This addition acknowledges that service

employees and consumers cognitively attend to the servicescape.

21

Figure 2: Mapping Bitner‘s (1992) Servicescape Framework against Mehrabian and

Russell‘s (1974) S-O-R Model

Source: Adapted from Bitner 1992 and Mehrabian and Russell 1974

Bitner‘s (1992) servicescape framework delineates physical attributes that stimulate

employees and consumers‘ internal responses, which lead to behavioural responses

(Bitner, 1992). Bitner proposed that there are three dimensions of environmental

stimuli: ambient conditions, space/function and signs, symbols and artefacts. These

dimensions incorporate attributes of the servicescape such as temperature, ambient

music, furniture, layout, signage and style. The organisms depicted in the framework

are the consumers and employees who act in the service environment and thus have

cognitive, emotional, and physiological responses to the servicescape. Finally, the

behavioural responses include affiliation, exploration, longer length of stay,

commitment or avoidance (e.g., Baker, 1987; Bitner, 1986; Booms & Bitner, 1982;

Shostack, 1977; Turley & Chebat, 2002; Turley & Milliman, 2000; Upah & Fulton,

1985; Zeithaml & Bitner, 2003; Zeithaml, Parasuraman, & Berry, 1985). For

Ambient

Conditions

temperature

air quality

noise

music

odour

etc.

Space/Function

layout

equipment

furnishings

etc.

Signs, Symbols &

Artefacts

signage

personal artefacts

style of décor

etc.

Perceived

Servicescape

Employee

Response

Moderators

Customer

Response

Moderators

ENVIRONMENTAL

DIMENSIONS

HOUSTIC

ENVIRONMRNT

MODERATORS INTERNAL RESPONSES BEHAVIOR

Cognitive

beliefs

categorisation

symbolic

meaning

Emotional

mood

attitude

Physiological

pain

comfort movement

physical fit

Employee

Responses

Customer

Responses

Cognitive

beliefs

categor-isation

symbolic

meaning

Emotional

mood

attitude

Physiological

pain

comfort movement

physical fit

Approach

affiliation

exploration

stay longer

commitment

carry out plan

Avoid

(opposite of

approach)

Social

Interactions

Between and

Among

Customers and

Employees

Approach

affiliation

exploration

stay longer

commitment

carry out plan

Avoid

(opposite of

approach)

Stimuli Organism Response

22

example, the attribute of slow-tempo background music (stimulus) has been

demonstrated to improve shoppers‘ emotional responses (organism), which results in

them being more willing to spend more time in the shopping environment and

explore more products (Milliman, 1982).

In a meta-analysis of the physical attributes of servicescapes, Turley and Milliman

(2000) further investigated environmental stimuli and identified four categories of

stimuli: store exterior, store layout, general interior design and interior displays (see

Table 2). These stimuli were drawn from a wide body of literature and overlap

significantly with Bitner‘s (1992) environmental stimuli dimensions. Store exterior

variables include everything from micro-variables such as the storefront and display

windows up to macro-variables such as the shopping district and parking. These

variables influence consumers‘ behaviour and service quality perception (Edwards &

Shackley, 1992; Grossbart, Mittelstaedt, Curtis, & Rogers, 1975; Lewis, 1991; Pinto

& Leonidas, 1994). For example, consumers are more satisfied with banks that

provide parking facilities (Lewis, 1991).

23

Table 2: Servicescape Dimensions and Related Attributes in Existing Literature

Servicescape Dimension Attributes

Physical and

intangible

attributes

Exterior variables

Storefront (Oppewal & Timmermans, 1999)

Entrances (Chartrand, Huber, Shiv, & Tanner, 2008)

Display windows (Ewards and Shackley, 1992; Ward, Bitner,

& Barnes, 1992)

Building architecture (Bäckström & Johansson, 2006; Gilboa &

Rafaeli, 2003)

Surrounding area (Grossbart, Mittelstaedt, Curtis, & Rogers,

1975)

Parking (Pinto & Leonidas, 1994)

Location (Ownbey, Davis, & Sundel, 1994; Vandell & Carter,

1993)

Store layout and

design variables

Allocation of floor space (Doyle & Gidengil, 1977)

Traffic flow (Sigurdsson, Saevarsson, & Foxall, 2009; Smith &

Burns, 1996; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1996)

Department locations (Dudey, 1990; Horton, 1968)

Allocations within departments (Borin, Farris, & Freeland,

1994)

Shelf space (Cox, 1964; Kotzan & Evanson, 1969; Frank &

Massey, 1970; Curhan, 1972, 1974; Chevalier, 1975; Patton,

1982; Wilkinson, Mason, & Paksoy, 1982; Gagnon &

Osterhaus, 1985; Bawa, Landwehr, & Krishna, 1989)

General interior

variables

Flooring (Roos & Hugosson, 2008)

Carpeting (Stafford & Enis, 1969)

Lighting (Areni & Kim, 1994; Baker, Grewal & Parasuraman,

1994; Baker, Levy & Grewal, 192)

Scents (Hirsch, 1995; Mitchell, Kahn, & Knasko, 1995;

Spangenberg, Crowley, & Henderson, 1996)

Sounds (Milliman, 1982, 1986; Morin, et al., 2007; Oakes &

North, 2008)

Temperature (Reimer & Kuehn, 2005)

Cleanliness (Mattila & Wirtz, 2001)

Colour usage (Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Crowley, 1993; Bellizzi,

Crowley & Hasty, 1983)

Interior display

variables

Product display (Simonson & Winer, 1992)

Point-of-purchase display (Gagnon & Osterhaus, 1985)

Posters and signs (Patton, 1981)

Wall decorations (Wall & Berry, 2007)

Socio-

servicescape

attributes

Human variables

(employees and

consumers

behaviour )

Crowding (Eroglu, Machleit, & Barr, 2005; Eroglu & Machleit,

1990; Eroglu, Machleit, & Chebat, 2005; Harrell, Hutt, &

Anderson, 1980; Hui & Bateson, 1991; Tombs & McColl-

Kennedy, 2003)

Consumer characteristics (Edvardsson & Enquist, 2011; Tombs

& McColl-Kennedy, 2003)

Employee characteristics (Ekinci & Riley, 2003)

Employee Appearance (Baker, Levy, & Grewal, 1992; Bitner,

1990; L. C. Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Solomon, 1985)

Source: Adapted from Bitner, 1992; Berman & Evans, 1995; Turley & Milliman, 2000;

Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003

24

Store layout attributes include allocation of floor space, product groupings, traffic

flow and department locations. These attributes have been demonstrated to influence

consumers‘ decision-making behaviour as well as product sales. For example, shelf

space has a small and positive relationship on product unit sales (Doyle & Gidengil,

1977).

In contrast to the exterior attributes and store layout attributes, the general interior

and interior display attributes have received far more attention in research examining

their impact on consumers‘ approach or avoidance behaviour. General interior

variables include attributes such as flooring material, lighting, temperature and

colour usage; interior displays include product displays, signage and wall decorations.

Many studies have shown that general interior attributes influence consumers‘

internal responses and behaviours. For example, certain odours have been found to

enhance casino patrons‘ gambling mood and increase the time they were willing to

stay at the casino (Hirsch, 1995). Similarly, point-of-purchase displays have been

found to increase the sales by up to 388% (Gagnon & Osterhaus, 1985).

In addition to physical attributes, Berman and Evans (1995) argue that socio-

servicescape attributes are critical to a holistic understanding of the servicescape.

Socio-servicescape attributes refer to the social interactions between people in the

servicescape (Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Turley & Milliman, 2000). While Bitner (1992)

acknowledged that social interactions are a behavioural outcome of the servicescape,

Berman and Evans (1995) argue that socio-servicescape attributes are in fact stimuli.

As a result, the servicescape framework has been re-defined to encompass ―the

physical environment and service staff qualities that characterise the context which

houses the service encounter, which elicits internal reactions from consumers leading

to the display of approach or avoidance behaviour‖ (Harris & Ezeh, 2008, p. 392).

Compared to the physical and intangible attributes (i.e., store exterior, store layout,

general interior design and interior displays), socio-servicescape attributes have

received relatively little attention (e.g., Rosenbaum & Montoya, 2007; Tombs &

McColl-Kennedy, 2003). Two main dimensions have been used to classify socio-

servicescape attributes: the influence of other consumers and the influence of service

employees. These two dimensions were identified because service delivery processes

25

involve interactions between employees and consumers, as well as between

consumers themselves (Nguyen, 2006; Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003; Turley &

Milliman, 2000). In fact, consumers may find it easier to evaluate service employees‘

characteristics, as opposed to inanimate products or brands due to the participation

that services require (Ekinci & Riley, 2003). Moreover, consumers‘ satisfaction may

be negatively influenced by the severity of the other consumer failure experience

(Huang, 2008).

The literature suggests that employees‘ appearance and behaviour critically influence

consumers‘ attitudes and behaviour (Ekinci & Riley, 2003; Harris & Ezeh, 2008;

Nguyen, 2006). For example, hospitality employees‘ physical attractiveness and

competence have been found to influence consumers‘ loyalty intention towards the

service (Nguyen, 2006; Harris & Ezeh, 2008). However, employee behaviour needs

to be considered as part of the broader servicescape. Harris and Ezeh (2008)

empirically demonstrated that human variables must be investigated as part of

servicescape design because consumers evaluate physical and socio-servicescape

attributes concurrently during service delivery.

The influence of other consumers, on the other hand, refers to perceived crowding

and other consumers‘ characteristics. For example, perceived crowding negatively

influences consumers‘ satisfaction (Eroglu & Machleit, 1990), postpones their

shopping (Grossbart, Hampton, Rammohan, & Lapidus, 1990) and reduces

excitement and quality perceptions (Wakefield & Blodgett, 1996, 1999). These

perceptions do not require any interaction between consumers to be formed.

Tombs and McColl-Kennedy (2003) argue that consumer-to-consumer interactions

also influence emotions in the servicescape. Consumers‘ interaction and

characteristics, such as their susceptibility to emotional contagion, will in turn

influence their displayed emotions and their perceptions of social density. For

example, consumers‘ who display happiness and excitement positively influence the

emotions of other consumers (Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003).

Despite the fact that servicescapes are a holistic collection of both physical and

socio-servicescape dimensions, research generally examines the impact of one or two

26

predetermined servicescape attributes, such as music or aroma, on consumers‘

emotional, physiological and behavioural responses (e.g., Akhter, Andrews, &

Durvasula, 1994; Donovan, Rossiter, Marcoolyn, & Nesdale, 1994; Grossbart, et al.,

1990; Ward, et al., 1992). While servicescape frameworks acknowledge that both

service employees and consumers cognitively interpret and respond to the service

environment, most research (as well as this research program) focuses on consumers‘

responses because their approach behaviour is integral to the profitability and growth

of service organisations. However, such research ignores the fact that consumers

respond to holistic environments rather than a single attribute in isolation (Mehrabian

& Russell, 1974). This results in the endless generation of servicescape attributes to

study, which makes the evaluation of holistic servicescape design difficult.

Taking a more holistic perspective, Harris and Ezeh (2008) empirically demonstrated

that a combination of physical, intangible and socio-servicescape attributes influence

consumers‘ loyalty intention in a restaurant setting. Although these findings

demonstrate that multiple physical, intangible and socio-servicescape attributes are

evaluated concurrently, it does not identify which servicescape attributes are salient

to consumers‘ servicescape evaluations (Dijkstra, Pieterse, & Pruyn, 2008).

Moreover, the results lack some external validity because the study focuses on the

evaluation of a single, specific service environment (Harris & Ezeh, 2008).

In order to address these limitations, this thesis suggests that servicescapes are not

just a collection of attributes; rather, servicescapes are perceived as a constellation of

attributes that are symbolically meaningful to consumers‘ sense of Self. This thesis

proposes that it is these symbolic meanings that drive preference for a specific

servicescape. This chapter argues that consumers interpret servicescape attributes,

ascribe them symbolic meaning based on their cognitive beliefs of Self, and respond

to the holistic servicescape accordingly.

2.1.2 Symbolism in Servicescape

Traditional servicescape research examines the impact of predetermined attributes on

consumers‘ approach or avoidance intention (e.g., Harris & Ezeh, 2008). Prior

servicescape attributes, such as colours, scents, aesthetic settings, shelf space,

27

numbers, point-of-purchase display, service personnel‘s appearance and facial

expressions and social density, have been found to influence consumers‘ internal

responses and behavioural outcomes (Donthu & Yoo, 1998; e.g., Doyle & Gidengil,

1977; Gagnon & Osterhaus, 1985; Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Hirsch, 1995; Lehrner, et al.,

2000; Newman, 2007; Patterson & Smith, 2003; Rosenbaum, 2005; Titus & Everett,

1995; Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003; Usunier & Lee, 2005; Walch, et al., 2005;

Winsted, 1997). This range of attributes is extensive to the point of being infinite.

In reality, however, consumers‘ attention to environmental attributes is selective:

they typically only attend to six to eleven salient attributes at a time (Bell, Greene,

Fisher, & Baum, 2001; Fishbein, 1967; Mehrabian, 1977; Reed II, 2002). Thus,

research that relentlessly investigates endless servicescape attributes and how they

relate to superior customer satisfaction is flawed. Conversely, identifying salient

servicescape attributes is critical to understanding service firms‘ success because of

what they represent. Salience is ―the degree to which the self as an object is

prominent in one‘s mind, is at the forefront of attention‖ (Rosenberg, 1979, p. 283).

Using their sense of Self, consumers may cognitively ascribe symbolic meanings to

salient servicescape attributes.

Although Bitner‘s (1992) servicescape framework alludes to the importance of

consumers‘ cognition of symbolic meanings (see Figure 2), the symbolic meanings

that consumers ascribe to salient servicescape attributes, and how these meanings

influence consumers‘ attitudes (particular preference), and thus behavioural

intentions, remains unknown. How consumers cognitively attend to and construe a

servicescape may explain their subsequent behaviour.

2.2 The Self

Consumer Self may be an avenue to better understand how consumers cognitively

perceive a servicescape (Bitner, 1992; Friedmann, 1986; Rapoport, 1990; Sirgy, et al.,

2000). This section draws on Self Theory (Epstein, 1973; Gecas, 1982; Grubb &

Stern, 1971; Malhotra, 1981, 1988; Purkey, 1970) to explain why consumers prefer

particular servicescapes. By synthesising existing knowledge of Self, this section

introduces theoretical grounding to explain which attributes are salient to consumers

28

and what symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to these attributes. This section

argues that personal values underpin consumer Self (Gecas, 2000; Hitlin, 2003;

Wojciszke, 1989) and that values of the Self, together with the personality of the Self

(Aaker, 1997, 1999; Malhotra, 1981), may influence consumers‘ servicescape

preferences.

2.2.1 Self Theory

An individual‘s internal view of their personal existence is called the ‗Self‘ (Epstein,

1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979). Psychologists view Self as ―the totality

of a complex and dynamic system of learned beliefs which each individual holds to

be true about his or her personal existence and which gives consistency to his or her

personality‖ (Purkey, 1970). In light of this definition, the cognitive beliefs that an

individual holds and learns about him/herself, is known as self-concept (Avila &

Purkey, 1972). Self Theory asserts that people perceive the world not in isolation but

in relation to one‘s Self; people are motivated to pursue experiences that are

consistent with their concept of Self and avoid experiences that are inconsistent

(Epstein, 1973, 1985; Markus & Wurf, 1987; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979).

The pursuit of self-concept often takes precedence over one‘s physical comfort and

safety (Purkey, 1970). For example, wearing high heels may enhance one‘s self

image of femininity but may result in physical discomfort and increase the risk of

injury. The self-concept is so powerful that its enhancement, maintenance and

protection motivates behaviour and affects decision-making (Epstein, 1973, 1985;

Schlenker, 1982; Tedeschi, 1986).

An individual may perceive their Self as having up to three components: actual self

(also called bodily self), ideal self (also called spiritual self), and social self (Gecas,

1982; Goffman, 1967; Hattie, 1992; Kelly, 1991; Markus, 1977; Markus & Wurf,

1987; Maslow, 1954; Sirgy, 1982; Sullivan, 1953). The actual self is defined as what

an individual really believes he/she is (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Huber, et al., 2010). The

ideal self relates to how an individual aspires to be (Aaker, 1999; Belk, 1988; Huber,

et al., 2010). Finally, the social self is defined as what an individual believes others

think of him/her and how they think they are perceived (Malhotra, 1988).

29

The three components of Self are ordered hierarchically (James 1898, cited by Hattie

1992). The foundation of Self is the actual self, which is then built upon by the social

self. Hattie (1992) states that the social self is set above the actual self because

individuals care more for their honour, their family and their friends than their actual

self. At the top level of the hierarchy, the ideal self is a supreme state. James (1898)

proposes that individuals would give up family, friends, fortune, properties and even

life itself for the pursuit of their ideal self (Hattie, 1992).

2.2.2 Self and Symbols

Many advances have been made in an effort to understand how Self is formed.

Psychologists suggest that the Self can be understood based on how individuals

respond to the environment (Tedeschi, 1986). Several frameworks, such as the

stimulus-response (S-R) model, were proposed to explain individuals‘ behaviours

(Guthrie, 1952). This S-R model proposes that consumers act when they are

stimulated by environmental stimuli such as objects, other human beings and events.

However, this model is considered too simple to explain complex behaviours.

In order to overcome the limitations of the S-R model, the Symbolic Interactionist

perspective posits that there is a missing piece between stimuli and response in the S-

R model. This perspective proposes that individuals possess a systematic array of

cognitive beliefs (referred to as organism, represented by O) that underpin the Self

and actively guide behaviour. This perspective is broadly encompassed in Mehrabian

and Russell‘s (1974) S-O-R model.

In an attempt to identify the relationship between S (stimulus) and O (organism‘s

cognitive beliefs), Symbolic Interactionism posits that consumers ascribe meaning to

and interpret environmental stimuli using their cognitive beliefs (i.e., their values and

personality) and respond accordingly (Blumer, 1969; Everett, et al., 1994; Rapoport,

1990; Solomon, 1983). Thus, environmental stimuli are symbolically meaningful to

consumers.

Symbolic meanings are defined by social consensus, which is derived from direct

social transactions and through social institutions (Belk, 1988; Dittmar, 1992;

Rochberg-Halton, 1984; Solomon, 1983). This definition explicitly reinforces that a

30

consensus of symbolic meaning is formed through constant social and cultural

practices, rather than driven by situational affective constructs such as interests or

sentiments (Blumer, 1969; Cardador & Pratt, 2006; Elsbach, 2003; Finegan, 2000;

Hewitt, 2007; Markus & Wurf, 1987; Solomon & Buchanan, 1991).

While individuals‘ cognitive beliefs of Self are developed through social interaction

that results in a consensus of meaning in society (Goizueta, 2004; Leigh & Gabel,

1992; Solomon, 1983), Symbolic Interactionism further claims that consumers‘

responses to environmental stimuli are not based on sensory input (Herek, 1986;

Hewitt, 2007; Leigh & Gabel, 1992; Solomon, 1983). Rather, the response is based

on the cognition of the environmental stimuli in relation to the Self. This mirrors the

assertion of Self Theory that consumers evaluate their environment in relation to

their Self (Purkey, 1970).

Symbolic Interactionism also posits that environmental stimuli are symbols. As

mentioned in the previous chapter, a symbol is defined as ―subjective, complex sets

of abstract beliefs associated with an object or action that represent an entity extrinsic

to the physical and/or intangible forms of objects, events, relationships, thoughts, and

feelings‖ (Allen & Ng, 1999, p. 11). Symbols do not exist in isolation because

consumers do not interact with only one symbol at a time in real social settings (e.g.,

Hewitt, 2008). Thus, a symbolic meaning may be ascribed to a constellation of

symbols that guide behaviour (Allen, 2002; Allen & Ng, 1999; Rochberg-Halton,

1984; Solomon, 1983; Solomon & Assael, 1987). Consequently, a constellation of

symbols (for this thesis, servicescape attributes) are ascribed a symbolic meaning and

are interpreted in relation to the Self.

As discussed previously, consumers‘ desires to extend, maintain and enhance the

Self typically take precedence over the desires of the physical body (Purkey, 1970).

Thus, the maintaining, protecting and enhancing Self become a powerful determinant

of consumers‘ behaviours. Given that consumers‘ cognitive beliefs of Self are

assumed to be the symbolic meanings consumers ascribed to servicescapes,

consumers may be motivated to approach those ascribed symbolic meanings of

servicescapes that are congruent to their Self. Conversely, they may avoid those

ascribed symbolic meanings of servicescapes that are against their Self. Thus,

31

consumers‘ desires of Self may be the best determinant to predict their preference for

a specific servicescape.

Self theorists posit that Self is an abstract construct that can be inferred from

evidence rather than articulated (Purkey, 1970; Wilska, 2002). This echoes Kelly‘s

(1955, 1991) Personal Construct Theory (PCT) assumption that the way individuals

construe their environment is a way to better understand their Self. Thus, PCT is a

useful theory to explore the relationship between environmental attributes and their

ascribed symbolic meanings in relation to individuals‘ Self (Butt, 2008). This theory

has been adopted in different disciplines to investigate how individuals construe their

environment using their own language (e.g.,Caldwell & Coshall, 2002; Fransella,

Bell, & Bannister, 2004). The results suggest that individuals actually use their

personal construct system when they are asked to describe environments (Butt, 2008).

2.2.3 Personal Construct Theory

Just as Self Theory asserts that individuals perceive certain environmental attributes

based on their cognitive beliefs about Self, PCT (Kelly, 1955, 1991) asserts that

individuals construe their environment using their construct meaning structure,

which is formed from their experience (Bannister, 2003; Butt, 2008; Kelly 2003).

Constructs are elements of knowledge (i.e., meanings) that individuals use to

interpret or construe their world (Cervone & Pervin, 2010; Kelly, 1955, 1991). An

individual‘s meaning structure reflects his/her existence (Rowe, 1996). According to

PCT, individuals make sense their environment by organising constructs into

dichotomies of similarities and differences (Burr & Butt, 1992). Thus, an

individual‘s construct system is a set of bipolar constructs; he/she never affirms

anything without denying something else simultaneously (Fransella, et al., 2004).

Butt (2008) asserts that individuals‘ behaviour can be predicted by understanding

their construct system, particularly by investigating which constructs individuals

prefer. To predict how an individual will respond to a particular stimulus, researchers

must first understand how it compares and contrasts with other stimuli, and then

which differentiating construct is preferred. An individual‘s construct system not

only governs their preference, but also makes explicit their sense of Self (Kelly,

32

1991). This is because individuals interpret the world in reference to their sense of

Self.

There may be a considerable consensus between different individual‘s construct

systems. One of the corollaries of PCT, the commonality corollary, asserts that a

considerable consensus exist between patterns of relationships among constructs

within people (Adams-Webber, 2003). Different individuals employ similar

constructs to differentiate events, objects, things and people. The commonality

corollary echoes the premise of Symbolic Interactionism that meanings ascribed to

symbols are developed through a constant immersion in society and culture

(Solomon, 1983). Consumers adopt and store these meanings in their cognitive

system and then ascribe these meanings to other environmental attributes in order to

make communal sense of the environment and orient their behaviours (Kozinets,

2001; Solomon, 1983). Consequently, symbolic meanings become shared and

understood in society. For example, red traffic lights are universally recognised to

mean ―stop‖ in modern society (Strong, 1999).

Just as Symbolic Interactionism posits that not all environmental attributes are

perceived (Hewitt, 2007), PCT (Kelly, 1955, 1991) asserts that individuals can only

construe a finite range of environmental attributes (Kelly, 2003). This is known as

the range corollary (Kelly, 1955, 1991). This corollary assumes that everyone has a

set of aggregated constructs that serve as indicators of perception when they describe

the environment (Kelly, 2003). For example, in the context of restaurants, white

tablecloths and subdued lighting are widely aggregated to form a quality indicator

(Bitner, 1992). As a result, only those attributes that are ascribed symbolic meaning

in relation to consumer Self become salient attributes that drive consumer behaviour

(Gecas, 1982; Goizueta, 2004; Grubb & Stern, 1971; Stryker, 2000; Verhoeven, van

Rompay, & Pruyn, 2009).

Even though Self theorists assert that consumers may have difficulty articulating

their Self (Epstein, 1973; Purkey, 1970), the way consumers construe their

environment using their construct system is likely to be the most meaningful

mechanism to understand how consumers describe their sense of Self (Butt, 2008;

Feist & Feist, 2002). Specifically, Butt (2008) asserts that individuals use their own

33

language to describe the environment in a way that in parallel to descriptions of their

own personality.

2.2.4 The Self and Personality

The marketing and consumer behaviour literature largely applies Self Theory to

investigate the relationships between products/brands and consumer Self, as well as

to predict consumer preferences and behaviour towards products/brands (e.g., Belk,

1988; Elliott, 1997; Elliott & Wattanasuwan, 1998; Escalas & Bettman, 2005; Grubb

& Grathwohl, 1967; Levy, 1999; Malhotra, 1988; Richins, 1994; Sirgy, 1979, 1982;

Sirgy & Danes, 1982). The main approach that these researchers use to predict

consumer behaviour is based on personality descriptor-based theories. This approach

asserts that the Self is a set of self-perceived personality descriptors that reflect a

system of cognitive thoughts and beliefs about the Self (e.g., Aaker, 1997; Epstein,

1973; Malhotra, 1988). These descriptors are often described using adjectives such as

friendly, rugged, honest, spirited, reliable, and feminine (Aaker, Benet-Martinez, &

Garolera, 2001).

Products/brands can be ascribed personality descriptors. Consequently,

understanding what personality descriptors are ascribed to products/brands and how

they relate to consumer Self is one approach to understand the fundamental interplay

between the Self and preference for products/brands (Belk, 1988; Belk, Bahn, &

Mayer, 1982; Hewitt, 2007; Leigh & Gabel, 1992; Solomon, 1983; Thompson &

Hirschman, 1995). By identifying personality descriptors that are common to both

products and consumers, products‘ symbolic meanings and consumers‘ hypothetical

constructs of Self can be delineated and scientifically examined (Epstein, 1989).

Many personality descriptors have been identified. For example, Malhotra (1981)

described personality using bipolar adjectives such as excitable-calm, complex-

simple, colourless-colourful, modest-vain, youthful-mature, and formal-informal.

Alternately, Aaker (1997) developed a set of personality descriptors (e.g., down-to-

earth, daring, reliable, upper class, outdoorsy) that are associated with brands.

To obtain unequivocal evidence of the effect of personality of the Self on attitudes

and behaviour, the literature suggests that three components of self (i.e., ideal self,

34

actual self and social self) should be taken into account (Aaker, 1997; Malhotra,

1988). However, research in this field has not yet reached consensus about which self

has better predictive ability. Some researchers suggest that consumers‘ sense of Self

may lie in the ideal self rather than actual self (e.g., McCarthy & Hoge, 1984).

Graeff (1996a, p. 16) claims that ideal self may be more relevant to publicly

consumed (rather than privately consumed) products. Moreover, ideal self is

demonstrated to better predict brand preferences among different product categories

(Hong & Zinkhan, 1995). Conversely, Ekinci and Riley (2003) found that while the

ideal self had more impact on consumer overall attitude, satisfaction and the

perception of service quality towards restaurants, actual self was a better predictor

for those attitudes and behaviours towards hotels or restaurants (Ekinci & Riley,

2003). The discrepant results may be caused by different methods between the two

studies.

From yet another perspective, some researchers argue that ideal self and actual self

have the same influence on brand attitudes. For example, Huber and his colleagues

(2010) found that brand congruities with ideal self and actual self both predict short-

term consumer-brand relationship quality. Thus far, the predictive abilities of actual

self and ideal self remains unknown.

Consumers‘ desire for social self has only recently received attention. Advocates in

this field emphasise the importance of consumer social self because they cannot

escape the marketplace in modern society (Holt, 1997; Holt & Thompson, 2004;

Kleine III, Kleine, & Kernan, 1993; McAlexander, Schouten, & Koenig, 2002;

Muñiz Jr & Schau, 2005; Schouten, 1991; Schouten & McAlexander, 1995). In fact,

groups of consumers regularly sacrifice their time and money to engage with the

product community due to the consensual meaning embedded in the product

(Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Belk, et al., 1982; Belk, Ger, & Askegaard, 2003;

Kozinets, 2001). In this sense, the influence of social self may be more significant

than the other two self constituents, particularly in a product/brand community,

because social self is enhanced through community consensus and admission

(Grayson & Martinec, 2004; Leigh, Peters, & Shelton, 2006; Muñiz Jr & Schau,

2005; Piacentini & Mailer, 2004). For example, a study of MG car consumption

35

found that the MG owners‘ social self can be enhanced/extended through purchasing

the car, experiencing driving the car, being a car club member, attending club events

and guiding other owners in how to repair their cars (Leigh, et al., 2006). Through

these experiences, MG owners obtained a sense of Self accomplishment and a sense

of Self mastery, so their desires for social self were satisfied (Leigh, et al., 2006).

Although many personality descriptors ascribed to products/brands can be identified

and the predictive strength of three components of the Self has been investigated, our

understanding of the impact of personality of the Self on consumers‘ attitude and

behaviour is fragmented, incoherent and highly diffuse (Sirgy, 1982; Reed II, 2002).

A review of the relevant studies has identified two deficiencies in the literature.

First, research has not yet identified the association between salient attributes of

products and the related personality descriptors (Allen & Ng, 1999; Reed II, 2004).

Research suggests that the importance of product attributes can only be understood

by their ascribed personality descriptors (Allen & Ng, 1999; Reed II, 2004).

However, using personality descriptors to examine self-congruity with products,

brands and services may be too superficial to predict consumer attitudes and

behaviours (Butt, 2008).

Second, there is a lack of consensus about which constituent of the Self better

predicts consumers‘ preference. Given the predictive ability of the personality of the

Self on consumer preference is weak and remains contentious, a test of the effects of

both personality of the Self and values of the Self on attitudes/behaviours is critical

for understanding either personality or personal values better predictive strength.

In fact, a review of the pertinent literature found that the meanings consumers ascribe

to salient servicescape attributes may in fact be drawn from personal values rather

than simply personality descriptors. Personality is theorised as a means towards

higher end values (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994). Thus, personal values may be

embedded at the heart of individuals‘ personality and may be the cognitive beliefs

that underpin Self (Epstein, 1989; Finegan, 2000; Gecas, 2000; Hitlin, 2003;

Kamakura & Novak, 1992; Knippenberg, Knippenberg, Cremer, & Hogg, 2004; Pitts

& Woodside, 1991; Wade-Benzoni et al., 2002; Wojciszke, 1989). This thesis

36

therefore posits that personal values define the distal element of Self that, together

with personality descriptors, may significantly influence consumer attitudes and

subsequent behaviours.

2.2.5 Personal Value Theory

Personal values are cognitive beliefs by which an individual orientates him/herself in

the environment. As such, personal values are ideal to unearth consumers‘ needs and

desires in consumption. Personal values are defined as ―abstract structures that

involve the beliefs that people hold about desirable ways of behaving or about

desirable end states‖ (Feather, 1995, p. 1). Personal values tend to be relatively

enduring, relatively trans-situational and thus act as criteria to guide behaviour

(Gecas, 2000; Rokeach, 1979; Wade-Benzoni, et al., 2002).

Personal values consist of two distinct sets of constructs (Rokeach, 1968, 1973). The

first relates to end-states, phrased as nouns that people strive for, which are known as

―terminal values‖. The second consists of modes of behaviour, phrased as adjectives,

which are known as ―instrumental values‖. Rokeach (1968) identified 18 terminal

values, such as an exciting life, a sense of accomplishment, freedom, pleasure and

happiness, as well as 18 instrumental values, such as honest, ambitious, clean,

cheerful, imaginative, polite and responsible. ―Freedom‖ is an example of a terminal

value indicating an individual‘s independence and free choice, whereas ―independent‖

is an instrumental value leading to individuals self-sufficient behaviour.

Although psychologists assert that there is a clear distinction between terminal and

instrumental values (e.g., Rokeach, 1968), little evidence supports this assertion.

Weishut (1989) argues that terminal and instrumental values can be transformed into

one another. For example, the terminal value ―independence‖ is in the noun form of

the adjective ―independent‖. Schwartz (1992) also demonstrated that the separation

of terminal and instrumental values had no effects on the personal values of

individuals.

Schwartz (1992, 1996) employed a circular model that draw explicitly on Rokeach‘s

values to construct ten universal human values: power, self-direction, stimulation,

hedonism, achievement, security, conformity, tradition, benevolence and

37

universalism. These values are considered culturally invariant, although the priority

of values may be different between individuals. In a social interaction, consumers‘

expressed behaviours are motivated by the values they hold (Schwartz, 1992;

Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987).

Schwartz‘s circular value model comprises two dimensions: self-enhancement versus

self-transcendence and conservation versus openness, which depicts the latent

conflicts and the compatibility among personal values. That is, the self-enhancement

dimension includes values promoting achievement and power whereas the self-

transcendence dimension includes values promoting benevolence and universalism.

For example, the pursuit of equality of opportunity (the dimension of self-

transcendence) conflicts with the pursuit of authority (the dimension of self-

enhancement). Conversely, the pursuit of social order (the dimension of self-

enhancement) is compatible with the pursuit of the obedience (the dimension of self-

transcendence) (Schwartz, 1992, 1996). In general, the pursuit of a particular value is

varied among individuals.

In a separate stream of concurrent research, Kahle and his colleagues developed the

list of consumer values (LOV) (Beatty, Kahle, & Homer, 1991; Kahle, Beatty, &

Homer, 1986) based on Maslow‘s hierarchy needs (Maslow, 1954) and Social

Adaptation Theory (Kahle, 1983). According to Kahle (1996, p.135), values are the

"most abstract type of social cognition that people use to store and guide general

responses to classes of stimuli". The LOV consists of nine values including self

respect, security, warm relationship with others, sense of accomplishment, self

fulfilment, sense of belonging, being well respected, fun and enjoyment in life, and

excitement.

The relationship between values, attitudes and behaviour has been demonstrated in

the literature on organisational behaviour and social psychology. Organisational

Behaviour researchers have demonstrated that value congruence can be used to

predict employee attitudes toward organisations and behavioural outcomes (Edwards

& Cable, 2009; Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman, & Johnson, 2005). Social psychology

researchers have demonstrated that value congruence predicts social relationship

quality, relationship affective commitment, partner liking, marital satisfaction and

38

relationship-maintaining behaviour (Aron, Steele, Kashdan, & Perez, 2006; Arthur,

Bell, Villado, & Doverspike, 2006; Byrne, 1997). Hence, personal values have been

demonstrated to be effective in predicting attitudes and subsequent behavioural

intentions.

2.2.5.1 Personal Values and the Self

The idea that personal values underpin consumer Self is not new (Brunsø, Scholderer,

& Grunert, 2004; Howard, 1995; Kahle, et al., 1986; Maio, 2010; Rokeach, 1973;

Schwartz & Bardi, 2001; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987). Drawing on Smith‘s (1963)

discussion of Self values as components of self-definition and standards that people

use for self-evaluation (aslo see Turner, 1968), Gecas (2000) proposed the existence

of values of the Self. The concept of values of the Self suggests that ―general goals

and end states are the basis of much of our feeling of authenticity. Being true to one‘s

values and principles is being true to oneself in a fundamental way‖ (Gecas, 2000, p.

102).

From a marketing perspective, research on product symbolism has found that the

symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to products do correspond with personal

values (e.g., Ennis & Zanna, 1993; Rose & Orr, 2007; Schouten & McAlexander,

1995; Vigneron & Johnson, 1999). As shown in

39

Table 3, Vigneron and Johnson (1999) found that consumer needs for uniqueness and

the enhancement of social relationships result in prestige-seeking behaviour. In this

example, ―sense of uniqueness‖ corresponds to the personal value of ―self-direction‖

because it refers to the individual‘s need for mastery (Schwartz, 1992). Meanwhile,

the ―enhancement of social relationships‖ corresponds to the personal value of

―social recognition‖, which refers to an individual‘s need for the approval of others

(Schwartz, 1992).

40

Table 3: Symbolic Meanings and Their Correspondence to Personal Values

Researchers

(year) Objects/Events Symbolic Meanings

Correspondence to

Human Values

Yamauchi &

Templer (1982)

Money Acquisition

Recognition

Achievement

Social power

Social recognition

Achievement

Prentice (1987) Possessions Recreational Self-expressive

Prestigious

Culture

Pleasure

Social power

Tradition

Belk &

Wallendorf

(1990)

Money Self sacrifice

Hard work

Conscientiousness as virtuous

Self-indulgence

Selfishness as evil

Benevolence

Conformity

Hedonism

Self-direction

Ennis & Zanna

(1993)

Automobile

function

Family

Luxury

Sport

Family security

Social recognition

Excitement

Schouten &

McAlexander

(1995)

Product

(Harley-

Davidson

motorcycles)

Personal freedom

Patriotism

Machismo

Freedom

National security

Bhat & Reddy

(1998)

Product brand Symbolic, Prestigious, Exciting,

Status symbols, Distinctive

Social power

Achievement

Excitement

Vigneron &

Johnson (1999)

Prestige brand

consumption

Conspicuous, Unique, Social

relationships, Emotional

Quality

Social recognition

Self-direction

Sense of belonging

Conover &

Feldman (2001)

Political

tendency

Status quo, Capitalism,

Disadvantaged, Radical left

Reformist left, Social control

Social power

Influential

McAlexander,

Schouten &

Koenig (2002)

Mosaic brand

communality

(Jeep)

Fun, Protecting the

environment, Authenticity,

Access to off-road trails

Pleasure

Environmental protection

Choosing one‘s own goal

Lievens &

Highhouse

(2003)

Organisational

attractiveness to

employees

(banks)

Honest, sincere, Daring, trendy,

exciting, cool, spirited, young

Secure, intelligent, reliable

Upper-class, prestigious

Masculine, strong, robust

Honest

Daring

Self-direction

Security

Intelligent and smart

Responsible

Rosenbaum

(2005)

Ethnic and

homosexual

consumption

Nostalgia, Community and

acceptance, Free to be (i.e. feel

safe and gay-friendly),

Connection to culture, Place

avoidance

Sense of belonging

Security

Tradition

Benevolence

Kressmann, et al.

(2006)

Brand

relationship

quality

Love/passion, Interdependence

Intimacy, Partner quality

(interpersonal attachment)

Sense of belonging

True friendship

Helpful

O‘Cass &

McEwen (2006)

Products

(fashion

clothing &

sunglasses)

Success, Prestige, Wealth,

Achievement, Interested in

status

Achievement

Social power

Wealth

Rose & Orr

(2007)

Money Status, Achievement, Worry,

Security

Social power

Achievement

Self-discipline

Security

41

Although the symbolic meanings ascribed to products and brands may correspond to

personal values, research has yet to fully identify what personal values may be

ascribed to services. Further, an identification of several aggregations of salient

service attributes should occur prior to identifying the personal values ascribed to

servicescapes (Reed II, 2002, 2004). Given that consumers hold different values, it

may be difficult to identify what personal values are most common and relatively

important in relation to servicescape evaluations. Thus, an identification of an

aggregation of salient attributes and their association to common personal values

may be a more significant predictor of consumers‘ servicescape preferences. As

services are perishable, intangible and cannot be separated from persons and physical

environments involved in the service delivery processes, the attributes ascribed with

values and embedded in servicescapes may become salient and attractive to the

extent that they facilitate consumer Self (Kleine III, et al., 1993; Spencer, 1981;

Zeithaml & Bitner, 2003). It is assumed that along with the identification of salient

servicescape attributes, consumer values of the Self and its relation to the perceived

values of salient attributes can be unearthed.

In conclusion, the preceding theoretical discussion focused on the influence that

personal values have on attitudes and behaviour. Given the assumption that personal

values are the symbolic meanings that underpin consumer Self (Gecas, 2000; Hitlin,

2003), values of the Self may be an alternative to understand how consumers‘

servicescape preferences are formed. An extensive literature review has shown that

no servicescape research has used values of the Self as an independent variable in

conjunction with the perceived servicescape values to predict servicescape

preferences. Thus, this may be a valuable line of inquiry.

In comparison to the limitations of personality descriptors that were presented in the

previous section, values of the Self may be a better predictor of servicescape

preference for several reasons. First, they are less situation bound (Brunsø, et al.,

2004; Rokeach, 1968, 1973; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987). Second, personal values are

relatively enduring in adults to motivate behaviour (Bilsky & Schwartz, 1994; Kahle,

Rose, & Shoham, 2000, Schwartz, 1992; Rokeach, 1973). Third, the values of the

Self allows consumers to enhance or extend their Self in the social interaction

42

scenarios because ―values develop in social contexts, draw on cultural significantly

symbolic materials, and are experienced as a necessary and fundamental, but non-

coerced, aspect of self‖ (Hitlin, 2003, p. 121). Therefore, this rationale suggests that

consumers carry values of the Self across situations, predisposing them to perceive

and act in situations in line with values of the Self (e.g., Stryker, 2000).

2.3 Self-Congruity Model

As mentioned previously, consumers‘ evaluations of a product are often affected by

the symbolic meaning they ascribe to the product (e.g., Bhat & Reddy, 1998). Given

that consumers use products for enhancing, extending, protecting and/or maintain

their Self (Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Leigh & Gabel, 1992; Piacentini & Mailer,

2004; Sirgy, et al., 2000; Solomon, 1983), preference and purchase behaviour can be

predicted by the perceived congruity between consumer Self (whether that is the

personality or values of the Self) and the ascribed symbolic meaning of the product.

Consumers are likely to prefer (and thus purchase) a product because they perceive

the symbolic meanings ascribed to that product extend their sense of Self or match

certain aspects their Self (Belk, 1988; Epstein, 1973; Sirgy, 1982).

The marketing literature widely applies the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) to

investigate the effect of congruence between consumer Self (i.e., Ideal Self, Actual

Self, and/or Social Self) and the product‘s symbolic meaning on preference and

purchase behaviour (Aaker, 1999; Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy & Danes, 1982). Self-congruity

is defined as ―the match between consumers‘ self-concepts and the user image (or the

corresponding self-relevant personality descriptors) of a given product, brand, store,

etc‖ (Kressmann, et al., 2006, p. 955). The Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982)

serves as a predictor of whether a consumer‘s desire for enhancing, extending and/or

maintaining Self is satisfied (Kressmann, et al., 2006). This model tests how well a

consumers‘ sense of Self matches with the symbolic meanings ascribed to a given

product (Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy & Danes, 1982; Sirgy, et al., 2000; Sirgy & Su, 2000),

brand (Huber, et al., 2010) or service (Harris & Fleming, 2005; Zhang & Bloemer,

2008). This model posits that the greater the degree of self-congruity with a given

product, brand or service, the greater the likelihood that preference is developed and

43

purchase will occur (Kressmann, et al., 2006; Sirgy & Su, 2000; Wheeler, et al.,

2005).

The Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) has been used to predict consumers‘

positive attitudes and approach behaviours towards products and brands (e.g., Graeff,

1996a, 1996b; Stanton & Lowenhar, 1974). It predicts consumers‘ occupational

mobility needs with clothes preference (Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992); preference and

purchase intentions for automobiles, beer, magazines and cigarettes (Birdwell, 1964;

Dolich, 1969; Graeff, 1996a; Grubb, 1965; Grubb & Stern, 1971; Hong & Zinkhan,

1995; Sirgy, 1985; Stanton & Lowenhar, 1974); brand choice and satisfaction

(Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992; Jamal, 2004; Jamal & Al-Marri, 2007; Jamal & Goode,

2001; Sirgy, Grewal, Mangleburg, Park, & et al., 1997; Sirgy, Johar, Samli, &

Claiborne, 1991); brand loyalty (Kressmann, et al., 2006); house preference

(Malhotra, 1988); satisfaction with holiday destinations (Chon, 1992); brand

relationship quality (Huber, et al., 2010; Kassarjian & Sheffet, 1991); retail purchase

intentions (Ibrahim & Najjar, 2008; Stern, Bush, & Hair, 1977); and perceptions of

value for money (O'Cass & Grace, 2008).

Although the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) has been widely used to

investigate congruence effects, little research investigates incongruence effects,

particularly incongruence between consumer Self and a given object (Edwards,

2009). To date, consumer research using the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) is

limited because most of the results focus on the effect of maintenance and protection

the Self (i.e., the more congruity, the better degree of the preference), rather than

incongruity. Consequently, this research will investigate the impact of both congruity

and incongruity between the Self and the symbolic meaning ascribed to servicescape

as this (in)congruence is likely to be a strong predictor of servicescape preference. In

this thesis, Self-Servicescape congruence is defined as ―the match between consumer

Self (i.e., personality of the Ideal Self, Actual Self, and Social Self, as well as the

values of the Self) and the symbolic meanings ascribed to a given servicescape‖.

Further discussion of this idea, as well as an empirical model and associated

hypotheses, will be presented in Chapter Five.

44

2.4 Conclusion

Given that servicescape attributes may be ascribed symbolic meanings in relation to

consumers‘ sense of Self, this thesis proposes that the (in)congruence between

consumer sense of Self and the symbolic meanings they ascribe to servicescapes

affects their preference for servicescapes. The proposed role of servicescape

symbolism is grounded in the three existing theories—Self Theory (e.g., Epstein,

1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970), Personal Construct Theory (Kelly, 1955, 1991) and

Human Value Theory (Rokeach, 1979; Schwartz, 1992)—that suggest that the

symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to servicescapes are drawn from self-relevant

personality descriptors (Kelly, 1955, 1991), as well as self-relevant values (Gecas,

2000; Hitlin, 2003). Values of the Self, together with personality of the Self (Aaker,

1997), form the evaluative criteria for servicescape performance. Consequently, the

Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) is used to investigate the (in)congruence

between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings (i.e., self-relevant personality

descriptors and personal values) ascribed to servicescapes in order to predict

preference.

The review of the existing servicescape literature illustrates that prior research has

focused on investigating how servicescape attributes arouse consumers‘ emotional

and physiological responses and, in turn, influence their approach behaviours (e.g.,

Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003). What remains under-

investigated is how self-relevant symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescape

attributes influence consumer perceptions of self-congruity/incongruity with the

servicescape, which in turn inform their preference for the servicescape.

In an effort to advance knowledge about the role of servicescape symbolism and its

influence on servicescape preference, this thesis seeks to investigate three issues: (1)

which servicescape attributes are salient to consumers and what symbolic meanings

consumers ascribe to those salient attributes, (2) how the symbolic meanings

ascribed to salient servicescape attributes can be measured and (3) how the joint

effect of consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to a servicescape

influences consumer preference for the servicescape. These issues will be

investigated in the three studies of this thesis.

45

3 STUDY ONE

While the previous chapter provided a theoretical foundation of servicescape

symbolism, this chapter presents the research method and findings of Study One.

Study One uses individual depth interviews to gain an insight into what symbolic

meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape attributes. This chapter discusses the

research objective, research design and justification, research procedure, method of

data analysis, and findings. The chapter concludes with an overview of salient

servicescape attributes and the symbolic meanings ascribed to those attributes.


In order to understand how consumer servicescape preference is formed, it is first

necessary to explore the symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to servicescapes.

Study One investigates which servicescape attributes are salient to consumers and

what symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to those attributes (Mason, 2002;

Tharenou, Donohue, & Cooper, 2007). Thus, the objective of the study is to answer

the following research question:

RQ1. What symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape attributes?

3.2 Research Design and Justification

In order to achieve the research objective presented above, a qualitative approach

was used. Qualitative approaches provide richness and detail about a phenomenon of

interest, which allows researchers to build theoretical explanations of a phenomenon

using informants‘ perceptions (Tharenou, et al., 2007). Researchers typically

interpret qualitative data subjectively, which raises questions about data

generalisability and rigour (Lee & Lings, 2008). However, using rigorous qualitative

methods and triangulating qualitative data with quantitative data (such as later data

presented in this thesis) ensures the validity and reliability of exploratory studies.

Qualitative research can be conducted using several different methods: individual

depth interviews, focus groups, case studies and secondary sources of data (Churchill,

1996; Creswell, 2003; Tharenou, et al., 2007). Individual depth interviews mainly

46

use open, direct, verbal questions to elicit concrete individual perceptions, feelings

and opinions, as well as to generate narratives that focus on specific research

questions (Miller & Crabtree, 2004, p.188-189). This method permits the researcher

to search much deeper into the research problem as well as allows more outspoken

discourse on the part of interviewees (Churchill, 1996). However, the conduct of

individual depth interviews generally costs more than other qualitative methods.

To ensure that the information obtained from interviews addresses the research

question, a protocol to guide interviews is typically developed (Lee & Lings, 2008).

The protocol can be an unstructured or semi-structured topic guide. Researchers may

only use a few brief topics to prompt the interviewee in totally unstructured

interviews; however, they may find it difficult to generate useful data because the

interview may contain some irrelevant data (Lee & Lings, 2008). Conversely,

researchers who conduct semi-structured interviews may find their data to be

particularly useful if they already have a clear theoretical comprehension of research

topics (Lee & Lings, 2008; Zikmund, 2003).

Alternately, focus groups are often ―conducted among a small number of individuals;

the interview relies more on group discussion than on directed questions to gather

data‖ (Churchill, 1996, p. 121). Although focus groups are easy to set up and a more

cost- and time-effective way to generate qualitative data, they are difficult to

moderate and interpret. Further, evidence suggests that researchers‘ preconceived

positions often bias their interpretation of group discussions (Churchill, 1996).

Meanwhile, informants‘ comments may be influenced because they may be

unwilling or feel too intimidated to share their views if they are different from others

in the group (Churchill, 1996).

A case study ―involves the intensive study of selected cases of the phenomenon

under investigation‖ (Churchill, 1996). There are many ways to examine selected

cases, including examining existing records, observing the phenomenon as it occurs

and conducting unstructured interviews (Churchill, 1996; Lee & Lings, 2008; Mason,

2002). Case studies are advantageous for seeking explanations for particular

phenomenon rather than testing explanations. However, the selection of cases must

be based on solid theoretical reasoning. Although case studies obtain sufficient

47

information to explain the unique features of the cases being studied, the validity,

reliability and generalisability of case studies is a constant debate among researchers.

Finally, secondary sources of data involve the analysis of pre-existing data rather

than active data collection (Lee & Lings, 2008). Secondary sources include public

and private documents such as the minutes of meetings, newspapers and personal

journals (Tharenou, et al., 2007). Documentation is often considered to be a

supplementary source of information that can be used to triangulate primary data or

counteract the biases of other methods (Lee & Lings, 2008).

In order to gain insight into the role of servicescape symbolism, Study One with the

exploratory nature was conducted using individual depth interviews. This method

permits the study to approach servicescape research from a different angle (i.e.,

identifying salient attributes) and in greater depth (Mason, 2002). To collect

pragmatic data, a semi-structured interview protocol was developed using projective

techniques.

Projective techniques ―are a non-directive interview technique where the informant

can project himself onto another and thus reveal some of the informant‘s own

thoughts, feelings and fears‖ (Boddy, 2005, p.241). Consumer researchers have

borrowed projective techniques from psychoanalysis and clinical psychology to

uncover real consumer attitudes and behaviours (Boddy, 2005; Donoghue, 2000;

Livingston, 2003; Steinman & Karpinski, 2009). These techniques are appropriate

for this study because they are able to stimulate consumers‘ free flow of associations

between servicescape attributes and the symbolic meanings ascribed to these

attributes.

Two projective techniques are used in this study: the repertory test technique (Kelly,

1955, 1991) and the laddering technique (Gutman, 1982, 1991, 1997). The Repertory

Test technique involves systematic, but flexible, data collection known as a triadic

exploratory technique. This process asks informants to describe the similarity and the

difference between a triad of things (e.g., objects, events or people) in their own

language (Fransella, et al., 2004). Alternately, the Laddering technique forces

48

informant to ascend a mental hierarchy from a concrete object to a more abstract

belief, which informs their preference for a given object.

In order to collect the qualitative data required to answer RQ1, Study One employs

repertory tests and then the laddering technique to better elicit informants‘ complex

cognitive values (i.e., servicescape symbolic meanings) from abstractions that

underlie salient servicescape attributes. The data is subsequently analysed using

Fishbein‘s (1963) categorisation, content analysis and presented using Hierarchical

Value Maps (HVM) (Guman, 1982). The details of the Repertory Test and Laddering

techniques are described in the following subsections.

3.2.1 Phase One: Repertory Test Technique

The Repertory Test technique was originally designed to operationalise Personal

Construct Theory (PCT) (Kelly, 1955, 1991). As discussed in Chapter Two, PCT

(Kelly, 1955, 1991) asserts that the way individuals construe their environment is an

expression of their personalities (Bannister, 2003; Butt, 2008; Kelly, 2003), which is

also known as an individual‘s construct system. Constructs are meanings and reasons

that individuals use to construe their environment (Kelly, 1955, 1991). Individuals

construe elements of their environment, such as events, activities, objects or people,

by organising them into dichotomous categories: similarities and differences (Burr &

Butt, 1992). An individual‘s construct system thus comprises a set of bipolar

constructs, which means that an individual can never affirm their preference for

something without rejecting a preference for its opposite (Fransella, 2003; Fransella,

et al., 2004). As a result, consumers‘ behaviour can be predicted by understanding

which constructs are being affirmed by them (Butt, 2008).

Although all individuals have complex personal construct systems, most are unable

to articulate their system to others. Consequently, Repertory Tests were designed to

use triads of elements to elicit and understand individuals‘ personal construct system.

The Repertory Tests technique requires individuals to use their own language to

describe the similarities and difference in a triad of elements. By describing these

similarities and differences, individuals are actually expressing their personal

construct system (Jankowicz, 2004). Further, an individual‘s preference for a

49

construct is informed by their view about their self (Butt, 2008; Fransella, et al., 2004;

Marsden & Littler, 2000a). For example, if an individual construe a triad of people as

either nice or nasty, and he/she chooses to interact with people who are considered

nice rather than people who are considered nasty, then he/she is likely to consider

his/herself a nice person. Such construal also operates in the wider environment:

individuals‘ responses to the environment can be predicted based on the meanings

they describe from the affirmed and denied environmental stimuli.

3.2.2 Phase Two: Laddering Technique

Once the preferred pole of a construct is identified, laddering technique can be

conducted to more deeply understand what symbolic meanings underlie the preferred

construct. The Laddering Technique is an elicitation technique devised by Gutman

(1982, 1997) to elicit means-end chain data. This technique allows researchers to

systematically identify consumers‘ hierarchical associations between a given object‘s

means (i.e., attributes, in this research), consequences and end-values (Gutman, 1982,

1997; Naoi, Airey, Iijima, & Niininen, 2006; Olson & Reynolds, 1983).

Means are products, characteristics or feature with which consumers engage during

decision-making. Consequences are the desired benefits that result from the product

characteristics or features, such as sexual appeal, that satisfy consumers‘ need for

value acquisition (Gutman, 1982). These consequences result in consistent situation

decision-making processes (Brunsø, et al., 2004). At the top of a consumer‘s

hierarchy, end-values are the mental states that govern broad choice patterns

(Gutman, 1982, 1997; Rokeach, 1968). Consumers‘ end-values are often internalised

in an abstract form and are trans-situational (Brunsø, et al., 2004).

Consequently, the Laddering technique is often used to uncover consumers‘ means-

end chains. This technique assist consumers to articulate the connections between

means, consequences and their personal cognitive values by repeatedly being asked

questions such as ―Why is that important to you?‖, ―What‘s the benefit of that?‖ and

―How would you define what you just described?‖ This technique was developed

because consumers often found it difficult to verbalise their enduring personal values

in personal interviews (Allen, 2002; Marsden & Littler, 2000b). With the iterative

50

inquiries, means become meaningful representations of values. In the marketing

literature, this technique has been widely adopted to map the associations between

the products or brand attributes and consumers‘ cognitive values (Dibley & Baker,

2001; Reynold, Gengler, & Howard, 1995; Zanoli & Naspetti, 2002).

3.2.3 Justification of a Combination of Repertory Test and Laddering

Techniques

Combining the two projective techniques of Repertory Tests and Laddering to

identify the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attributes is

justifiable for three reasons. First, conducting individual depth interviews with two

projective techniques (i.e., repertory test and laddering techniques) allows

researchers to more deeply understand informants‘ attitudes, motivations and

characteristic ways of responding to environments (Marsden & Littler, 2000b;

Zikmund, 2003). As the attitudes, motivations and characteristic environmental

responses elicited by Repertory Tests alone have been criticised for their deficiency

of richness and complexity, the laddering technique assists researchers to more

deeply understand the repertory test data (Marsden & Littler, 2000b).

Second, the combination of the two techniques minimise researchers‘ subjectivity

biases and lack of experience due to the way the data is collected (Naoi, et al., 2006).

The combined techniques require informants to compare and contrast environment

elements (such as events, activities, objects or people), which encourages informants

to describe elements using their own language without researcher interference

(Marsden & Littler, 2000b). Consequently, the data elicited from informants is

considered to be more objective.

Finally, the marketing literature has previously applied this joint method to

investigate consumers‘ perceptions of chocolate brands (Dibley & Baker, 2001) and

grocery shops (Hudson, 1974). These perceptions were meaningful when analysing

individuals‘ decision-making processes about their choice of products, brands and

services. The use of Repertory Tests and Laddering in the marketing literature is

gaining ground because they can effectively illuminate consumers‘ choices; thus, this

51

combination of projective techniques is appropriate to systematically explore salient

servicescape attributes and their symbolic meanings.

3.3 Research Procedure and Justification

In order to explore which symbolic meanings ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes, a semi-structured interview protocol combining repertory tests and the

laddering technique was designed. The protocol design assisted informants to

generate meaningful knowledge about their servicescape preferences.

3.3.1 Interview Protocol

The first step of the interview was to present the informant with triads of elements.

Elements can comprise anything (i.e., inanimate objects or human beings) relevant to

the domain of interest (Butt, 2008) and in Study One, servicescape images served as

elements. In a typical repertory test, elements are determined by the informants

rather than pre-selected by the researcher (Marsden & Littler, 2000b). However, a

researcher‘s subjective thinking is an essential part of the research process to

understand the phenomenon of interest (Kelly, 1969). Thus, this study used elements

that were pre-selected by the researcher.

The pre-selection of elements required three conditions to be satisfied. First, the

elements should evenly cover the entire domain of the research topic (Jankowicz,

2004). Second, elements should be able to elicit differentiated constructs to increase

overall predictive capacity (Adams-Webber, 1996), given that construct complexity

has a generalisable component that is applicable to other elements using a similar

constructs (Zinkhan & Biswas, 1988). Finally, the number of elements should vary

from a minimum of eight to a maximum of 30, although 16 to 20 is optimum

(Sampson, 1972). Element categories should be determined by literature review or

the research question (Jankowicz, 2004).

To satisfy the three conditions, 15 generic servicescape images (including images of

retail stores, banks, coffee shops, hotels, restaurants, hospitals, department stores,

shopping arcades, hairdressers, and legal services) were selected to guide the

interviews (Darby & Karni, 1973). These images were printed in full colour on A4

52

cards. The selection of images aimed to cover the extensive domain of service

environments. Further, the images were considered an appropriate tool to allow

informants to search, recognise, and infer information (Larkin & Simon, 1987)

because the variety of services represented in the images, including search-based,

experience-based and credence-based services, had two advantages. First, the wide

selection of images covered the whole field of interest evenly (Fransella, et al., 2004;

Jankowicz, 2004), which was considered appropriate for the study to identify the

association between salient servicescape attributes and relevant values. Second, the

selection of 15 images across three service types facilitated large amounts of

information to identify and compare. Thus, the significance and complexity of

elicited servicescape attributes can be ensured to generate the interviews‘ overall

predictive capacity (Adams-Webber, 1996; Gengler, Klenosky, & Mulvey, 1995).

In order to present triads of images, the optimal triadic combination of the 15

servicescape images needed to be determined. Using a balanced incomplete design

(Burton & Nerlove, 1976), the number of triadic combinations was reduced from a

possible 455 triads to 35 triads (as shown in Table 4). The 35 triadic combinations

were determined in accordance with Burton and Nerlove (1976).

Table 4: Presentation of the Set of Triads Using Balanced Incomplete Block Design

Base sets Derived sets

A: 1, 2, 3 ABC (1,5, 8) (2, 4, 7) (3, 6, 9)

B: 4, 5, 6 ABD (1, 6, 11) (2, 5, 10) (3, 4, 12)

C: 7, 8, 9 ABE (1, 4, 14) (2, 6, 15) (3, 5, 13)

D: 10, 11, 12 ACD (1, 7, 12) (2, 9, 11) (3, 8, 10)

E: 13, 14, 15 ACE (1, 9, 15) (2, 8, 13) (3, 7, 14)

ADE (1, 10, 13) (2, 12, 14) (3, 11, 15)

BCD (6, 8, 12) (5, 7, 11) (4, 9, 10)

BCE (6, 7, 13) (5, 9, 14) (4, 8, 15)

BDE (6, 10, 14) (5, 12, 15) (4, 11, 13)

CDE (8, 11, 14) (7, 10, 15) (9, 12, 13)

To ensure that each of the 35 triads had equal chance of being used, the sequence of

triad use had to be determined before conducting any interviews. Consequently, the

researcher first numbered the base sets and the derived sets of triads from one to 15.

The 15 numbers was then input into a website (www.random.org/sequences) that

calculates random sequences. Once the sets of three triads had been established, each

triad was numbered one to three and the random sequence generator was used to

http://www.random.org/sequences

53

decide the sequence in which the triads were presented to informants. The final

sequence of triads‘ usage was obtained.

Once the informants were given a triad of servicescape images at the start of the

interview, they were asked to break the triad in two and describe in a short phrase or

sentence how two servicescape images were alike but different from the third. In

describing the similarities and differences using their personal construct system,

informants identified servicescape attributes that were salient to them and thus

ascribed symbolic meanings to those attributes. This process describes a repertory

test.

Once the informant had described an attribute in a bipolar manner, they were asked

to nominate which side of the bipolar attribute they preferred the most. After they

nominated their preference, the laddering technique was introduced. Informants were

repeatedly asked why the pole they had chosen was preferable to them. By repeating

the question ―why‖ for newly emerged construct favoured by the informants, the

informants‘ cognitive end-values that were associated with environmental attributes

emerged. Once the end-value was reached, a new triad was presented and the same

questions were asked until informants could not identify any further unique

servicescape attributes (Fransella, et al., 2004; Marsden & Littler, 2000b).

3.3.2 Sample

Given its exploratory nature, this study aimed to collect the broadest range of

information possible as opposed to achieving sample precision (Allen & Ng, 1999;

Ericksen & Sirgy, 1992; Singleton & Straits, 2005). Thus, a purposeful sampling

strategy, which is a non-probability sampling strategy is useful for naturalistic

enquiry (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), was used to recruit informants. Although

purposeful sampling may result in an unrepresentative sample (Marshall & Rossman,

2006), Patton (2002) suggests that the sampling strategy for qualitative research

should be determined by the purpose and rationale of the research (also see Zikmund,

Ward, Lowe, & Winzar, 2007). Purposeful sampling results in a sample that is

meaningful and relevant to the research problem (Mason, 2002). Such sampling was

54

consequently considered an appropriate strategy for collecting rich information with

respect to the exploration of meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attributes.

While large samples are not required in qualitative research, the number of

interviews conducted was based on both a sense of redundancy and the theoretical

saturation of significant data from additional informants (Dibley & Baker, 2001;

Guba & Lincoln, 2008; Patton, 2002; Rafaeli & Vilnai-Yavetz, 2004; Strauss &

Corbin, 1990). Information-poor cases were also considered for elimination during

data analysis. In order to achieve data redundancy and theoretical saturation (Dibley

& Baker, 2001; Patton, 2002; Strauss & Corbin, 1990), 19 interviews were

conducted. Informants were recruited using flyers distributed on the campus of one

of Australia's largest universities. Informants comprised six males and 13 females,

aged between 26 and 64 (see Table 5).

Table 5: Employment, Gender and Age of the Informants of Study One

Code Employment/Gender Age Code Employment/Gender Age

001 Part-time student (F) 42 011 Part-time employment (M) 27

002 Full-time student (F) 36 012 Self employed (M) 27

003 Unemployed (F) 32 013 Full-time employment (F) 27

004 Full-time student (M) 32 014 Full-time student (F) 28

005 Full-time employment

(F) 34 015 Full-time student (F) 26


(F) 34 016 Full-time employment (F) 53

007 Full-time student (F) 38 017 Self employed (F) 66

008 Full-time student (F) 29 018 Full-time employment (M) 63

009 Part-time employment

(F) 61 019 Full-time employment (M) 39


(M) 62 ------- ----------------------------------- ------

3.3.3 Data Collection

Each interview was scheduled at a time and place of convenience for the informants.

All interviews were audio taped after receiving informants‘ permission. An initial

introduction to the research aims was critical to develop rapport between the

informants and the interviewer, as well as to encourage their cooperation during

55

interviews (Rao & Perry, 2003). Next, each informant was presented with a consent

form that described the research purpose and the confidentiality and anonymity

afforded to him or her during the interviews. The interviews began after informants

signed the consent forms.

At the beginning of the interview, the researcher described what a service

environment attribute was (Marsden & Littler, 2000a; McCrae & Costa, 1987;

Solomon, 1985, 1998). The informant was then presented with a series of

servicescape image triads. He/she was asked to take a moment to examine each triad

and was then asked, ―Can you think of one phrase or one sentence that describe

something that two of the images have in common, and in which they differ from the

third, in terms of the service environment characteristic?‖ (Fransella, et al., 2004;

Jankowicz, 2004). In general, the number of new attributes generated in a single

interview declined with each informant. In the first and second interviews, for

example, the informants generated 22 of the final 48 salient attributes (45.8 percent

of the total data). The number of new salient attributes significantly decreased until

Informant 010, who did not generate any new attributes (as shown in Appendix B).

This method gives rise to descriptions of salient servicescape attributes that are

essentially semantic differentials, as the description of the attribute common to the

two servicescapes falls at one end of the continuum and the description of the

attribute of the third servicescape falls at the other end. After identifying a salient

attribute, the informants were asked, ―Which description do you prefer?‖ Once the

preferred attributes were established, a laddering technique was initiated by the

researcher repeatedly asking ―Why is that favourable/important for you?‖ or ―What

is the benefit of that for you?‖. As the purpose of the laddering was to elicit

informants‘ values ascribed to salient attributes, the laddering questions were

repeated until data saturation occurred (Coshall, 2000; Marsden & Littler, 2000a).

Data saturation was achieved when the informants could provide no further

information. On average, this occurred after 8-12 triads. Note that for the second and

subsequent triads, informants were asked to identify a previously unmentioned

similarity/difference (Coshall, 2000; Sampson, 1972).

56

At the end of each interview, the informants were asked to complete a demographic

information form because it may influence the interview content they offered. On

average, each interview lasted approximately one hour. To prepare for data analysis,

the audio recording of each interview was transcribed, and then each transcription

was subject to rigorous error inspection.

3.4 Method of Data Analysis

The method of data analysis for this study was inductive. The analysis comprised

three stages: (1) sorting the data points into attributes, consequences and end-values,

(2) categorising the attributes and labelling their themes using Fishbein‘s (1963)

categorisation technique, and (3) categorising the consequences and end-values using

content analysis, and then labelling themes for each category using Fishbein‘s (1963)

categorisation technique.

Hierarchical Value Maps (HVM) were then constructed to graphically represent the

relationships between salient attributes and consumers‘ end-values (Marsden &

Littler, 2000a). A HVM consists of three tiers: attributes (Tier 1) are located at the

bottom of the map, consequences (Tier 2) are presented in the middle of the map, and

end-values are displayed at the top of the map (Tier 3) (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988).

In this study, the HVM comprised three tiers of procedural knowledge about how

consumers routinely act upon the meaning system that underpins a service product

(Brunsø, et al., 2004). On Tier 1, servicescape images act as situation-specific stimuli

to elicit salient attributes from informants. Tier 2 presents an intervening system of

cognitive structures that connect the salient attributes to increasingly abstract

cognitive categories. From a top-down perspective, the end-values on Tier 3 are the

driving force in orientating behaviour that is consistent across contexts and situations

(Rokeach, 1968). Using the laddering technique, the abstract end-values underlying

consumers‘ meaning systems can be systematically identified. Thus, categorisation,

content analysis and Hierarchical Value Mapping (HVM) are discussed in the

following subsections.

57

3.4.1 Sort Data Points

Data points within each transcript were initially sorted into one of three tiers:

attributes (A), consequences (C) or end-values (V). Two decision rules were used to

sort the data points into the tiers (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988). First, the distinction

between an attribute and its consequences (i.e., the first cut-off point) was

determined to be the point at which informants started stating the reasons why the

favoured attributes were important to them. For example, if ―spacious walkway‖ was

a favourable attribute of the service environment to the informant, ―easy to access‖

may have been the consequence indicating why it was important. The frequency of

each elicited attribute was calculated to determine the degree of the salience across

informants. Second, the distinction between consequences and values (i.e., the

second cut-off point) was determined to be the point at which informants could no

longer generate a higher level of reasoning about why the favoured attribute was

important to them. Although in many instances the distinction between consequences

and values was not clear-cut, frequently informants did reach a level where they were

describing their own values (Gutman, 1991, 1997).

3.4.2 Categorise and Theme Attributes

Once the attributes had been sorted, they were grouped into themes using Fishbein‘s

(1963) categorisation technique. Several criteria were applied to categorise the

attributes. Starting with the most obvious features (Fishbein, 1963; Reynolds &

Gutman, 1988), the first criterion grouped attributes based on their association with

the physical environment (i.e., anything inanimate) or the social environment (i.e.,

anything relevant to human beings). Once attributes had been ascribed to either the

physical environment or social environment, further categorisation occurred. When

the physical environment category was examined, its fundamental functions were

determined to be the next categorisation criterion. Conversely, when the social

environment category was examined, the role of the relevant actors was determined

to be the categorisation criterion. In addition, the frequency of each attribute was

calculated as an indicator of the degree of salience. Idiosyncratic attributes (i.e.,

those occurring in only a few interviews) were not analysed further, whereas

common attributes were grouped together into themes.

58

3.4.3 Categorise and Theme Consequences and End-Values

Once the attributes had been categorised and themed, content analysis (Holsti, 1969;

Kassarjian, 1977; Kerlinger, 1964 ; Krippendorff, 2004) was adopted to categorise

and theme the consequences and the end-values. Content analysis is defined as ―a

research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from texts (or other

meaningful matter) to the context of their use‖ (Krippendorff, 2004, p. 18). As this

study aimed to identify the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes, content analysis was considered to be an appropriate method to interrogate

the data using the parent theories of Self Theory and Human Values Theory

(Creswell, 2003; Mason, 2002).

The consequences were first examined to see whether they were similar to the human

personalities traits described in Self Theory (Epstein, 1973; Gecas, 1982; Grubb &

Stern, 1971; Malhotra, 1981, 1988; Sirgy, 1979). Recall from Chapter Two that

personality descriptors are considered to be a relevant criterion to group

consequences because consumers describe themselves and their environments in

similar terms. Next, the systematic content analysis used Schwartz‘s (1992)

Universal Human Value Types to further group the consequences and ladder up to

universal human values. Once the consequences and end-values were categorised,

Fishbein‘s (1963) categorisation technique was used to theme each category of

consequences.

3.4.4 Data Presentation

After the data points were sorted, categorised and themed, the next step involved

examining the original attribute categories to determine whether there was a logical

fit between the categories of attributes, the categories of consequences and the final

end-values using Hierarchical Value Maps (HVMs) (Reynold & Gutman, 1988).

HVMs were constructed for each of the themes that emerged from categorising the

attributes. As the means-end information represented the content and structure of

informants‘ cognitive values (Gutman, 1991), informants‘ personal values were

identified as meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attributes, which were

explored in the interviews.

59

By illustrating means-end data in a HVM (Grunert & Grunert, 1995; Reynolds &

Gutman, 1988), the data set is transformed into information that is more meaningful.

Specifically, HVMs provided a perspective on how the servicescape was interpreted

from a motivational perspective (i.e., the desires of the vales self) so that the

underlying reason why an attribute was important could be uncovered (Gutman,

1982; 1997; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988).

3.4.5 Method Summary

In sum, Study One used a combination of repertory tests and the laddering technique

within individual depth interviews to elicit informants‘ end-values. This research

design uncovered the symbolic meanings that are embedded in consumers‘ cognitive

value system, which informants may not consciously know or be able to explain.

Thus, the study objective was achieved through the identification of salient

servicescape attributes and the symbolic meanings that consumers ascribe to these

attributes. Through the construction of HVMs, the relationships between salient

attributes, consequences and values were graphically presented.

3.5 Findings

From the transcripts of 19 depth interviews, 211 data points were initially

distinguished as a servicescape attribute (Tier 1), consequence (Tier 2) or end-value

(Tier 3) (see Appendix B). To develop the three tiers of the HVMs, the data was then

divided into three groups for analysis using Fishbein‘s (1963) categorisation strategy

and content analysis. Data points that were homogenous were grouped together and

their frequency was recorded. For example, if two observations, such as ‗subdued

lighting‘ and ‗the lighting is not bright; it‘s a little bit dark so you cannot see through

the space‘ were homogeneous, they were combined into one data point named

‗subdued/indirect lighting‘ and marked with a frequency of two for further analysis.

After coding, idiosyncratic data points (i.e., those that didn‘t occur more than once;

see bolded in Appendix B) or data points that were not directly relevant to describing

the servicescape were deleted. This analysis identified 37 salient attributes, 92

consequences and 28 end-values (as shown in Figure 3). Once the categorisation was

60

completed and each category was labelled with a theme, HVMs were created to

represent the data.

Figure 3: Relationship between Attributes, Consequences, and End-values

3.5.1 Tier 1: Salient Attributes

Of the 37 salient attributes identified, the most salient servicescape attribute was staff

eye contact with consumers (mentioned by 12 informants). This may be salient for

two reasons. First, informants perceived that face-to-face interaction with staff would

be friendly, helpful and patient. This mirrors findings in the servicescape literature,

which claims that staff facial expressions and behaviour are equally as important as

physical service environment attributes because consumers perceive and evaluate

them simultaneously (Bitner, 1992; Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Turley & Milliman, 2000).

Further, staff facial expressions and behaviour have the power to alter consumers‘

prior cognitions (i.e., perceptions and attitudes) before they engage with services

(e.g., Brady & Cronin, 2001). Thus, staff behaviour allows consumers‘ aggregated

expectations to become experience-based evaluations (Halstead, 1999).

Second, staff eye contact implies that service staff will actively participate in the

service exchange and thus gives consumers confidence that they will achieve their

service goals. This is reflected in a number of comments by informants, including ―I

61

can achieve my goal by coming to this service‖ (Informant 011) and ―I can get what I

want to know here‖ (Informant 008). Put simply, an engaged conversation between

staff and a consumer influences the consumer‘s perception of control over the

outcomes of the service (Grewal, Gopalkrisnan, Gotlieb, & Levy, 2007; Thompson,

1981) and subsequently determines if he/she is likely to achieve the expected goal of

the service exchange process.

The second most salient attributes were (1) subdued/indirect lighting, (2) an outdoor

atmosphere with fresh air and sunshine, and (3) lots of space (each mentioned by

nine informants, respectively). Informants perceived that subdued lighting would

make them feel relaxed (Informants 001, 003, 015, 018 and 019), whereas an outdoor

atmosphere with fresh air and sunshine would put them in a more positive mood

(Informants 006, 007, 012 and 013). This mirrors findings in the servicescape

literature that sunshine helps to reduce perceptions of stress (Walch, et al., 2005) and

feelings of anxiety (Lehrner, et al., 2000).

The provision of space in the servicescape meant that informants perceived they

would be able to move without constraint and thus exercise control over their

behaviour (Informant 002, 003 and 010). This mirrors the findings of an

experimental study on retail environments (van Rompay, Galetzka, Pruyn, & Garcia,

2008), which demonstrated that consumers‘ perceptions of spatial density

significantly influence their feelings of control over their environment (van Rompay,

et al., 2008). Given that consumers‘ feelings of control facilitate goal achievement

(Hui & Bateson, 1991; Ward & Barnes, 2001), it is not surprising that lots of space

was a strongly salient servicescape attribute to informants.

The third most salient attributes mentioned were (1) plain or less formal interior

design, (2) a variety of products/shops, (3) many other consumers that look busy with

different activities, (4) other consumers are smiling, and (5) service staff are smiling

(each mentioned by eight informants, respectively). Informants perceived that a plain

or less formal interior design would be a less intimidating environment (Informants

004 and 005). Alternately, informants perceived that a store with a variety of

products or an area with lots of shops would be a convenient ―one stop‖ shop

(Informants 017 and 018). The final three attributes (i.e., busy, smiling consumers

62

and smiling staff) meant informants perceived that they would not be alone

(Informants 002, 003, 007, 008, 009 and 010). Smiling consumers were salient

because they brought a sense of energy and liveliness to the servicescape, which in

turn would bring happiness to informants (Informants 014 and 018). Similarly,

smiling service staff look friendly and give informants a warm and inviting feeling

about the servicescape (Informants 001 and 019). These three salient attributes add

weight to prior findings that others in the servicescape influence the consumer‘s

emotions and subsequent behaviours (e.g., Tombs & McColl-Kennedy, 2003).

Fourth, colourful décor and furnishings were salient to informants (mentioned by six

informants). Colourful décor arouses informants‘ desires to approach the

servicescape; subsequently, they reported that they would be more likely to spend

time searching in the servicescape because such an environment would be novel

(Informants 001 and 17). Theoretically, our understanding of the direct effect of

colour on consumer behaviour maybe scant; however, the indirect influence of

individual colours on consumer purchase intention have been investigated (Bellizzi,

Crowley, & Hasty, 1983; Bellizzi & Hite, 1992; Kaya & Epps, 2004). Bellizzi and

Hite (1992) found that consumers purchase more in a blue environment than a red

environment. In addition, Bellizzi, Crowley and Hasty (1983) found that subjects did

not find the colour red to be pleasant, although they were drawn to the warm colour.

On the other hand, Kaya and Epps (2004) found the colour green evoked positive

consumer emotions, such as feelings of relaxation and comfort. They explain this

effect using the association between the colour green and nature, which is thought to

be emotionally soothing (Kaya & Epps, 2004).

Once the degree of salience for each attribute had been established, Fishbein‘s (1963)

categorisation strategy was further used to group common attributes into

heterogeneous themes (see Table 6). First, attributes were grouped based on their

association with the physical environment (i.e., anything inanimate) or the social

environment (i.e., anything relevant to human beings). Next, physical environment

attributes were grouped into outdoors and indoors, and social environment attributes

were grouped into those relating to staff and other consumers. Finally, the attributes

in each of the four categories were grouped into heterogeneous themes. At the end of

63

the three-step categorisation process, 11 heterogeneous themes were identified:

outdoor atmosphere, colour, architectural design, furnishing, cleanliness, layout and

space, certification, staff behaviour, staff appearance, consumer behaviour, and

consumer appearance. Once these themes were established, the consequences were

examined.

64

Table 6: Emergent Themes Derived from Salient Attributes Criteria 1 Criteria 2 Themes Attributes (frequency of informant elicitation)

Ph

ysi

cal

En

vir

on

men

t A

ttri

bu

tes

Outdoors Outdoor

atmosphere

An outdoor atmosphere including fresh air and sunshine (9)

Flowers and trees (2)

Indoors

Colour

Interior design is plain, less formal and doesn‘t looks expensive

(8)

Colourful décor and furnishings (6)

Colour red (2)

The colour of the tiles (2)

Architectural

design

High ceilings (5)

Atrium with natural light (3)

Historical architecture with painting, fretwork, railings, old

glasses, balconies, old style hanging light, and a mezzanine floor

(6)

Furnishing

Subdued/indirect lighting (9)

Soft arm sofa (6)

The high standard quality and material of furnishings (6)

Bright lighting (5)

Tables and chairs (3)

Wooden furnishings (2)

Cleanliness Clean (2)

Layout and

space

Lots of space (9)

Products were organised and clearly displayed with price tags (6)

The enclosed area/private area with curtains or doors (5)

There is no counter or no partition or no curtains (5)

The layout is wide and easy to access (2)

The sign is written in a foreign language (2)

Various products/shops (8)

Variety of products in one shop (4)

Certification Certificates and qualifications on the wall (5)

So

cial

en

vir

on

men

t at

trib

ute

s

Staff

Staff

behaviour

One-to-one/face-to-face interaction with eye contact (12)

Service staff are smiling (7)

Service staff are visible (3)

Service staff are invisible (2)

Staff

appearance

Service staff wear formal attire/uniforms (4)

Service staff wear casual clothes (3)

Other

consumers

Consumer

behaviour

Smiling consumers (8)

Many other consumers that look busy with different activities (8)

Consumers are hanging around without a particular aim (7)

Consumers that appear healthy and active (5)

Consumer

appearance

Consumers are dressed up (2)

Consumers have different colour hair/from different countries (3)

65

3.5.2 Tier 2: Consequences

Once the attributes in Tier 1 had been categorised and themed, a content analysis and

categorisation of the consequences in Tier 2 were conducted. The consequences are

useful to understand how cognitive structures connect salient attributes to abstract

end-values. Initially, 92 consequences were identified. Next, content analysis using

Self Theory (Epstein, 1973; Purkey, 1970) and Universal Human Value Theory

(Schwartz, 1992) categorised those consequences into 28 categories (see Table 4). In

order to label each category, Fishbein‘s (1963) categorisation strategy then was used.

This strategy labels themes using the most frequently occurring consequence within

each category (Fishbein, 1963) (see Table 7).

66

Table 7: Consequence and the Themes

Consequences (with themes in bold)

1. It is attractive and stylish

Gives a feeling of high-end elegance

How people evaluate my looks is important (I would like to have a good public image +Others

may see me beautiful)

2. I would receive the staff’s full attention when I want

The staff have to pay attention to me

I feel that I am a special customer and would receive exclusive service

People should consider how others see you

I am important to the service provider

The service provider would treat me better/with respect

3. I feel free to communicate with others and present myself (+ I perform better)

I can have better, detailed, less ambiguous information

I feel less barriers

I feel free to ask for service

I feel that I am not left behind

4. The environment helps me to meet my goals (life goals, career goals or the goal of

attending to the service)

People are engaged with each other (+ They commit to each together)

It means triumphs and trust (+ The commitment implies success)

I am a task-oriented person

5. I can buy valuable products

I use my money wisely

It helps me to use my time efficiently (+ save me time)

It (the modern facility/furnishing) is up-to-date, gives a feeling of intelligence and

sophistication

Everything is organised and well-planned

6. People’s smiling face create a positive mood

This environment gives a feeling of a life and energy (I feel this environment is full of life and

full of energy + It gives you energy)

7. I am relaxed, comfortable and not in a rush I feel content and satisfied

I am happy, enjoying myself and having fun

8. The environment gives you the opportunities to indulge yourself

You cannot take your health for granted (pamper yourself)

9. The exploration of unfamiliar area/countries is exciting It‘s full of enthusiasm and enjoyment

10. Interested in different cultures and histories

It (the old style architecture/décor) provides an opportunity to experience another lifestyle from

our normal life, to detach from real life temporarily

11. They induce my desire and make me want to go in and buy something

I am curious

12. I have control over my own space

Everything is visible and nothing is hidden

I am not intermingle with others; I have freedom of movement

It means that people have hopes and the choice to do whatever they want to do

It (the organised environment) maintains my serenity and patience to shop

It gives a feeling of less pressure

I don‘t feel comprised

I would have confidence to make decisions

The environment helps me to clear my mind (+ It makes me calm)

It allows you to have certain privacy or keep your privacy

It allows me to find directions and I know where to ask for service or to buy products

I take my time and I am not in a rush to make an order

13. I will be able to get my job done without asking for help

I have confidence to make decisions

67

Consequences (with themes in bold)

I will be able to share an experience and learn a new trend

I am independent and autonomous

14. It inspires my imagination

I feel that I am not limited (I have no limits for doing things + I feel my imagination is

unlimited)

I will be able to observe others and make up their stories

Observing others‘ activities stimulates my imagination and makes me more enlivened

15. We should protect the environment

People should appreciate the environment (I feel appreciative of the environment + It would be

better if the store uses recycled wood for the counter or furnishing design)

16. I feel I am part of the nature I feel peaceful (feeling peace of mind)

I am emotionally comfortable

17. Everyone is equal and has their own rights and values

There is no status in the environment

18. I feel I am more inclined to take others’ suggestion

It (modern facilities, socialising with people) gives me opportunities to learn new technology,

improve my knowledge, open my mind

19. We share stories and experience

I might develop good relationship with the staff or customers here

20. This is honest, real, practical and down to earth

I won‘t lose the contact with real world

I can be truthful of myself and I don‘t need to pretend

21. People should remember the history and respect different cultures We need to protect heritage buildings and relevant things

I like to connect history and old fashion stuff

22. Everyone knows the rules and follows the rules

The situation is predicable so that I know how to respond and behave

23. I feel safe

I am less guarded when staying in the spacious room

I have no fear to stay in the environment

It allows me to avoid the risk comparing to staying in the outdoor environment

24. I don’t feel alone (even I don’t know others)

People understand what I am talking about

It (the dim light) has an intimate atmosphere, gives a feeling of warm and feels like home (+ I

would like to attend to the environment that people I am familiar with)

It is like the store just around the corner that I am familiar with

I feel that someone would look after me and/or support me when I need assistance (+ It‘s

always good to pass time with families and friends)

Feel warm and inviting in the environment

The environment tells about stories, reminds me my childhood memories (+ I feel like that I am

back to my childhood)

This is a friendly environment

25. I feel healthier; it’s good to my health

I can react and I‘m not vulnerable

26. I would receive the service as I expect, a satisfied return

27. I will be able to help others

28. It looks professional and reliable

I am confident with the service (+ I trust those service staff because they have professional

knowledge)

(+ Customers would receive high quality service) I cannot allow my family to suffer

68

3.5.3 Tier 3: Values

As informants thought critically about their preferences for salient attributes, they

often reached a point where they start describing their values (Gutman, 1991, 1997;

Reynolds & Gutman, 1988). When an end-value is established, the underlying reason

why an attribute is important to informants is uncovered. These end-values are self-

relevant, and thus are known as personal values (Rokeach, 1973). Personal values are

enduring beliefs that guide consumer behaviour across specific situations (Vinson,

Scott, & Lamont, 1977). Their centrality to a consumer‘s cognitive system means

they can predict consumer evaluation and choice (Rokeach, 1973). Given this, end-

values are essential to this thesis because they are likely to predict consumers‘


Once the consequences in Tier 2 had been categorised, a content analysis of the end-

values in Tier 3 occurred. The end-values are the symbolic meanings ascribed to

salient servicescape attributes. Overall, 28 end-values were elicited from informants

(as shown in Table 8). Although consumers often have difficulties identifying their

own values, or articulating reasons why some things are important or beneficial to

them (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988), all informants (except 007 and 011) were able to

describe their cognitive values.

The most common end-value elicited was ―sense of belonging‖ (mentioned by 16

informants). This value corresponds to Schwartz‘s (1992) universal human value of

Security. The second most common value elicited was ―a pleasurable experience and

pleasant mood‖ (mentioned by 15 informants). This value corresponds to Schwartz‘s

(1992) human value of Hedonism, which reinforces human needs for enjoyment and

happiness. The third most common value elicited was ―feelings of control over the

environment‖ (mentioned by 12 informants). This value corresponds to Schwartz‘s

(1992) human value of self-direction, which refers to the need for control over the

environment. The full list of elicited values and their relationship to Schwartz‘s

(1992) human value types are shown in Table 8.

69

Table 8: Values and Their Themes in Corresponding to Schwartz‘s (1992) Value Types

Universal Values (Schwartz, 1992)

Elicited end-values

Power Enhances and maintains public image Needs for recognition

Achievement Capability Success Intelligent and smart

Hedonism Pleasure and pleasant Enjoying life Self-indulgent

Stimulation An exciting life A varied life

Self-direction

Creation and imagination Have control Independent Curiosity

Universalism

Environmental protection Harmony with nature Equality/fairness Open minded/broad minded

Conformity Self-discipline

Benevolence Responsible/reliable True friendship Helpful

Tradition To be true to self (Accepting my portion in life) Honouring culture and history

Security

Sense of belonging Reciprocation Healthy Feeling of safety

3.6 Development of Hierarchical Value Maps

The next step in the data analyses was to map the relationships between attributes,

consequences and end-values using the Hierarchical Value Maps (HVMs). HVMs

allow these relationships to be identified at a glance. Using the 28 consequence

themes and 10 value themes, a HVM was constructed for each of the 11 salient

attribute themes (see Table 9 for theme codes). Each HVM illustrates how one

attribute theme ladders up to particular consequence themes and end-value themes.

The HVMs are now presented according to how salient each attribute was to the

respondents.

70

Table 9: Themes and Themed Codes for Attributes, Consequences and End-values

Tier Themes and themed codes for attributes, consequence and end-values

Tier 1:

Salient

attributes

A1. Outdoors

A2. Colour

A3. Architectural design

A4. Furnishing

A5. Cleanliness

A6. Layout and space

A7. Certification

A8. Staff behaviour

A9. Staff appearance

A10. Consumer behaviour

A11. Consumer appearance

Tier 2: Consequences

C12. It is attractive and stylish

C13. I would receive the staff‘s full attention when I want

C14. I feel free to communicate with others and present myself

C15. The environment helps me to meet my goals

C16. I can buy valuable products

C17. People‘s smiling faces create a positive mood

C18. I am relaxed, comfortable and not in a rush

C19. The environment gives you the opportunities to indulge yourself

C20. The exploration of unfamiliar area/countries is exciting

C21. Interested in different cultures and histories

C22. Those things induce my desire and make me want to go in and buy something

C23. I have control over my space

C24. I will be able to get my job done without asking for help

C25. It inspires my imagination

C26. We should protect the environment

C27. I feel I am part of the nature

C28. Everyone is equal and has their own rights and values

C29. I feel I am more inclined to take others‘ suggestion

C30. We share stories and experience

C31.This is honest, real, practical and down-to-earth

C32. People should remember the history and respect different cultures

C33. Everyone knows the rules and follows the rules

C34. I feel safe

C35. I don‘t feel alone (even I don‘t know others)

C36. I feel healthier; it‘s good to my health

C37. I would receive the service as I expect, a satisfied return

C38. I will be able to help others

C39. It looks professional and reliable

Tier 3:

End-values

V40. Power

V41. Achievement

V42. Hedonism

V43. Stimulation

V44. Self-direction

V45. Universalism

V46. Benevolence

V47. Tradition

V48. Conformity

V49. Security

71

3.6.1 Staff Behaviour (A8)

The first attribute theme, staff behaviour (A8), was strongly associated with nine

consequences:

I would receive the staff‘s full attention when I want (C13)

I feel free to communicate with others and present myself (C14)

The environment helps me to meet my goals (C15)

I can buy valuable products (C16)

People‘s smiling face create a positive mood (C17)

We share stories and experience (C30)

I don‘t feel alone (C35)

I would receive the service as I expect, a satisfied return (C37)

It looks professional and reliable (C39).

These consequences informed six end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

These end-values are power (V40), achievement (V41), hedonism (V42), self-

direction (V44), benevolence (V46), and security (V49) (as shown Figure 4).

Figure 4: Staff Behaviour and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

72

This theme (A8) comprises the most salient attribute to respondents: one-to-one/face-

to-face interaction with eye contact (mentioned by 12 informants), The HVM

indicates that face-to-face interaction with eye contact during service interaction

satisfies informants‘ desires for capability, success, reliability, and trust. For example,

Informant 011 pointed out that:

―…I would prefer this one-to-one interaction [A8] scenario, because two parties

are engaged with each other [C15], involving more detailed information. This is

easier to get information across without distraction.… You can clearly discuss the

key issues you want to get or you want to solve and both parties understand to each

other… In this case, you can achieve your goal for the service [V41] easily.‖

- Informant 011 (Male, 27yo)

Additionally, this attribute theme (A8) comprises another attribute: the smiling

service staff (mentioned by seven informants). Informants perceived this attribute

created a positive atmosphere in the servicescape, which is potentially contagious.

Smiling service staff (A8) have a range of positive consequences, including positive

mood (C17) and warm and welcoming feelings (C35). These consequences were

associated with three end-values: capability, pleasure, and sense of belonging. For

example, informants perceived that smiling service staff help them to achieve their

goals for the service, which corresponds to the universal human value of

achievement. Informant 006 pointed out that:

―…the service lady is smiling [A8]; it looks like she is inviting people to come

in….It just makes me feel very positive even before receiving the service…. If this

was my work environment, I would want to receive positive feelings from another

party [C17]. It just makes me perform better [C14] if I am in a good mood. Of

course, if I perform better, I would expect I can achieve the goal that I want to

achieve [V41]. For example, a promotion, and in the service environment, I suppose

that I feel free to ask questions and get the product that I want.‖

- Informant 006 (Female, 34yo)

73

3.6.2 Furnishing (A4)

The second attribute theme, furnishing (A4), was strongly associated with 11

consequences:

It is attractive and stylish (C12)

I am relaxed, comfortable and not in a rush (C18)

The environment gives you the opportunities to indulge yourself (C19)

I have control over my space (C23)

We should protect the environment (C26)

I feel I am more inclined to take others‘ suggestion (C29)

People should remember the history and respect different cultures (C32)

I feel safe (C34)


I will be able to help others (C38)


These consequences informed seven end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

These end-values are power (V40), hedonism (V42), self-direction (V44),

universalism (V45), benevolence (V46), tradition (V47), and security (V49) (as

shown in Figure 5).

Figure 5: Furnishing and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

74

This theme (A4) comprises a salient attribute, subdued/indirect lighting (mentioned

by nine informants), which was strongly associated with two consequences: feeling

warm and inviting in the environment, I feel safe (C34) and I am not alone (C35).

These relationships indicate that subdued/indirect lighting embedded in a service

environment satisfied informants‘ desires for a sense of belonging. For example,


―…the subdued lighting [A4] makes me feel warm and invited [C34]. I feel like I

am at home. I feel safe [V49] …. If the lighting is bright, I would feel

uncomfortable and cold.‖


In addition, this theme (A4) comprises another salient attribute, soft arm sofas

(mentioned by six informants), which was strongly associated with three

consequences: it gives a feeling of high-end elegance (C12); I am relaxed,

comfortable and not in a rush (C18); and I am more inclined to take others‘

suggestions (C29). These relationships indicate that the soft arm sofas were salient to

informants with the values of enjoying life, maintaining and/or enhancing public

image, and open-minded/broad-minded. For example, Informant 010 stated that:

―…it (sofa arm sofas) [A4] contributes to your mood. You are relaxed [C18] and

are probably more inclined to take on some suggestions [C29]. I mean that you

are probably more open to others’ suggestions [V45].‖


3.6.3 Outdoors (A1)

The third attribute theme, outdoors (A1), was strongly associated with 13

consequences:



The exploration of unfamiliar area/countries is exciting (C20)

Interested in different cultures and histories (C21)

75

Those things induce my desire and make me want to go in and buy something

(C22)


I will be able to get my job done without asking for help (C24)

It inspires my imagination (C25), I feel I am part of the nature (C27)

Everyone is equal and has their own rights and values (C28)



I will be able to help others (C38).

These consequences informed informants‘ seven end-values (i.e., universal human

value types). These end-values are achievement (V41), stimulation (V43), self-

direction (V44), universalism (V45), benevolence (V46), conformity (V48) and

security (V49) (as shown in Figure 6).

Figure 6: Outdoors and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

76

This theme (A1) comprises the salient attribute, an outdoor atmosphere with fresh air

and sunshine (mentioned by nine informants), which was associated with two

consequences: helps people clear their mind (C23) and inspire imagination (C25).

These consequences were subsequently associated with six end-values: achieve

career goal, satisfy one‘s ambition of creation and imagination, have control over the

environment, allow one to feel harmony with nature, improve one‘s personal health,

and gain a sense of belonging. For example, Informant 016 stated that:

―I don‘t really like artificial air-con environments. I feel emotionally comfortable

[C27] when I am outdoors [A1]. I think it is the age thing because I grew up in this

kind of environment. We did not really have shopping malls when I was young. You

know, all shops were on the street; you go to a shop, exit the shop onto the street, and

go to another shop, all outdoors. This is what I am used to and I feel that I am

back at the place where I come from [V49].‖


3.6.4 Layout and Space (A6)

The fourth attribute theme, layout and space (A6), was strongly associated with 12

consequences:



I am relaxed, comfortable and no in a rush (C18)

The environment gives you the opportunities to indulge yourself (C19),


(C22)



We should protect the environment (C26)



I feel safe (C34)

77


These consequences informed seven end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

These end-values are achievement (V41), hedonism (V42), self-direction (V44),

universalism (V45), benevolence (V46), tradition (V47) and security (V49) (as

shown in Figure 7).

Figure 7: Layout and Space and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A6) comprises the salient attribute, lots of space (mentioned by nine

informants), which was strongly associated with four consequences: I do not

intermingle with others, I have freedom of movement, I have control over my own

space, and I have certain privacy or keep my own privacy (C23). These relationships

indicate that a spacious environment enabled informants to have end-value of control

over their service environment and safety. For example, Informant 011 pointed out

that:

―This is the place where you can have your own privacy [C23]. No one knows

who you are, but you are still part of activities, probably don‘t feel lonely… you have

78

your own choice to explore something or not. You have control over the

environment [V44]‖


In addition, this theme (A6) comprises another salient attribute, products are

organised and clearly displayed with price tags (mentioned by six informants), which

was strongly associated with nine consequences: I can buy valuable products (C16), I

use my money wisely (C16), it helps me to use my time efficiently (C16), everything

is organised and well-planned (C16), I am happy, enjoying myself and having fun

(C18), those things induce my desire and make me want to get in and buy something

(C22), it maintains my serenity and patience to shop (C23), and have confidence to

make decision (C24). These relationships indicate that this attribute was ascribed

symbolic meaning in relation to informants‘ four end-values: success, capability,

enjoying life and curiosity. For example, Informant 016 pointed out that:

―…the environment is organised and well-planned with clear price tags on

products [A6]…you won‘t feel lost. You can compare the prices and have

confidence to make decisions [C24]. And you got whatever you want [V41]‖


Another salient attribute, variety of products and shops (mentioned by eight

informants)(A6), was associated with four consequences: I can buy valuable products

(C16), I use my money wisely (C16), helps me to use my time efficiently (C16),

people have choice to do whatever they want (C23). These consequences were

associated to three end-values including intelligent and smart (V42), control (V44),

and equality and fairness (V45). For example, Informant 006 pointed out that:

―…I can get everything I want in one place rather than go do different places

for different things [A6]. This environment helps me to save my time and money

I have lots of choices and I can choose value for money and quality [C16] [V41].‖


79

3.6.5 Colour (A2)

The fifth attribute theme, colour (A2), was strongly associated with nine

consequences:





(C22)



It inspires my imagination (C25)


This is honest, real, practical and down-to-earth (C31).

These consequences informed five end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

These end-values are achievement (V41), hedonism (V42), self-direction (V44),

universalism (V45), and tradition (V47) (as shown in Figure 8).

Figure 8: Colour and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

80

This theme (A2) comprises the salient attribute, plain and less formal interior design

(mentioned by eight informants), which relates to six consequences: I feel less

barriers (C14), I am relaxed, comfortable and not in a rush (C18), the environment

helps me to clear my mind (C23), there is no status in the environment (C28), the

environment is practical, real and honest (C31), and I can be truthful of myself and I

don‘t need to pretend (C31). These relationships show that a plain and less formal

servicescape satisfied informants‘ end-values such as enjoying life, having control,

equality and fairness, and being true to self. For example, Informant 019 stated that:

―The benefit of waiting for this service (in a bland environment) [A2] is that you

enjoy the peace, quiet, and non-stimulating atmosphere [C18]. You are not

worried about the passage of time. You are relaxed and not in a rush [V42]. You

have more patience to wait for the service.‖


3.6.6 Consumer Behaviour (A10)

The sixth attribute theme, consumer behaviour (A10) was strongly associated with

five consequences:

People‘s smiling face create a positive mood (C17)



(C22)

I feel safe (C34)

This is honest, real, practical and down-to-earth (C35).

These consequences informed four end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

These end-values are hedonism (V42), stimulation (V43), self-direction (V44), and

security (V49) (as shown in Figure 9).

81

Figure 9: Consumer Behaviour and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A10) comprises the salient attribute: many people look busy with

different activities, which was perceived by informants as company in the service

environment. This company was associated with end-values of enjoying life, a sense

of belonging, and a feeling of safety in the servicescapes. These end-values were

established from four consequences: I am happy, enjoying myself and having fun

(C18); I have no fear staying in this environment (C34); I feel safe (C34); and I don‘t

feel alone (even I don‘t know others) (C35). These relationships indicate that

informants perceived a busy service environment as full of company. For example,


―…(in this busy environment) [A10] even if you are there by yourself, you don’t

really feel alone [C35]. You can observe people even if you are not part of the

thing…. It’s always interesting to see people coming and going [C18]. You‘re

enjoying yourself [V42]‖


82

In addition, another salient attribute, smiling consumers (mentioned by seven

informants) (A10), had five consequences: positive mood (C17); full of life and full

of energy (C17); I am happy, enjoying myself and having fun (C18); I don‘t feel

alone (C35); and feel warm and invited in the environment (C35). These

consequences were laddered to informants‘ end-values of pleasure and pleasant

mood and sense of belonging, because smiling consumers created a positive

atmosphere that may be contagious to other consumers. For example, Informant 014

stated that:

―...people are smiling [A10]. It makes you happy; it’s contagions [C18]. If you

see someone smiling it makes you smile. It’s positive, and enjoyable [V42]. It

cheers you up. If you feel tried and sad, they can make you smile.‖


3.6.7 Architectural Design (A3)

The seventh attribute theme, architectural design (A3), was strongly associated with

six consequences:


The environment gives you the opportunities to indulge yourself (C19)

Interested in different cultures and histories (C21)

It inspires my imagination (C25)

People should remember the history and respect different cultures (C32)

I don‘t feel alone (C35).

These consequences informed five end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

They are achievement (V41), hedonism (V42), stimulation (V43), self-direction

(V44), tradition (V47), and security (V49) (as shown in Figure 10).

83

Figure 10: Architectural Design and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A3) comprises the salient attribute, historical architecture (mentioned by

seven informants) (A3), which was associated with eight consequences: attractive

and stylish (C12), elegance with high quality (C12), opportunities to indulgence

yourself (C19), opportunities to experience different lifestyle from normal life and to

detach from real life temporary (C21), we should protect heritage buildings and

relevant things (C32), I like to connect history and old-fashioned stuff (C32), people

should remember the history and respect different cultures (C32), and it tells about

stories (C35). These consequences informed end-values including self-indulgence,

enhances and/or maintains public image, a varied life, honouring culture and history,

and sense of belonging.

The HVM indicates that historical architecture and its features made informants feel

inclined to indulge themselves; they considered their image to be enhanced, felt

surrounded by culture and history, belonged to the place, and were able to experience

a varied life. For example, Informant 019 stated that:

―….the atmosphere (i.e., having history) [A3] is taken from your real world and

everyday life… It allows you to connect with the history, removed from your

daily life [C21]. Like escaping daily life temporarily, escaping the reality [V43].‖


84

3.6.8 Certification (A7)

The eighth attribute theme, certification (A7), was strongly associated with four

consequences:



I would receive the service as I expect, a satisfied return (C37)


These consequences informed three end-values (i.e., universal human value types).

These end-values are achievement (V41), benevolence (V46), and security (V49) (as

shown in Figure 11).

Figure 11: Certification and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A7) comprises the salient attribute, certificates and qualifications on the

wall (mentioned by five informants), which was associated with three consequences:

I have confidence to make decision such as my investment plan (C14), I may have a

satisfied return, I may gets extra return from my investment when doing business

with this service provider (C37), and this service provider looks reliable and

professional (C39). These consequences satisfy informants‘ desires to be capable,

responsible, and reciprocal. For example, Informant 005 stated that:

85

―…qualifications on the wall [A7]. It‘s got the high standard customer service. …

because it will be better customer service and value for the money [C16]. You

want to spend money on something you’ll have a satisfied return [V49], I think.‖


3.6.9 Consumer Appearance (A11)

The ninth attribute theme, consumer appearance (A11), was strongly associated with

three consequences: the exploration of unfamiliar area/countries is exciting (C20),

interested in different cultures and histories (C21), and it inspires my imagination

(C25). These consequences informed two end-values (i.e., universal human value

types). These end-values are stimulation (V43) and self-direction (V44) (as shown in

Figure 12).

Figure 12: Consumer Appearance and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A11) comprises the salient attributes, people are dressed up and people

have different colour hair or from different countries, which have three consequences:

I can explore an unfamiliar country and that makes me feel exciting (C20), I am

interested in different cultures (C21), and I observe others and make up their stories

(C25). These consequences resulted in informants‘ anticipation of a different

86

experience in consumption that satisfied their end-values of an exciting life and

stimulating one‘s curiosity and creativity. For example, Informant 012 stated that:

―…people may be from different countries [A11]… It is important to experience

different cultures because you learn about things you never knew before [C21];

that‘s exciting. And you learn about other cultures, food, different way they are

living, in every way. You make your life different and varied [V43].‖


3.6.10 Staff Appearance (A9)

The tenth attribute theme, staff appearance (A9), was strongly associated with two

consequences: I am relaxed, comfortable and not in a rush (C18) and it looks

professional and reliable (C39). These consequences informed three end-values (i.e.,

universal human value types). These end-values are achievement (V41), hedonism

(V42), and benevolence (V46) (as shown in Figure 13).

Figure 13: Staff Appearance and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A9) comprises two salient attributes: service staff wear uniforms and

service staff wear casual clothes. These two attributes were ascribed two different

end-values. On one hand, informants perceived staff wearing casual clothes as

relaxed and not in a rush (C18), which laddered up to the value of enjoying life. On

87

the other hand, informants perceived staff wearing uniforms as professional and

reliable (C39), which satisfied their need for responsibility. For example, Informant

006 stated that:

―…the service person wearing uniform [A9] appears to be professional. It looks

organised [C39]. These elements reflect the quality of service and products. … it is

worth of money that you pay because you expect to pay for the quality of

services [V41]. With the good quality of services or products, I would actually have

long term usage of that service...‖


3.6.11 Cleanliness (A5)

The final attribute theme, cleanliness (A5), was strongly associated with two

consequences: I feel safe (C34) and I feel healthier, so it‘s good to my health (C36).

These consequences informed the end-value of security (V49) (as shown in Figure

14).

Figure 14: Cleanliness and Its Association with Consequences and End-Values

This theme (A5) comprises the salient attribute, cleanliness, which was perceived by

informants as an indicator for a healthy environment. It fulfilled informants‘ basic

needs for health. For example, Informant 003 stated that:

88

―… I think it‘s about personal physical and mental health [V49]. We should have

no fear [C34] staying in a place... I think the cleanliness [A5] is an indicator because

you can actually see it is clean or not‖


Overall, the HVMs highlighted that 28 end-values represented the symbolic

meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attributes. These values correspond to

Schwartz‘s 10 Universal Human Value Types (Schwartz, 1992), which are explored

along with the identification of salient servicescape attributes and their consequences.

3.7 Conclusion

This chapter outlined the method and findings of Study One. The study aimed to

fulfil its research objective by identifying (a) which servicescape attributes are salient

to consumers, and (b) what symbolic meanings are ascribed to those attributes. To

address the research objective, the study used individual depth interviews to gain

insight into the role of servicescape symbolism.

The study identified 37 servicescape attributes that were salient to consumers. They

are physical attributes, such as an outdoor atmosphere environment, general and

plain interior design, subdued lighting, lots of space, as well as social attributes, such

as one-to-one interaction with eye contact, service staff and other consumers are

smiling. These salient attributes are ascribed 92 consequences (i.e., symbolic

meanings) by informants that relate to 28 end-values (i.e., symbolic meanings).

These end-values include a sense of belonging, life enjoyment, pleasure, being

recognised by others, responsibility, capability, open minded, a varied life and

curiosity. Further, these end-values ascribed to salient attributes correspond to 10

universal human value types (Schwartz, 1992), which exist in consumers‘ cognitive

systems. By identifying salient servicescape attributes, as well as their ascribed

symbolic meanings in relation to their end-values, this study answered the following

research question:

RQ1. What symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape attributes?

89

The next study aims to expand Study One‘s findings by modifying an existing scale

to measure the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes.

91

4 STUDY TWO

The purpose of Study One was to identify salient servicescape attributes and the

symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to those attributes. In order to investigate

whether those symbolic meanings can be measured, this study modifies an existing

self-concept scale using factor analysis to measure the symbolic meanings ascribed

to servicescapes. This chapter presents the method and results of this study. Specially,

this chapter discusses the research objective, research design and justification,

research procedure, data collection, methods for data analysis, and findings for Study

Two.


Having identified what symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes, and with the overall objective of investigating whether consumers‘

preference for service environments can be determined by the congruence between

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to service environments, it is

important to ascertain how symbolic meanings can be measured. Building on Study

One, Study Two answers the following research question:



Study Two aims to modify an existing self-concept scale to measure the symbolic

meanings ascribed to servicescapes.


In order to achieve the research objective outlined above, a quantitative approach

was used. Quantitative approaches ―seek the facts or causes of social phenomena

without advocating subjective interpretation‖ (Deshpande, 1983, p. 103). This

approach was considered appropriate for this study as it aims to empirically modify

an existing scale (Zikmund, 2003).

92

There are two major quantitative approaches: experimental designs and cross-

sectional designs (Lee & Lings, 2008; Tharenou, et al., 2007; Vogt, 2011). Studies

that use experimental designs to collect data ―are normally conducted away from

where the phenomenon usually occurs, and attempts are made to control as many

extraneous influences as possible in that setting‖ (Tharenou, et al., 2007, p. 17). This

design allows researchers to manipulate independent variables as well as randomly

assign cases to treatment and control groups (Tharenou, et al., 2007; Vogt, 2011). As

a result, experimental designs ensure the accuracy of causal inferences about the

relations among variables (i.e., high level of internal validity) (Vogt, 2011).

Although experimental designs provide more convincing evidence of casual

relationships than other designs, this approach has three critical issues. First, it is

difficult to control extraneous influences (Churchill, 1996). Second, the cost to

implement an experimental study may be high (Churchill, 1996). Finally, the time

required for an adequate experimental study may be substantial (Churchill, 1996).

Alternately, cross-sectional (survey) designs ―involve researching a sample of

elements selected from the population of interest‖ (Churchill, 1996, p.141). This

design is similar in nature to experimental designs in that they examine the

relationship between variables; however, it has two different features. First, data

collected in cross-sectional designs normally occur at a single point in a time. Second,

studies that use cross-sectional designs must observe variation in the relevant

variables by examining multiple cases (Lee & Lings, 2008). By examining a large

sample of cases at one time, cross-sectional designs achieve a higher level of external

validity that allows researchers to conclude tentative causalities between variables

(Lee & Lings, 2008).

To ensure that data collected in Study Two had a high level of external validity, a

cross-sectional design (i.e., survey) was undertaken. This design was suitable for this

study for two reasons. First, it examined whether the symbolic meanings ascribed to

salient servicescape attributes are valid to a large sample of consumers. Second, it

evidenced the solid theoretical and statistical base of the symbolic meanings ascribed

to servicescapes (Tharenou, et al., 2007).

93

Surveying is the most suitable data collection technique for studies aiming to

generate large-scale quantitative data to test research hypotheses. It is also the most

cost-effective and efficient way to gather written data via self-report ratings

(Tharenou, et al., 2007). Accordingly, the selection and design of questions for a

survey should be based on theoretical frameworks or theories that underlie the

proposed phenomenon being examined (Lee & Lings, 2008; Tharenou, et al., 2007).

The purpose of each question has to be clear in order to properly measure the

theoretical constructs.

In general, survey questions are designed using two different response categories:

closed-ended and open-ended questions. Closed-ended questions are often adopted in

structured surveys as they emphasise participants‘ answers on rating scales

(Tharenou, et al., 2007). Open-ended questions are often adopted in unstructured

questionnaires as they require participants to freely discuss their attitudes towards

research issues rather than being restricted to selecting from a set of options

(Churchill, 1996). However, both open- and closed-ended questions can be used in

semi-structured surveys, with probing questions to clarify and confirm answers to

closed questions (Tharenou, et al., 2007). Given that the objective of this study is to

modify an existing self-concept scale, this study used a structured survey with

closed-end questions (derived from the results of Study One).

Surveys can be administered using several techniques: face-to-face, telephone, mail,

and web (Zikmund, 2003). Face-to-face and telephone interviews have the advantage

of ensuring that every survey question will be answered; however, it may be

inefficient and costly. Mail surveys can target samples to ensure external validity;

however, low response rates are often a concern. Web-based surveys utilises the

internet to assess target samples. They are considered the most cost-effective and

efficient way to collect survey data. Questions in web-based surveys can be

presented in a variety of formats, including text, images, graphics, and video. Like

other techniques, however, online surveys may suffer from untruthful reporting and

low response rates.

To collect data in order to modify an existing self-concept scale to measure the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes, this study adopted web-based, self-

94

report survey. This technique provided two advantages. First, it allowed a

servicescape image to be presented as stimulus (Zikmund, 2003). Second, was

programmed to prevent missing data. With the use of forced answering software,

participants were required to answer every question before moving to the next

section of the survey.

Once the quantitative data is collected, Study Two employed Exploratory and

Confirmatory Factor Analysis to assess the effectiveness of the modified measure,

specifically its ability to measure the symbolic meaning ascribed to servicescapes.

Factor analysis is used to derive the underlying dimensions of symbolic meanings

ascribed to servicescapes that collectively represent the holistic concept of

servicescape symbolism (a latent variable) (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham,

2010).

4.3 Research Procedure

In order to modify an existing scale to measure the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes, a reliable and well-designed survey is critical (Creswell, 2003).

Building on the results of Study One, this study required a structured survey

comprising three stages: (a) selecting stimuli, (b) developing and selecting items for

the survey, and (c) finalising the survey layout and instructions. These three elements

are now discussed in detail.

4.3.1 Stage One: Selecting Stimuli

The stimuli refer to a selection of representative servicescape images. In order to

demonstrate that the ascribed symbolic meanings (i.e., 92 consequences and 28 end

values) ascribed to salient servicescape attributes in Study One are valid and

generalisable, the three most representative servicescape images were selected from

the bank of 15 servicescape images (developed for Study One). In order to be

selected as a representative image, each image had to fulfil three eligibility criteria

(Mindak, 1961).

First, the selected images should show both salient physical and socio-servicescape

attributes, because consumers interact with physical and socio-servicescape attributes

95

concurrently in service consumption. Second, the selected images had to collectively

encapsulate as many salient attributes as possible. Finally, the images had to be

significantly different from one another so that they represented different symbolic

meanings (i.e., 92 consequences and 28 end values).

In light of the eligibility criteria, three servicescape images were selected (as shown

in Table 10). Servicescape A comprised five salient attributes: (1) one-to-one/face-

to-face interaction with eye contact, (2) certificates and qualifications on the wall, (3)

private areas, (4) service staff wearing formal attire or uniforms, and (5) no counter

between the service personnel and the consumer. Servicescape B comprised three

different salient attributes: (1) many people in the servicescape that look busy with

different activities, (2) general interior design, and (3) lots of space. Servicescape C

comprised seven salient attributes: (1) an outdoor atmosphere, (2) smiling service

staff, (3) service staff are visible, (4) service staff wearing casual clothes, (5) smiling

consumers, (6) people hanging around without a particular aim, and (7) tables and

chairs.

Table 10: Three Representative Servicescape Images

Servicescape A Servicescape B Servicescape C

4.3.2 Stage Two: Developing Items and Selecting the Scaling Format

In order for participants to evaluate a phenomenon (i.e., the symbolic meanings

ascribed to servicescapes), a reliable scale is critical (Mitchell, 1985). A scale is ―a

continuous spectrum or series of categories to present an item‘s, a person‘s or an

event‘s place in the spectrum‖ (Zikmund, 2003, p. 300). For this study, an existing

Self-Concept scale (Malhotra, 1981) was modified to measure the ascribed symbolic

meanings that consumers used to evaluate servicescapes (identified in Study One).

96

The existing scale was a semantic differential scale that comprised 15 pairs of

personality descriptors, and was developed to evaluate the self-concept of people and

products (Malhotra, 1981).

Using the personality descriptors identified in Study One, the 15 pairs of personality

descriptors in the Self-Concept scale (Malhotra, 1981) were examined to see whether

they covered the scope of the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes.

Recalling that PCT (Kelly, 1955, 1991) asserts that consumers construe

servicescapes in parallel to the way they would describe themselves (Butt, 2008), this

study compared the personality descriptors identified in the Tier 2 consequences

presented in the HVMs with the existing 15 pairs of items. Initially, 145 Tier 2

personality descriptors were identified in Study One (Mindak, 1961).

In order to avoid data redundancy and create a parsimonious basis for comparison,

four criteria were used to scrutinise the 145 Study One personality descriptors

systematically in order to assess their compatibility and appropriateness for

measuring both the Self and servicescapes accurately. The first criterion aimed to

avoid synonymous terms. Consequently, descriptors that had the same substantial

meaning were combined to one adjective based on both the logic informants

generated in the interviews and a dictionary. For example, the descriptors ―practical‖

and ―down-to-earth‖ were synonymous in servicescape usage and were combined to

one item that referred to a down-to-earth personality.

The second criterion considered the idiosyncrasy and representativeness of the

descriptors. Practically speaking, each adjective should be idiosyncratic to a

particular value. This meant that any personality descriptor that has been laddered to

different personal values was excluded because its meaning was not distinctive to a

specific value. For example, informants laddered the personality descriptor

―unpredictable‖ up to two contrasting instrumental values: ―an exciting life‖ and

―feeling of safety‖. Consequently, the personality descriptor ―unpredictable‖ was

excluded from further analysis.

The third criterion aimed to ensure the descriptors were applicable to both consumers

and servicescapes. For example, the descriptor ―ornate‖ was appropriate to describe

97

servicescapes but it was not applicable to consumers‘ personality. Such specific

terms were deleted from further analysis.

The final criterion aimed to evaluate the ambiguity of personality descriptors, as

some terms had less meaning when informants used them to describe servicescape

images. For example, a servicescape being described as ―interesting‖ did not

explicate the informant‘s attitude to that attribute. Thus, ―interesting‖ was excluded

from analysis as it could not imply a positive or negative attitude towards

servicescapes.

Using these four criteria, the 145 initial personality descriptors identified in Study

One were reduced to 28 personality descriptors that could delineate between the

three servicescape images selected as stimuli. These 28 personality descriptors

corresponded to one of nine self-relevant values (shown in Table 11).

98

Table 11: Servicescape Images and Their Corresponding Personality Descriptors and Self-

Relevant Values

Selected Servicescape Images Personality

Descriptors (28) Self-Relevant Values (9)

A Impressive Being recognised by others

Elegant

Organised

Capable Calm

Modern

Sophisticated

Reliable

Responsible

Formal

Serious

Private

Professional

B Autonomous Independent

Self-reliant

Flexible

Choose you own goal/

Perceived control

Informal

Control over

Care-free

Straightforward

Honest Down-to-earth

Uncomplicated

C Pleasant Pleasant and pleasure

Positive

Relaxed

Life enjoyment Comfortable

Self-indulgence

Friendly

Sense of belonging Welcoming

Sociability

Once the 28 personality descriptors had been identified, Malhotra‘s (1981) 15 pairs

of Self-Concept items were compared to the personality descriptors to assess how

well they overlapped. Five pairs (i.e., rugged/delicate, colourless/colourful,

rational/emotional, youthful/mature, orthodox/liberal) were deemed to be irrelevant

to servicescapes and the Self, and thus were excluded from further analysis. Ten

pairs of items were deemed appropriate to measure 12 of the personality descriptors

identified in Study One (shown in Table 12).

99

Table 12: A Comparison Between 28 Personality Descriptors and Malhotra‘s (1981) 15

Pairs of Self-Concept Items

28 Personality Descriptors

identified in Study One Malhotra’s (1981)

15 Pairs of Self-Concept Items

Ov

erla

pp

ing

Ite

ms

Autonomous Dominating/Submissive Calm Excitable/Calm

Comfortable Uncomfortable/Comfortable Down-to-earth Self-indulgence

Thrifty/Indulgent

Formal Informal

Formal/ Informal

Impressive Modest/Vain

Modern Contemporary/Non-contemporary

Organised Organised/Unorganised

Pleasant Pleasant/Unpleasant

Uncomplicated Complex/Simple

Non

-over

lappin

g I

tem

s

Care-free

Control Over Elegant Flexible Friendly Positive Private

Professional Relaxed Reliable

Self-reliant Serious Sociable

Straightforward Sophisticated Welcoming

Rugged/Delicate Colourless/Colourful Rational/Emotional

Youthful/Mature Orthodox/Liberal

After assigning Malhotra‘s (1981) 15 pairs of Self-Concept items to 12 personality

descriptors, semantic differential items were then developed for the remaining 16

personality descriptors (Churchill & Iacobucci, 2005). Given that the choices of the

opposing descriptors did not simply involve creating opposite terms, an English

linguist contributed to this process by selecting and evaluating the representativeness

of the opposing descriptors and their applicability for both consumers and

servicescapes (Churchill, 1979; Churchill & Iacobucci, 2005; Mindak, 1961;

100

Zikmund, 2003). The appropriateness of those opposing descriptors was further

assessed to ensure both criterion validity and content validity was achieved.

As a result, 27 bipolar items were developed to form the initial servicescape meaning

scale (see Table 13). The scale measured 27 personality descriptors as two

descriptors, formal and informal, overlapped in one of Malhotra‘s bipolar items (i.e.,

formal-informal). Thus, these two descriptors were collapsed into a single item. In

addition, the phrase ―sense of community‖ was replaced with the adjective ―sociable‖

and its bipolar meaning was nominated to be ―unsociable‖ in order to make all items

meaningful descriptors of consumers. The 27 pairs of personality items were

considered suitable for further testing to evaluate consumers‘ sense of Self and

servicescape meanings.

Table 13: Bipolar Personality Descriptors

The next step was to determine the scaling format. Four main scaling formats have

been used in the marketing literature: simple attitude scales, category scales, Likert-

type scales and semantic differential scales. According to Zikmund (2003), a simple

attitude scale requires participants to agree or disagree with a statement using yes or

no answers, whereas a category scale uses a descriptive or evaluative dimension to

obtain participants‘ attitudes. A Likert-type scale is designed to ―allow participants to

indicate how strongly they agree or disagree with the constructed statements that

range from very positive to very negative towards an attitudinal object‖ (Zikmund,

Bipolar Personality Descriptors Bipolar Personality Descriptors

1 Autonomous/Dependent 15 Down-to-earth/Idealistic 2 Calm/Excitable 16 Uncomplicated/Complex 3 Carefree/Worried 17 Positive/Negative 4 Comfortable/Uncomfortable 18 Relaxed/Tense 5 Controlling/Unpredictable 19 Reliable/Untrustworthy 6 Elegant/Plain 20 Independent/Restricted

7 Flexible/Inflexible 21 Serious/Frivolous

8 Formal/Informal 22 Self-indulgent/Thrifty

9 Impressive/Ordinary 23 Sociable/Unsociable

10 Modern/Classic 24 Sophisticated/Unsophisticated 11 Organised/Unorganised 25 Straightforward/Mysterious 12 Pleasant/Unpleasant 26 Friendly/Unfriendly 13 Professional/Nonprofessional 27 Welcoming/Inhospitable

14 Private/Public

101

2003, p. 312). Finally, a semantic differential scale uses a series of descriptive

bipolar adjectives scale to assess a construct. Semantic differential scales are

considered an efficient means for collecting consumers‘ attitudes towards a concept

(Mindak, 1961).

Many Likert-type scales of both Self and objects have been widely used in the

marketing literature to measure constructs such as brand personality (Aaker, 1997)

and store personality (d'Astous & Lévesque, 2003). Semantic differential scales,

however, have been widely adapted to delineate product profiles and characteristics

in order to investigate consumer preference (e.g., Ekinci & Riley, 2003; Malhotra,

1988). Consequently, this study adopted a seven-point semantic differential scale to

measure the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes (see Table 14) because it is

a versatile measurement tool. Further, semantic differential scales have been widely

used in image studies (Zikmund, 2003).

102

Table 14: Seven-Point Semantic Differential Symbolic Servicescape Meaning Scale

Descriptors 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Descriptors

1 Autonomous Dependent

2 Calm Excitable

3 Carefree Worried

4 Comfortable Uncomfortable

5 Controlling Unpredictable

6 Elegant Plain

7 Flexible Inflexible

8 Formal Informal

9 Impressive Ordinary

10 Modern Classic

11 Organised Unorganised

12 Pleasant Unpleasant

13 Professional Nonprofessional

14 Private Public

15 Down-to-earth Idealistic

16 Uncomplicated Complex

17 Positive Negative

18 Relaxed Tense

19 Reliable Untrustworthy

20 Independent Restricted

21 Serious Frivolous

22 Self-indulgent Thrifty

23 Sociable Unsociable

24 Sophisticated Unsophisticated

25 Straightforward Mysterious

26 Friendly Unfriendly

27 Welcoming Inhospitable

The final part of the survey collected basic demographic information about survey

participants. It comprised six questions about the participants‘ demographic

information such as gender, age, educational background, marital status, and

occupation. These items were important for the analysis because participants‘

demographic characteristics may influence the way they answered in the survey

(Brangule-Vlagsma, Pieters, & Wedel, 2002).

103

4.3.3 Stage Three: Finalising Survey Layout and Instructions

Three structured surveys were developed for data collection (an example of the

survey is shown in Appendix C). Each survey consisted of two sections. The first

section was the servicescape evaluation, which comprised one of the three

servicescape images and then the symbolic servicescape meaning scale. This section

aimed to obtain participants‘ evaluation of the symbolic meanings ascribed to one

servicescape image. The participants were guided with the following instruction:

“The above picture represents a customer and a service provider interaction in a

service environment. People would describe this environment with some

characteristics. How would you describe the characteristics of the service

environment (as in the picture)? The service environment refers to the whole

environment including physical setting and people who interact in the environment.

Please indicate what best represents your view of the characteristics of the service

environment.”

The second section collected the demographic information of participants. Each

survey comprised 39 items in total, and was designed to ensure better quality of

responses. In practice, a small survey is easier to complete and less likely to cause

participants to discontinue their participation in the survey (Churchill & Iacobucci,

2005).

4.3.4 Survey Pre-Testing

Before surveys are distributed for data collection, pre-testing is imperative. There are

several kinds of pre-tests: protocol interviews with experts or potential participants

(DeVellis, 2003; Lee & Lings, 2008; N. Reynolds & Diamantopoulos, 1998) and a

pilot study with small numbers of potential participants. The aim of pre-testing is to

uncover questions in which the wording could be improved or the sequence changed

for clarity (Churchill, 1996).

This study conducted a two-stage pre-test to ensure that the survey was clear and

concise. The first pre-test was a sequence of face-to-face interviews with marketing

academics (i.e., protocol interviews) (Churchill & Iacobucci 2005; DeVellis 2003;

104

Lee & Lings 2008). Six marketing academics were invited to examine the draft

surveys. Their feedback on item wording and the overall survey was solicited to

detect problems pertaining to item wording, question content, question sequence,

question difficulty and the instructions for the survey (Blair & Presser, 1992;

Reynolds & Diamantopoulos, 1998). This ensured the clarity of the survey and that

ambiguous wording and implicit assumptions were identified and removed (Malhotra,

Hall, Shaw, & Oppenheim, 2006).

The revised surveys were then pre-tested with small number of students (i.e., pilot

study with potential participants). This pilot study was distributed using the similar

method to the main data collection procedure (Malhotra, et al., 2006). A convenience

sample of 53 participants was gathered from the student population of the summer

school program of a university in Australia. They were solicited to fill one of the

three surveys and provide their feedback.

Although convenience samples and student samples are not always considered

representative, efforts were made to resolve general bias by recruiting students from

summer school programs (Cestre & Darmon, 1998). In general, students who enrol in

summer programs are employed full time, thus avoiding biases due to limited

financial resources and student lifestyle. In addition, the small sample size for this

pilot study met the minimum requirement of 50 of the target sample (i.e., people

aged 18 years or older) (Lee & Lings, 2008).

Two kinds of errors were identified in the pretesting: semantic issues and task errors

(Blair & Presser, 1992; DeVellis, 2003; Reynolds & Diamantopoulos, 1998).

Semantic problems were errors in the question wording whereas task errors referred

to the difficulty of completing the survey even when participants understand the

question wording.

In terms of the semantic problems, three pairs of personality items were found to be

problematic. First, the negative personality descriptor ―disingenuous‖ was considered

inappropriate to pair with the positive personality descriptor ―straightforward‖.

―Disingenuous‖ was replaced by the descriptor ―mysterious‖ because pre-test

105

respondents felt that inappropriate vocabulary may lead to missing data (Reynolds &

Diamantopoulos, 1998).

Second, at least five participants declared that they did not know how to rate the

environment using the pair of the personality descriptors: ―self-reliant‖ and ―reliant‖.

Thus, these bipolar descriptors were replaced by another pair of descriptors:

―independent‖ and ―restricted‖. Both of these alternative terms were present in the

content analysis conducted in Study One. Thus, the replacement did not change the

original meaning informants used to describe the salient servicescape attributes.

One final semantic error was found in the descriptor ―inelegant‖, which was

considered inappropriate to describe an environment even though it was proposed as

the negative meaning to the descriptor ―elegant‖. Consequently, the descriptor ―plain‖

replaced ―inelegant‖ to better describe the service environments.

In terms of the task errors, some participants stated that they had difficulties relating

the service environment to the opening pair of personality descriptors ―autonomous‖

and ―dependent‖. Although it would have been appropriate to move this pair of

personality descriptors down the scale (as suggested by one experienced academic), a

practice task in filling in a semantic differential scale was instead provided, which

used an iPhone as an example. This allowed participants to gain a better

understanding of how to use a semantic differential scale to evaluate a servicescape,

but did not bias the responses because iPhones are not part of general servicescapes.

Overall, the pretesting ensured the logic of the question sequence and the

comprehension of the survey (Churchill & Iacobucci, 2005; Lee & Lings, 2008).

4.4 Data Collection

4.4.1 Sample Size and Sampling Strategy

The sample size for extracting valid symbolic meanings across three servicescape

images was determined according to the number of variables in the study (DeVellis,

2003; Hair, et al., 2010; Malhotra, et al., 2006; Nunnally, 1978). As a rule of thumb,

the acceptable sample size would have a minimum of 10 cases per item in the study

(Cavana, Delahaye, & Sekaran, 2001; Hair, et al., 2010). The symbolic servicescape

106

meaning items initially consisted of 27 pairs of variables, requiring an overall

minimum sample size of 270 participants for three surveys to conduct subsequent

statistic analysis.

Next, an adequate sampling strategy must be used to ensure data validity (Mitchell,

1985). To best address the study objective, purposive sampling, a non-probability

sampling strategy, was adopted. It enabled the researcher to select potential

participants (Churchill & Iacobucci, 2005; Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007;

Zikmund, 2003) who meet the recruitment criteria. Adults who were over the age of

18 years were recruited for the study, which was consistent with the informant

recruitment criteria for Study One. This measure ensures the external validity of the

purified symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes.

To recruit the target sample, consumer panel data was purchased from a private

market research company. This recruitment strategy was appropriate because this

study aims to ascertain whether the ascribed symbolic meanings are valid and

generalisable to servicescapes among adult consumers (Churchill, 1996; Ericksen &

Sirgy, 1992).

4.4.2 Survey Administration

As stated previously, this study distributed surveys online. Three URLs were created

for three versions of the surveys using Queensland University Technology (QUT)

Key Survey software. Each URL corresponded to one version of the survey. They

were then used to recruit participants through the consumer panel. Each of the three

links was randomly distributed to 250 panel consumers respectively. After an

introduction page with a participant information sheet, participants were asked if

they were over the age of 18 years. Once they passed the screening question, they

were directed to the main survey.

The administration of web-based surveys was completed in June 2011. With an

average response rate at around 91%, 681 participants completed the surveys: 232

participants for Version 1(Servicescape A), 215 participants for Version 2

(Servicescape B), and 234 participants (Servicescape C) for Version 3.

107

4.5 Methods for Data Analysis

To further ascertain the validity and generalisability of the symbolic servicescape

meaning scale, a purification of items was first conducted. The most common way to

purify scale items is by factor analysis (Hair, et al., 2010). Several criteria were

adopted to determine the factor structure. This statistical measure ensured the

internal consistency of the scale and eliminates ―garbage items‖ (Hair, et al., 2010).

In addition, the purification process ensured that the scale covered the elements best

delimiting the three servicescape images (Mindak, 1961).

4.5.1 Factor Analysis

To ascertain whether the personality descriptors are valid and generalisable to

measure the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes, survey data was analysed

using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) (Churchill, 1979; Hair, et al., 2010). Both

conceptual and statistical assumptions were taken into account to ensure the

appropriateness of applying EFA. From the conceptual standpoint, the overriding

conceptual concern was to ascertain whether the symbolic meanings ascribed to

salient servicescape attributes (as identified in Study One) are valid and generalisable

across a range of servicescapes. While the personality descriptors for servicescape

meaning evaluation were determined based upon the findings of Study One, the

conceptual validity of the underlying theoretical structures in the set of pre-identified

personality descriptors (i.e., symbolic meanings) can be tested.

From the statistical standpoint, factor analysis is a technique that ensures the quality

of factor structures by defining sets of variables (for this study, personality

descriptors) that are highly interrelated and subsets that are relatively independent of

each other (Hair, et al., 2010). Each factor comprises a number of specific variables

(i.e., for this study, personality descriptors), which in turn allow the factors to be

interpreted and described. Hence, statistical evidence was critical to justify the

intercorrelation among the overall measures as well as variables-specific measures.

To better justify the application of factor analysis, an initial step ensured that the data

matrix was sufficiently correlated (Hair, et al., 2010). Three statistical outputs,

108

including the anti-image correlation matrix, Bartlett test of sphericity and measure of

sample adequacy (MSA), were used to diagnose the factorability of the data (Hair, et

al., 2010). The anti-image correlation matrix is the negative value of the partial

correlation in a data matrix provided by SPSS. By inspecting the correlation matrix

visually, any correlation values below .3 indicate that factor analysis would be

inappropriate. Bartlett test of sphericity is a statistical test for the correlation matrix

among the variables (Hair, et al., 2010). It is an indicator that shows the statistically

significant correlations among some of the variables in the matrix. A value of

significance smaller than .05 indicates the correlations that are sufficient among the

variables. However, the use of Bartlett‘s was suggested only if there were less than

five cases per variable because of its dependence on sample size (Tabachnick &

Fidell, 2007). Finally, the measure of sample adequacy (MSA) quantifies the degree

of intercorrelations among the observed variables that indicates the appropriateness

of factor analysis. It looks at both the correlations and the patterns between variables.

The index ranges from zero to one. Having values approaching one is considered

good factor analysis as it indicates that each variable can be predicted without error

by the other variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Any variables with values less

than .05 should be deleted from the factor analysis one at a time (Hair, et al., 2010).

In addition, all MSA values should surpass .05 for both the overall test and each

individual variable.

While EFA has been widely applied to ascertain the psychometric properties of

scales (Reise, Waller, & Comrey, 2000), it was considered suitable for this study

because it sought to ascertain the ascribed symbolic meanings for servicescape

evaluation. Along with the personality descriptors for servicescapes‘ evaluation, the

abstract symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes (i.e., self-relevant values) can

be identified systematically based on the findings of Study One.

4.5.2 Method for Factor Extraction

Before conducting EFA, the factor extraction method was determined (Hair, et al.,

2010). Principal components analysis was used for prediction purpose. This analysis

summarises the original information in a minimum number of components. In

addition, this analysis considers the total variance and derived components that

109

contained small proportions of unique variance and error variance (Hair, et al., 2010).

Conversely, common factor analysis is mainly used to identify latent factors

presenting the common or shared variance among variables. This analysis does not

take the unique variance and error variance into account when defining the structure

of the variables (Hair, et al., 2010).

A continuous debate has been made as to which factor analysis is better to apply

(Arrindell & van der Ende, 1985; Costello & Osborne, 2005; Hair, et al., 2010). This

study used the principle component factor (PCA) analytic model, which is most

appropriate for data reduction when the goal is to extract as much variance as

possible in the least amount of factors (Floyd & Widaman, 1995; Hair, et al., 2010).

As such, PCA was adopted to ascertain the underlying evaluative personality

descriptors for servicescapes that took the unique and error variances into account

(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).

4.5.3 Factor Interpretation

Factor interpretation aims to understand the underlying factor that unifies the set of

variables loading onto it (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). In practice, it is an iterative

process. Researchers need to use three fundamental tools in factor analysis: factor

rotation, factor loading and factor interpretation, and re-specification. Factor analysis

starts with an unrotated factor matrix. Factor loadings are the degree of similarity

between each variable and the factor that can be used to interpret the role each

variable play in defining each factor. The unrotated factor matrix, however, may not

be able to provide sufficient information to interpret the variables adequately.

In contrast, the extraction technique of factor rotation can reduce the ambiguous

variables, simplify the structure and allow precise interpretation. Thus, factor rotation

is the second tool to achieve a simpler but theoretically meaningful factor pattern.

Two rotation techniques—orthogonal factor rotation and oblique factor rotation—are

most commonly used to obtain factors.

Orthogonal factor rotation maintains the rotated axes at 90 degrees using three

techniques: varimax, quartimax and equamax (Hair, et al., 2010). Varimax rotations

simplify the factors by maximising the variance of the loadings within factors across

110

variables, whereas quartimax simplifies the variables by increasing the dispersion of

the loadings within variables across factors (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). By

simplifying factors and variables simultaneously, equamax tends to produce unstable

results, which may only be adopted when the researcher can confidently specify the

number of factors. In practice, varimax is the most common application because

researchers are usually more interested in simplifying factors rather than variables.

Oblique rotation is similar to orthogonal rotation, but it produces a continuous range

of correlation between factors without maintaining independence of each rotated

factor (Hair, et al., 2010; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). The amount of correlation

between factors is determined by an indicator called delta (δ). When the value is less

than zero, solutions are increasingly orthogonal and when the value is about -4, the

solution is orthogonal. When the value is zero, solutions can be fairly highly

correlated. Values near 1 indicate that factors are very highly correlated (Tabachnick

& Fidell, 2007).

Accordingly, the decision to choose either orthogonal or oblique rotation should be

determined by the research problem (Hair, et al., 2010). Instead of an oblique

rotation, an orthogonal solution with varimax rotations was used in this study to

ensure the variables (i.e., 27-pair personality descriptors) were uncorrelated with

each other to the best possible extent (Hair, et al., 2010).

In addition, the rotated loading matrix presents other relationships such as

communality, proportion of variance and proportion of covariance. Communality is

the sum of squared loadings (SSL) for a variable across factors, which explains a

variable‘s variance degree that is predicted by the factors. When an orthogonal

rotation was adopted for this study, the sum of squared loadings for the factor

divided by the number of variables showed the proportion of variance in the set of

variables explained by a factor.

Finally, the proportion of covariance is the SSL for the factor divided by the sum of

communalities. Overall, these relationships show the difference between the

unrotated and the rotated factor matrices, which is called the residual correlation

matrix. A ―good‖ factor analysis shows small numbers of the residual correlation

111

matrices that indicates little difference between the unrotated and the rotated

correlation matrices (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).

Once the significance of correlations (i.e., interpretability of the factors) is achieved,

the final stage concerns the interpretation of the factor matrix. Loadings obtained

from the orthogonal rotation are correlations between variables and factors. Rules of

thumb suggest that the greater the loading value, the more the variable is a measure

of the factor (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Accordingly, loadings above .71

(indicating 50 percent overlapping variance) are considered excellent. In addition,

only variables with correlation values (i.e., factoring loadings) in excess of .32 can be

interpreted (Comrey & Lee., 1992; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Overall, the factor

interpretation process requires several iterations in order to process the data.

4.5.4 Missing Data

Missing data can be estimated, deleted or analysed using a pairwise correlation

matrix (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). For this study, missing data patterns were

checked using descriptive statistics. Missing data comprised less than 2 percent of

the survey. Thus, respondents with missing data were excluded from the study.

4.5.5 Criteria to Extract Factors

In the process of factor interpretation, the decision to retain a number of factors

should be based on both theoretical and statistical considerations. The theoretical

consideration, also known as the predetermined criterion, should indicate the number

of factors to extract prior to undertaking the factor analysis (Hair, et al., 2010). The

predetermined criterion can then be combined with other statistical criteria, including

the latent root, the percentage of variance, the scree test and the heterogeneity of the

participants, when determining the number of factors (Hair, et al., 2010).

First, the latent root criterion is the most commonly used criterion as it examines

eigenvalues. Only factors with eigenvalues greater than 1 are considered significant.

Accordingly, using the eigenvalues to evaluate the cutoff point is reliable when the

numbers of variables are between 20 and 50 (Hair, et al., 2010). Second, the

percentage of variance is another criterion used to retain adequate numbers of factors

112

based on meeting a specified cumulative percentage at 60% or higher of total

variance extracted by enough factors. Third, the scree test of eigenvalues plotted

against factors is a commonly used criterion to determine the optimum number of

factors. Here, the point at which the curve begins to reach approximately horizontal

is considered an indication of the maximum number of factors to extract (Hair, et al.,

2010; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Finally, shared variance across the entire sample

can also be used to decide on the number of factors. Factors that are less beneficial in

discriminating among sample subgroups should be eliminated.

Researchers often use more than one criterion to determine how many factor to

extract. However, it is suggested that researchers should compare and contrast

different approaches to achieve the best structure of data interpretation (Hair, et al.,

2010).

4.5.6 Label Factors

Once an acceptable factor structure is obtained, labelling factors is the last step of

factor analysis. The labelling involves considering a factor‘s replicability, utility, and

complexity (Hair, et al., 2010). For example, a researcher may consider if the final

solution can be replicated with different groups or at other times (Tabachnick &

Fidell, 2007). In general, factor labels are developed intuitively so they are

appropriate to represent the factors. The labelling for this study relied on the factors‘

correspondence with the theoretically defined personal values.

4.5.7 Reliability and Validity

Once a factor structure had been determined, the symbolic servicescape meaning

scale was then tested for reliability and validity (Churchill, 1979). The reliability of

the symbolic servicescape meaning scale was assessed using Cronbach alpha.

Cronbach alpha is a common measure used to evaluate the scale reliability (Churchill,

1979; Netemeyer, Bearden, & Sharma, 2003). It assesses the quality of scales with

multiple items and an interval level of measurement (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).

With the Cronbach alpha, a set of items‘ internal consistency and the degree of

correlations among a set of items can be examined (Cortina, 1993). Rules of thumb

suggest that the lower limit for Cronbach alpha levels is .70; however, it is

113

acceptable if the level is decreased to .60 in exploratory research (Hair, et al., 2010;

Nunnally, 1978).

Establishing construct validity for the extracted factor structure is essential because

the factors derived from EFA are statistical rather than theoretical outputs (Hair, et

al., 2010). Validity is defined as ―the extent to which a scale accurately represents the

concept of the research interest‖ (Hair, et al., 2010, p. 689). Four components

constitute construct validity: convergent validity, discriminant validity, nomological

validity and face validity.

Convergent validity is ―the extent to which indicators of a specific construct

converge or share a high proportion of variance in common‖. Three values—

standardised loadings, variance extracted, and reliability—can be estimated to ensure

convergent validity. Factor loadings should be .5 or higher, and ideally .7 or higher.

When the loading of an observed variable is below │.5│, it is considered a candidate

for deletion. Variance extracted (VE) is referred to as communities and indicates the

―total amount of variance a measured variable has in common with the constructs

upon which it loads‖. As suggested, the value of VE should be .5 or greater to

suggest adequate convergent validity. Construct reliability should be .7 or higher to

indicate adequate convergence or internal consistency.

Discriminant validity is ―the extent to which a construct is truly distinct from other

constructs‖. When VE estimates for two factors are greater than the square of the

correlation between the two factors, they provide evidence for the construct

discriminant validity.

Face validity is established before any theoretical testing. As underscored by Hair et

al. (2010), only when the researchers understand every item‘s meaning and that they

are consistent with the construct definition, can face validity be achieved.

Nomological validity is a direct investigation of the consistency of the constructs and

the measure by means of a formal theoretical framework and a set of hypotheses

from theory (Peter, 1981). This validity is established when the relationships between

constructs are as hypothesized through a further empirical study. For this research

114

program, nomological validity was verified in Study Three, in which the formulated

research hypotheses are tested and the nomological validity is subsequently verified.

The psychometric properties of the modified scale and the stability of the factors can

be estimated through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using structural equation

modeling (SEM) (Hair, et al., 2010). CFA is used to examine reality with regard to a

researcher‘s theoretical pattern of factor loadings. In this study, it allows either the

confirmation or rejection of the preconceived factor structure obtained from EFA.

For Study Two, AMOS 18.0 was used to test the construct validity of the extracted

factors (i.e., personality descriptors ascribed to servicescapes that correspond to

personal values) and the related observed variables.

4.6 Findings

4.6.1 Sample Characteristics

A total of 681 participants were recruited for the study, resulting in a response rate of

91%. In order to test the factor structures extracted from EFA using CFA, an

additional sample was required. Since the required sample for the scale item

reduction (i.e., 27-pair personality descriptors, so 270 respondents) was met, the

original sample was randomly split up to two samples. The first sample consisted of

431 participants and was used to conduct the EFA. The second sample consisted of

250 participants and was used to conduct the CFA.

Between two samples, the five demographic background items were similar. The

EFA sample consisted of more female participants (259, 60.1%) than male

participants (172, 39.9%), which was similar to the CFA sample (165 or 66%

females). The majority of participants were born in Australia (68.7% for EFA sample;

69.2% for CFA sample). In both samples over half (55%) of the participants were

aged between 26 and 45 years (see Table 15).

115

Table 15: Overview of Two Sample Characteristics of Participants

EFA Samples

CFA Samples for

Validity Testing Variable Items Total

Number Percentage

Total

Number Percentage

Gender Female 259 60.1% 165 66.0% Male 172 39.9% 85 34.0% Total 431 100.0% 250 100.0%

Age 18-25 82 19.0% 46 18.4% 26-35 142 32.9% 89 35.6% 36-45 97 22.5% 56 22.4% 46-55 59 13.7% 28 11.2% 56-65 39 9.0% 26 10.4% 66+ 12 2.8% 5 2.0% Total 431 100.0% 250 100.0%

Country

of Birth Australia 296 68.7% 173 69.2% Overseas 134 31.1% 77 30.8% Total 430 99.8% 250 100.0%

Education Post graduate degree or

equivalent 96 22.3% 73 29.2%

Undergraduate degree or

equivalent 115 26.7% 58 23.2%

Diploma 54 12.5% 33 13.2% Certificate IV 47 10.9% 23 9.2% Year 12 Higher School

Certificate 64 14.8% 35 14.0%

Year 10 School

Certificate 44 10.2% 21 8.4%

Others 11 2.6% 7 7.0% Total 431 100.0% 250 100.0%

Work

Situation Home duties 44 10.2% 24 9.6% Unemployed 18 4.2% 7 2.8% Self employed 27 6.3% 20 8.0% Full time employed 176 40.8% 99 39.6% Part time employed 49 11.4% 29 11.6% Casual employed 25 5.8% 18 7.2% Fulltime Student 59 13.7% 36 14.4% Retired 33 7.7% 17 6.8% Total 431 100.0% 250 100.0%

4.6.2 Intercorrelations

To assess the item intercorrelations (an assumption of EFA), a visual inspection of

the correlations between the 27 pairs of variables was conducted. Among the 27 pairs

of variables, the overall MSA value was appropriate (with a value of .912). A visual

inspection identified that all variables had moderate anti-image values (i.e., all of

them were above .60). As the whole set of variables exceeded the minimum

acceptable MSA level (above .50), they were all retained as they were deemed

116

appropriate for factor analysis (see Table 16). Further, the data set was deemed

suitable for factor analysis because the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling

adequacy was above the minimum threshold (value of .738, which is above .6) and

Bartlett‘s Test of Sphericity was significant (see Table 17).

117

Table 16: Inter-Item Corrections and MSA Values Between Variables

Anti-image

Correlation Impressive

/Ordinary Modern /Classic

Professional

/Nonprofess

-ional

Private /Public

Positive /Negative

Serious /Frivolous

Friendly /Unfriendly

Welcoming

/Inhospitable Elegant /Plain

Impressive/ Ordinary

.726a

Modern/ Classic

-.115 .694a

Professional/ Nonprofessional

-.096 -.062 .657a

Private/ Public

-.003 .146 -.286 .744a

Positive/ Negative

-.033 -.011 -.154 -.035 .864a

Serious/ Frivolous

-.074 -.012 -.428 -.257 .037 .718a

Friendly/ Unfriendly

-.024 -.114 -.106 .078 -.180 .139 .746a

Welcoming/ Inhospitable

-.067 .105 -.044 .138 -.317 .078 -.633 .725a

Elegant/ Plain

-.456 -.113 .000 -.176 -.135 .102 -.033 .010 .685a

a. Measures of Sampling Adequacy(MSA)

118

Table 17: KMO and Bartlett's Test Across Three Versions of Surveys

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy .738

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 1347.619

df 6

Sig. .000

4.6.3 Final Scale Structure

After numerous iterations of principle components analysis to purify the scale, a final

scale structure for the symbolic servicescape meaning scale was determined (see

Table 18). The final scale comprised nine bipolar items. Principle components

analysis revealed the presence of three components with eigenvalues exceeding 1

(3.015, 2.142, 1.112 respectively). Component 1 consisted of the personality

descriptors welcoming/inhospitable, friendly/unfriendly and positive/negative.

Component 2 consisted of the personality descriptors private/public,

serious/frivolous and professional/nonprofessional. Component 3 consisted of the

personality descriptors elegant/plain, impressive/ordinary and modern/classic. An

inspection of the scree plot revealed a clear break after the third component. The

three component solution explained explained nearly 70 percent (cumulative

variance= 69.646%) of the total variance. The rotated solution revealed the presence

of simple structure, with the three components showing a number of strong loadings

(i.e., over .6) and all variables loaded substantially on only one component (Hair, et

al., 2010). The final component structure was considered acceptable for the

subsequent study.

119

Table 18: Final Three-Component EFA Structure for Symbolic Servicescape Meaning Scale

Item Component 1 Component 2 Component 3 Communalities

Welcoming/ Inhospitable

.905 .856

Friendly/ Unfriendly

.879 .826

Positive/Negative .828 .725

Professional/

Nonprofessional .799 .726

Serious/Frivolous .793 .700

Private/ Public .783 .664

Elegant/Plain .755 .640

Impressive/ Ordinary

.741 .649

Modern/Classic .673 .483

Eigenvalue 3.015 2.142 1.112

% of variance 33.497 23.796 12.353

Cumulative % 33.497 57.293 69.646

Cronbach Alpha .881 .702 .587

Self-relevant

Values

Pleasant and

pleasure, Life

enjoyment,

Sense of

belonging

Responsibility

Being

recognised by

others

Extraction method: Principle component factoring Rotation method: Orthogonal rotation

4.6.4 Qualitative Interpretation of the Three-Component Structure

The final three-component solution was interpreted theoretically and qualitatively

(see Table 19) in order to label the components. The first component comprised the

personality descriptors positive, friendly and welcoming. Consequently, this

component was labelled Sociability, which reflects three Self-relevant values:

pleasant and pleasure, life enjoyment and sense of belonging (DeVellis, 2003). The

second component comprised the personality descriptors serious, private and

professional. Consequently, this component was labelled professionalism, which

reflects the Self-relevant value of responsibility. The third component comprised the

personality descriptors impressive, elegant and modern. Consequently, this

component was labelled style, which reflects the Self-relevant value of recognition.

120

Overall, this three- component structure was considered statistically and theoretically

sound and thus valid for subsequent tests of Self-congruity.

Table 19: Servicescape Personality Descriptors, the Extracted Factors and the

Corresponding Self-Relevant Values

Component (3) Items of Personality

Descriptors (9) Self-Relevant Values (5)

Sociability

Positive Pleasant and pleasure Life enjoyment

Sense of belonging Friendly

Welcoming

Professionalism

Serious

Responsibility Private

Professional

Style

Impressive Being recognised by others

(Recognition) Elegant

Modern

4.6.5 Reliability and Validity of the Measure

In order the test the scale reliability, internal consistency with tested. Only two

components—sociability and professionalism—showed a high level of internal

consistency (Cronbach‘s alpha=.881 and .701 respectively). The third component—

style—exhibited less internal consistency (below .6); however, it was considered

acceptable for this study because the three were theoretically sound in light of

Universal Human Values Theory (Schwartz, 1992). In addition, they corresponded

with the findings of Study One.

To investigate scale validity, confirmatory factor analysis was used. The Maximum

Likelihood (ML) method was applied to the CFA model because the multivariate

normality assumption was not critically violated. This method reduces bias even

when the condition that data be missing at random is not completely satisfied (Little

& Rubin, 2002) and it improves parameter estimates to minimise a specified fit

function (Hair, et al., 2010). The results for the SEM measurement model

demonstrated reasonable fit, although it fell just short of the desired threshold (x2=

110.741, df= 24, x2/df = 4.614, CFI=.899, NFI=.877, RMSEA=.120) (shown in Table

20).

121

Table 20: CFA Model Fit (N=250)

Goodness-of-fit statistics The proposed model Desired values for good fit

X2/df 110.741/24=4.614 <3.00

CFI .899 >.90

NFI .877 >.90

RMSEA .120 <.08

Construct validity of the purified symbolic servicescape meaning scale was

confirmed because the scale was modified from an existing Self-Concept scale

(Malhotra, 1981) and then developed based on the findings of Study One and

relevant theoretical insights. Convergent validity was confirmed using factor loading

estimates (i.e., standardized regression weights in AMOS) and average variance

extracted (AVE). All factors loadings for constructs were over the minimum

threshold (at least .5) and were significant (p<.001), except the bipolar item

modern/classic (see Table 21). However, the item was retained for theoretical

reasons.

Table 21: Regression Weights (N=250)

Factors and variables Standardised

Estimate S.E. C.R. P

Sociability

Welcoming/inhospitable .919 .092 32.887 ***

Friendly/unfriendly .883 .089 34.501 ***

Positive/negative .755 .087 37.544 ***

Professionalism

Private/public .894 .127 35.796 ***

Serious/frivolous .685 .091 40.443 ***

Professional/nonprofessional .538 .087 37.594 ***

Style

Impressive/ordinary .874 .091 49.000 ***

Elegant/plain .654 .092 47.298 ***

Modern/classic .245 .097 43.123 ***

*** Significantly different from zero at the .001 level.

The average variance extrated from the CFA exceeded the minimum threshold

(over .5) (see Table 22). In addition, all average variance-extracted estimates were

greater than the corresponding inter-construct squared correlations (the squared of

122

correlation estimates between style and professionalism was .29; between style and

sociability was .354) (see Table 22). Thus, discriminant validity was confirmed.

Overall, the confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the scale exhibited high

convergent and discriminant validity and was replicable using a validation sample.

Table 22: Correlations, Squared Correlations and VE of CFA Model (N=250)

Correlations Among Latent Construct (Squared)

Measure Style Professionalism Sociability VE

Style 1.00 .892

Professionalism .291** 1.00 .542

Sociability .354*** -.225** 1.00 .1080

a. ** Correlation is significant at the .05 level. *** Correlation is significant at the .001 level.

b. All VE exceed .50, showing convergent validity. c. All VE are greater than the square correlation estimates, showing discriminant validity.

4.7 Conclusion

The aim of Study Two was to modify an existing Self-Concept scale (Malhotra, 1981)

to create a symbolic servicescape meaning scale. The study used quantitative surveys

to ascertain whether the ascribed symbolic meanings identified in Study One

captured the domain of the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes. By

identifying three personality components (i.e., sociability, professionalism and style)

as well as five corresponding self-relevant values (i.e., life enjoyment, pleasant and

pleasure, sense of belonging, responsibility and being recognised by others ascribed

to servicescapes), Study Two answered the following research question:



The results suggest that the symbolic servicescape meaning scale is a valid and

reliable measure for the evaluation of consumers‘ sense of Self and the symbolic

meanings ascribed to servicescapes.

123

5 Study Three

The purpose of Study Two (Chapter Four) was to modify an existing scale in order to

develop a symbolic servicescape meaning scale to measure the symbolic meanings

ascribed to servicescapes and consumers‘ sense of Self. Having ascertained that three

personality components and five corresponding self-relevant values capture the

symbolic meanings that consumers ascribe to servicescapes, Study Three utilities a

descriptive survey design to investigate the effect of congruence between the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes and consumer Self on preference. This

chapter presents both the method and findings of Study Three. Specially, it addresses

the research objectives and hypotheses, research design and justification, research

procedure, method of data analysis and justification, and the findings. Finally, a

conclusion for Study Three is presented.

5.1 Research Objective and Hypotheses

As stated in Chapter Two, Self Theory (Epstein, 1973; Gecas, 1982; Purkey, 1970)

posits that servicescapes are perceived as a constellation of attributes that are

symbolically meaningful to consumers‘ sense of Self. In fact, self-concept is so

powerful that its enhancement, maintenance and protection motivates behaviour and

affects decision-making. This thesis consequently argues that consumers are more

likely to prefer (and thus purchase) a service that either matches or extends their

sense of Self.

Although the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) has been widely used to

investigate the consequences of the desire to maintain and protect the Self by

pursuing congruent products and environments, little research has investigated the

consequences of the desire to extend the Self by pursuing incongruent products and

environments. Consequently, this research investigates the impact of both congruity

and incongruity between the Self and the symbolic meaning ascribed to the

servicescape because this (in)congruence is likely to be a strong predictor of

servicescape preference. Recall that Self-Servicescape congruence is defined as ―the

match between consumer Self (i.e., personality of the Ideal Self, Actual Self, and

124

Social Self, as well as personal value of the Self) and the symbolic meanings

ascribed to a given servicescape‖.

Study Three has three aims. First, this study aims to examine the joint effects of four

components of consumer Self—(1) personality of the Ideal Self, (2) personality of

the Actual Self, (3) personality of the Social Self and (4) values of the Self—and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescape on preference. Second, this study aims

to test the predictive capacity of both personality components and Self-relevant

values on preference. Third, this study aims to examine the moderating effects of the

salience of each personality component and personal value on the Self-Servicescape

congruence effects.

With regard to the second aim, as discussed in Chapter Two, scant research has

tested whether personality components or personal values better predict preference.

Given that both personality components and personal values underpin Self, a test of

their predictive strength is critical because the former have questionable influence on

attitudes and behaviours. Given that personal values are relatively enduring, trans-

situational and thus act as criterion to guide behaviour (Brunsø, et al., 2004; Gecas,

2000; Wade-Benzoni, et al., 2002), testing the predictive strength of values of the

Self on preference may provide a better alternative to enhance the predictive power

of the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982).

Having confirmed that three personality components (i.e., sociability,

professionalism and style) and five corresponding self-relevant values (i.e., pleasant

and pleasure, life enjoyment, responsibility, sense of belonging and recognition)

capture the symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to servicescapes (as found in

Study Two), an empirical framework is developed to guide this study (see Figure 15).

This framework comprises (1) the joint effects of the personality of the Actual, Ideal

and Social Self and the personality ascribed to the servicescape, (2) the joint effects

of Self-relevant individual values and the value ascribed to the servicescape, and (3)

the corresponding moderating effect of each personality or value component on


125

Figure 15: Empirical Framework of Symbolic Servicescape

(Source: Developed for this thesis)

H7c

H7b

H7a

H6a

H6b

H6c

H5c

H5b

H5a

H8e

H8d

H8c

H8b

H8a

H4e

H4d

H4c

H4b

H4a

H3c

H3b

H3a

H2c

H2b

H2a

H1c

H1a

H1b

Salience of

Professionalism

Salience of

sociability

Salience of style

Salience of life

enjoyment

Salience of pleasant

and pleasure

Salience of sense

of belonging

Salience of

responsibility

Salience of

recognition

126

By examining the effects of Self-Servicescape congruence, Study Three will address

the following research question:



5.1.1 Personality of the Self and Servicescape Preference

The idea that a servicescape can be designed to satisfy consumers‘ social needs is not

new. In fact, research has conceptualised ―social servicescapes‖ to underscore the

importance of social elements embedded in servicescapes (Rosenbaum, 2005, 2009;

Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011; Rosenbaum & Montoya, 2007; Tombs & McColl-

Kennedy, 2003). For example, the perceived social support in a servicescape may

enhance consumers‘ positive attitude and approach behaviour (Oldenburg, 1999;

Rosenbaum, 2009; Rosenbaum, Ward, Walker, & Ostrom, 2007).

However, scant research has empirically tested the joint effect of sociability of the

consumer Self and sociability ascribed to the servicescape on preference. By taking

the three components of consumer Self into account, consumers‘ preference for

servicescapes may be better predicted using the sociability ascribed to a servicescape

because consumers are likely to prefer an environment that allows them to

demonstrate their sociability (in accordance with the Actual Self) or their aspirations

for sociability (in accordance with their Ideal or Social Self). Thus, the following

hypothesis is proposed:

H1: The congruence between the sociability of the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self, and

(c) Social Self, and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape.

The idea that consumers desire professionalism during services consumption is also

not new. In fact, professionalism corresponds to several service quality dimensions

such as reliability, responsiveness, competence, credibility, security and

understanding (Grönroos, 1982; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985). Research

on service quality has long recognised the importance of professionalism during

127

service delivery process (Kasper, Helsdingen, & Gabbott, 2006; Parasuraman, et al.,

1985).

Consumers‘ needs for professionalism has been theorised to have significant impact

on attitudes, such as satisfaction, and behavioural outcomes (e.g., Vinagre & Neves,

2008), such as approach intensions (e.g., Jang & Namkung, 2009). For example,

Vinagre and Neves (2008) demonstrated that the perceived service quality of

reliability and employee assurance led to patient satisfaction.

However, scant research has empirically tested the joint effect of the professionalism

of the consumer Self and professionalism ascribed to the servicescape on preference.

By taking the three components of consumer Self into account, consumers‘

preference for servicescapes may be better predicted using the professionalism

ascribed to a servicescape because consumers are likely to prefer an environment that

allows them to either demonstrate their professionalism (in accordance with the

Actual Self) or their aspirations for professionalism (in accordance with their Ideal or

Social Self). Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H2: The congruence between professionalism of the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self,

and (c) Social Self, and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


The servicescape literature has previously identified that style in an impactful

element of servicescapes. For example, Creighton (1998) showed that consumers

perceive some servicescapes as ―sleek‖, ―sophisticated‖, ―aesthetically attractive‖

d‘Astous and Levesque (2003) found that sophistication is one of the main

dimension of retail store personality. Although consumers reportedly aspire to be

stylish (McGrath, 1998), scant research has empirically tested the joint effect of the

style of the consumer Self and the style ascribed to the servicescape on preference.

By taking the three components of consumer Self into account, consumers‘

preference for servicescapes may be better predicted using the style ascribed to a

servicescape because consumers are likely to prefer an environment that allows them

to either demonstrate their style (in accordance with the Actual Self) or their

128

aspirations for style (in accordance with their Ideal or Social Self). Thus, the

following hypothesis is proposed:

H3: The congruence between the style of the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self, and (c)

Social Self, and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


5.1.2 Values of the Self and Servicescape Preference

The servicescape personality component sociability corresponds to the Universal

Human Values of hedonism and security. First, the literature on consumer

consumption motivation has referred to the pursuit of fantasies, feelings and fun as

hedonic consumption (Holbrook & Hirschman, 1982; O‘Shaughnessy &

O‘Shaughnessy, 2002). Based on this paradigm, consumers are satisfied by

experiencing playful leisure activities, sensory pleasures and/or daydreams. Research

further underscores that servicescapes can be designed to satisfy the pursuit of

pleasure. For example, toy store servicescapes use animation and regional

embeddedness to attract and maintain consumers (Wallendorf, Lindsey-Mullikin, &

Pimentel, 1998). Given that hedonism embodies the two Self-relevant values of life

enjoyment and pleasant and pleasure, this research hypothesises that:

H4a: The congruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life

enjoyment value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to preference for the

servicescape.

H4b: The congruence between the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the

pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to


Second, servicescapes has been found to be third places that have therapeutic value

when consumers seek friendships or social support from service employees and other

consumers (Day, 2000; Price & Arnould, 1999; Rosenbaum, 2006; Rosenbaum et al.,

2007; Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011). Such a third place satisfies a need for the

Universal Human Value of security, which is defined as ―safety, harmony and

stability of society, of relationships and of self‖ (Schwartz, 1992, p. 9). For example,

129

consumers may become regular patrons of a particular service because they have

formed friendships with the service staff and/or other consumers (Rosenbaum et al.,

2007). Thus, servicescapes may satisfy consumers‘ needs for sense of belonging.

Thus, this research hypothesises that:

H4c: The congruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense

of belonging value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to preference for

the servicescape.

The Universal Human Value of benevolence (Schwartz, 1992) is defined as the

―preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in

frequent personal contact‖ (Schwartz, 1992, p. 11). Consumers who value

benevolence may behave prosocially as they desire positive servicescape interactions

and affiliations. The literature on service quality has long recognised the influence of

reliability, responsiveness and credibility on consumer satisfaction, approach

intention and word-of-mouth (Kasper, et al., 2006). Thus, this study hypothesises

that:

H4d: The congruence between the responsibility value of the Self and the

responsibility value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to preference for

the servicescape.

The Universal Human Value of power (Schwartz, 1992) is defined ―the attainment of

social status and prestige, and control or dominance over people and resources

including authority, wealth, social power, preserving my public image and social

recognition‖ (Schwartz, 1992, p. 9). Literature suggests that consumers may value

being recognised by others in a servicescape because it reflects their desire for status

and conspicuous consumption (Henry, 2002; O'Cass & McEwen, 2004). This stream

of research argues that the usage of specific products may denote status. Thus, the

acquisition of products becomes an indicator of social success that is used to secure

positions of status. Research has further evidenced that consumers‘ desires to

reinforce their social class may be integrated into their Self and will drive

conspicuous consumption behaviour (Henry, 2002). Thus, this research hypothesises

that:

130

H4e: The congruence between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition

value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to preference for the

servicescape.

5.1.3 Moderating Effect of Salient Personality Components on Preference

The salience of personality components may influence the effect of the congruence

between Self and other (i.e., other people and objects) on preference (Bono &

Colbert, 2005). The literature demonstrates that salient self-esteem and self-efficacy

descriptors are highly correlated with job satisfaction, life satisfaction and job

performance (Bono & Judge, 2003; Judge, Erez, Bono, & Thoreson, 2002).

Furthermore, these personality descriptors influence individuals‘ motives for self-

enhancement (Bono & Colbert, 2005). In an attempt to investigate the influence of

salient personality descriptors on self-congruity effects, Bono and Colbert (2005)

found that salient personality descriptors moderated the effect of self-other

congruence on goal commitment. Thus, this study proposes the following hypotheses

about the moderating effects of salient personality components on the effect of

congruence between personality of the Self and personality ascribed to servicescapes

on preference for servicescapes.

H5: The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape

congruity of sociability on servicescape preference for the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual

Self and (c) Social Self, respectively.

H6: The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-

servicescape congruity of professionalism on servicescape preference for the (a)

Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self and (c) Social Self, respectively.

H7: The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape

congruity of style on servicescape preference for the (a) Ideal Self (b) Actual Self

and (c) Social Self, respectively.

131

5.1.4 Moderating Effect of the Salient Personal Values on Preference

The salience of personal values may also moderate the effect of Self-Servicescape

congruence on preference. Personal values are organised in hierarchies of importance

(Schwartz, 1996). Thus, some values are more important than others in determining

attitudes and behaviours, particularly when values conflict (Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz

& Bilsky, 1987). Consumers prioritise their personal values differently and

behaviours may express only one primary value or more than one value. For example,

consumers who value hedonism more than security would tend to engage in

pleasurable activities rather than avoiding them (Bardi & Schwartz, 2003).

When examining preference formation, the degree of the salience of personal values

may moderate the effect of the Self-servicescape congruence because consumers

cognitively evaluate the pros and cons of the value they pursue (Bardi & Schwartz,

2003; McClelland, 1985). Thus, this study proposes the following hypotheses about

the moderating effects of salient personal values:

H8a: The salience of life enjoyment significantly moderates the effect of the

congruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value

ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8b: The salience of pleasant and pleasure significantly moderates the effect of the

congruence between the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and

pleasure value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8c: The salience of sense of belonging significantly moderates the effect of the

congruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of

belonging value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8d: The salience of responsibility significantly moderates the effect of the

congruence between the responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value

ascribed to servicescape on preference.

132

H8e: The salience of recognition significantly moderates the effect of the congruence

between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to

servicescape on preference.

5.1.5 Summary

In summary, this section presented an empirical framework of servicescape

symbolism. Twenty-eight hypotheses (see Table 23) were formulated to be tested in

Study Three. The research design and justification, the research procedure, the

method for data analysis and justification, and the findings of this study are reported

in the following sections.

133

Table 23: Summary of Hypotheses for Study Three

Code Personality /Values Hypotheses

H1 Sociability The congruence between the sociability of the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self, and (c) Social Self, and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is

positively related to preference for the servicescape.

H2 Professionalism The congruence between professionalism of the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self, and (c) Social Self, and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is

positively related to preference for the servicescape.

H3 Style The congruence between the style of the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self, and (c) Social Self, and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively

related to preference for the servicescape.

H4a Life enjoyment The congruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to servicescape is positively related to


H4b Pleasant and pleasure The congruence between the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to servicescape is positively

related to preference for the servicescape.

H4c Sense of belonging The congruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related

to preference for the servicescape.

H4d Responsibility The congruence between the responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to


H4e Recognition The congruence between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to a servicescape is positively related to preference

for the servicescape.

H5 Sociability The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on servicescape preference for the (a)

Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self and (c) Social Self, respectively.

H6 Professionalism The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism on servicescape preference for

the (a) Ideal Self, (b) Actual Self and (c) Social Self, respectively.

H7 Style The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape preference for the (a) Ideal Self (b)

Actual Self and (c) Social Self, respectively.

H8a Life enjoyment The salience of life enjoyment significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life

enjoyment value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8b Pleasant and pleasure The salience of pleasant and pleasure significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and

the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8c Sense of belonging The salience of sense of belonging significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the

sense of belonging value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8d Responsibility The salience of responsibility significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the responsibility value of the Self and the

responsibility value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

H8e Recognition The salience of recognition significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition

value ascribed to servicescape on preference.

134


In order to investigate the joint effect of the Self and the ascribed symbolic meanings

of servicescapes on consumer servicescape preference, Study Three was conducted

using a quantitative approach. As discussed in Chapter Four, quantitative approaches

―seek the facts or causes of social phenomena without advocating subjective

interpretation‖ (Deshpande, 1983, p. 103). Such an approach is suitable for this study

because it aims to empirically and objectively investigate the role of servicescape

symbolism on consumers‘ preference for servicescape using a large sample (Lee &

Lings, 2008).

Surveys are the most popular method for quantitative approaches. Surveys are

―typically guided by hypothesis which concerns with determining the frequency with

which something occurs or the extent to which two variables covary‖ (Churchill,

1996, p.115). A survey is appropriate for this study for two reasons. First, it allows

the validity and reliability of the data interpretation in Study One and Study Two to

be tested (Cooper, 1998). Second, it provides better confidence for drawing

conclusion about the causality between variables (Lee & Lings, 2008).

To test the research question and hypotheses, surveys usually require measures of

several independent variables and one or more dependent variables (Tharenous,

Donohue & Cooper, 2007). Strong measures with systematic and standardised

measurement of variables across multiple cases are critical for quantitative studies to

examine the variation between variables (Lee & Lings, 2008). Building on Study

One and Study Two, Study Three adopted the purified nine-item symbolic

servicescape meaning scale to evaluate both consumers‘ sense of Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes. By using the same measure to evaluate

two constructs, the joint relationship between consumer sense of Self and the

ascribed symbolic meanings of servicescape and its influence on servicescape

preference can be better understood (Edwards, 2009).

135

5.3 Research Procedure

Three web-based versions of the survey were developed for Study Three. Each

survey consisted of four sections. In Section 1, participants were first asked to

evaluate the three different components of themselves (i.e., personality of their Ideal

Self, Actual Self and Social Self). Next, participants were asked to examine a

servicescape image and then evaluate which personality components they would

ascribe to the servicescape. Third, participants were asked to evaluate the salience of

the personality components. In Section 2, participants were first asked to visualise

the kind of person who possessed the values listed, and then evaluate themselves in

relation to those values. Next, participants were asked to evaluate the values evident

in the servicescape image. Third, participants were asked to evaluate the salience of

the personal values listed. In Section 3, participants were asked to evaluate their

preference for the servicescape. In Section 4, participants were asked to complete

their demographic information such as gender, nationality, age, marital status, their

highest level of education and current work situation.

To summarise, the participants‘ task sequence for Study Three was as follows (see

Appendix D):

Evaluation of personality of the Self, salient personality components and

personality ascribed to the given servicescape image

Evaluation of values of the Self, salient values and values ascribed to

the given servicescape image

Preference for the given servicescape image

Demographics

The measures for this survey are presented in Table 24.

136

Table 24: Survey Measures

Personality of the Self & Servicescape Source of Measures Scaling Format 1 Elegant- Plain

Symbolic Servicescape

Meaning Scale

developed in Study

Two (modified from

Malhotra‘s (1981) Self-

Concept Scale)

7-point semantic

differential scale (3-2-1-0-1-2-3)

2 Friendly- Unfriendly 3 Impressive- Ordinary 4 Modern- Classic

5 Positive - Negative 6 Private - Public 7 Professional- Nonprofessional

8 Serious- Frivolous

9 Welcoming- Inhospitable

Salient Personality Component Source of Measures Scaling Format

1 Being ‗sociability‘ is an important

part of who I am. Modified self-important

personality descriptors

(Bono & Colbert, 2005)

7-point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree to

7= Strongly agree) 2

Having a ‗professionalism‘ is an

important part of who I am.

3 Having ‗style‘ is an important part

of who I am.

Values of the Self & Servicescape Source of Measures Scaling Format

1 I am a person who enjoys life. /

This place would be enjoyable.

Items are adapted from

Schwartz‘s (1992)

Universal Human Value

Scale

7-point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree to

7= Strongly agree)

2 I am a person who seeks pleasure. /

This place would be pleasurable.

3 I am a responsible person. / This

place would be responsible.

4 I have a sense of belonging. / This

place would give me a sense of

belonging.

5 I am recognised by others. / This

place would give me a sense of

recognition.

Salient Personal Values Source of Measures Scaling Format

1 Life enjoyment (enjoying leisure,

food, etc.)

Schwartz‘s (1992)

Universal Human Value

Scale

9-point Likert scale (-1= contradict my

values, 0= not

important, 1=

important, 6= very

important to 7=

supremely important)

2 Pleasuring seeking (gratification of

desires)

3 Responsibility (dependable and

reliable)

4 Need to belong

5 Need to be recognised by others

Servicescape Preference Source of Measures Scaling Format

1 Bad-Good Items adopted from the

literature of Day &

Stafford, 1997;

Gregory, Munch &

Peterson, 2002; & Kim,

Allen & Kardes, 1996

5-point semantic

differential scale (2-1-0-1-2)

2 Unpleasant-Pleasant

3 Unattractive-Attractive

4 Disagreeable-Agreeable

5 Negative-Positive

137

The consolidated surveys were pre-tested with five adults. This ensured the

questionnaires‘ content and face validity as well as uncovered problems regarding

web-based survey administration (Churchill, 1996). Some wording issues were found

and corrected based on the pre-test feedback. The first issue related to the wording

for the evaluation of servicescapes‘ values. The second issue related to participants

who may have difficulties when asking how they believe others see them (i.e., the

evaluation of Social Self). The pre-test participants indicated that a definition should

be given to define ―others‖. Thus, a definition of ―others‖ was added in the

introduction that was in line with the definition of Social Self. The added definition

was ―others refers to important people to you, such as your family or your friends‖.

5.3.1 Sample and Data Collection

To ensure external validity, adult consumers were recruited for Study Three, which is

consistent with the sampling strategy of Study Two. Each version of the survey was

distributed online to 360 consumers over the age of 18 years that were members of

the consumer panel of a private marketing company. Participants indicated that they

consented to participate in the study by completing their survey. In order to conduct

the polynomial regression with response surface analysis, a minimum sample size of

200 participants for each version of the questionnaire was required. The final

responses and the demographics for each survey are listed in Table 25.

The sample for the first survey comprised 203 participants (117 women, 86 men).

Over 80 percent of participants were born in Australia and the majority (52%) were

aged from 26 to 45 years old. Nearly half of the participants were full-time or part-

time employed. Participants came from a variety of educational backgrounds:

participants variously held a post-graduate degree or equivalent (n = 27),

undergraduate degree or equivalent (n = 51), diploma (n = 28), Certificate IV (n =

26), Year 12 Higher School Certificate (n = 35), or Year 10 School Certificate (n =

34).

The sample for the second survey comprised 214 participants (119 women, 95 men).

Similar to Version 1, nearly 80 percent of the participants were born in Australia and

138

over 44 percent of the participants were aged from 26 to 45 years old. Nearly half of

the participants were full-time or part-time employed. Participants came from a

variety of educational backgrounds: participants variously held a post graduate

degree or equivalent (n = 32), undergraduate degree or equivalent (n = 61), diploma

(n = 32), Certificate IV (n = 19), Year 12 Higher School Certificate (n = 37), or Year

10 School Certificate (n = 23).

Finally, the sample for the third survey comprised 203 participants (115women, 88

men). Over 80 percent of the participants were born in Australia and over half of the

participants were aged from 26 to 45 years old. Nearly half of the participants were

full-time or part-time employed. Participants came from a variety of educational

backgrounds: participants variously held a post graduate degree or equivalent (n =

29), undergraduate degree or equivalent (n = 54), diploma (n = 27), Certificate IV (n

= 25), Year 12 Higher School Certificate (n = 29), or Year 10 School Certificate (n =

28). Overall, there were no statistically significant differences between samples (see

Table 25).

139

Table 25: Overview of Sample Characteristics for Study Three Version 1

Servicescape A

Version 2

Servicescape B

Version 3

Servicescape C

Variable Items Total number % Total number % Total number %

Gender Female 117 57.6% 119 55.6% 115 56.7%

Male 86 42.4% 95 44.4% 88 43.3%

Total 203 100.0% 214 100.0% 203 100.0%

Age 18-25 28 13.8% 33 15.4% 27 13.3%

26-35 56 27.6% 45 21.0% 51 25.1%

36-45 54 25.1% 54 23.8% 60 29.6%

46-55 38 18.7% 33 15.4% 32 15.8%

56-65 20 9.9% 39 18.2% 28 13.8%

66+ 10 4.9% 13 6.1% 5 2.5%

Total 203 100.0% 214 100.0% 203 100.0%

Country of

birth

Australia 164 80.8% 169 79.0% 171 84.2%

Overseas 39 19.2% 45 21.0% 32 15.8%

Total 203 100.0% 214 100.0% 203 100.0%

Education Post graduate degree or equivalent 27 13.3% 32 15.0% 29 14.3%

Undergraduate degree or equivalent 51 25.1% 61 28.5% 54 26.6%

Diploma 28 13.8% 32 15.0% 27 13.3%

Certificate IV 26 12.8% 19 8.9% 25 12.3%

Year 12 Higher School Certificate 35 17.2% 37 17.3% 29 14.3%

Year 10 School Certificate 34 16.7% 23 10.7% 28 13.8%

Others 2 1.0% 10 4.7% 11 5.4%

Total 203 100.0% 214 100.0% 203 100.0%

Work

situation

Home duties 35 17.2% 37 17.3% 26 12.8%

Unemployed 17 8.4% 20 9.3% 17 8.4%

Self employed 10 4.9% 17 7.9% 14 6.9%

Full time employed 92 45.3% 85 39.7% 95 46.8%

Part time employed 30 14.8% 29 13.6% 30 14.8%

Casual employed 11 5.4% 14 6.5% 9 4.4%

Fulltime Student 8 3.9% 12 5.6% 12 5.9%

Total 203 100.0% 214 100.0% 203 100.0%

140

5.4 Methods for Data Analysis and Justification

Polynomial regression with response surface analysis was adopted to analyse the data.

This joint method is drawn from the management literature because it is considered

an effective technique to test the effect of congruence between individuals, such as

employees, and their perceptions, such as his/her perception of company (also known

as P-E fit) (Cable & Edwards, 2004; Edwards & Parry, 1994; Edwards & Cable,

2009; Shanock, Baran, Gentry, Pattison, & Heggestad, 2010). Polynomial regression

with response surface analysis results in a better explanation of the impact of the

degree of congruency between of two predictor variables on an outcome variable

(Edwards & Parry, 1994; Shanock, et al., 2010).

Using polynomial regression with response surface analysis, Study Three examines

the effects of congruence in three ways. First, the study investigates how the degree

of congruence between two predictor variables relates to an outcome. Congruence

occurs when the levels of two predictor variables are identical. Second, the study

investigates how the degree of incongruence between two predictor variables relates

to an outcome variable. The degree of incongruence indicates the extent to which the

levels of two predictor variables differ from one another. For this study, the level of

consumer servicescape preference (i.e., the outcome variable) can be ascertained

using the degree of the convergence and divergence between the self and the ascribed

symbolic meaning of the servicescape (i.e., the two predictor variables). Third, the

study investigates how the direction of incongruence between two predictor variables

relates to an outcome variable. The direction of incongruence refers to which

predictor is higher than the other. For example, while the Self is higher than the

ascribed symbolic meaning of the servicescape, an over-evaluation is exhibited;

when the Self is lower than the ascribed symbolic meanings of the servicescape, an

under-evaluation is exhibited (e.g., Atwater, Ostroff, Yammarino, & Fleenor, 1998;

Yammarino & Atwater, 1997).

141

5.4.1 Polynomial Regression

In this study, the polynomial regression depicts the joint relationship between the

Self (X) and the ascribed symbolic meanings of the servicescape (Y) with the

servicescape preference (Z) on a three-dimensional surface (Cable & Edwards, 2004;

Edwards, 2007; Edwards & Cable, 2009; Edwards & Parry, 1993). The squared

difference model is chosen to represent X-Y fit:

Z=bz0 + bz1X + bz2Y + bz3X2 + bz4X*Y + bz5Y

2 + ez, (1)

where Z represents the servicescape preference; X and Y are the Self and the

ascribed symbolic meaning of the servicescape for one of the three personality

components (or, for one of the five personal values). The term X2, XY and Y

2 were

included along with X and Y to determine whether the effects of the Self and the

servicescape meanings (that is, personality components or personal values) can be

interpreted as a congruence effect. However, the results of this approach are difficult

to interpret.

5.4.2 Response Surface Analysis

Edwards (2002, 2007) overcomes the difficulty of interpreting polynomial regression

by using the response surface technique to interpret the three-dimensional surfaces of

unstandardised regression equations and shapes for hypothesised relationships

(Edwards & Parry, 1993). A response surface diagram is obtained by calculating the

unstandardised coefficients of a polynomial regression model that is depicted in a

three-dimensional visual diagram to represent the response surface pattern. It

implicitly assumes that the joint relationship between congruence and other variables

is curvilinear (Edwards, 1994).

The response surface technique (Box & Draper, 1987) can identify subtle differences

in the joint relationships of two predictor variables (in this study, the Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to the servicescape) to an outcome variable (in this

study, the servicescape preference) (Shanock, et al., 2010). In their study of the joint

relationship between individual employee values and the perceived organisational

142

values, Edwards and Cable (2009) illustrated an idealised response surface pattern

(shown in Figure 16). This three-dimensional diagram comprises two conceptual

relationship lines (i.e., individual and organisational values) at the base of the graph.

The first congruence line depicts a perfect match between individual and

organisational values. The slope of this line shows the various levels of the outcome

variable for individuals whose levels of the two predictor variables are essentially

alike across the continuum from low ratings on both predictors to high ratings on

both individual and organisational values. The line perpendicular to the line of

congruence is the incongruence line, which depicts a discrepant relationship between

individual and organisational values (Edwards, 2007). The outcome variable

decreases when individual and organisational values differ from each other in either

left- or right-hand sides. The curvature of the surface along this line shows how the

degree of incongruence between individual and organisational values will influence

the outcome variable (Shanock, et al., 2010). In this example, the surface is curved

downward along the incongruence line.

Figure 16: A Representation of Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Pattern

(Source: Edwards & Cable, 2009)

The ridge in the three-dimensional diagram illustrates the peak of the surface along

the congruence line, indicating that the outcome variable is maximised at the point of

congruence between all levels of individual and organisational values. Moreover,

when the surface is flat along the congruence line, the level of the outcome is the

same despite low or high levels of the joint relationships between individual value

143

and organisational value. In sum, by depicting the polynomial regression results in a

three-dimensional graph (Edwards & Parry, 1993), the nuances of how congruence

between two predictor variables relates to an outcome variable can be demonstrated

(Edwards, 2007).

5.4.3 Assumptions of the Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Analysis

Three assumptions have to be met when using polynomial regression with response

surface analysis (Edwards, 2002). First, the two predictor variables must be drawn

from the same conceptual domain to allow a meaningful interpretation of any

differences. This study developed a symbolic meaning scale that was applied to both

predictor variables: consumer Self and the symbolic meaning ascribed to

servicescapes. As a result, the effect of the congruence between the Self and the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes will be meaningful because the

measures were derived from the same conceptual domain.

Second, the predictor variables must be measured on the same numeric scale to

determine their degree of correspondence (Edwards, 2002; Shanock et al., 2010). In

this study, a seven-point semantic differential scale was used for the evaluations of

personality of the Self and the personality components ascribe to servicescapes. A

seven-point Likert type scale of personal values was used for the evaluation of values

of the Self and the values ascribed to servicescapes. Both satisfy the second

assumption for the use of polynomial regression analysis.

Finally, the four basic assumptions of traditional moderated regression must be met

when the analysis of congruence effects is conducted (Edwards, 2002; Shanock, et al.,

2010). These specify the linearity of the phenomenon, constant variance of the error

terms, independence of the error terms and normality of the error term distribution

(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).

Linearity of the phenomenon refers to ―the linearity of the relationship between

dependent and independent variables represented the degree to which the change in

the dependent variable is associated with the independent variable‖ (Hair, et al.,

2010). Since the concept of correlation is based on the linear relationship, any

144

violation of the linearity has to be corrected before conducting regression analysis.

Three corrective remedies for non-linear data include data value transformation,

polynomial terms creation and using nonlinear regression to accommodate the

curvilinear effects of independent variables or other more complex nonlinear

relationships.

Constant variance of the error terms indicates the presence of equal variances. The

equality of variance needs to be confirmed when conducting regression analysis, so

issues such as nonlinearity and heterscedasticity need to be corrected. Accordingly,

the procedure of weighted least squares is employed when the violation is attributed

to a single independent variable. Alternatively, variance-stabilising transformation is

employed to allow transformed variables to exhibit homoscedasticity, which can then

be used directly in the regression model (Hair, et al., 2010).

5.4.4 Justification of the Polynomial Regression with Response Surface Analysis

Polynomial regression with response surface analysis has been proposed as a solution

for the problems caused by using difference scores to analysing discrepancies in

ratings (Edwards, 1994, 2002, 2009; Edwards & Parry, 1993). Difference scores

include the algebraic, squared or absolute difference between two scores as well as

the absolute or squared difference among a profile of scores.

In comparison to traditional difference scores, the use of polynomial regression has

two main benefits. First, the independent effect of each predictor variable can be

retained by conducting polynomial regression. It benefits the examination of the

extent to which either X or Y contributes to variance in the outcome, which helps to

overcome problems with ambiguous interpretation and confounded effects.

Difference scores confound the effects of each of the predictor variables on the

outcome by combining two predictor variables into one score. That is, difference

scores cannot be used to identify whether X or Y (in this study, the Self and the

ascribed symbolic meanings of servicescape) contributed more to an outcome (Z) (in

this study, the preference for servicescapes), or whether it was better or worse for Z

to have more X than Y or vice versa.

145

Second, response surface analysis explains more about how the combinations of the

two predictor variables may affect the outcome variable. Traditional regression

analysis with a two-dimensional graph does not allow researchers to determine if

there is a non-linear relationship along the line of perfect congruence related to the

outcome variable. To elaborate, a two-dimensional graph may not provide nuanced

information about how the continual changes of incongruence between two predictor

variables may influence to the outcome variable. Response surface analysis, however,

depicts how an increasing degree of incongruence between predictor variables relates

to outcome. For example, the increasing distance from the line of perfect congruence

in either direction indicates the degree of incongruence between the predictor

variables (Shanock, et al., 2010). In other words, some valuable information may

lose when representing the congruence result in two-dimensional diagrams.

Taken together, polynomial regression with response surface analysis has several

benefits. First, it provides more rigorous and comprehensive test of the congruence

hypotheses (Edwards, 2002; Edwards & Cable, 2009; Edwards & Parry, 1993;

Griffith & Myers, 2005). For this study, it allows a better identification of nuanced

differences in the level of the self-servicescape congruence and its effects on

consumers‘ preference for servicescapes. Second, it helps to overcome the

limitations of individual congruence evaluation. Moreover, it minimises the effect of

common method variance on the results of the study. Finally, it provides a solution to

the issue of linear interpretation of congruence models. For example, it allows the

study to compare and contrast the moderation effects between high levels and low

levels of the salience of personality components/personal values. Although

polynomial regression with response surface analysis has been demonstrated to have

better explanatory power to explain congruence effects (e.g., Edward, 2002; Edward

& Parry, 1993), its explanatory power for incongruence effects has received far less

attention (Shanock, et. al., 2010). To the best of our knowledge, no research has

applied this joint method to examine the congruence/incongruence effect in the

marketing literature.

146

5.4.5 Data Analysis Procedure

To analyse data using polynomial regression with response surface analysis, seven

steps were undertaken.

Step 1: Scale-Centring Predictors and Creating Quadratic and Interactions Terms

The first step was to scale-centre the predictor variables—the Self (X) and the

ascribed symbolic meanings of servicescape (Y)—at the midpoint of their respective

scales (Edwards, 1994). The study first subtracted four (4) from each score because

X and Y were measured on a seven-point semantic differential scale. Although there

are a variety of ways to centre data, such as using the mean and the midpoint of the

scale (Aiken & West, 1991), centring the midpoint of the scale aids interpretation

and reduces the potential for multicollinearity, so it was recommended for use in

polynomial regression with response surface analysis (Aiken & West, 1991; Edwards,

1994).

Three new variables for each model were then created: (a) the square of the centred

X variable, (b) the cross-product of the centred X and Y variable and (c) the square

of the centred Y variable. These terms were transformed into weighted linear

composite variables based on the estimated unstandardised regression coefficients.

Step 2: Data Screening for Outliers and Influential Observation

The second step was to identify outliers in the data. Each equation (of 42 equations

in total) was screened for outliers using leverage (i.e., the diagonal values of the hat

matrix) and Cook‘s D statistic (Belsley, Kuh, & Welsch, 1980; Fox, 1991). The

identification of outliers was important because they may substantially change

coefficients and/or fitted values in the regression model, so they are also known as

influential observations (Belsley, et al., 1980). Observations that exceeded the

minimum cut-off on the two outlier criteria (Bollen & Jackman, 1990) and were

clearly discrepant on plots were excluded from the equation.

In addition, cubic terms were created to diagnose variance. When conducting

polynomial regression, it is recommended to conduct a sequence of tests once the

147

significant variance is found in the quadratic terms. Thus, a set of cubic terms has to

be added into the equations for testing the significant variance (Hair, et al., 2010). If

a cubic term adds variance, then a quadratic term should be added to the test.

However, it is rare to have higher-order effects beyond cubic terms in practice (Hair,

et al., 2010).

Step 3: Run Polynomial Regression in SPSS and Calculate the Surface Values

In the third step, the polynomial regression analysis was conducted using the newly-

created variables. For personality of the Self-Servicescape congruence effects, the

analysis depicted the joint relationship between (a) Actual Self (AS), (b) Ideal Self

(IS) and (c) Social Self (SoS) and the servicescape meaning evaluation (SME) with

the servicescape preference (SP) on three three-dimensional surface graphs (Edwards

1993; Edwards 1994; Edwards & Parry 1993). Squared difference models were

chosen to represent the congruence effects:

SP=b0 + b1AS + b2SME + b3AS2 + b4AS*SME + b5SME

2 + e, (2)

SP=b0 + b1IS + b2SME + b3IS2 + b4IS*SME + b5SME

2 + e, (3)

SP=b0 + b1SoS + b2SME + b3SoS2 + b4SoS*SME + b5SME

2 + e, (4)

where SP represented servicescape preference, and AS, IS, SoS and SME were the

evaluation of the Self and the ascribed symbolic meanings of servicescape for one of

the three personality components. The term AS2, IS

2, SoS

2, AS*SME, IS*SME,

SoS*SME and SME 2 were included along with the Self in three different

components and SME to determine whether the effects of the Actual Self/Ideal

Self/Social Self and the personality components ascribed to servicescapes can be

interpreted as a personality congruence effect.

In terms of values of the Self-Servicescape congruence effects, the analysis depicted

the combinations between values of the Self (VS) and values ascribed to

servicescape (SVE) with the servicescape preference (SP) on one-three-dimensional

surface graphs (Edwards 1993; Edwards 1994; Edwards & Parry 1993). The squared

difference model to represent the congruence effects was:

148

SP=b0 + b1VS + b2SVE + b3VS2 + b4VS*SVE + b5SVE

2 + e, (5)

where VS and SVE were the evaluation of values of the Self and values ascribed to

servicescape for one of five personal values. The term VS2, VS*SVE and SVE

2 were

included along with values of the Self and SVE to determine whether the effects of

values of the Self and values ascribed to servicescape can be interpreted as a value

congruence effect. Fourteen hypotheses were tested three times using each of the

three servicescape images.

Step 4: Interpret the Surface Values and Graph

In the fourth step, the response surface diagram was introduced. Polynomial

regression alone does not examine the regression coefficients to explain the results

(Edwards 2002). Rather, four surface test values (a1, a2, a3, a4) were adopted to better

analyse the congruence effects. As shown in Figure 16, the slope of the line of

perfect congruence (X=Y) as related to the outcome variable was assessed by

calculating a1= (b1+b2), where b1 was the unstandardised beta coefficient for the

centred X variables and b2 was the unstandardised beta coefficient for the centred Y

variable. Curvature along the line of perfect congruence as related to the outcome

variable was given by a2 = (b3+b4+b5), where b3 was the unstandardised beta

coefficient for the centred X squared, b4 was the unstandardised beta coefficient for

the cross-product of the centred X and centred Y, and b5 was the unstandardised beta

coefficient for the centred Y squared. The curvature of the line of incongruence as

related to the outcome variable, showing the degree of difference between X, Y, and

the outcome, was assessed by calculating a4 = (b3-b4+b5). The slope of the line of

incongruence as related to the outcome variable, showing the direction of the

difference (X>Y or X<Y), was assessed by calculating a3= (b1-b2).

Step 5: Tests of Confidence Intervals and Significance

The fifth step of the data analysis is the tests of confidence intervals and significance.

Bootstrapping was used to calculate the standard errors and means for these terms

(i.e., X, Y, X*Y, X2 and Y

2) (Efron, 1979; Efron & Tibshirani, 1986; Hinckely,

1988). It is this technique that validates a multivariate model by drawing a large

149

number of subsamples and estimating models for each subsample, then determining

the values for the parameter estimates from the set of models by calculating the mean

of each estimated coefficient across all the subsample models (Hair, et al., 2010).

The bootstrap procedure was used instead of R2 because the equations for these terms

contain nonlinear combinations of regression coefficients. More formally, the

standard errors for certain parameter estimates such as the stationary point, principal

axes and slopes along the principal axes cannot be used in studies in which

polynomial regression with response surface analysis were conducted. Hence, the

bootstrap standard error was adopted to construct confidence intervals and conduct

significance tests to draw inferences about the parameter estimates (Edwards &

Cable, 2009; Kalliath, Bluedorn & Strube, 1999) by means of an excel file provided

by Shanock, et al., (2010).

Step 6: Comparing the Predictive Strength of Personality Components and Personal

Values

The sixth step in the data analysis compares the predictive strength of personal

values and personality components. The statistic R2 change was used to compare the

predictive strength of each value in the Self-congruity model compared to each

personality component in the Self-congruity model. For example, to compare the

predictive ability of sociability of the Ideal Self and the life enjoyment value of the

Self on preference, two model‘s equation terms (i.e., X, Y, X2 XY Y

2 for one model)

were considered as a set respectively and were input into two regression analyses

interchangeably. The resulting two R2 change and related statistics then were

compared and evaluated for significance and differences. The larger the value of R2

change, the better predictive strength was demonstrated.

Step 7: Moderator Test on the Congruence Effects

The final step was to examine the moderator effects. The moderating effect of W was

captured by the five terms WX, WY, WX2, WXY and WXY

2 as a set, suggested by

Edwards and Rothbard (1999). The moderation effects were tested by assessing the

150

increment in R2

yielded by the terms WX, WY, WX2, WXY and WXY

2, which

amounts to testing whether the R2

from Eq. (6) was larger than the R2 from Eq. (1).

Z=b0+b1X+b2Y+b3X2+b4XY+b5Y

2+b6W+b7WX+b8WY+b9WX

2+b10WXY+b11WY

2+e (6)

Determining the moderation effect depends on the increment in R2 yielded by the

five terms WX, WY, WX2, WXY and WXY2. Edwards and Rothbard (1999) suggest

that if the R2 is statistically significant and sufficiently large from a substantive

perspective, it is appropriate to interpret the form of the moderating effect yielded by

the moderator (Edwards & Rothbard, 1999).

To further determine the strength of the moderating effects, Study Three examined

the response surface relating the Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescape ratings to servicescape preference at high (above the mean) and low

(below the mean) levels of the evaluation of the salience of each personality

components and personal values, respectively. In general, high and low scores were

determined by adding and subtracting 1 SD to the mean of the variables of interest

(Cohen & Cohen, 1983; Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003). However, this study

did not adopt this analysis because a single-item scale was used to evaluate the

degree of the salience for each personality component and personal values

respectively. This study simply used the mean values to divide the responses on the

evaluation of the salience of personality components and personal values into two

groups. Here, individuals with low level of the salient personality

components/personal values were those below the mean. Individuals with high level

of the salient personality components/personal values were those above the mean.

5.5 Findings

This section begins with a brief description of the outliners and influential

observations, as well as higher-order curvatures tests. The main hypotheses tests

using polynomial regression with response surface analysis are then presented using

42 response surface figures. A summary table of the results of hypotheses tests

across the three servicescape images is then presented. The predictive strength of the

personality components and personal values are reported, followed by the

151

moderating polynomial regression analyses on the congruence/incongruence effects.

Among the moderating polynomial regression model, only significant moderating

models are presented and discussed.

5.5.1 Preliminary Data Preparation

Prior to the analysis, the treatment of missing data was conducted. The surveys were

administrated online and so participants were forced to answer all questions before

continuing. Although some missing values were still found in the data, no more than

five cases were found per variable in three surveys respectively. The listwise

function was consequently adopted to conduct the regression analysis.

To determine whether any outliers may be influential cases, each equation (i.e., 42

equations) was screened for outliers (e.g., Cook‘s D) (Edwards & Parry, 1993;

Kalliath, Bluedorn, & Strube, 1999). This screening procedure found that no more

than five observations per equation, or less than 2.5% of the sample used in each

analysis, were outliers. Consequently, neither data transformations nor smoothing

methods were necessary.

Next, cubic terms were created and entered into the polynomial regression models to

rule out the presence of higher-order curvatures (Kalliath, et al., 1999). The cubic

terms were entered in to polynomial regression test. Overall, no higher-order

curvatures were found, which indicated that the models were significant (Edwards

1994, p. 73). In addition, the interdependence of the error terms and normality of the

error term distributions were confirmed. The information about the means, standard

deviations, intercorrelations of variables, and internal consistency (i.e., alpha

coefficients) of measures used in the study are shown in Table 26 to Table 31. The

alpha coefficients (arranged along the diagonal) ranged from 0.54 to 0.93. Most

predictor variable scales were considered internally consistent (ranging from alpha

coefficient ranged from 0.63 to 0.91), except the scale for professionalism. Its alpha

coefficients ranged from 0.54 to 0.69, indicating marginal scale reliability. The

preference scale had alpha coefficients at 0.93. The distributions were positively

skewed for most of the measures, suggestive of an overall tendency to score in the

152

upper ranges of the measures. The intercorrelations between most variables were

positive.

153

Table 26: Means, Standard Deviation, Intercorrelation and Alpha Coefficients Between Personality Components Variables (Version 1: Servicescape A) Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Independent variable

Sociability

1Ideal Self 6.11 1.02 .91

2Actual Self 5.34 1.16 .447** .81

3 Social Self 5.25 1.27 .415** .831** .85

4 SP1 4.12 1.17 -.053 .161* .175** .88

Professionalism

5 Ideal Self 5.03 0.95 .425** .253** .230** .112 .54

6Actual Self 5.03 0.97 .261** .294** .277** .145** .631** .56

7Social Self 5.25 1.07 .255** .285** .315** .160* .574** .746** .58

8 SP1 5.35 0.97 .126 .206** .236** .245** .101 .188** .126 .69

Style

9 Ideal Self 4.32 1.04 .563** .315** .302** .088 .452** .271** .301** .083 .63

10 Actual

Self 4.23 1.11 .101 .524* .480** .254** .260** .358** .337** .058 .517** .75

11Social Self 4.32 1.17 .126 .504** .604** .255** .258** .369** .395** .110 .138** .783** .74

12 SP1 3.88 1.20 .219** .165* .163* .647** .140* .122 .154* .315** .013 .385** .219** .73

Dependent variable

13 Preference 3.01 0.87 -.109 .076 .087 .608** -.016 .048 .059 .218** .026 .179* .178* .457** .93

1. SP equals to the personality ascribed to Servicescape A

154

Table 27: Means, Standard Deviation, Intercorrelation and Alpha Coefficients Between Personal Values Variables (Version 1: Servicescape A) Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11


Life enjoyment

1The value of the Self 5.29 1.40

2 SV1 3.04 1.42 .194**

Pleasant and pleasure

3 The value of the

Self

5.00 1.41 .642** .125

4 SV1 2.88 1.39 .133 .868** .185**

Responsibility

5 The value of the

Self

5.74 1.26 .399** .076 .307** .072

6 SV1 5.04 1.25 .073 .166** .130 .180** .173*

Sense of belonging

7 The value of the

Self

5.04 1.53 .677** .261** .499** .216** .500** .142*

8 SV1 3.38 1.54 .111 .745** .150* .739** .084 .358** .257**

Recognition

9 The value of the

Self

4.82 1.47 .612** .212** .564** .192** .352** .150* .698** .227**

10 SV1 3.87 1.60 .083 .618** .172* .573** .027 .412** .224** .786** .196**

Dependent variable

11 Preference 3.01 0.87 .096 .646** .105 .538** .002 .239* .194** .587** .153* .532** .93

1. SV equals to the value ascribed to Servicescape A

155

Table 28: Means, Standard Deviation, Intercorrelation and Alpha Coefficients Between Personality Components Variables (Version 2: Servicescape B) Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13


Sociability

1Ideal Self 6.19 0.95 .84

2Actual Self 5.42 1.07 .598** .81

3 Social Self 5.33 1.18 .563** .789** .83

4 SP1 4.49 1.08 .138** .169** .152* .82

Professionalism

5 Ideal Self 5.19 0.92 .410** .352** .258** .074 .49

6Actual Self 5.13 1.06 .356** .225** .174** .132* .729** .66

7Social Self 5.00 1.09 .310** .172** .224** .057 .607** .760** .67

8 SP1 3.91 0.94 .070 .116* .113* .530** .204** .233** .192** .51

Style

9 Ideal Self 5.06 1.13 .511** .273** .262** .105 .381** .317** .331** .179** .67

10 Actual

Self

4.18 1.15 .238* .464** .369** .252** .306** .313** .282** .290** .585** .76

11Social

Self

4.30 1.20 .243** .362** .474** .157* .303** .312** .350** .274** .526** .796** .80

12 SP1 3.80 1.32 .091 .116* .121* .617** .122* .201** .178** .604** .155* .238** .189** .84

Dependent variable

13

Preference

3.29 0.89 .79 .148* .145* .650** .016 .044 -.007 .343** -.067 .096 .032 .559** .94

1. SP equals to the personality ascribed to Servicescape B

156

Table 29: Means, Standard Deviation, Intercorrelation and Alpha Coefficients Between Personal Values Variables (Version 2: Servicescape B)

Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11


Life enjoyment

1 Values of the

Self 5.27 1.33

2 SV1 3.81 1.41 .154*


3 Values of the

Self 5.00 1.22 .552** .021

4 SV1 3.65 1.38 .152* .842** .092

Responsibility

5 Values of the

Self 5.76 1.30 .577** .060 .411** .046

6 SV1 4.38 1.30 .189** .505** .115* .459** .137*

Sense of belonging

7 Values of the

Self 5.06 1.50 .662** .205** .445** .202** .527** .147*

8 SV1 3.52 1.51 .157* .723** .063 .732** .049 .582** .180**

Recognition

9 Values of the

Self 4.87 1.35 .543** .135* .464** .131* .450** .151* .598** .084

10 SV1 3.28 1.52 .103 .697** .092 .715** .034 .551** .174** .877** .107

Dependent variable

11 Preference 3.29 0.89 .109 .673** -.078 .627** .029 .426** .113* .574** .107 .566** .94

1. SV equals to the value ascribed to Servicescape B

157

Table 30: Means, Standard Deviation, Intercorrelation and Alpha Coefficients Between Personality Components Variables (Version 3: Servicescape C)

Mea

n S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13


Sociable

1Ideal Self 6.13 0.95 .88

2Actual

Self 5.35 1.10 .630** .81

3 Social

Self 5.30 1.28 .509** .762** .88

4 SP1 5.39 0.97 .367** .235** .183** .84

Professionalism

5 Ideal Self 5.07 1.00 .435** .271** .149* .177** .59

6Actual

Self 5.02 1.02 .311** .179** .147* .142* .707** .54

7Social

Self 4.89 1.19 .258** .214** .272** .094 .545** .738** .65

8 SP1 3.50 1.03 -.077 .135* .093 .167** .194** .173** .298** .65

Style

9 Ideal

Self

5.09 1.72 .501** .284** .136* .226** .416** .211** .038 -.005 .72

10 Actual

Self 4.15 1.10 .162* .134** .263** .081 .260** .213** .147* .188** .551** .76

11Social Self 4.28 1.14 .182** .325** .516** .104 .206** .256** .298** .169** .431** .700** .71

12 SP1 4.04 1.14 -.018 .135* .130* .322** .155* .154* .148* .578** .067 .214** .258** .72

Dependent variable 13

Preference 3.79 0.78 .231** .175** .086 .593** .190** .177** .119* .263** .205** .051 .004 .376** .93

1. SP equals to the personality ascribed to Servicescape C

158

Table 31:Means, Standard Deviation, Intercorrelation and Alpha Coefficients Between Personal Values Variables (Version 3: Servicescape C)

Mean S.D. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11


Life enjoyment

1The value of the Self 5.28 1.37

2 SV1 4.81 1.38 .276**


3 Values of the Self 5.09 1.20 .584** .196**

4 SV1 4.72 1.39 .261** .885** .221**

Responsibility

5 Values of the Self 5.75 1.29 .488** .201** .338** .124*

6 SV1 4.40 1.25 .291** .604** .247** .588** .226**

Sense of belonging

7 Values of the Self 5.06 1.51 .688** .353** .365** .314** .522** .356**

8 SV1 4.07 1.42 .108 .545** .114 .520** .142* .507** .235**

Recognition

9 Values of the Self 4.83 1.45 .592** .324** .455** .244** .449** .286** .728** .136*

10 SV1 3.73 1.50 .103 .392** .103 .401** .105 .449** .196** .784** .199**

Dependent variable

11 Preference 3.79 0.78 .092 .488** .109 .458** .169** .376** .143* .403** .079 .377** .93

1. SV equals to the value ascribed to Servicescape C

159

5.5.2 Hypotheses Testing

This section reports the tests of congruence effects of the Self and the ascribed

symbolic meanings of servicescape on the servicescape preference for each survey

(i.e., each servicescape) sequentially. Each survey produced 14 models; thus, 42

models are presented. A summary of the results is presented in Table 32.

160

Table 32: Results of Hypotheses Testing for Congruence and Moderating Effects

Code Personality/

Values1

Congruence Hypotheses SA

2 SB

2 SC

2

Congruity/Incongruity

H1a

Sociability

The congruence between the sociability of the Ideal Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape. N/N N/Y Y/Y

H1b The congruence between the sociability of the Actual Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related

to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H1c The congruence between the sociability of the Social Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H2a

Professionalism

The congruence between professionalism of the Ideal Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related

to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/N Y/N

H2b The congruence between professionalism of the Actual Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related

to preference for the servicescape. N/Y Y/N Y/N

H2c The congruence between professionalism of the Social Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related


H3a

Style

The congruence between the style of the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape. N/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H3b The congruence between the style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


H3c The congruence between the style of the Social Self and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


H4a Life enjoyment The congruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to servicescape is

positively related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H4b Pleasant and

pleasure

The congruence between the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to

servicescape is positively related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/N

H4c Sense of

belonging

The congruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to a

servicescape is positively related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H4d Responsibility The congruence between the responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to a servicescape is

positively related to preference for the servicescape. N/Y Y/N Y/Y

H4e Recognition The congruence between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to a servicescape is positively

related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

161

Code Personality/

Values1

Moderating Hypotheses SA2 SB

2 SC

2

H5a

Sociability

The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on servicescape

preference for the Ideal Self. Y Y Y

H5b The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on servicescape

preference for the Actual Self. Y Y Y

H5c The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on servicescape

preference for the Social Self. Y Y Y

H6a

Professionalism

The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism on

servicescape preference for the Ideal Self. Y Y Y

H6b The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism on

servicescape preference for the Actual Self. Y Y Y

3

H6c The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism on

servicescape preference for the Social Self. Y Y Y

H7a

Style

The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape preference

for the Ideal Self. Y

3 Y Y

H7b The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape preference

for the Actual Self. Y

3 Y Y

H7c The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape preference

for the Social Self. Y

3 Y Y

H8a Life enjoyment The salience of life enjoyment significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the life enjoyment value of

the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

H8b Pleasant and

pleasure

The salience of pleasant and pleasure significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the pleasant and

pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

H8c Sense of

belonging

The salience of sense of belonging significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the sense of belonging

value of the Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

H8d Responsibility The salience of responsibility significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the responsibility value of the

Self and the responsibility value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y

3 Y

H8e Recognition The salience of recognition significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the recognition value of the Self

and the recognition value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

1. The shaded rows are personality component (while others are values).

2. SA= Servicescape A, SB= Servicescape B, SC= Servicescape C. 3.

The moderator significantly influences the congruence effects on preference and will be reported in the findings.

162

5.5.2.1 Servicescape A (Version 1)

This section reports the results of 14 self-servicescape congruity models pertaining to

Servicescape A. The polynomial regression with response surface analyses showed

that 12 out of 14 self-servicescape congruity models for Servicescape A had

significant effects on preference. The two exceptions were found for the congruence

effects of the Ideal Self and the ascribed personality of Servicescape A along the

components of sociability and style. Table 33 and Table 34 display the parameter

estimates and standard error estimates for Hypotheses 1a to 4e for the prediction of

preference for Servicescape A.

The following 14 surface diagrams represent the congruence effect of the consumer

Self and the ascribed personality of servicescape on preference for three components

of Self (Ideal Self, Actual Self and Social Self) and five values of the Self,

respectively. Each surface was plotted using understandarised coefficients.

163

Table 33: Version 1-Hypotheses 1a-3c: Predicting Preference for Servicescape A from Personality of the Self-Servicescape A Congruence Sociability (1a -1c) Professionalism (2a -2c) Style (3a -3c)

Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self

Coefficient

Standard Error

Coefficient Standard

Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error

X= Y line Slope (a1)

0.17 0.32 0.40*** 0.07 0.46*** 0.06 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.17 -0.04 0.17 0.20 0.11 0.33*** 0.06 0.37*** 0.06

Curvature (a2)

0.01 0.15 -0.04 0.05 -0.07 0.04 0.10* 0.05 0.09 0.07 0.11 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.04 -0.01 0.06

X= -Y line

Slope (a3)

-0.46 0.27 -0.36*** 0.10 -0.39*** 0.09 -0.63*** 0.15 -0.38* 0.16 -0.39** 0.15 -0.15 0.13 -0.20* 0.09 -0.15 0.09

Curvature (a4)

-0.13 0.15 -0.16** 0.05 -0.15** 0.04 -0.05 0.10 -0.23* 0.09 -0.22** 0.08 -0.12 0.08 -0.11 0.08 -0.15** 0.06

P<.05; P<.01; P<.001

Table 34: Version 1-Hypotheses 4a-4e: Predicting Preference for Servicescape A from Values of the Self-Servicescape A Congruence Life enjoyment (4a) Pleasant and pleasure (4b) Responsibility (4c) Sense of belonging (4d) Recognition (4e) Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self

Coefficient Standard Error Coefficient Standard Error Coefficient Standard Error Coefficient Standard Error Coefficient Standard Error

X= Y line

Slope (a1) 0.31*** 0.06 0.24*** 0.05 0.06 0.12 0.32*** 0.06 0.30*** 0.05

Curvature (a2)

-0.02 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.07 -0.02 0.04 -0.04 0.04

X= -Y line

Slope (a3) -0.25** 0.12 0.03 0.12 -0.13 0.10 -0.22** 0.09 -0.27 0.08

Curvature (a4)

-0.08** 0.04 -0.17*** 0.04 -0.07** 0.02 -0.05 0.04 0.00 0.04

P<.05; P<.01; P<.001

164

Figure 17 illustrates the response surface relating the sociability of the Ideal Self and

the sociability ascribed to Servicescape A. Moving along the X=Y line from the front

of the graph to the back, the line of perfect congruence as related to servicescape

preference had a positive slope but is insignificant. The lowest level of servicescape

preference was at the front corner of the graph where the sociability of the Ideal Self

and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape A were both low. However, the surface

along the congruence line waved and the high point of the wave did not show that the

increasing higher toward the back of the graph where the sociability of the Ideal Self

and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape A were both in the congruence and high.

Meanwhile, Figure 17 shows that towards the left and right of the graph, where the

sociability of the Ideal Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape A became

more discrepant, the preference for Servicescape A decreased. The wave surface

indicated that no significant effect was found along the Ideal Self-Servicescape A

congruence line, nor the Ideal Self-Servicescape A incongruence line, for the

personality component of sociability.

Figure 17: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Sociability of the Ideal Self &

Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 18 illustrates the surface relating the professionalism of the Ideal Self and the

professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A. Moving along the X=Y line from the

front of the graph to the back, the line of perfect congruence as related to preference

for Servicescape A had a positive slope but insignificant. This indicated that the

lowest level of preference for Servicescape A was at the front corner of the graph

where the professionalism of the Ideal Self and the professionalism ascribed to

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2

-4

X

(Centered

ISsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y

(Centered SSsociable Scale)

165

Servicescape A were both low. However, the curvature of surface along the X=Y line

showed that a positive effect (curvature=.10, p <.05), indicating that the increasing

higher toward the back of the graph where the professionalism of the Ideal Self and

the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A were both in the congruence and

significantly high. In addition, another significant effect was found along the X= -Y

line in the professionalism personality component. The slope of the surface along the

incongruence line (slope= -.63, p< 001) showed that when the professionalism of the

Ideal Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A became more and

more discrepant, the preference for Servicescape A decreased. In sum, the hypothesis

is supported pertaining to the congruence on professionalism between the Ideal Self

and the professionalism ascribed to servicescape that had positive and significant

effect on consumers‘ preference for Servicescape A.

Figure 18: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Ideal

Self & Professionalism Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 19 represents the surface relating the style of the Ideal Self and the style

personality component ascribed to Servicescape A. The response surface waved

along the congruence line, indicating insignificant congruence effect of the style of

the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A on preference for

Servicescape A. Although the slop and the curvature of the surface along the

incongruence line showed that the more discrepancy between the style of the Ideal

Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A, the degree of preference for

Servicescape A decreased, but the test of p-value shows that no significant effect of

the joint relationship.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y

(Centered SSpromanner Scale)

166

Figure 19: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Style of the Ideal Self & Style

Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 20 shows the surface relating the sociability of the Actual Self and the

sociability ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the surface corresponding to the

X=Y line was significant for H1b (slope= 0.40, p < .001) and but the curvature of the

surface was not significant. Yet, the slope and the curvature of the surface

corresponding to the X= -Y line were both significant (slope= -.036, p < .001;

curvature = -0.16, p < .001). Two substantive features in Figure 20 are concluded.

First, high amount of the sociability of the Actual Self sociability and the sociability

ascribed to Servicescape A predicted higher levels of preference for Servicescape A,

while low amount of both the sociability of the Actual Self and the sociability

ascribed to Servicescape A produced lower levels of preference for Servicescape A.

Second, the curvature of the surface corresponding to the congruence line did not

support the hypotheses pertaining to the congruence of the sociability of the Actual

Self and the sociability personality ascribed to Servicescape A predicting consumers‘

preference for Servicescape A. The convex surface corresponding to the

incongruence line, however, indicated the misfit between the sociability of the Actual

Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape A strongly affected consumers‘


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y

(Centered SSstyle Scale)

167

Figure 20: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Sociability of the Actual Self

& the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 21 shows the surface relating the professionalism of the Actual Self and

professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope and curvature of the surface

corresponding to the X= Y line was not significant which is against the H2b. This

means the congruence between the professionalism of the Actual Self and

professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A did not predict preference.

However, the slope and the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line

were both significant (slope= -0.38, p < .05; curvature = -0.23, p < .05), indicating

that the higher degree of discrepancy between the professionalism of the Actual Self

and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A, the lower preference for

Servicescape A occurred. The bowl shape surface along the incongruence line

provided another nuanced congruence effect, indicating that the incongruence of the

professionalism of the Actual Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape

A strongly predicted consumers‘ preference for Servicescape A.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


168

Figure 21: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Actual

Self & the Professionalism Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 22 shows the surface relating the style of the Actual Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line

was significant for H3b (slope= 0.33, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface

corresponding to the congruence line did not show a significant effect. Analogously,

the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant (slope= -0.20,

p < .05) but not for the curvature.

These features indicated that the congruence of the style of the Actual Self and style

ascribed to Servicescape A predicts maximum the degree of preference for

Servicescape A. Thus, the results strongly support for Hypothesis H3b,

demonstrating that the Actual Self-Servicescape A congruity on style predicts

consumers‘ preference for Servicescape A. Moreover, the incongruence between the

style of the Actual Self and style ascribed to Servicescape A predicts the degree of

the preference for Servicescape A.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASpromannerScale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


169

Figure 22: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Style of Actual Self & Style

Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 23 illustrates the surface relating the sociability of the Social Self and the

sociability ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the surface corresponding to the

X=Y line was significant for H1c (slope= 0.46, p < .001) and but the curvature of the

surface did not show a significant effect. Moreover, the slope and the curvature of

the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line were both significant (slope= -.039, p

< .001; curvature = -0.15, p < .001). Two substantive features in Figure 23 were

concluded.

First, high amount of the sociability of the Social Self and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape A predicted higher levels of preference for Servicescape A, while lower

levels of both the sociability of the Social Self and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape A produced lower levels of preference for Servicescape A. Second, the

convex surface along the congruence line indicated strong support for the hypotheses

pertaining to the congruence between the sociability of the Social Self and the

sociability ascribed to Servicescape A strongly predicting consumers‘ preference for

Servicescape A.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASstyle cale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


170

Figure 23: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Sociability of the Social Self

& the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 24 shows the surface relating the congruence of the professionalism of the

Social Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope and the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line did not support H2c. That is,

the congruence between the professional of the Social Self and the professionalism

ascribed to Servicescape A did not predict the preference for Servicescape A. Yet,

the slope and the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line were both

significant (slope= -.039, p < .05; curvature = -0.22, p < .05), indicating that the more

discrepancy between the professionalism of the Social Self and the professionalism

ascribed to Servicescape A, the less preference for Servicescape A.

Figure 24: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Social

Self & the Professionalism Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 25 illustrates the surface relating the style of the Social Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line

was significant for H3c (slope= 0.37, p < .001). However, the curvature of the

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSpromanner

Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


171

surface along the congruence line did not show a significant effect simultaneously.

The curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line, on the other hand, was

significant (curvature = -0.15, p < .05) even though the slope along the incongruence

was insignificant. According to these features, Figure 25 indicated that high amount

of the style of the Social Self and the style personality component ascribed to

Servicescape A predicted higher levels of preference, while lower levels of both the

style of the Social Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A produced lower

levels of preference for Servicescape A. In addition, the convex surface curved

downward along the incongruence line indicated that the incongruence between the

style of the Social Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A decreases consumers‘


Figure 25: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Style of the Social Self & the

Style Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

The following figures show the congruence effects of values of the Self and values

ascribed to Servicescape A along five personal values respectively. Figure 26

illustrates the surface relating the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life

enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the surface corresponding

to the X=Y line was significant for H4a (slope= 0.31, p < .001) but the curvature of

the surface was insignificant. However, the slope and the curvature of the surface

corresponding to the X= -Y line were both significant (slope= -0.25, p < .05;

curvature = -0.08, p < .05). These three substantive figures are discussed.

First, high amount of the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment

value ascribed to Servicescape A predicted higher levels of preference for

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


172

Servicescape A, while lower levels of both the life enjoyment value of the Self and

the life enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape A produced lower levels of

preference for Servicescape A. Second, the convex surface curved downward along

the incongruence line indicated that the higher degree of incongruence between the

life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to

Servicescape A, the level of preference for Servicescape A decreased.

Figure 26: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Life Enjoyment Value of the

Self & the Life Enjoyment Value Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 27 illustrates the surface relating the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self

and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the

surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H4b (slope= 0.24, p < .001)

but the curvature of the surface did not enhance this congruence effect

simultaneously. While the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was

insignificant either, the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line

showed a significant effect (curvature = -0.17, p < .001).

These two substantive figures showed that, in Figure 27, high amount of the pleasant

and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to

Servicescape A predicted higher levels of preference for Servicescape A, while lower

levels of both the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and

pleasure value ascribed to Servicescape A produced lower levels of preference for

Servicescape A. In addition, the convex surface curved downward along the

incongruence line indicated the incongruence between the pleasant and pleasure

value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to Servicescape A in

predicting preference.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V1 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y

(Centered SV1 Scale)

173

Figure 27: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Pleasant and Pleasure Value of

the Self & the Pleasant and Pleasure Value Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

Figure 28 illustrates the surface relating the responsibility value of the Self and the

responsibility value ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope and the curvature of the

surface corresponding to the X=Y line were both insignificant that rejected H4d

pertaining to the join effect between the responsibility value of the Self and the

responsibility value ascribed to Servicescape A will positively maximum the degree

of preference for Servicescape A.

Meanwhile, although the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was

also insignificant, the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line

showed a significant effect (curvature = -0.07, p < .05). The convex surface curved

downward along the incongruence line, indicating that the incongruence between the

responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility ascribed to Servicescape A

significantly minimised consumers‘ preference for Servicescape A.

Figure 28: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Responsibility Value of the

Self & the Responsibility Value Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V2 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V3 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


174

Figure 29 shows the surface relating the sense of belonging value of the Self and the

sense of belonging value ascribed to Servicescape A. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H4c (slope = 0.32, p < .001) but

the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line did not show the same

effect. That is, moving along the X=Y line from the front of the graph to the back,

the line of perfect congruence as related to servicescape preference had a positive

and significant effect. The lowest level of preference for Servicescape A was at the

front corner of the graph where the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense

of belonging value ascribed to Servicescape A are both low. Moreover, the level of

preference increasing higher toward the back of the graph where the sense of

belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to Servicescape

A were both in the congruence and high.

The join effect on incongruence was also significant. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant (slope = -0.22, p < .05) but not for

the curvature. This indicated that the higher degree of discrepancy towards left or left

between the Self-Servicescape A congruity on the value of sense of belonging, the

lower the degree of preference for Servicescape A. In sum, these feature indicated

that both congruence and incongruence between the sense of belonging value of the

Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to Servicescape A predicted


Figure 29: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Sense of Belonging Value of

the Self & Sense of Belonging Value Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V4 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


175

Figure 30 illustrates the response surface relating the recognition value of the Self

and the recognition value ascribed to Servicescape A. The Figure denotes two

substantive points. First, the slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was

significant for H4e (slope = 0.30, p < .001).The curvature of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was insignificant in which it was concluded that the

height of the surface varies along the congruence line. The Figure shows that the

surface curved down along the congruence line. It indicated that the lowest level of

preference was at the front corner of the graph where the recognition value of the

Self and the recognition value ascribed to Servicescape A were both low. The degree

of preference for Servicescape A was increasing higher toward the back of the graph

where the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to

servicescape were both in the congruence and in high.

Second, the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant

(slope = -0.27, p < .05) but not for the curvature. It indicated that incongruence of the

recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to Servicescape A

also predicted preference for Servicescape A. An unexpected phenomenon was found

that when the recognition value of the Self at a relatively low point corresponding to

the highest point of the recognition ascribed to Servicescape A results in a maximum

level of the preference for Servicescape A.

Figure 30: Preference for Servicescape A as Predicted by the Recognition Value of the Self

& Recognition Value Ascribed to Servicescape A Discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V5 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


176

5.5.2.2 Servicescape B (Version 2)

This section reports the effect results of 14 Self-Servicescape B congruity models

sequentially in Version 2 survey. The polynomial regression with response surface

analyses showed that all 14 Self-Servicescape B congruity models had significant

effects on the preference for Servicescape B. Table 35 and Table 36 display the

parameter estimates and standard error estimates for Hypotheses 1a to 4e for the

prediction of preference for Servicescape B.

The following 14 surface diagrams represent the congruence effects of the consumer

Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to Servicescape B on preference along three

personality components on the Ideal Self, Actual Self and Social Self and five values

on values of the Self, respectively. Among the 14 models, in particular, the

congruence between pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and pleasant and

pleasure value ascribed to Servicescape B exhibited strong effect on consumers‘

preference for Servicescape B.

177

Table 35: Version 2-Hypotheses 1a-3c: Predicting Preference for Servicescape B from Personality of the Self-Servicescape B Congruence Sociability (1a -1c) Professionalism (2a -2c) Style (3a -3c)

Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self Ideal Self- Actual Self Social Self Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error X= Y line

Slope (a1)

0.21 0.18 0.60*** 0.11 0.62*** 0.10 0.36* 0.15 0.24* 0.11 0.23* 0.11 0.27** 0.08 0.34*** 0.05 0.32*** 0.05

Curvature (a2)

0.10 0.06 -0.02 0.06 -0.04 0.06 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.05

X= -Y line

Slope (a3)

-0.30* 0.13 -0.43*** 0.10 -0.45*** 0.10 -0.17 0.19 -0.13 0.17 -0.22 0.16 -0.38** 0.12 -0.50*** 0.08 -0.50*** 0.08

Curvature (a4)

-0.16* 0.06 -0.08 0.06 -0.05 0.06 -0.06 0.10 -0.12 0.09 -0.08 0.09 -0.03 0.05 0.13* 0.05 0.08 0.05

P<.05; P<.01; P<.001

Table 36: Version 2-Hypotheses 4a-4e: Predicting Preference for Servicescape B from Values of the Self-Servicescape B Congruence Life enjoyment (4a) Pleasant and pleasure (4b) Responsibility (4c) Sense of belonging (4d) Recognition (4e)

Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self


X= Y line

Slope (a1) 0.39*** 0.05 0.28*** 0.07 0.22** 0.08 0.37*** 0.05 0.39*** 0.06

Curvature (a2)

0.04

0.04 0.10* 0.04 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04

X= -Y line

Slope (a3) -0.39*** 0.08 -0.34*** 0.09 -0.15 0.10 -0.28** 0.08 -0.25** 0.08

Curvature (a4)

0.00 0.04 -0.08* 0.04 -0.09 0.04 -0.02 0.04 -0.02 0.04

P<.05; P<.01; P<.001

178

Figure 31 illustrates the response surface relating the joint relationship between the

sociability of the Ideal Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B. Moving

along the X=Y line from the front of the graph to the back, the line of perfect

congruence as related to the preference for Servicescape B is insignificant. To

illustrate, the slope and the curvature of the surface along the congruence line did not

show significant congruence effects in prediction of consumer servicescape

preference. Rather, the slope and the curvature of the surface along the X= -Y line

(slope= -0.30, p< .05, curvature= -.016, p< .05) was demonstrated a significantly

effect on preference for Servicescape B. Towards the right and left of the graph, the

degree of the preference for Servicescape B decreases where the sociability of the

Ideal Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B become more and more

discrepant. Here, the lowest level of preference is at the front corner of the graph

where the sociability of the Ideal Self and the sociability ascribed Servicescape B are

both low.

Figure 31: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Sociability of the Ideal Self &

the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 32 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationships between the

professionalism of the Ideal Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape B.

Moving along the X=Y line from the front of the graph to the back, the line of

perfect congruence as related to servicescape preference had a positive and

significant effect (slope= 0.36, p < .05). This indicated that the highest level of the

preference for Servicescape B was at the back top corner of the graph the

professionalism of the Ideal Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape B

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


179

were both high. However, the curvature of surface along the X=Y line showed that

no significant effect. In addition, no significant effect was found along the X= -Y

line in the professionalism personality component. The hypothesis H2b was

supported pertaining to the congruence between the professionalism of the Ideal Self

and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape B that had positive and significant

effect on consumers‘ preference for Servicescape B.

Figure 32: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Ideal

Self & the Professionalism Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 33 represents the surface relating the joint relationship between the style of

the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape B. The figure showed a

significant congruence effect between the style of the Ideal Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape B on the preference for Servicescape B. The slope of the

surface along the congruence line (slope= 0.27, p<.05) indicated the highest point of

servicescape preference shows where the style of the Ideal Self and the style ascribed

to Servicescape B were both high. However, the deviated surface along the

congruence line exhibited no significant join effect on preference.

A similar result was found in the slope and the curvature of the surface along the

incongruence line. A significant congruence effect was found on the slope along the

X= -Y line, indicating that the incongruity between the style of the Ideal Self and the

style ascribed to Servicescape B predicts the preference. That is, the lowest point of

the preference for Servicescape B showed where the style of the Ideal Self and the

style ascribed to Servicescape B were both low. However, the test of p-value on the

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISpromanner scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y

(Centered SSpromanner scale)

180

curvature of the surface along the incongruence line showed no significant effect of

the joint relationship.

Figure 33: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Style of the Ideal Self & the

Style Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 34 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the sociability of

the Actual Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B. The slope of the

surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H1b (slope= 0.60, p < .001)

and but the curvature of the surface was not significant. This indicated that high

amount of the sociability of the Actual Self and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape B predicted higher levels of preference for Servicescape B, while lower

levels of both the sociability of the Actual Self and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape B produced lower levels of preference for Servicescape B. Yet, the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the congruence line did not show the same

effect.

Another similar feature was found that the slope of the surface corresponding to the

X= -Y line was significant (slope= -.043, p < .001). Along the incongruence line

towards the right-hand corner, Figure 34 indicated that the lowest level of preference

for Servicescape B would occur where the sociability of the Actual Self was at the

highest point but and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B was at the lowest

point. This further enhances that the misfit between the sociability of the Actual Self

and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B strongly affect consumers‘ preference.

-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


181

Figure 34: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Sociability of the Actual Self

& the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 35 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the


B. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X= Y line was significant (slope=

0.24, p < .05) which supported the H2b. This means the congruence between the


B did affect consumers‘ preference for Servicescape B. That is, the congruence

between the professionalism of the Actual Self and the professionalism ascribed to

Servicescape B strongly predicted consumers‘ preference for Servicescape B.

However, the saddle-shaped surface along the congruence line did not show the same

effect nor the slope and the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line.

Figure 35: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Actual


Figure 36 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the style of the

Actual Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape B. The slope of the surface

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


182

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant (slope= 0.34, p < .001). This indicated

that high amount of the style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape

B predicted higher levels of the preference for Servicescape B, while lower levels of

both the style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape B produced

lower levels of preference. However, the curvature of the surface corresponding to

the congruence line did not show a significant effect.

On the other hand, the slope and the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=

-Y line were both significant (slope= -0.20, p < .05; curvature=0.13, p<.05). This

indicated that the maximum degree of the preference for Servicescape B is occurred

where the style of the Actual Self was low but and the style ascribed to Servicescape

B was high. Overall, the results support for Hypothesis 3b, demonstrating that the

Actual Self-Servicescape B congruity on the personality of style predicted consumers‘


Figure 36: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Style of the Actual Self & the


Figure 37 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the sociability

of the Social Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B. The slope of the

surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H1c (slope= 0.62, p < .001)

but the curvature of the surface did not show a significant effect. Analogously, the

slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant (slope= -.045, p

< .001) but the curvature of the surface did not show a significant effect.

-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


183

Two substantive features in Figure 37 were concluded. First, the high amount of the

sociability of the Social Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B predicted

higher levels of preference, while lower levels of both the sociability of the Social

Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape B produced lower levels of

preference. Second, the slope of the surface corresponding to the incongruence line

indicated that the degree of the preference for Servicescape B was high where the

sociability of the Social Self was the lowest point but and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape B was at a corresponding high point.

Figure 37: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Sociability of the Social Self &

the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy


professionalism of the Social Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape B.

The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line supported H2c (slope=.023,

p<.05). That is, the congruence between the professionalism of the Social Self and

the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape B predicts preference for Servicescape

B. Yet, the slope and the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line

showed no significant effect on the prediction of preference for Servicescape B.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


184

Figure 38: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Social


Figure 39 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the style of the

Social Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape B. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H3c (slope= 0.32, p < .001).

However, the curvature of the surface along the congruence line did not show a

similar significant effect. The similar effects were found on the slope and the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line. The slope of the surface

along the incongruence line was significant (slope = -0.50, p < .001) although the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was insignificant.

Accordingly, Figure 39 indicated that high amount of the style of the Social Self and

the style ascribed to Servicescape B predicted higher levels of preference for

Servicescape B, while lower levels of both the style of the Social Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape B produced lower levels of preference for Servicescape B.

Figure 39: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Style of the Social Self –the


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


185

In the following figures, the congruence effects between values of the Self and

values ascribed to servicescapes along five personal values are represented

respectively. Figure 40 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between

the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to

Servicescape B. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was

significant for H4a (slope= 0.39, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface was

insignificant. On the other hand, the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y

line was also significant (slope= -.039, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface

corresponding to the incongruence line did not show the same effect.

Two implications were found in Figure 40. First, the high amount of the life

enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape B

predicted higher levels of preference for Servicescape B, whereas the lower levels of

both the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to

Servicescape B produced lower levels of preference for Servicescape B. Second, the

discrepancy between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment

value ascribed to Servicescape B also predicted the preference. Preference for

Servicescape B was high while the life enjoyment value of the Self was low but the

life enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape B was high. In addition, the degree of

reference for Servicescape B became low where the life enjoyment value of the Self

was high but the life enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape B was low.

Figure 40: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Life Enjoyment Value of the

Self & the Life Enjoyment Value Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V1 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


186

Figure 41 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the pleasant


Servicescape B. Among the 14 congruence models‘ test on Servicescape B, the four

indicators of the congruence on value of pleasant and pleasure showed significant

effect on the preference for Servicescape B. The slope and the curvature of the

surface corresponding to the X=Y line were both significant for H4b (slope= 0.28, p

< .001; curvature = 0.10, p < .05). Meanwhile, the slope and the curvature of the

surface corresponding to the X= -Y line were also both significant (slope= -0.34, p

< .001; curvature = -0.08, p < .05).

Figure 41 showed two substantive features. First, high amount of the pleasant and

pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to

Servicescape B predicted higher levels of servicescape preference, while lower levels

of both the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure

value ascribed to Servicescape B produced lower levels of preference. Second, the

incongruence of the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and

pleasure value ascribed to Servicescape B also predicted the preference for

Servicescape B.

Figure 41: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Pleasant and Pleasure Value of

the Self & the Pleasant and Pleasure Value Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 42 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the

responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility ascribed to Servicescape B.

Among the four indications, only the slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y

line was significant for H4d. This indicates that when the responsibility value of the

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V2 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


187

Self and the responsibility ascribed to Servicescape B are both at their high points;

the degree of the preference for Servicescape B is also in a maximum point.

Figure 42: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Responsibility Value of the

Self & the Responsibility Value Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 43 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the sense of


B. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H4c

(slope = 0.37, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y

line did not show the same effect. Moving along the X=Y line from the front of the

graph to the back, the line of perfect congruence as related to preference for

Servicescape B had a positive and significant effect. In line with the congruence line,

the increasing higher toward the back of the graph showed that the sense of


B were both in the congruence and high where the preference for Servicescape B

reaches the highest level.

Meanwhile, the join effect on incongruence was also significant. The slope of the

surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant (slope = -0.28, p < .05) but

not for the curvature. This indicated that the moves of the discrepancy towards left or

left between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging

value ascribed to Servicescape B predicted preference for Servicescape B.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V3 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


188

Figure 43: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Sense of Belonging Value of

the Self & the Sense of Belonging Value Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

Figure 44 illustrates the response surface relating the recognition value of the Self

and the recognition value ascribed to Servicescape B. The Figure denotes two

substantive points. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was

significant for H4e (slope = 0.39, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was insignificant. Second, the slope of the surface

corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant (slope = -0.25, p < .05) but not for

the curvature.

These points indicated that the lowest level of preference for Servicescape B was at

the front right-hand corner of the graph where the recognition value of the Self was

high but the recognition value ascribed to Servicescape B was low. Thus, the

incongruence between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value

ascribed to Servicescape B also predicted consumers‘ preference for Servicescape B.

Moreover, along the congruence line, the increasing higher toward the back of the

graph where the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to

Servicescape B were both in the congruence and high, preference for Servicescape B

was at its highest level.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V4 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


189

Figure 44: Preference for Servicescape B as Predicted by the Recognition Value of the Self

& the Recognition Value Ascribed to Servicescape B Discrepancy

5.5.2.3 Servicescape C (Version 3)

This section reports the effect results of 14 self-servicescape congruity models

sequentially in Version 3 survey pertaining to the image of Servicescape C. The test

on the polynomial regression with response surface diagrams showed that all 14 Self-

Servicescape C congruity models for Servicescape C had significant effects on the

preference. Table 37 and Table 38 display the parameter estimates and standard error

estimates for Hypotheses 1a to 4e for the prediction of the preference for

Servicescape C.

The following 14 response surface diagrams represent the congruence effect of the

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to Servicescape C on preference

along three personality components on Ideal Self, Actual Self and Social Self and

five values on values of the Self, respectively. Each surface was plotted using

understandarised coefficients.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V5 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


190

Table 37: Version 3-Hypotheses 1a-3c: Predicting Preference for Servicescape C from Personality of the Self-Servicescape C Congruence Sociability (1a -1c) Professionalism (2a -2c) Style (3a -3c)

Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self Ideal Self Actual Self Social Self


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error Coefficient

Standard Error


Error

X= Y line Slope (a1)

0.57*** 0.13 0.69*** 0.12 0.52*** 0.12 0.44*** 0.11 0.28* 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.46*** 0.08 0.23** 0.07 0.16** 0.05

Curvature (a2)

-0.05 0.04 -0.09* 0.04 -0.03 0.06 -0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.13** 0.05 -0.06 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.08 0.06

X= -Y line Slope (a3)

-0.57** 0.21 -0.47*** 0.12 -0.63*** 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.04 0.15 0.02 0.12 -0.20* 0.10 -0.29*** 0.07 -0.37*** 0.08

Curvature (a4)

0.06 0.07 -0.02 0.04 -0.03 0.06 -0.08 0.07 -0.05 0.06 -0.09 0.05 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.06

P<.05; P<.01; P<.001

Table 38: Version 3-Hypotheses 4a-4e: Predicting Preference for Servicescape C from Values of the Self-Servicescape C Congruence Life enjoyment (4a) Pleasant and pleasure (4b) Responsibility (4c) Sense of belonging (4d) Recognition (4e)

Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self Values of the Self


X= Y line

Slope (a1) 0.22*** 0.05 0.24** 0.07 0.21** 0.08 0.21*** 0.04 0.18** 0.06

Curvature (a2)

0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.04

X= -Y line

Slope (a3) -0.28** 0.08 -0.15 0.09 -0.25* 0.10 -0.07* 0.07 -0.19** 0.06

Curvature (a4)

0.06 0.04 -0.01 0.04 0.10* 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.04

P<.05; P<.01; P<.001

191


sociability of the Ideal Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape C. Moving

along the X=Y line from the front of the graph to the back, the line of perfect

congruence as related to servicescape preference had a positive and significant for

H1a (slope= 0.57, p< 001). The lowest level of the preference for Servicescape C

was at the front corner of the graph where the sociability of the Ideal Self and the

sociability ascribed to Servicescape C were both low. Moving along the X= -Y line,

on the other hand, the slope of the surface corresponding to this incongruence line

(slope= -.57, p< 05) showed that the lowest level of the preference for Servicescape

C is occurred where the sociability of the Ideal Self was high but the sociability

ascribed to Servicescape C was low. However, when the sociability of the Ideal Self

was decreasing but the sociability ascribed to Servicescape C was getting higher, the

degree of the preference for Servicescape C was increasing.

Figure 45: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Sociability of the Ideal Self &

the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy


professional of the Ideal Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C.

Moving along the X=Y line from the front of the graph to the back, the line of

perfect congruence as related to preference for Servicescape C was positive and

significant for H2a (slope= 0.44, p< 001). This indicated that the increasing higher of

the preference for Servicescape C toward the back of the graph where the

professional of the Ideal Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C

were both in the congruence and significantly high. However, the slope and the

-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


192

curvature of the surface corresponding to the discrepancy line did not show

significant effect on preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 46: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Ideal

Self & the Professionalism Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

Figure 47 represents the surface relating the joint relationship between the style of

the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape C. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H3a (slope= 0.46, p < .001) but the

curvature of the surface was not significant. This indicated that the degree of the

preference reaches the highest point where the style of the Ideal Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape C were both high and vice versa. In addition, the slope of

the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was also significant (slope= -.020, p

< .05). The response surface along the incongruence line indicated the degree of the

preference for Servicescape C was high where the style of the Ideal Self was low but

the style ascribed to Servicescape C was high.

Figure 47: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Style of the Ideal Self & the

Style Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


193

Figure 48 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the sociability of

the Actual Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape C. The slope and the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line were both significant for H1b

(slope= 0.69, p < .001; curvature= -0.09, p< .05). The incongruence also predicted

consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C. The slope of the surface corresponding to

the X= -Y line was significant (slope= -0.47, p < .001). Figure 48 denotes that high

amount of the sociability of the Actual Self and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape C predicted higher levels of preference for Servicescape C, while lower

levels of both the sociability of the Actual Self and the sociability ascribed to

Servicescape C produced lower levels of preference. Moreover, the sociability of the

Actual Self exceeded the sociability ascribed to Servicescape C as the incongruence

line extended to the right-hand corner, indicating the lowest point of consumers‘

preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 48: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Sociability of the Actual Self

& the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy



C. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X= Y line showed a positive and

significant effect on consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C. Therefore, H2b was

supported. The congruence between the professionalism of the Actual Self and the

professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C showed its effects on consumers‘

preference for Servicescape C. The higher degree of congruence between the


C, consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C increased. However, the discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


194

between the professionalism of the Actual Self and the professionalism ascribed to

Servicescape C did not show its influence on preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 49: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Actual


Figure 50 shows the surface relating the style of the Actual Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape C. Both congruence and discrepancy relationships have

impact on consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H3b (slope= 0.23, p < .05) but the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the congruence line did not show a

significant effect. This feature indicated that the degree of the preference for

Servicescape C was in a maximum level where the style of the Actual Self and the

style ascribed to Servicescape C were both at their highest levels.

Analogously, the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant

(slope= -0.29, p < .001) but the curvature along the incongruence line did not show

the same effect. The incongruence between the style of the Actual Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape C reduced the degree of the preference for Servicescape C.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


195

Figure 50: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Style of the Actual Self & the


Figure 51 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the sociability

of the Social Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape C. The slope of the

surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H1c (slope= 0.52, p

< .001); however, the curvature of the surface did not show a significant effect.

Similarly, the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant

(slope= -.063, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface corresponding the

incongruence line did not show the same effect.

Figure 51 demonstrated two features. First, high amount of the sociability of the

Social Self and the ascribed sociability of Servicescape C predicted higher levels of

the preference for Servicescape C, while lower levels of both the sociability of the

Social Self and the sociability ascribed to Servicescape C produced lower levels of

preference for Servicescape C. Second, the slope of the surface along the congruence

line indicated that the discrepancy between the sociability of the Social Self and the

sociability ascribed to Servicescape C predicts consumers‘ preference for

Servicescape C.

-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


196

Figure 51: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Sociability of the Social Self &

the Sociability Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

Figure 52 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the professional

of the Social Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C. Only the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line showed a significant effect on

consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C. An interesting feature was found that the

ridge of the surface corresponding to the congruence line shows the degree of

preference for Servicescape C was in a maximum point where the professional of the

Social Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C were both at their

negative points.

Figure 52: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Professionalism of the Social


Figure 53 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the style of the

Social Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape C. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H3c (slope= 0.16, p < .05).

However, the curvature of the surface along the congruence line did not show a same

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSsociable Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSpromanner

Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


197

significant effect. The slope of the X= -Y line, on the other hand, was significant

(slope = -0.37, p < .001) although the curvature of the surface along the

incongruence was insignificant.

The two significant slope figures showed that high amount of the style of the Social

Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape C predicted higher levels of the

preference for Servicescape C, while lower levels of both the style of the Social Self

and the ascribed style of Servicescape C produced lower levels of the preference for

Servicescape C. In addition, the slope of the surface along the incongruence line

indicated that the incongruence between the style of the Social Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape C predicts consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C. For

example, while the style of the Social Self was low but the style ascribed to

Servicescape C was high, the degree of their preference for Servicescape C was high.

Figure 53: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Style of the Social Self & the


For the evaluation of Servicescape C, the following figures show the congruence

effect between values of the Self and values ascribed to Servicescape C along five

personal values on the preference, respectively. Figure 54 illustrates the surface

relating the joint relationship between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the

life enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape C. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H4a (slope= 0.22, p < .001) but the

curvature of the surface for the congruence effect was insignificant. Similarly, the

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


198

slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant as well (slope= -

0.28, p < .05).

The two substantive figures in Figure 54 indicated that both congruence and

incongruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment

value ascribed to Servicescape C had effects on the preference for Servicescape C.

First, high amount of the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment

value ascribed to Servicescape C predicted higher levels of preference for

Servicescape C, while lower levels of both constructs produced lower levels of

preference. Second, the degree of incongruence between the life enjoyment value of

the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to Servicescape C resulted in the

decrease of the preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 54: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Life Enjoyment Value of the

Self & the Life Enjoyment Value Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

Figure 55 illustrates the surface relating the joint relationship between the pleasant


Servicescape C. Only the slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was

significant (slope= 0.24, p < .001). The curvature of the surface corresponding to the

congruence line did not show this congruence effect. Moreover, neither the slope nor

the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant. Thus,

H4b was supported because high amount of the pleasant and pleasure value of the

Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to Servicescape C predicted higher

levels of the preference for Servicescape C. In addition, lower levels of both

constructs produced lower levels of preference for Servicescape C.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V1 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


199

Figure 55: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Pleasant and pleasure Value of

the Self & the Pleasant and Pleasure Value Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy


responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to Servicescape

C. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant

(slope=0.21, p<.05) supported H4d pertaining to the congruence effect between the


C positively influence the preference for Servicescape C. Moreover, the slope and

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line were both significant

(slope= -0.25, p<.05; curvature = 0.10, p < .05). The concave surface slightly curved

upward along the incongruence line, indicating that the incongruence between the


C significantly minimised consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 56: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Responsibility Value of the

Self & the Responsibility Value Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V2 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0

4 1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V3 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


200

Figure 57 shows the surface relating the joint relationship between the sense of


C. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H4c

(slope = 0.21, p < .001) but the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y

line did not show the same effect. That is, moving along the X=Y line from the front

of the graph to the back, the line of perfect congruence as related to the preference

for Servicescape C has a positive and significant effect. When the level of the

preference for Servicescape C was low, the sense of belonging value of the Self and

the sense of belonging value ascribed to Servicescape C were both low. The

increasing higher of preference for Servicescape C toward the back of the graph

where the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging value

ascribed to Servicescape C were both in the congruence and high.

The join effect on incongruence was also significant. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X= -Y line was significant (slope = -0.17, p < .05) but the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the incongruence line did not show a

significant effect. This indicated that the higher degree of discrepancy towards left or

left between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging

value ascribed to Servicescape C predicted consumers‘ preference. Thus, both

congruence and incongruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and

the sense of belonging value ascribed to Servicescape C predicted consumers‘

preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 57: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Sense of Belonging Value of

the Self & the Sense of Belonging Value Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V4 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


201


recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to Servicescape C.

The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line was significant for H4e

(slope = 0.18, p < .05) but the curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line

was insignificant. The level of the preference for Servicescape C was at its highest

level in the back of the graph where the recognition value of the Self and the

recognition value ascribed to Servicescape C were both in the congruence and in

high.

On the other hand, the slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line was

significant (slope = -0.27, p < .05) but not for the curvature. It showed that that the

lowest level of preference for Servicescape C is at the front right-hand side of the

graph where the recognition value of the Self was high but the recognition value

ascribed to Servicescape C was low. Therefore, both congruence and incongruence

between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to

Servicescape C predicted consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C.

Figure 58: Preference for Servicescape C as Predicted by the Recognition Value of the Self

& the Recognition Value Ascribed to Servicescape C Discrepancy

Overall, Study Three showed a considerable amount of support for the congruence

effect between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes

on preference for three servicescape images. In addition to the congruence between

two predictor variables that predicts consumers‘ preference for servicescapes, the

incongruence between two predictor variables also predicts the preference.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V5 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


202

Table 39 summarises the test of the congruence hypotheses across three servicescape

images. Three main implications are found along with each servicescape image. For

the evaluation of Servicescape A (version 1), neither congruence nor incongruence

between the personality of the Ideal Self and the ascribed personality of the

servicescape on sociability and style exhibited significant effects on consumers‘

preference for Servicescape A. However, the more discrepancy of professionalism

and responsible between the personality of the Self and the ascribed personality of

Servicescape A, the less preference for Servicescape A formed.

For the evaluation of Servicescape B (version 2), all congruence tests were supported

except the congruence effect between the sociability of the Ideal Self and the

ascribed sociability of Servicescape B, which did now show significant effect on the

preference for Servicescape B. While most of incongruities have shown their effect

on preference, the incongruence between the professionalism and responsibility of

the Self and the professionalism and responsibility ascribed to Servicescape B did

not predict consumers‘ preference for Servicescape B.

For the evaluation of Servicescape C (version 3), all congruence models have effects

on consumer servicescape preference. Moreover, the incongruities between the Self

and the symbolic meanings ascribed to Servicescape C along the personality

components (sociability and style) as well as the values (sense of belonging, life

enjoyment, responsibility and being recognised (i.e., recognition) also predict

consumers‘ preference for Servicescape C.

203

Table 39: Results of Hypotheses Testing for Congruence and Incongruence Effects

1. The shaded rows are personality components (while others are values)

2. SA= Servicescape A, SB= Servicescape B, SC= Servicescape C

Code Personality/

Values1

Congruence Hypotheses SA

2 SB

2 SC

2

Congruity/Incongruity

H1a

Sociability

The congruence between the sociability of the Ideal Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape. N/N N/Y Y/Y

H1b The congruence between the sociability of the Actual Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


H1c The congruence between the sociability of the Social Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


H2a

Professionalism

The congruence between professionalism of the Ideal Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/N Y/N

H2b The congruence between professionalism of the Actual Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related


H2c The congruence between professionalism of the Social Self and sociability ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related


H3a

Style

The congruence between the style of the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to

preference for the servicescape. N/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H3b The congruence between the style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


H3c The congruence between the style of the Social Self and the style ascribed to a servicescape, is positively related to


H4a Life enjoyment The congruence between the life enjoyment value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to servicescape is

positively related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H4b Pleasant and

pleasure

The congruence between the pleasant and pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to

servicescape is positively related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/N

H4c Sense of

belonging

The congruence between the sense of belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to a

servicescape is positively related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

H4d Responsibility The congruence between the responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to a servicescape is

positively related to preference for the servicescape. N/Y Y/N Y/Y

H4e Recognition The congruence between the recognition value of the Self and the recognition value ascribed to a servicescape is positively

related to preference for the servicescape. Y/Y Y/Y Y/Y

204

5.5.3 Predictive Strength of Personality Components and Personal Values

This section presents the results of examining the predictive strength of personality

descriptors and personal values. The predictive strength of each personality

component in the Self-congruity model was compared with its corresponding value

in the Self-congruity model by examining the statistic R2 change. Accordingly, the

larger the value of R2 change, the better predictive strength can be demonstrated

(Hair, et al., 2010). Given that each survey produced 15 models for the predictive

strength comparisons of personality components and personal values, 45 comparison

models were produced (see Appendix E). Table 40 provides an overview of the

predictive strength comparisons of each personality component and its corresponding

personal values across three servicescape images.

Overall, the results suggest that personality components and personal values are

equally good predictors of consumers‘ servicescape preference. Although the table

shows that there is no significant evidence that either personality components or

personal values have better/consistent level of predictive power for preference,

personal values are likely to be a better real world predictor of preference because

values are likes, desires, wants, goals, and needs that are relatively enduring, and

thus should be relatively trans-situational and consistent compared to personality

components (Rokeach, 1979).

205

Table 40: Overview of the Predictive Strength Comparison of Personality Components and

Personal Values

Personality component

vs. Personal value

Servicescape A (Version 1)

Servicescape B (Version 2)

Servicescape C (Version 3)

Th

e P

erso

nal

ity

of

the

Idea

l S

elf

vs.

T

he

val

ue

of

the

Sel

f

Sociability vs.

Life enjoyment √ √ ○

Sociability vs.

Pleasant and pleasure ○ √ ○

Sociability vs.

Sense of belonging ○ √ ○

Professionalism vs.

Responsibility ○ √ √

Style vs.

Recognition √ ○ ○

The

Per

sonal

ity o

f th

e A

ctual

Sel

f vs.

T

he

val

ue

of

the

Sel

f

Sociability vs.


Sociability vs.


Sociability vs. Sense of belonging

○ ○ ○

Professionalism vs.


Style vs.

Recognition √ ○ √

Th

e P

erso

nal

ity

of

the

Soci

al S

elf

vs.

T

he

val

ue

of

the

Sel

f

Sociability vs.


Sociability vs.


Sociability vs.

Sense of belonging ○ ○ ○

Professionalism vs.


Style vs.

Recognition √ ○ ○

Note: √ indicates the personal value has better predictive strength on preference; whereas ○

indicates the personality component has better predictive strength on preference.

206

5.5.4 Testing the Moderating Effects

This section reports on tests of the moderating effects of salience on the joint

influence of the Self and symbolic meanings ascribed of servicescapes on preference.

For each servicescape image, the salience of each personality component/personal

value was regressed with the corresponding 14 polynomial regression models. The

moderated polynomial regression analyses produced an R2

statistic for each model,

which was compared to the original R2

(i.e., the non-moderated polynomial

regression models). In the following paragraphs, only the significant moderating

effect models with their response surface figures are discussed. Specifically, the

discussion focuses on high and low levels of moderating effect.

5.5.4.1 Servicescape A

For the evaluation of Servicescape A (Version 1), 13 out of 14 personality

components/personal values moderated the congruence effects of the Self and

Servicescape A. The only exception was the salient responsibility, which did not

moderate the congruence or incongruence effects on consumers‘ preference for

Servicescape A. Among the 13 moderated polynomial regression models, the

salience of style showed its influence on Ideal Self-, Actual Self- and Social Self-

congruities with the style ascribed to Servicescape A (as shown in Table 41). Here,

the increment R2 was sufficiently large to interpret the moderating effect yielded by

the salience of style personality. This study therefore divided Version 1 responses

into two groups in light of the high and the low level of the salient style in relation to

the mean of the total sample. The high and low moderating results are reporting next.

207

Table 41: Comparisons on R 2 between Polynomial Regressions and Moderated Polynomial

Regression Models (Servicescape A)

Component of

Self

Personality/Value

s

R2 Moderated R

2

Personality of the

Idea Self

Sociability .427** .468**

Professionalism .116** .152**

Style .238** .325**

Personality of the

Actual Self


Professionalism .100** .133*

Style .233** .327**

Personality of the

Social Self



Style .238** .329**

Values of the Self

Life enjoyment .427** .443**

Pleasant and

pleasure

.387** .404**

Responsibility .070* .084

Sense of belonging .349** .413**

Recognition .299** .353**

* p < .05 ** p < .01

Complete descriptive statistics for consumers‘ Self and Servicescape A evaluation

level, preference at low and high levels of the salient style are reported in Table 42.

A main effect of the salient style personality on preference for low and high level of

the salience of style personality was found (average servicescape preference for low

and high level of the salience of style personality =2.92 and 3.15, respectively).

While the non-moderated joint relationship between the style of the Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape A showed significant effect on the preference for

Servicescape A, the salience of style personality further enhanced the congruence

effects of Ideal Self-, Actual Self- and Social Self-Servicescape A.

208

Table 42: Mean and SD of Variable at High and Low Levels of the Salient Style Personality

(SIstyle) (Servicescape A)

Low SIstyle High

SIstyle

The Evaluation of the Style of the Ideal Self

M 4.73 5.54

SD .88 1.09

N 123 80

The Evaluation of the Style of the Actual Self

M 3.85 4.80

SD .95 1.11

N 123 80

The Evaluation of the Style of the Social Self

M 3.88 5.00

SD .97 1.13

N 123 80

The Evaluation of the Style Ascribed to Servicescape A

M 3.83 3.95

SD 1.09 1.36

N 123 80

Preference for Servicescape A

M 2.92 3.15

SD .80 .96

N 123 80

NB. Individuals with low salient style personality are those below and between the mean.

Individuals with high salient style personality are those above the mean.

To fully appreciate the interaction between the style of the Self-Servicescape A joint

relationships and the salience of style personality, three comparisons on Ideal Self,

Actual Self and Social Self for low level of the salience of style personality (as

shown in Figure 59, Figure 61 and Figure 63), as well as for high level of the salient

style personality (as shown in Figure 60, Figure 62 and Figure 64) are provided and

discussed.

Figure 59 (low level of the salient style personality) and Figure 60 (high level of the

salient style personality) revealed the interaction results between the style of the

Ideal Self-Servicescape A congruity effect and the salience of style personality.

Figure 59 illustrated the congruence effects among participants with low salience of

style personality that denoted two important features. First, the slope of the surface

209

corresponding to the X=Y line (slope= 0.31, p<.05) showed significant influence on

preference for Servicescape A. The degree of the preference for Servicescape A was

at its highest point where the style of the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to

Servicescape A were both high. Second, the curvature of the surface corresponding

to the X= -Y line (curvature= -0.24, p<.05) significantly demonstrated that the more

discrepancy between the style of the Ideal Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape

A from either direction, the less preference for Servicescape A was formed.

Figure 59: Low Levels of the Salient Style on Personality of Ideal Self (SIstyle)

Figure 60 illustrated the congruence effects among participants with high salience of

style personality. The Figure denoted an important feature in relation to the

incongruent effects. Although the slope and the curvature of the surface

corresponding to the X=Y line did not show significant effect on preference for

Servicescape A. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line (slope= -

0.45, p<.05) exhibited significant effect on preference for Servicescape A. Along

with the incongruence line towards the right-hand corner, where the style of the Ideal

Self was at the highest level but the style ascribed to Servicescape A was at the

lowest level, consumers‘ preference for Servicescape A was also at the lowest level.

The findings showed that high salience of style personality moderated the level of

preference for Servicescape A more when the discrepancy between the style of the

Ideal Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A was occurred.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


210

A comparison between Figure 59 and Figure 60 also revealed that the high salience

of style personality groups had the highest level of the preference when the style of

the Ideal Self was congruent with the style ascribed to Servicescape A.

Figure 60: High Levels of the Salient Style on Personality of Ideal Self (SIstyle)

As shown in Table 41, the moderated polynomial regression R2 showed that the

salience of style personality substantive influenced the congruence effect between

the style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A on consumers‘

preference. Figure 61 (low level of the salience of style personality) and Figure 62

(high level of the salience of style personality) revealed the interaction results

between the style of the Actual Self-Servicescape A joint relationships and the

salience of style personality.

The congruence effect test on the group with low level of the salience of style

personality did not show much difference from the non-moderated model as shown

in Figure 61. The slope of the surface corresponding to the X=Y line (slope=0.40,

p< .001) was significant. Moving along with the congruence line, the low level of the

salience of style personality group showed that the preference for Servicescape A

reached its highest level where the style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to

Servicescape A were both at their positive and highest levels.

The curvature of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line (curvature = -0.32,

p< .05) enhanced the discrepant effect on the preference evaluation. Among the low

level of the salience of style personality group, the more discrepancy between the

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ISstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


211

style of the Actual Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A from either left or

right direction, the less preference for Servicescape A was formed.

Figure 61: Low Levels of the Salient Style on Personality of Actual Self (SIstyle)

On the other hand, Figure 62 shows that the group with high level of the salience of

style personality did not enhance the congruence effect between the style of the

Actual Self and the style ascribed to Servicescape A. Conversely, it enhanced the

incongruence effect on preference for Servicescape A. The slope of the surface

corresponding to the X=-Y line (slope =-0.81, p< .05) was improved that denoted an

important feature. In the high level of the salience of style personality group,

participants who evaluated the style of the Actual Self at a low level but the style

ascribed to Servicescape A at a high level, their preference for Servicescape A was at

high level.

Figure 62: High Levels of the Salient Style on Personality of Actual Self (SIstyle)

Figure 63 (low level of the salience of style personality) and Figure 64 (high level of

the salience of style personality) revealed the interaction result between the style of

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


212

the Social Self-Servicescape A congruity effect and the salience of style personality.

The congruence effects were tested again on the high and low level of the salience of

the style personality groups. In the low level of the salience of style personality

group, the level of the preference did not show much difference from the non-

moderated results as shown in Figure 63. The slope of the surface corresponding to

the X=Y line (slope=0.36, p< .05) was significant, demonstrating that when the style

of the Social Self and the style personality ascribed to Servicescape A were both at

high amount, the preference for Servicescape A was also high. Meanwhile, the

curvature of the surface corresponding to the X=-Y line (curvature = -0.28, p< .05),

showing that the more discrepancy between the style of the Social Self and the style

ascribed to Servicescape A from either direction, the less preference for Servicescape

A was formed.

Figure 63: Low Levels of the Salient Style on Personality of Social Self (SIstyle)

On the other hand, in the high level salience of style personality group, participants

who formed high level of preference for Servicescape A when their style of the

Social Self were low but the style ascribed to Servicescape A were high (as shown in

Figure 64). The slope of the surface corresponding to the X= -Y line (slope =-0.60,

p< .05) demonstrated this incongruent effect.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


213

Figure 64: High Levels of the Salient Style on Personality of Social Self (SIstyle)

5.5.4.2 Servicescape B (Version 2)

For the evaluation of Servicescape B (Version 2), all 14 moderated polynomial

regression models moderated the congruence effects between the Self and

Servicescape B. Among the 14 moderated polynomial regression models, the

salience of responsibility value showed its influence on the congruence effect

between the responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to

Servicescape B (as shown in Table 43). The increment R2 was sufficiently large to

interpret the moderating effect yielded by the salience of personal value on

responsibility.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

SoSstyle Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


214

Table 43: Comparisons on R2 between Polynomial Regression and Moderated Polynomial

Regression Models (Servicescape B)

Self Personality

Components/Values R

2 Moderated R2

Personality of the

Idea Self



Style .370** .387**

Personality of the

Actual Self



Style .338** .362**

Personality of the

Social Self



Style .339** .363**

Values of the Self


Pleasant and pleasure .453** .468**

Responsibility .199** .255**



* p < .05, ** p < .01

Version 2 samples then were divided into two groups in light of the high and the low

salience of responsibility value that was judged by the mean of the overall sample.

The high and low moderating results are reporting next respectively. Completed

descriptive statistics for Self and Servicescape B evaluation level, preference at low

and high levels of the salience of responsibility value are reported in Table 44. The

average figures of servicescape preference for low and high level of the salience of

responsibility value are 3.25 and 3.30, respectively. The following Figure 65 (low

level of the salience of personal value on responsibility) and Figure 66 (high level of

the salience of personal value on responsibility) illustrated the interaction between

the responsibility value of the Self-Servicescape B congruence effect and the salience

of responsibility value.

215

Table 44: Mean and SD of Variable at High and Low Levels of the Salient Responsibility

Value (SIrespon) (Servicescape B)

Low SIrespon High

SIrespon

The Evaluation of the Responsibility Value of the Self

M 5.07 6.28

SD 1.17 1.07

N 87 124

The Evaluation of the Responsibility Ascribed to Servicescape B

M 4.22 4.50

SD .99 1.44

N 87 123

Preference for Servicescape B

M 3.25 3.30

SD .77 .96

N 87 124

Note. Individuals with low salient responsibility value are those below and between the

mean. Individuals with high salient responsibility value on are those above the mean.

The comparison revealed that the highest point of preference for Servicescape B was

occurred for participants who had low level of the salience of responsibility value as

shown in Figure 65(slope= 0.43, p<.001). The curvature of the surface corresponding

to the incongruence line was significant (curvature= -0.28, p<.05) in Figure 65,

indicating that the discrepancy between the responsibility value of the Self and the

responsibility value ascribed to Servicescape B resulted in the lowest level of


Figure 65: Low Levels of the Salient Responsibility on Values of the Self (SIrespon)

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V3 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


216

On the other hand, Figure 66 showed the curvature of the surface corresponding to

the incongruence line was also significant. This denoted that the discrepancy

between the responsibility value of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to

Servicescape B predicted preference for Servicescape B for participants who had

high level of the salience of responsibility value. For example, while the

responsibility value of the Self was high and the responsibility value ascribed to

Servicescape B was low, the level of preference for Servicescape B was low.

However, while the responsibility value of the Self was low where the responsibility

value ascribed to Servicescape B was high, the level of preference for Servicescape

B increased.

Figure 66: High Levels of the Salient Responsibility on Values of the Self (SIrespon)

5.5.4.3 Servicescape C (Version 3)

For the evaluation of Servicescape C (Version 3), all 14 moderated polynomial

regression models moderated the congruence effects between the Self and

Servicescape C. Among 14 moderated polynomial regression models (Table 45), the

interaction between the salience of professionalism personality and the responsibility

value of Self-Servicescape C congruity had statistically significant influence on

preference for Servicescape C. The increment R2 was sufficiently large to interpret

the moderating effect yielded by the salience of professionalism personality.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

V3 Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


217

Table 45: Comparisons on R s between Polynomial Regression and Moderated Polynomial

Regression Models (Servicescape C)

Self Personality/Value

s

R2 Moderated R

2

Personality of the

Idea self



Style .200** .237**

Personality of the

Actual Self


Professionalism .095* .163**

Style .147** .198**

Personality of the

Social Self



Style .176** .204**

Values of the Self


Pleasant and

pleasure

.268** .292**

Responsibility .183** .248**



* p < .05 ** p < .01

Version 3 samples then were divided into two groups in light of the high and the low

level of the salience of professionalism that was judged by the mean of the overall

sample. Complete descriptive statistics for the Self and Servicescape C evaluation

level, the average figures of preference at low and high levels of the salience of

professionalism personality are reported in Table 46. To better appreciate the

interaction between the salient professionalism personality and the congruity rating, a

comparison of Figure 67 (low level of the salience of professionalism personality)

and Figure 68 (high level of the salience of professionalism personality) were

informative.

218

Table 46: Mean and SD of Variable at High and Low Levels of the Salient Professionalism

Personality (SIproman) (Servicescape C)

Low SIproman High

SIproman

The Evaluation of the Professionalism of the Actual Self

M 4.54 5.37

SD .96 .92

N 84 119

The Evaluation of the Professionalism Ascribed to Servicescape C

M 3.49 3.52

SD 1.01 1.05

N 84 119

Preference for Servicescape C

M 3.69 3.85

SD .77 .77

N 84 119

Note. Individuals with low level of the salience of professionalism personality are those

below and between the mean. Individuals with high level of the salience of professionalism

personality are those above the mean.

The comparison revealed that the lowest level of preference for Servicescape C was

occurred for the group with high level of the salience of professionalism personality.

Figure 67 (i.e., those individuals with low level of the salience of professionalism

personality) showed that the joint relationship had no significant effect on the

preference for Servicescape C. It demonstrated that the low level of the salience of

professionalism personality did not moderate the effect of thecongruence between

the professionalism of the Actual Self and the professionalism ascribed to

Servicescape C on preference.

Figure 67: Low Levels of the Salient Professionalism on Actual Self (SIproman)

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


219

Conversely, Figure 68 showed that the curvature of the surface corresponding to the

X=-Y line was significant (curvature= -0.20, p< .05). This indicated that moving

along the incongruence line in Figure 68 (i.e., the group with high level of the

salience of professionalism personality), the more discrepancy between the

professionalism of the Actual Self and the professionalism personality ascribed to

Servicescape C from either direction, the less preference for Servicescape C was

formed.

Figure 68: High Levels of the Salient Professionalism on Actual Self (SIproman)

Overall, the test of moderating effects of the salient personality component or

personal values showed its influence on the effect of the congruence between

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes on preference.

Table 47 summarises the test of the moderating hypotheses across three servicescape

images.

-4

0 4

1

2

3

4

5

4 2 0 -2 -4

X

(Centered

ASpromanner Scale)

Z

(Preferences)

Y


220

Table 47: Summary of Hypotheses Testing for the Moderating Effects Code Personality/Values

1 Moderating Hypotheses SA

2 SB

2 SC

2

H5a

Sociability

The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on

servicescape preference for the Ideal Self. Y Y Y

H5b The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on

servicescape preference for the Actual Self. Y Y Y

H5c The salience of sociability significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of sociability on

servicescape preference for the Social Self. Y Y Y

H6a

Professionalism

The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism

on servicescape preference for the Ideal Self. Y Y Y

H6b The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism

on servicescape preference for the Actual Self. Y Y Y

3

H6c The salience of professionalism significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of professionalism

on servicescape preference for the Social Self. Y Y Y

H7a

Style

The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape

preference for the Ideal Self. Y

3 Y Y

H7b The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape

preference for the Actual Self. Y

3 Y Y

H7c The salience of style significantly moderates the effect of self-servicescape congruity of style on servicescape

preference for the Social Self. Y

3 Y Y

H8a Life enjoyment The salience of life enjoyment significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the life enjoyment

value of the Self and the life enjoyment value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

H8b Pleasant and pleasure The salience of pleasant and pleasure significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the pleasant and

pleasure value of the Self and the pleasant and pleasure value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

H8c Sense of belonging The salience of sense of belonging significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the sense of

belonging value of the Self and the sense of belonging value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

H8d Responsibility The salience of responsibility significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the responsibility value

of the Self and the responsibility value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y

3 Y

H8e Recognition The salience of recognition significantly moderates the effect of the congruence between the recognition value of

the Self and the recognition value ascribed to servicescape on preference. Y Y Y

1. The shaded rows are personality components (while others are values).

2. SA= Servicescape A, SB= Servicescape B, SC= Servicescape C. 3.

The moderator significantly influences the congruence effects on preference and was reported in the findings.

221

5.5.5 Summary of the Findings

Study Three investigated how symbolic meanings influence consumers‘ preference

for servicescapes. This was achieved using three types of empirical tests. First, the

tests of the relationship between the Self and a servicescape showed its congruence

effects on consumers‘ preference for the servicescape. Second, personal values were

hypothesised to be a better predictor of consumers‘ preference for servicescapes,

compared to personality components. However, both personal values and personality

components predicted preference equally well. Third, the salience of personality

components and personal values were hypothesised to moderate the effect of the

congruence between the Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes on

preference that were also tested. The overall congruence hypotheses were supported,

with five exceptions.

Considered as a whole, the joint effects of personality of the Self/values of the Self

and the personality/values ascribed to the servicescapes significantly influenced

preference for servicescapes. However, professionalism and responsibility of the Self

and their congruities with Servicescape A does not predict preference for

Servicescape A. Moreover, the degree of consumers‘ preference for Servicescape A

decreased, while their professionalism/responsibility of the Self and the

professionalism/responsibility ascribed to Servicescape A were discrepant from each

other.

Conversely, the effects of the incongruence between the Self (across personality of

the Self and values of the Self) and the symbolic meanings (both personality and

values) ascribed to servicescapes on preference was demonstrated. The analysis

demonstrated that the degree of discrepancy between two independent variables also

predict consumers‘ preference for servicescapes. As shown in Figure 47, the

response surface along the incongruence line indicated the degree of preference for

Servicescape C was high where the style of the Ideal Self was low but the style

ascribed to Servicescape C was high.

With regard to the moderating effects, the response surface diagrams from Figure 59

to Figure 68 provided information about the impact of the salience of personality and

personal values on the congruence between the Self and the symbolic meanings

222

ascribed to servicescapes on preference. Five moderation hypotheses (H5 to H8e)

were all supported across three servicescape images.

The salience of style and professionalism, as well as the salience of responsibility,

were demonstrated to significantly moderated Self-Servicescape congruity effects on

preference. First, in the group with high levels of the salience of style, the more the

discrepancy was found between the style of the Self (for Ideal Self, Actual Self and

Social Self) and the style ascribed to Servicescape A, the less preference was formed.

In particular, a high degree of Servicescape A preference was produced in the group

with high level of the salience of style when their style of the Self was low where the

style ascribed to Servicescape A was high.

Second, for the group with low level of the salience of responsibility, the level of

preference for Servicescape B remained low when their responsibility of the Self was

low, no matter the level of responsibility ascribed to Servicescape B. For participants

who did not consider responsibility to be a salient value of their Self, their preference

for Servicescape B was not influenced by the responsibility value ascribed to

Servicescape B.

Third, in the group with low levels of the salience of professionalism, neither

congruence nor incongruence between the professionalism of the Actual Self and the

professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C had an effect on preference for

Servicescape C. Conversely, for the group with high levels of the salience of

professionalism, the more the discrepancy was found between the professionalism of

the Actual Self and the professionalism ascribed to Servicescape C, the less the

preference for Servicescape C was formed.

Taken together, both personality of the Self- and values of the Self-servicescape

congruities were demonstrated to be evaluative criteria of servicescape performance,

which inform consumer preference for servicescapes. In addition, the degree of the

salience of personality and personal values were found to moderate the congruence

effect on preference.

223

5.6 Conclusion

This chapter tested an empirical framework of servicescape symbolism and its

relevant hypotheses, and outlined the method and findings of Study Three. This

study aimed to fulfil its research objective by testing how the joint effect of

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes influences

consumers‘ preference for servicescapes. To address the research objective, Study

Three conducted web-based surveys.

Three servicescape images were used as stimuli to test the nine-item servicescape

personality scale and the corresponding five personal values (ascertained in Study

Two). The study resulted in 42 models of the effects of Self-servicescape congruity

on preference. The predictive ability of personality components and personal values,

as well as the moderating effects of the salience of personality components/personal

values, were then reported sequentially. By using polynomial regression with

response surface analysis to analyse the effects of Self-servicescape congruence,

most of the research hypotheses were supported. This study answered the following

research question:



The next chapter discusses findings of three studies and presents theoretical and

managerial implication of this thesis.

225

6 DISCUSSION

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the effect of congruence between


for servicescapes. In order to understand consumer preference, this thesis examined

(1) which servicescape attributes are salient to consumers and what symbolic

meanings consumers ascribe to those salient attributes; (2) how the symbolic

meanings ascribed to salient servicescape attribute can be measured; and (3) how the

congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to a

servicescape influence consumer preference for the servicescape.

In fulfilling this aim, this thesis proposes three key outcomes: first, that salient

servicescape attributes are ascribed symbolic meanings in relation to consumers‘

sense of Self (as presented in Chapter Three: Study One); second, that the symbolic

meanings ascribed to servicescapes can be measured using a modified self-concept

scale (as presented in Chapter Four: Study Two); and third, that both congruence and

incongruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to a

servicescape influence consumer preference for a servicescape (as presented in

Chapter Five: Study Three).

These findings are significant because service firms devote considerable effort and

investment to creating a service environment that consumers will prefer over the

environment of their competitors. Given consumers‘ desire to use the environment to

present their Self authentically, servicescape symbolism can be used as a direct

operational input to enhance consumers‘ service quality perceptions and drive

sustainable financial profitability (Heskett, et al., 1994).

This chapter concludes this thesis by discussing the overall contribution of the three

studies. First, the overall research purpose is reviewed, then the findings of the three

studies‘ are discussed. Next, the theoretical contributions of this thesis are presented,

followed by the managerial implications. Finally, this chapter discusses the

limitations of the thesis and presents future research directions.

226

6.1 Overall Research Purpose

Prior to this research program being conducted, research on service environments

identified various stimuli that arouse consumers‘ positive internal affective and

physiological responses, which result in approach behaviour (e.g., Bitner, 1992;

Harris & Ezeh, 2008). This thesis, however, argued that consumers cognitively

interpret the symbolic meanings present in service environments, and evaluate if

those meanings are congruent with their sense of Self, in order to form a preference

for the service environment (McGrath, 1998; Rosenbaum & Massiah, 2011; Sherry,

1998b; Solomon, 1998). These symbolic meanings correspond to the personality and

values of the Self (e.g., Hitlin, 2003; Kelly, 1955, 1991). Given that the enhancement,

protection, and maintenance of consumer Self takes precedence over the

physiological needs that motivate consumer behaviour (e.g., Purkey, 1970), the

congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to a

servicescape are the best predictor of consumer preference and behaviour.

Consequently, how consumers cognitively interpret servicescapes and how this

subsequently influences preference for servicescapes needed to be identified and

synthesised into extant servicescape research in order to develop a better

understanding of the formation of servicescape preference.

Understanding how consumers form a preference for a servicescape is critical to

services managers because preference is theorised to result in desirable consumer

behaviour such as loyalty (Harris & Ezeh, 2008), repurchase (Mittal & Kamakura,

2001), patronage (Bolton, 1998) and cross-purchasing (Loveman, 1998), which in

turn translate into higher service firm profits (Heskett, et al., 1994; Kamakura, et al.,

2002). Consequently, the overall purpose of this thesis was to investigate the joint

effect of consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes on

preference for servicescapes. This purpose was captured by the broad research

question posed in Chapter One:


A review of the development of the field in Chapter Two resulted in three specific

research questions:

227

RQ1: What symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape

attributes?





To address these research questions, a three-stage, multi-method study was designed.

Study One answered RQ1 using a combination of repertory tests and laddering

techniques within 19 individual depth interviews. Fishbein‘s (1963) categorisation

and content analysis identified 37 salient servicescape attributes that were ascribed

92 consequences and 28 self-relevant values. Following Study One, Study Two

answered RQ2 by using factor analysis to ascertain whether the symbolic meanings

ascribed to salient servicescape attributes could be measured using a modified self-

concept scale. Finally, Study Three answered RQ3 by demonstrating that ascribed

symbolic meanings and consumer Self have a joint effect on servicescape preference.

Using polynomial regression with response surface analysis, the impact of

(in)congruity between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes on preference was illuminated.

6.2 Discussion of the Research Findings

The findings of this research program significantly contribute to our understanding of

servicescape symbolism and how it informs consumers‘ preferences for

servicescapes. The findings and contributions of these integrated studies will now be

discussed.

6.2.1 Study One: Exploring the Symbolic Meanings Ascribed to Salient

Servicescape Attributes

In order to investigate the role of servicescape symbolism, it was first necessary to

identify which servicescape attributes were salient to consumers and what symbolic

meanings were ascribed to those attributes. In conducting this investigation, Study

One resulted in three major contributions to the field: (1) it illuminated the

228

phenomenon of servicescape symbolism by explaining the hierarchical relationships

between salient attributes and their ascribed symbolic meanings in relation to the Self;

(2) it evidenced that socio-servicescape attributes were as important as physical

servicescape attributes because both are ascribed symbolic meanings by consumers;

and (3) it provided an alternative categorisation structure for salient servicescape

attributes based on the symbolic meanings ascribed to them (rather than their basic

characteristics).

The first and the most prominent contribution of Study One was the illumination of

the hierarchical relationships between servicescape attributes and the Self, which

evidenced the phenomenon of servicescape symbolism (Gutman, 1982, 1997).

Hierarchical value maps were used to graphically present the laddering from salient

servicescape attributes to their consequence and end-values. These maps illustrated

how symbolic meanings are ascribed to salient servicescape attributes in relation to

consumer Self (Gutman, 1982, 1991; 1997; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988). In doing so,

they show that the symbolic meanings ascribed to salient attributes correspond to a

relatively concrete aspect of self-relevant personality, as well as to more abstract

self-relevant values. This finding provides evidence for the assumption in Self

Theory that attributes are not just perceived; they are perceived and then evaluated in

relation to sense of Self (Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979). As such, salient attributes

and their ascribed symbolic meanings can illuminate how consumers cognitively

respond to servicescapes.

The second contribution of Study One was that it provided evidence that both socio-

servicescape attributes and physical servicescape attributes may be ascribed symbolic

meanings. Previous literature has demonstrated that physical attributes such as layout,

furnishings, cleanliness and colour usage influence consumers‘ emotional and

physiological responses to a service environment. For example, a retail environment

with poor layout, which leads to crowding, results in consumers avoiding the service

environment (Pan & Siemens, 2011). However, Study One provided a new insight

into the critical role of socio-servicescape attributes because they are perceived and

evaluated together with physical attributes in a holistic manner that informs

consumers‘ overall evaluation of servicescapes. This finding provided support for the

theoretical claim that environmental attributes (for this study, both social and

229

physical servicescape attributes) are not evaluated in isolation (Bell, et al., 2001;

Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Rapoport, 1990). Thus, socio-servicescapes attributes should

not be ignored because they are equally as salient as physical attributes that are

cognitively interpreted by consumers.

The third contribution of Study One was that it resulted in an alternative

categorisation structure for salient servicescape attributes. Rather than categorising

attributes by their physical or social characteristics, the full constellation of attributes

can now be categorised by their ascribed symbolic meanings. This contribution

provides evidence for earlier theorising that symbols do not exist in isolation but

rather are meaningful in combinations that guide behaviour (Rochberg-Halton, 1984;

Solomon, 1983; Solomon & Assael, 1987). Salient physical and socio-servicescape

attributes that have quite different characteristics were found to share the same

symbolic meanings and thus in future be categorised together.

Overall, the findings of Study One first identify which servicescape attributes were

salient to consumers, and then what symbolic meanings they ascribed to those

attributes, thus answering RQ1. Moreover, the symbolic meanings were identified by

laddering salient attributes up to the personality descriptors and values that underpin

consumers‘ sense of Self.

6.2.2 Study Two: Modifying a Measure to Evaluate the Symbolic Meanings

Ascribed to Servicescapes

In order to investigate the congruence between the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes and consumer Self, it is first necessary to develop a scale that measures

the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes. Having identified which

servicescape attributes are salient to consumers and the symbolic meanings ascribed

to those attributes, Study Two used web-based surveys to modify an existing Self-

Concept scale (Malhotra, 1981) to create a symbolic servicescape meaning scale that

measures the joint effect of consumers‘ Self and the symbolic meaning ascribed to

the servicescape.

Study Two resulted in two major contributions to the field: (1) it modified an

existing scale to create a 27-item semantic differential scale that measures the

230

symbolic meaning ascribed to servicescapes, and (2) it identified three personality

components (i.e., sociability, professionalism and style) and five self-relevant values

(i.e., life enjoyment, pleasant and pleasure, sense of belonging, responsibility and

recognition) that can be used to examine the joint effects of consumers‘ Self and the


The first and the most prominent contribution of Study Two was the modification of

an existing scale to create a measure of symbolic servicescape meaning. The 27

bipolar items were not predetermined but rather were derived from the salient

servicescape attributes identified in Study One. In measuring attributes that were

previously identified as salient to consumers, this scale is superior to existing scales

because it was systematically developed based on the relationship between salient

attributes, personality components and the Self.

The second contribution of Study Two was the identification of three servicescape

personality components. These components comprised:

1. Sociability (comprising the bipolar personality items of friendly-unfriendly,

positive-negative, and welcoming-inhospitable)

2. Professionalism (comprising the bipolar personality items of professional-

nonprofessional, serious-frivolous, and private-public)

3. Style (comprising the bipolar personality items of elegant-plain, impressive-

ordinary, and modern-classic).

These purified personality components correspond to five personal values of the Self

that may also be ascribed to servicescapes:

1. Life enjoyment (comprising the bipolar personality items friendly-unfriendly,

positive-negative, and welcoming-inhospitable ),

2. Pleasant and pleasure (comprising the bipolar personality items friendly-

unfriendly, positive-negative, and welcoming-inhospitable),

3. Sense of belonging (comprising the bipolar personality items friendly-unfriendly,

positive-negative, and welcoming-inhospitable),

4. Responsibility (comprising the bipolar personality items professional-

nonprofessional, serious-frivolous, and private-public),

231

5. Recognition (comprising the bipolar personality items elegant-plain, impressive-

ordinary, and modern-classic).

Both the personality components and the self-relevant values capture the symbolic

meanings ascribed to servicescapes. The first two self-relevant values, life enjoyment

and pleasant and pleasure, correspond to the Universal Human Value of hedonism,

which is defined as ―need for pleasure or sensuous gratification for oneself‖

(Schwartz, 1992, p.8). Consuming to satisfy the value of hedonism has been well

researched in the marketing literature (e.g., Hirschman, 1980; Holbrook &

Hirschman, 1982; O‘Shaughnessy & O‘Shaughnessy, 2002). For example,

Hopkinson and Pujari (1999) argue that consuming sports, arts, leisure and

entertainment satisfies consumers‘ need for hedonism rather than having utility. They

further demonstrate that consumers‘ sport consumption satisfied self-expression,

achievement, social belonging and the need for exciting life.

Study Two furthers previous findings (e.g., Hopkinson & Pujari, 1999;

O‘Shaughnessy & O‘Shaughnessy, 2002) by demonstrating that consumers‘ desire

for hedonism in services consumption may be satisfied if and when they perceive

that their hedonic value of the Self that can be enhanced, extended, protected and/or

maintained through a servicescape. To be perceived with the ascribed value of

hedonism, a service environment often includes physical attributes such as

welcoming colours, inviting furnishings, natural elements such as flowers and green

foliage, as well as social attributes such as smiling service staff and consumers. The

aggregation of those salient attributes embedded in servicescapes satisfies consumers‘

desires for the hedonic value of the Self, and thus, their preference for this

servicescape is increased.

The third self-relevant value, sense of belonging, corresponds to the Universal

Human Value of security, which is defined as the ―basic individual and group

requirement of safety, harmony and stability of society, of relationships, and of self‖

(Schwartz, 1992, p. 9). Previous research has identified that the perception of

acceptance and safety in a service environment may lead consumers to approach the

environment (e.g., Rosenbaum, 2005). The findings of Study Two confirm this

previous research and suggest that a safe and secure service environment can be

232

created using salient attributes such as one-to-one/face-to-face interaction with good

eye contact and bright lighting. When aggregated, these attributes are ascribed with

the value of security, which can be used to facilitate consumers‘ desires for

belonging, which further affirms their sense of Self.

The fourth self-relevant value, responsibility, may also influence consumer

evaluation and preference for servicescapes. Responsibility corresponds to the

Universal Human Value of benevolence, which concerns ―the welfare of close others

in everyday interaction‖ (Schwartz, 1992, p. 11). A servicescape can be designed to

appeal to the value of responsibility through attributes such as service staff wearing

uniforms. Thus, when consumers evaluate themselves as responsible, or aspire to be

responsible, they will look for signals such as staff uniforms or certification. An

aggregation of these salient attributes are ascribed the value of responsibility and

thus influence preference for a servicescape.

The last self-relevant value, recognition, corresponds to the Universal Human Value

of power, which is defined as the ―identification of social status and prestige and

dominance over people and resources‖ (Schwartz, 1992, p. 8). The marketing

literature has demonstrate that consuming services satisfies consumers‘ needs for

power (Usunier & Lee, 2005; Winsted, 1997). For example, consumers tend to

associate service formality with service satisfaction because they consider formality

to be a symbol that signifies their social status (Winsted, 1997). Study Two furthers

our knowledge of the association between service formality, social status and

consumers‘ needs for the value of recognition. For example, when services staff pay

individual attention to them, consumers perceive that they are being recognised. To

ensure that consumers‘ desire for the value of recognition of the Self is met, a

servicescape can be designed with salient socio-servicescape attributes such as

visible service staff, as well as the physical attributes such as high quality

furnishings.

Overall, the findings of Study Two affirm that the symbolic meanings ascribed to

salient servicescape attributes can be measured, thus answering RQ2. These ascribed

symbolic meanings are interpreted in relation to Self and thus are used to evaluate

servicescapes, which may result in a preference for a servicescape. In applying Self

233

Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979) to understand

servicescape preference, Study Two provided insight into how to best measure the


6.2.3 Study Three: Testing the Joint Effects of Consumer Self and Symbolic

Meanings Ascribed to Servicescapes on Preference

Having identified the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes and developed a

scale to measure those ascribed symbolic meanings, Study Three investigated the

joint effects of consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes

on preference. In conducting this investigation, Study Three made three major

contributions to the field: (1) it empirically demonstrated the appropriateness of

using Self Theory to explain how consumer servicescape preference is formed; (2) it

explained why prior studies that used the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) to test

self-product congruence had ambiguous and inconsistent results, as they failed to

account for incongruence effects when forming preference; and (3) it demonstrated

that salient personality components and values moderate Self-Servicescape

congruence effects on servicescape preference.

The first contribution of Study Three was the demonstration of the effectiveness and

appropriateness of using Self Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg,

1979) to explain how consumers‘ Self influences the interpretation of servicescapes

and how this interpretation informs preference. This theory suggests that the

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes correspond to consumers‘ personality

descriptions, as well as their values, which underpins their sense of Self. Further,

these values were found to correspond with Schwartz‘s (1992) Universal Human

Values, which are the basic motivators of behaviour (Schwartz, 1992). As a result,

Self Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979) is a useful

theoretical framework to explain how consumers‘ cognitive interpretations of

servicescapes that are (in)congruent with their sense of Self will inform their

preference.

The second and most prominent contribution of Study Three was that it explained

why the predictive capacity of the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy &

Danes, 1982), was questionable. In applying the polynomial regression with response

234

surface analysis (Edwards, 2007; Edwards & Cable, 2009), the deficiency of the

predictive strength of the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) was discovered. The

results empirically demonstrated that incongruity, as well as congruity, between Self

and servicescape can predict positive attitudes (which in this study was preference).

For example, consumer preference for Servicescape C (a hospitality environment)

was high when they evaluated the style of their Ideal Self as low, but perceived the

style of the servicescape was high. This study evidenced that although a consumer

may not aspire to being stylish, a stylish hospitality service setting may still be

considered desirable and preferential, which will increase approach behaviour. This

illustrates the predictive strength of the incongruence effects and presents a more

parsimonious theoretical explanation of preference based on consumers‘ desires for

self-enhancement and/or self-extension.

The third contribution of Study Three was that it demonstrated that salient

personality components and values moderate Self-Servicescape congruence effects

on servicescape preference. The findings showed that most salient personality and

personal values moderated the effects of Self-Servicescape congruity on servicescape

preference. These findings advance our theoretical understanding of Self-congruity

effects taking into consideration the importance of personality components and

values, which underpin Self. In fact, these findings provide empirical evidence for

the assertion that different degrees of salience of personality components and values

will have different amounts of influence behaviours (e.g., Aquino & Reed II, 2002).

In demonstrating these moderation effects, the findings suggest that style (which

corresponds to the value of recognition) and professionalism (which corresponds to

the value of responsibility) are the most important personality components for

servicescape evaluation. Thus, to improve preference for a servicescape, service

managers should concentrate on imbuing their servicescapes with these personality

traits.

Overall, the hypotheses testing in Study Three proved that the congruence between

consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes influence

preference for servicescape, thus answering RQ3. Data analysis indicated that

consumers‘ preference for servicescapes are formed when they perceive that the

235

symbolic meanings ascribed to servicescapes are (in)congruent with the personality

components and/or personal values of their Self. These findings present a

parsimonious theoretical explanation of preference, based on consumers‘ desires for

Self authenticity in services consumption and the desire to maintain, enhance, extend

and/or protect their Self.

Although there is no significant evidence has shown that either personality

components or personal values has better predictive ability on preference, values of

the Self are arguably better for predicting servicescape preference (and thus

behaviours) in comparison with personality of the Self for two reasons. First, values

are experienced as part of one‘s Self, to which he/she internally commits, whereas

personalities are external attributions that distinguish individuals (Bilsky & Schwartz,

1994). Second, personal values are likes, desires, wants, goals, and needs that are

relatively enduring, and thus should be relatively trans-situational and consistent

compared to personality components (Rokeach, 1979). Thus, consumers‘ desires for

values of the Self promote the congruent attitudes and behaviours, which reinforce

their values of the Self.

Further, the superior predictive ability of values of the Self may emerge when

consumers confront social or psychological conflict between values. Theoretically, it

may be difficult for a consumer to identify the relationship between his/her values

and the behaviours; however, his/her attitudes and choices are often formed based on

the most salient value they hold, if and when the value conflict occurs (Schwartz,

1996). The salience of values of the Self will be further discussed later in the chapter.

6.3 Contributions to Theory

This thesis makes three major contributions to theory. The first contribution furthers

the explanatory capacity of Self Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970;

Rosenberg, 1979) by using it to explain how consumers‘ servicescape preference is

formed. The second contribution evidences that human values underpin consumers‘

sense of Self, and relate to servicescape evaluation. The third contribution

demonstrates both effects of self-incongruity and self-congruity with the

environment on preference. These contributions are now discussed.

236

6.3.1 Self Theory

Prior to this research program being conducted, Self Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1985;

Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979) had not been applied to explain the formation of

consumers‘ preference for commercial servicescapes. By providing both qualitative

and quantitative evidence that consumers cognitively interpret servicescapes in

relation to their sense of Self, this thesis furthers our theoretical understanding about

servicescapes.

Servicescapes were initially viewed as a form of nonverbal communication (Bitner,

1992; Broadbent, Bunt, & Jencks, 1980; Rapoport, 1990) for service firms to deliver

information to their customers (Bitner, 1992). Although previous researchers have

proposed that consumers‘ cognition of servicescapes influence their approach or

avoidance intentions (e.g., Bitner, 1992; Bitner, Booms, & Tetreault, 1990), the

scope of the pertinent literature is highly diffuse as it investigates the effect of only

one or two attributes at a time and assumes that consumers are passive respondents.

Given that consumers actively interpret their environment (Arnould & Thompson,

2005) and respond to the environment holistically, rather than attending to individual

attributes (Rapoport, 1990), this thesis provides new insights into our understanding

of servicescapes by empirically evidencing that servicescapes are ascribed self-

relevant symbolic meanings for consumers to maintain, protect, extend and/or

enhance themselves.

By integrating this new insight into current theorising about servicescapes, this thesis

advances the predictive power of Self Theory (Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970;

Rosenberg, 1979), particularly the role of servicescape symbolism. Using

underutilised investigative techniques, the role of servicescape symbolism was

revealed by identifying servicescape attributes that are salient to consumers, as well

as the symbolic meanings consumers ascribe to those aggregated salient attributes

(Gutman, 1982, 1991, 1997).

These findings echo the tenets of Consumer Culture Theory (CCT) (Arnould &

Thompson, 2005; Cova & Dalli, 2009; Kozinets et al., 2004), which makes two

assertions. First, CCT proposes that consumers are meaning producers and/or

interpretation agents of the environments. Thus, consumers actively extract a

237

product‘s meanings (imbued by marketers or firms). They then reframe and store

these meanings in their cognitive value system, and then subsequently use these

meanings to describe to other objects (Cova & Dalli, 2009). Second, CCT proposes

that consumers‘ Self is developed through a constant, overlapping immersion process

in the experiential, social and cultural meanings attached to products (Arnould &

Thompson, 2005; Kozinets, 2001; Kozinets & Handelman, 2004), which has become

a dominant reason for consumption (e.g., Halton & Rumbo, 2007).

The findings of this thesis provide empirical evidence for the assertions of CCT

(Arnould & Thompson, 2005; Cova & Dalli, 2009; Kozinets, et al., 2004) by

demonstrating that consumers actively ascribe meanings to salient servicescape

attributes in order to pursue their goal of Self authenticity with the environment,

rather than simply responding to the meanings provided by marketers. Further, these

ascribed meanings correspond to consumers‘ personality and values of the Self,

which influence their preference for servicescapes. Given that such preference drives

consumers‘ subsequent behaviour such as loyalty, purchase and word-of-mouth, a

servicescape may be created to correspond with the target customers‘ values of the

Self (i.e., create a customer value-oriented servicescape).

6.3.2 Human Value Theory

Within the framework of Universal Human Value Theory (Bardi & Schwartz, 2003;

Schwartz, 1992), this thesis also adds to our theoretical understanding of the

formation of Self. The findings empirically affirm recent theorising (Gecas, 2000;

Hitlin, 2003) that asserts that consumers‘ sense of Self is derived from their

increasing abstraction of cognitive values (Cova & Dalli, 2009; Schwartz, 1992).

Values are theorised to be relatively stable in adults (compared to personality

components) and have been empirically demonstrated to be universally and cross-

culturally valid (Schwartz, 1992). Consequently, values are so influential and

consistent that they result in individuals possessing a sense of Self that is

consolidated, trans-situational, and a strong guide to behaviour (Hitlin, 2003).

For example, formal dressing in the work environment can be seen as an act that

reflects that an individual‘s valuing of social recognition (i.e., the value of power);

however, it more strongly reflects their desire for their sense of Self to be recognised

238

by others (Gecas, 2000). This thesis advances this theoretical assertion by

empirically demonstrating that five self-relevant values underpin consumers‘ sense

of Self and are used to interpret servicescapes. The predictive power of values of the

Self is also demonstrated because consumers pursue specific values of the Self that

will guide their attitudes and behaviour.

Given this evidence that values underpin sense of Self (Gecas, 2000; Hitlin, 2003),

the limitations of current servicescape frameworks become clear. Turley and

Milliman (2000) divide servicescape attributes into two main categories: physical

and social. However, the findings of this thesis suggest that attributes across

categories share the same symbolic meanings, which means the existing categories

have limited explanatory power for consumer behaviour.

Consequently, this thesis suggests that servicescape attributes should be re-

categorised according to their ascribed symbolic meanings. The re-categorisation is

not based on spurious servicescape characteristics such as the physical, intangible or

social characteristics that are utilised within the existing literature (Berman & Evans,

1995; Bitner, 1992; Turley & Milliman, 2000); rather, it is determined by the self-

relevant values ascribed to salient servicescape attributes. This newly developed

categorisation of servicescape attributes provides a more parsimonious and

meaningful alternative for investigating consumers‘ holistic evaluations of

servicescapes. Further, the findings provide support for the assertion in

environmental psychology that consumers respond to their environment holistically

(Bell, et al., 2001; Rapoport, 1990).

6.3.3 Self-Congruity Model

In using polynomial regression with response surface analysis, this thesis uncovers

the predictive power of the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982; Sirgy & Danes, 1982)

by demonstrating that Self-Servicescape incongruence is just as powerful in

explaining preference as Self-Servicescape congruence. Given that the predictive

capacity of the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) is weak (Goldsmith, 2002;

Helgeson & Supphellen, 2004; Kressmann, et al., 2006; Summers, Belleau, & Xu,

2006), this thesis used a novel method to unpack the difference between self

239

maintenance through congruence with the environment and self enhancement and

extension through incongruence with the environment.

This thesis provides revelatory evidence that incongruence plays a strong role in

enhancing and extending the Self when consumers aspire to the values ascribed to a

servicescape, and thus this aspiration can drive preference (Belk, 1988; Belk, et al.,

2003; Solomon, 1983, 1998). For example, although consumers may not perceive

their Social Self (i.e., their extend self) to be stylish, they may prefer a servicescape

that they perceive to be stylish because the servicescape will reflect a stylish image

back on them (Solomon, 1998). Thus, the effects of Self-incongruity may be a

fruitful area for further research to predict consumer attitudes and behaviour.

Considered as a whole, this thesis significantly advances our theoretical and

methodological understanding of the role of servicescape symbolism and its

influence on consumer preference (Whetten, 1989). When a service product takes no

physical form, servicescapes become the physical cue that consumers use to evaluate

service performance (Reimer & Kuehn, 2005; Sherry, 1998a; Verhoeven, et al.,

2009). This thesis moved beyond the dominate focus on service quality

(Parasuraman, et al., 1985) and store image or personality (d'Astous & Lévesque,

2003) to advance our knowledge of how to better create servicescapes according to

consumers‘ values of the Self and their need for Self authenticity.

6.4 Contributions to Practice

Alongside its theoretical contributions, the findings of this thesis have a range of

practical implications for marketing managers. These implications cluster around the

design of servicescapes and its aggregate effects on consumer preference, and service

employee training and recruitment.

6.4.1 Implication for Segmentation and Servicescape Design

First, this thesis offers practical implications for creating value-oriented

servicescapes to improve customers‘ servicescape preference. Given that five self-

relevant values will be used to ascribe meanings to servicescapes, this thesis suggests

that these values can be used to segment service consumers. Although personal

240

values have been widely used as a strategy to segment consumers (e.g., Kahle, et al.,

1986), little research has identified which values are relevant to servicescape

evaluation. Service managers can then use these values to create value-oriented

servicescapes in order to satisfy their target customers‘ desires for values of the Self.

This newly developed segmentation strategy is quite different from traditional

segmentation variables such as demographics (e.g., Heckman, Sherry, & De Mejia,

2010) and lifestyle characteristics (e.g., Kucukemiroglu, 1999; Orth, McDaniel,

Shellhammer, & Lopetcharat, 2004). By identifying the key value that target

customers possess, service managers will be able to strategically create a value-

oriented servicescape that will fulfil target customers‘ desires of specific values of

the Self (Ailawadi, Neslin, & Gedenk, 2001; Vinson, et al., 1977). Given that

consumers‘ desires of values of the Self motivate their behaviours (Gecas, 1982,

2000; Purkey, 1970), this newly-developed segmentation strategy should result in the

attraction of more profitable customers (Kamakura, et al., 2002).

Alongside this newly developed consumer value segmentation, an alternative to

categorise salient servicescape attributes can be proposed. Service managers may

first identify their target customers‘ value and what salient attributes they would

ascribe the value, and thus design a customer value-oriented service environment to

satisfy their customers‘ desires for Self authenticity. Given that both Self-

Servicescape incongruence and congruence significantly influence servicescape

preference, service managers should also constantly examine and identify salient

attributes to improve servicescape performance with maximum level of specific

values in order to retain target customers‘ attention and increase their preference for

servicescapes.

This thesis offers a strategy about how to better create value-oriented servicescapes

by accounting for the symbolic meanings of salient attributes and target customers‘

values. By doing this, target customers‘ preference, satisfaction, loyalty and

repurchase behaviours will be further enhanced. Consequently, a firm‘s sustainable

competitive advantage can be strengthened, which drives the firm‘s long-term

financial outcomes (Anderson & Mittal, 2000; Zeithaml, 2000).

241

6.4.2 Implication for Service Employee Training and Recruitment

Second, this thesis has practical implications for service employee training and

recruitment. Previous literature reports that employee behaviour and appearance

significantly influence consumers‘ internal responses to servicescapes, which in turn

impact their approach or avoidance behaviour (Harris & Ezeh, 2008; Turley &

Milliman, 2000). While the Service Profit Chain (e.g., Schlesinger & Heskett, 1991)

alludes to the importance of service employees in driving customer behaviour, this

thesis presents empirical evidence that the way employees interact with consumers is

one of the most salient attributes consumers use to evaluate servicescape

performance. Consequently, this thesis highlights the critical role that service

employees play in servicescape design.

The findings of this thesis suggest that four personal values are relevant to service

employee behaviours. These values are pleasure and pleasant, sense of belonging,

responsibility and recognition. Given these recognised values, service managers

should recruit employees who can deliver value-oriented service. Such employees

would need to display a pleasant attitude, encourage customers to feel a sense of

belonging to the service, appear responsible to their customers, and acknowledge

their customers as soon as they enter the servicescape. While all of this value-driven

behaviour can be trained, such skills will become key competences to create a

sustainable competitive advantage in services (Bove & Smith, 2006; Rosenbaum,

2005).

Further, service managers must also consider the triangular relationship between

service environment, customer values of the Self and service employees’ values of

the Self. The service environment is not only where consumers purchase the service

but also where employees perform it. Consequently, identifying which attributes are

salient to both customers and employees, and what symbolic meanings employees

ascribe to these salient attributes may be critical to better understand employees‘ job

satisfaction. Given that servicescape preference is driven by Self-relevant values,

service managers should recruit employees whose values of Self match the service

environment in which they will work.

242

6.5 Limitations and Future Research Directions

This thesis has a number of limitations that may be addressed in future research. The

first limitation relates to the role of service employees in the servicescape framework

(Bitner, 1992; Parish, Berry, & Lam, 2008). Prior to Bitner‘s (1992) servicescape

framework being proposed, office layout design was found to influence employee

behaviours such as friendship formation, small group interaction, and communication

patterns (e.g., Holahan, 1986; Sundstrom, 1986, 1991). Given that the focus of this

thesis is the role of consumers‘ cognitive responses, we do not currently know how

service employees cognitively respond to their working environment and how that

affects their ability to perform value-driven behaviour such as displaying a pleasant

attitude. This is a fruitful area for further research given that understanding

employees‘ cognitive responses and subsequent behaviour will deepen our

knowledge of the holistic effects of servicescape.

The second limitation relates to the use of a purposeful sample to identify salient

servicescape attributes and the symbolic meanings ascribed to them in Study One.

Accordingly, there is a possibility that this sample was not representative of the

wider population and thus the generalisability of the research results may be limited

(Marshall & Rossman, 2006). Although the subsequent studies addressed this

deficiency and drew statistical conclusions from an appropriate, large sample

(Zikmund, et al., 2007), further data collection and confirmatory studies will ensure

that these findings can be replicated on a broader scale.

The third limitation relates to the fact that consumers‘ real approach or avoidance

behaviours were not studied. While the research clearly demonstrates the influence

of values on preference, the thesis did not demonstrate that preference results in real

approach behaviour. Thus, future research may consider using a longitudinal design

to replicate the present study in the field (i.e., using real service environments as

stimuli). The causal relationships between consumers‘ servicescape preference and

their subsequent approach or avoidance behaviours may then be confirmed.

243

6.6 Conclusion

The purpose of this thesis was to investigate the effect of congruence between


for servicescapes. To address this purpose, this thesis draws on the Self Theory

(Epstein, 1973, 1985; Purkey, 1970; Rosenberg, 1979), Personal Construct Theory

(Kelly, 1955, 1991), Human Value Theory (Schwartz, 1992) from a Symbolic

Interactionist perspective to illuminate the role of servicescape symbolism. This

thesis then used the Self-Congruity Model (Sirgy, 1982) to investigate how the

congruence between consumer Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed

servicescapes influences consumer preference for servicescapes. The overall results

move beyond the dominant service quality and satisfaction literature by

demonstrating new insights into how consumer preference is formed.

As a whole, Chapter One introduced the research objectives. Chapter Two discussed

development of the field and proposed the role of servicescape symbolism. Chapter

Three reported the procedure for, and the findings of, a depth interview analysis of

the salient servicescape attributes and the symbolic meaning ascribed to these

attributes using the repertory tests (Bell, 2003; Fransella, et al., 2004) and laddering

techniques (Gutman, 1982, 1991, 1997; Reynolds & Gutman, 1988). Chapter Four

reported the procedure for, and results of, the modification of an existing self-

concept scale to create a symbolic servicescape meaning scale using factor analysis.

Chapter Five reported the method for, and findings of, a study examining the joint

effects of consumer sense of Self and the symbolic meanings ascribed to

servicescapes on consumer preference for servicescapes using the polynomial

regression with response surface analysis (Edwards, 2007; Edwards & Cable, 2009;

Edwards & Parry, 1993). Finally, this chapter concluded the thesis by discussing the

overall research purpose, the findings of each study, contributions to theory,

contributions to practice, and the limitations and future research directions.

245

Appendix A: Study One Interview Information

246

PARTICIPANT INFORMATION for QUT RESEARCH PROJECT


Research Team Contacts

Cindy Yun-Hsin Chou, PhD student Principle supervisor Ian Lings, Associate Professor

Phone: 07 3138 8309 Phone: 07 3138 4329

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Description

This study is being undertaken as part of PhD project for Cindy Yun-Hsin Chou. The purpose of this

study is to develop a framework to better understand consumers symbolic interpretation of the service

environment (including physical and social environments), and examine how the congruence between

the service environment and consumer self-image may affect consumers‘ evaluation of and behaviours

towards, service firms.

The research team requests your assistance because your participation will offer valuable information

for both academics and service firms. For academics, the information will be used to fill the theoretical

gaps. For service firms, the information will be used to design the service environment and to ensure

customers have better service experiences.

Participation

Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you do agree to participate, you can withdraw from

participation at any time during the project without comment or penalty. Your decision to participate will in

no way impact upon your current or future relationship with QUT (for example your grades).

Your participation will involve an interview with a set of service environment photos and will be asked

to evaluate these service environments. The interview will last 60 minutes approximately and will be

conducted on site at QUT, or in another convenient location.

Expected benefits

It is expected that this study will not benefit you directly. However, it may benefit you indirectly. The

information you offer the research team will be used to develop theoretical framework and the findings of

this study will be offered to service firms to help them to design better service environments. Consumers

like you may ultimately benefit from better service experiences.

Risks

There are no foreseen risks associated with your participation in this study.

Confidentiality

All responses will be treated confidentially and the results will only be published in aggregate and for

research purposes. The names of individual persons are not required in any of the responses. All interview

materials will be stored at QUT, and will only be accessed by the research team.

Consent to Participate

Please sign at the end of the consent section to confirm your agreement to participate.

Questions / further information about the project

You may contact the researchers listed above to have any questions answered or if you require further

information about the study.

Concerns / complaints regarding the conduct of the project

QUT is committed to researcher integrity and the ethical conduct of research projects. However, if you do

have any concerns or complaints about the ethical conduct of the project you may contact the QUT

Research Ethics Officer on +61 7 3138 2091 or [email protected]. The Research Ethics Officer is

not connected with the research project and can facilitate a resolution to your concern in an impartial

manner.

mailto:[email protected]



247

CONSENT FORM for QUT RESEARCH PROJECT


Statement of consent

By signing below, you are indicating that you:

have read and understood the information document regarding this project

have had any questions answered to your satisfaction

understand that if you have any additional questions you can contact the research team

understand that you are free to withdraw at any time, without comment or penalty

understand that you can contact the Research Ethics Officer on +61 7 3138 2091 or

[email protected] if you have concerns about the ethical conduct of the project

agree to participate in the project

Name

Signature

Date / /

Media Release Promotions

From time to time, we may like to promote our research to the general public through, for

example, newspaper articles. Would you be willing to be contacted by QUT Media and

Communications for possible inclusion in such stories? By ticking this box, it only means

you are choosing to be contacted – you can still decide at the time not to be involved in any

promotions.

Yes, you may contact me about inclusion in promotions

No, I do not wish to be contacted about inclusion in promotions


249

Appendix B: Study One Preliminary Analysis

250

In terms of service environmental characteristics, could you tell me in a short phrase or a sentence that describe something that two of them have in common but different from the third? Informant number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019

Gender of informant Male (M)/ Female (F)

F F F M F F F F F M M M F F F F F M

M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39

Number of new attributes elicited 12 10 3 3 4 2 4 2 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12

Duration of the interview 75:57 65:49 54:54 49:01 60:58 59:02 68:35 70:06 65:11 82:00 49:29 55:10 50:26 48:48 58:33 54:04 50:00 60:03 68:09

Cognitive attributes (Frequency)

Flowers and Trees (2) ○ ○

Colourful décor and furnishings (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

High Ceiling (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Interior design is general, less formal, plain colour & doesn’t looks expensive (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Smiling people (7) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Service staff have smiling faces (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Service staff is visible (3) ○ ○ ○

Soft arm sofa (6) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

People have different colour hair/ from different countries (3)

○ ○ ○

Dim/indirect lighting (9) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Outdoor environments (9) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The sign is written in foreign language (2)

○ ○

Lots of space (9) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

One to one/face to face interaction with eye contact (12)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Bright lighting (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

People are hanging around without particular aims (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Variety products/shops (8) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Variety products in one shop (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

251

Informant number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019



M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



The quality/material of furnishing, fabric not plastic (3)

○

○ ○

Serves food and beverage (7) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Busy environment with many people & different activities, no one is alone (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The quality & colour of the tiles (2) ○ ○

Products on the shelves are organised & clear displayed & clear price tags (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The enclosed area/ private area With curtain, or door (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

There is no counter or no partition or no curtains (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Medical care or products & theme products or services (2)

○ ○

Tables and chairs (3) ○ ○ ○

People are healthy and active (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Cleanliness (2) ○ ○

Service staff is invisible (2) ○ ○

Service staff wear casual clothes (3)

○ ○ ○ ○

Certificate on the wall (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The layout is easy to access (2) ○ ○

Service staff wear uniforms (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

The rope (3) ○ ○ ○

There is a counter (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Atrium with natural light (3) ○ ○ ○

252



F F F M F F F F F M M M F F F F F

M

M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



Crowded (3) ○ ○ ○

No sign to ask people to register (1)

○

Modern facilities (3) ○ ○ ○

Historical architecture, including painting, fretwork, rail, old glasses, balcony, old style hanging light, mezzanine floor (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Colour red (2) ○ ○

People are dressed up (2) ○ ○

The smells from bakery (2) ○ ○

Wooden counter or furnishing (2) ○ ○

The store mainly offers service rather than products (1)

○

People go shopping alone (1) ○

253

In terms of service environmental characteristics, could you tell me in a short phrase or a sentence that describe something that two of them have in common but different from the third? Informant number

001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019

Gender of informant Male (M)/Female (F)


M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39

Number of new consequence elicited

23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12

Duration of the interview/ Minutes 75:57 65:49 54:54 49:01 60:58 59:02 68:35 70:06 65:11 82:00 49:29 55:10 50:26 48:48 58:33 54:04 50:00 60:03 68:09

Consequences (Frequency)

It (The décor) is very attractive and stylish (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It’s full of enthusiasm and enjoyment (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It (Colourful décor) inspires my imagination (3)

○ ○ ○

I feel my imagination is unlimited (2)

○ ○

I feel relaxed, comfortable and not in a rush (14)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I feel content and satisfied (14) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The environment tells about stories, reminds me my childhood memories (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

I feel I am part of the nature (3) ○ ○ ○

People should not be bossy (1) ○

Everyone is equal and has their own rights sand values (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

254




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



It means that people have hopes and have many choices to do whatever they want to do (9)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It gives a feeling of less pressure (11)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It likes the store just around the corner that I are familiar with (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

I feel like that someone would look after me and/or support me when I need assistance (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

People understand what I am talking about (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

We share stories and experience (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I feel confident and free to communicate with others and present myself (3)

○ ○ ○

I can be optimistic towards everything and any challenges (1)

○

I feel healthier; it’s good to my health (10)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

255




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



I don’t feel alone (even I don’t know others) (10)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Feel warm and inviting in the environment (9)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Interested in different cultures and histories (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

The exploration of unfamiliar area/countries is exciting (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It (The sign) allows me to find the direction and I know where to ask for service or to buy products (3)

○ ○ ○

I can think properly and then make decisions (1)

○

I would have confidence to make decisions (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The environment helps me to meet my goals (life goals, career goals or the goal of attending toe the service) (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I can buy value products (6) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I use my money wisely (9) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It helps me to use my time efficiently, save my time (11)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I probably feel less obstacles (2) ○ ○

Others may see me beautiful (2) ○ ○

People have to consider how others see you (2)

○ ○

256




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



I would like to have a good public image (2)

○ ○

It (Food and beverage) gives you energy (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I feel that I am a special customer and would receive exclusive service (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I am happy, enjoying myself and having fun (12)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I can have better, detail, and less ambiguity information (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It (The dim light) has an intimate atmosphere, gives a feeling of warm and feel like home (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

I don’t fear to stay in the environment (2)

○ ○

I would receive staff’s full attention when I want (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I am important to the service provider (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The environment is friendly, and gives a feeling of no boundaries (8)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I cannot make my family to be suffered (2)

○ ○

I feel free to ask for service (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

257




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



It’s good to my mental health (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

People are engaged to each other (2)

○ ○

They commit to each together (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

It means triumphs and trust (3) ○ ○ ○

The commitment implies the success (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

I feel peaceful (2) ○ ○

People’s smiling face give a positive feeling (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

The environment is practical, real and honest (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I can be truthful of myself and I don’t need to pretend (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

I would receive the service as I expect, a satisfied return (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I don’t feel comprised (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

I might develop good relationship with the staff or customers here (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

Money and status cannot buy true friendship (1)

○

It allows me to avoid the risk comparing to staying in the outdoor environment (2)

○ ○

I feel safe (3) ○ ○ ○

There is no status in the environment (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

258




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



It give a feeling of professional service (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Customers would receive high quality service (3)

○ ○ ○

I am confident with the service (6) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I won’t lose the contact with real world (3)

○ ○ ○

You know everything is organised, and well-planned (6)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The staff has to pay attention to me (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I feel this environment is full of life and full of energy (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I can react and not vulnerary (2) ○ ○

The whole context of the architecture is elegance, high quality (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

The environment helps me to clear my mind (3)

○ ○ ○

I will be able to get my job done without asking help (3)

○ ○ ○

I am independent and autonomy (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

It allows you to have certain privacy or keep your privacy (3)

○ ○ ○

I feel proud of myself when getting the tough job done (3)

○ ○ ○

259




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



It (The modern facility/furnishing) is up to date, gives a feeling of intelligent, and sophisticated (2)

○ ○ ○

It (Modern facilities, socialising with people) gives me opportunities to learn new technology, get my knowledge improved, open my mind (7)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

I will be able to share experience and learn new trend (3)

○ ○ ○

I feel that I am not behind (3) ○ ○ ○

It (the organised environment) maintains my serenity and patience to shop (3)

○ ○ ○

I have control of my own space (3)

○ ○ ○

Everyone knows the rules and follows the rules (3)

○ ○ ○

I trust those service staff because they have professional knowledge (2)

○ ○

Nothing bad can happen whiling staying with people (1)

○

I feel appreciated of the environment (3)

○ ○ ○

I am less guarded when staying in the spacious room (2)

○ ○

260




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



I would like to attend to the environment that people I am familiar with (3)

○ ○ ○

The service provider would treat me better with honour/respect (2)

○ ○

I feel like that I have higher social status (1)

○

I will be able to help others (2) ○ ○

People are similar to my age (1)

○

I will be able to observe others and make up their stories (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

Observing others’ activities stimulates my imagination and makes me more enlivened (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

I like to connect history & old fashion stuff (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

People should remember the history and respect different cultures (2)

○ ○

We need to protect heritage building and relevant things (2)

○ ○

It (The old style architecture/décor) gives the opportunities to experience lifestyle from our normal life, to detach from real life temporary (4)

○ ○ ○ ○

261




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



I feel like that I am back to my childhood (3)

○ ○ ○

I take my time and I am not in a rush to make an order (2)

○ ○

I feel I am more inclined to take others’ suggestion (2)

○ ○

I prefer to make my life simple and not too complicated, so that I don’t like too much choice (1)

○

I won’t get anxious whiling staying in the environment with bright lights (1)

○

Everything is visible and nothing is hidden (2)

○ ○

I have no limit at doing things (2) ○ ○

I know my money is really going to these working people but not those big corporation heads (1)

○

People should get equal opportunities to earn money (1)

○

The environment gives you the opportunities to indulge yourself (2)

○ ○

262




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


23 15 7 16 8 11 6 5 7 3 2 6 4 1 3 1 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12



I would be better if the store uses recycled wood for the counter or furnishing design (2)

○ ○

We should protect the environment (2)

○ ○

I am a task-oriented person (2) ○ ○

Those things induce my desire and make me want to get in and buy something (2)

○ ○

I am curious (2) ○ ○

It’s always good to pass time with families and friends (2)

○ ○

Sometimes I am easy to be affected by others’ mood (2)

○ ○

The situation is predicable so that I know how to response and behave (2)

○ ○

Customers should be more independent in this environment (1)

○

I don’t feel the obligation to ask something actively (1)

○

I am not intermingle with others; I have freedom of movement (2)

○ ○

263

In terms of service environmental characteristics, could you tell me in a short phrase or a sentence that describe something that two of them have in common but different from the third? Informant number 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 014 015 016 017 018 019



M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39

Number of new values elicited 8 5 2 4 2 4 0 2 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12

Duration of the interview/Minutes 75:57 65:49 54:54 49:01 60:58 59:02 68:35 70:06 65:11 82:00 49:29 55:10 50:26 48:48 58:33 54:04 50:00 60:03 68:09

Values (Frequency)

Creation and imagination (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Pleasure and pleasant (15) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Equity and/or fairness (7) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Feeling in control (12) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Sense of belonging (16) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Capability (8) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Enjoying life (8) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Helpful (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

Intelligent and smart (7) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Success (9) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Self-discipline (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

To be recognised by others (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

Enhances/maintains public image (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Feeling of safety (3) ○ ○ ○

264




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12


Values (Frequency)

Healthy (5) ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Harmony with nature (2) ○ ○

True friendship (1) ○ ○

Uncertainty avoidance (2) ○ ○

Reciprocation (3) ○ ○ ○

Self-respect (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

True to be self (Accepting the portion in life) (5)

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Organised and well-planned (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

Respect others (3) ○ ○ ○

An exciting life (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

Social power (3) ○ ○ ○

Reliable/Responsible (4) ○ ○ ○ ○

Independent (2) ○ ○

A varied life (3) ○ ○ ○

Honouring culture and history (2) ○ ○

265




M

Age of informant 42 36 32 32 34 34 38 29 61 62 27 27 27 28 26 53 66 63 39


Number of triads 12 12 11 7 10 12 11 14 11 9 11 10 13 13 11 12 7 13 12


Values (Frequency)

Open-minded/broad-minded (3) ○ ○ ○

Self indulgence (3) ○ ○ ○

Curious (1) ○

Protect the environment (1) ○

267

Appendix C: Study Two Survey Information

268

Servicescape Symbolism

QUT Ethics Approval Number 1100000391 RESEARCH TEAM

Principal

Researcher:

Cindy Yun-Hsin Chou, PhD student, Phone: 07 3138 6637,

Email: [email protected]

Associate

Researcher(s):

Associate Professor Ian Lings, Principal supervisor, Phone: 07 3138 4329,

Email: [email protected]

Dr Ursula Bougoure, Associate supervisor, Phone: 07 3138 4158,

Email: [email protected] DESCRIPTION

This project is being undertaken as part of PhD project for Cindy Yun-Hsin Chou. The purpose of this study is to

better understand your interpretation of the service environment.

The research team requests your assistance. Your views will inform theory which will help firms to better design

service environments and provide better service experiences.

PARTICIPATION

Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you do agree to participate, you can withdraw from participation at

anytime without comment or penalty until you submit the survey, as the data are anonymous. Your decision to

participate will in no way impact on any current or future relationship with QUT.

Your participation will involve completing an online survey and will take approximate 5 minutes. The questionnaire

asks questions about how you view service environments, about yourself and your attitude towards service

environments. For example, please choose the following (e.g., friendly/unfriendly, calm/worried, and private/public)

that best represents your view of the characteristics of the service environment.

As the project involves the submission of an anonymous questionnaire, participants are advised that it will not be

possible to withdraw, once you have submitted.

EXPECTED BENEFITS

This study will not benefit you directly. However, it may benefit you indirectly. The information you provide will be

used to develop theoretical framework and the findings of this study will be offered to service firms to help them to

design better service environments. Consumers like you may ultimately benefit from better service experiences.

RISKS

There are no risks beyond normal day-to-day living associated with your participation in this project.

PRIVACY AND CONFIDENTIALITY

All comments and responses are anonymous and will be treated confidentially. Your name is not required in any of

the responses.

CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE

Submitting the completed online questionnaire is accepted as an indication of your consent to participate in this

project. If you would like to have the results, please contact the principle researcher Cindy Chou via email:

[email protected].

QUESTIONS / FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROJECT

If have any questions or require any further information about the project please contact one of the research team

members below.

Cindy Yun-Hsin Chou – PhD student Associate Professor Ian Lings – Principal

Supervisor

School of Advertising, Marketing and Public Relations

Phone: 07 3138 6637 Phone: 07 3138 4329

Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] CONCERNS / COMPLAINTS REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF THE PROJECT

QUT is committed to research integrity and the ethical conduct of research projects. However, if you do have any concerns

or complaints about the ethical conduct of the project (approval number: 1100000391) you may contact the QUT Research

Ethics Unit on [+61 7] 3138 5123 or email [email protected]. The QUT Research Ethics Unit is not connected with

the research project and can facilitate a resolution to your concern in an impartial manner.

Thank you for helping with this research project. Please keep this sheet for your information.

PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FOR QUT RESEARCH PROJECT








http://www.qut.edu.au/

269

SECTION ONE: The following questions relate to your perception of iPhone.

Please consider the above iPhone picture. People would describe iPhone with some characteristics. How would you describe the characteristics of iPhone? Please choose the following that best represents your view of the characteristics of iPhone. Please take the time to answer ALL the questions.


2 Calm Excitable

3 Carefree Worried



6 Elegant Plain

270

SECTION TWO: The following questions relate to your perception of the service

environment.

Please consider the picture below. This is representing a customer and a service provider interaction at a service environment.

271

The above picture represents a customer and a service provider interaction at a service environment. People would describe this environment with some characteristics. How would you describe the characteristics of the service environment (as in the picture)? The service environment is referred to the whole environment including physical setting and people who interact in the environment. Please choose the following that best represents your view of the characteristics of the service environment. Please take the time to answer ALL the questions.


2 Calm Excitable

3 Carefree Worried



6 Elegant Plain


8 Formal

Informal


10 Modern Classic




14 Private Public




18 Relaxed Tense










http://www.thefreedictionary.com/inhospitable

272

Think about the same service environment picture that you just evaluated. Please put yourself in this service scenario; for example, if you were a customer in the scenario. Please indicate your agreement or disagreement to the following statement on a scale of 1 to 5 (1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree). Please take the time to answer ALL the questions.

The evaluation of self-congruity

Strongly Disagree Strongly agree

1 The characteristics of the service environment is consistent with how I see myself

1 2 3 4 5

2 The characteristics of the service environment reflects who I am

1 2 3 4 5

3 People who patronise at the service environment are similar

to me

1 2 3 4 5

4 The characteristics of the service environment is very much like me

1 2 3 4 5

273

SECTION THREE: In this section, we would like to know about you.

To what extent do the following personality traits apply to you? Please choose the following that best represents how you see yourself.

Please take the time to answer ALL the questions.


2 Calm Excitable

3 Carefree Worried



6 Elegant Plain


8 Formal Informal


10 Modern Classic




14 Private Public




18 Relaxed Tense










274

Imagine how you would aspire to be. To what extent do the following personality traits apply to how you would aspire to be? Please choose the following that best represents how you would aspire to be.



2 Calm Excitable

3 Carefree Worried



6 Elegant Plain


8 Formal Informal


10 Modern Classic




14 Private Public




18 Relaxed Tense










275

Think about how you believe others (e.g., the important person to you who can be your family or your friends) see you. To what extent do the following personality traits apply to how you believe others see you? Please choose the following that best represents how you believe others see you. Please take the time to answer ALL the questions.


2 Calm Excitable

3 Carefree Worried



6 Elegant Plain


8 Formal Informal


10 Modern Classic

11 Organised Disorganised



14 Private Public




18 Relaxed Tense










276

Please circle a number on a scale of -1 to 7 (-1= contradict my values, 0= not important, 3=important, 6= very important to 7= supremely important) that best reflects how important these values are as guiding principle in your life. Some values may be followed in parentheses by a short explanatory phrase. Please take the time to answer ALL the questions.

Personal values Contradict my values Supremely important

1 Capable -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2 Choose you own goal/ Being in control

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3 Honest -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4 Independent -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

5 Enjoy life (enjoying leisure, food, etc.)

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6 Pleasant and pleasure (gratification of desires)

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7 Responsible (dependable and reliable)

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8 Social power (control over others, dominance)

-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9 Sense of belonging -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

10 To be recognised by others -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Think about the same service environment picture that you just evaluated. To what extend does the service environment similar to your personal values. Please indicate your agreement or disagreement to the following statement on a scale of 1 to 5 (1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree). Please take time to answer ALL the questions.

The evaluation of self value congruence

Strongly Disagree Strongly agree

1 The service environment is consistent with my own values

1 2 3 4 5

2 The service environment reflects the values as who I am 1 2 3 4 5

3 People patronise at the service environment have values

which are similar to mine

1 2 3 4 5

4 Purchasing at the service environment shows my own values

1 2 3 4 5

277

SECTION FOUR: In this section, we would like to know about your attitude.

How would you rate this service environment image?

1 Bad 1 2 3 4 5 Good

2 Dislikeable 1 2 3 4 5 Likeable

3 Unpleasant 1 2 3 4 5 Pleasant

4 Poor quality 1 2 3 4 5 High quality

5 Unattractive 1 2 3 4 5 Attractive

6 Inferior 1 2 3 4 5 Superior

7 Unfavourable 1 2 3 4 5 Favourable

8 Boring 1 2 3 4 5 Interesting

9 Negative 1 2 3 4 5 Positive

278

Thank

you for participating!

Section Five The information about you

1.

What is your gender?

□ Female □ Male

2.

Where were you born? □ Australia □ Overseas (Please specify____________________)

3.

What is your age? □ 18-25 yrs

□ 66+

□ 26-35yrs □ 36-45yrs □ 46-55 yrs □ 56-65

4.

What is your marital status?

□ Single □ Married/de facto □ Separated/divorced

5.

What is your highest qualification? (please tick one)

□ Post graduate degree or equivalent □ Certificate IV

□ Undergraduate degree or equivalent □ Year 12 Higher School Certificate

□ Diploma □ Year 10 School Certificate

□ Other (please specify)___________________________

6.

How would you best describe your current work situation?

□ Home duties □ Part time employment

□ Unemployed □ Casual employment

□ Self employed □ Fulltime Student

□ Full time employment

279

Appendix D: Study Three Survey Information

280

SECTION ONE:

In this section, we would like to know about (1) how you would like to be

(2) how you see yourself

(3) how you think others see you


Please choose the best description of

how you would like to be.


how you really are.


how you think others (i.e., your family or

important friends) see you.

Very Neither Very Very Neither Very Very Neither Very

Elegant 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Plain Elegant 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Plain Elegant 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Plain

Friendly 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Unfriendly Friendly 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Unfriendly Friendly 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Unfriendly

Impressiv

e

3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Ordinary Impressive

3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Ordinary Impressiv

e

3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Ordinary

Modern 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Classic Modern 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Classic Modern 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Classic

Positive 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Negative Positive 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Negative Positive 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Negative

Private 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Public Private 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Public Private 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Public Professional 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Nonprofessional Professional 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Nonprofessional Professional 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Nonprofessional

Serious 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Frivolous Serious 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Frivolous Serious 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Frivolous

Welcoming 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Inhospitable Welcoming 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Inhospitable Welcoming 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 Inhospitable

281

Listed below are some characteristics that might describe a person: sociability, professionalism and style. The person with each of these characteristics

could be you or it could be someone else.

For a moment, visualise in your mind the kind of person who has each of these characteristics, respectively. Imagine how that person would think, feel

and act. When you have a clear image of what this person would be like answer the following questions.


Self-importance pertaining to characteristics Strongly disagree Strongly agree

Being ‘sociability’ is an important part of who I am. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Having a ‘professionalism’ is an important part of who I am. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Having ‘style’ is an important part of who I am. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

282

The picture below represents a customer and a service provider interaction at a service environment.

The picture represents a customer and a service provider interacting in a service

environment.

People would describe this environment with some characteristics. How would you

describe the characteristics of the service environment (as in the picture)? The

service environment refers to the whole environment including physical setting and

people who interact in the environment.

Please choose the best description of how you see the service environment.


Very Neither Very

Elegant Plain

Friendly Unfriendly

Impressive Ordinary

Modern Classic

Positive Negative

Private Public

Professional Nonprofessional

Serious Frivolous

Welcoming Inhospitable

283

SECTION TWO: In this section, we would like to know about your personal values and your perception of the values of the

service environment.

Listed below are values that might describe a person: enjoys life, pleasant and pleasure, responsibility, sense of belonging and recognised by others.

The person with each of these values could be you or it could be someone else.

For a moment, visualise in your mind the kind of person who has these values, respectively. Imagine how that person would think, feel and act. When

you have a clear image of what this person would be like answer the following questions.


Values of individuals Strongly disagree Strongly agree

I am a person who enjoys life. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

I am a person who seeks pleasure. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

I am a responsible person. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

I have a sense of belonging. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

I am recognised by others. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

284

Please circle a number on a scale of -1 to 7 (-1= contradict my values, 0= not important, 3=important, 6= very important to 7= supremely

important) that best reflects how important these values are as guiding principle in your life. Some values may be followed in parentheses

by a short explanatory phrase.


How important these values are as

guiding principle in your life

Contradict

my values Unimportant Supremely

important

Life enjoyment (enjoying leisure, food, etc.) -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Pleasant and Pleasure (gratification of

desires) -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Responsible (dependable and reliable) -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Need to belong -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Need to be recognised by others -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

285

Please consider the same picture below. This is representing a customer and a service provider interaction at a service environment.

The left picture represents a customer and a service provider interaction at a service

environment.

People would describe this environment with some values. How would you describe the

values of the service environment (as in the picture)? The service environment refers to the

whole environment including physical setting and people who interact in the environment.

Please circle a number on a scale of 1 to 7 (1= Strongly disagree to 7= Strongly agree)

that best represents your view of the values of the service environment.


Values of the environment Strongly disagree Strongly

agree

This place would be enjoyable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

This place would be

pleasurable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

This place would be

responsible 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

This place would give me a

sense of belonging 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

This place would give me a

sense of recognition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

286

SECTION THREE: In this section, we would like to know about your attitude.

How would you rate this service environment?


Very Neither Very

Bad Good

Unpleasant Pleasant

Unattractive Attractiv

e

Disagreeable Agreeabl

e

Negative Positive

287

SECTION FOUR: Some more information about you

1. What is your gender? □ Female □ Male 2. Where were you born? □ Australia □ Overseas (Please specify_____________________________)

3. What is your age? □ 18-25 yrs □ 26-35yrs □ 36-45yrs □ 46-55 yrs □ 56-65 yrs □ 66+

4. What is your marital status? □ Single □ Married/de facto □ Separated/divorced

5. Which of the following best represent your level of education? (please tick one)

□ Post graduate degree or equivalent □ Certificate IV

□ Undergraduate degree or equivalent □ Year 12 Higher School Certificate

□ Diploma □ Year 10 School Certificate

□ Other (please specify___________________________)

6. How would you best describe your current work situation? (please tick one)

□ Home duties □ Part time employed

□ Unemployed □ Casual employed

□ Self employed □ Fulltime Student

□ Full time employed

Thank you for participating!

289

Appendix E: Study Three Results of the Predictive Strength

Comparison Models

Version 1: Servicescape A

Table 1: The Predictive Strength Comparison between Ideal Self-Congruity with

Servicescape A on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape A on Life

Enjoyment for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self life enjoyment)

Overall model fit R2 Change Statistics

Step R R2 Adjusted R2

Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change

df1 df 2 Significance

of R2 change

1 .653 .427 .412 .66896 .427 29.168 5 196 .000

2 .740 .547 .523 .60225 .121 10.165 5 191 .000

Step 1: (ISsocSSsoc, ISsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrISsociability, cntrSSsociability)

Step 2: (ISsocSSsoc, ISsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrISsociability, cntrSSsociability), (cntrV1,

SV1SQUA, V1SV1, V1SQUA, cntrSV1)

Model Summary 1-2 (value self life enjoyment x ideal self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .662 .438 .424 .66213 .438 30.584 5 196 .000

2 .740 .547 .523 .60225 .109 9.183 5 191 .000

Step 1: (cntrV1, SV1SQUA, V1SV1, V1SQUA, cntrSV1)

Step 2: (cntrV1, SV1SQUA, V1SV1, V1SQUA, cntrSV1), (ISsocSSsoc, ISsociabilitySQUA,

SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrISsociability, cntrSSsociability)

Table 2: The Predictive Strength Comparison between Actual Self-Congruity with


Enjoyment for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self life enjoyment)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .652 .425 .410 .67005 .425 28.946 5 196 .000

2 .738 .544 .520 .60426 .119 10.001 5 191 .000

Step 1: (ASsocSSsoc, ASsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrASsociability, cntrSSsociability)

Step 2: (ASsocSSsoc, ASsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrASsociability, cntrSSsociability), (cntrV1,


Model Summary 1-2 (value self life enjoyment x actual self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .662 .438 .424 .66213 .438 30.584 5 196 .000

2 .738 .544 .520 .60426 .106 8.869 5 191 .000


Step 2: (cntrV1, SV1SQUA, V1SV1, V1SQUA, cntrSV1), (ASsocSSsoc, ASsociabilitySQUA,

SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrASsociability, cntrSSsociability)

290

Table 3: The Predictive Strength Comparison between Social Self-Congruity with


Enjoyment for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self life enjoyment)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .648 .420 .405 .67278 .420 28.393 5 196 .000

2 .736 .542 .518 .60554 .122 10.190 5 191 .000

Step 1: (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrSoSsociability, cntrSSsociability)

Step 2: (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrSoSsociability, cntrSSsociability),

(cntrV1, SV1SQUA, V1SV1, V1SQUA, cntrSV1)

Model Summary 1-2 (value self life enjoyment x social self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .662 .438 .424 .66213 .438 30.584 5 196 .000

2 .736 .542 .518 .60554 .104 8.670 5 191 .000


Step 2: (cntrV1, SV1SQUA, V1SV1, V1SQUA, cntrSV1), (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociableSQUA,

SSsociableSQUA, cntrSoSsociable, cntrSSsociable)


Servicescape A on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape A on

Pleasant and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .652 .425 .411 .66886 .425 29.019 5 196 .000

2 .716 .513 .487 .62387 .087 6.858 5 191 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self pleasant and pleasure x ideal self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .599 .359 .343 .70624 .359 21.991 5 196 .000

2 .716 .513 .487 .62387 .153 12.034 5 191 .000




291



Pleasant and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .651 .423 .409 .67000 .423 28.788 5 196 .000

2 .716 .513 .487 .62404 .089 6.988 5 191 .000

Step 1: (ASsocSSsoc, ASsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrASsociable, cntrSSsociable)

Step 2: (ASsocSSsoc, ASsociableSQUA, SSsociableSQUA, cntrASsociable, cntrSSsociable), (cntrV2,


Model Summary 1-2 (value self pleasant and pleasure x actual self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .599 .359 .343 .70624 .359 21.991 5 196 .000

2 .716 .513 .487 .62404 .153 12.007 5 191 .000






Pleasant and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .647 .419 .404 .67278 .419 28.227 5 196 .000

2 .713 .508 .483 .62670 .090 6.977 5 191 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self pleasure seeking x social self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .599 .359 .343 .70624 .359 21.991 5 196 .000

2 .713 .508 .483 .62670 .149 11.581 5 191 .000


Step 2: (cntrV2, SV2SQUA, V2SV2, V2SQUA, cntrSV2), (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociabilitySQUA,

SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrSoSsociability, cntrSSsociability)

292


Servicescape A on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape A on Sense

of Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .653 .427 .412 .66729 .427 29.311 5 197 .000

2 .726 .527 .502 .61413 .100 8.116 5 192 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self sense of belonging x ideal self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .594 .353 .337 .70865 .353 21.523 5 197 .000

2 .726 .527 .502 .61413 .173 14.063 5 192 .000


Step 2: (cntrV4, SV4SQUA, V4SV4, V4SQUA, cntrSV4), (ISsocSSsoc, ISsociableSQUA, SSsociableSQUA,

cntrISsociable, cntrSSsociable)



of Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .652 .425 .410 .66837 .425 29.089 5 197 .000

2 .723 .523 .499 .61622 .099 7.951 5 192 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self sense of belonging x actual self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .594 .353 .337 .70865 .353 21.523 5 197 .000

2 .723 .523 .499 .61622 .170 13.707 5 192 .000




293



of Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .648 .420 .405 .67109 .420 28.535 5 197 .000

2 .728 .530 .505 .61218 .110 8.948 5 192 .000

Step 1: (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrSoSsociable, cntrSSsociable)

Step 2: (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociableSQUA, SSsociableSQUA, cntrSoSsociable, cntrSSsociability), (cntrV4,


Model Summary 1-2 (value self sense of belonging x social self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .594 .353 .337 .70865 .353 21.523 5 197 .000

2 .728 .530 .505 .61218 .176 14.397 5 192 .000





Servicescape A on Professionalism and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape A on

Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self professionalism x value self responsibility)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .340 .116 .093 .82874 .116 5.147 5 197 .000

2 .386 .149 .105 .82343 .033 1.509 5 192 .189

Step 1: (SSpromannerSQUA, cntrISpromanner, ISpromannerSQUA, ISpromannerSSpromanner,

cntrSSpromanner)


cntrSSpromanner), (cntrV3, SV3SQUA, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3)

Model Summary 1-2 (value self responsibility x ideal self professionalism)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .265 .070 .047 .84962 .070 2.984 5 197 .013

2 .386 .149 .105 .82343 .079 3.546 5 192 .004

Step 1: (SV3SQUA, cntrV3, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3)

Step 2: (SV3SQUA, cntrV3, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3), (cntrISpromanner, ISpromannerSQUA,

SSpromannerSQUA, ISpromannerSSpromanner, cntrSSpromanner)

294



Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self professionalism x value self responsibility)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .317 .100 .078 .83582 .100 4.395 5 197 .001

2 .368 .136 .091 .82989 .035 1.565 5 192 .172

Step 1: (ASpromannerSSpromanner, SSpromannerSQUA, ASpromannerSQUA, cntrASpromanner,

cntrSSpromanner)






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .265 .070 .047 .84962 .070 2.984 5 197 .013

2 .368 .136 .091 .82989 .065 2.895 5 192 .015

Step 1: (cntrV3, SV3SQUA, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3)

Step 2: (cntrV3, SV3SQUA, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3), (ASpromannerSSpromanner, SSpromannerSQUA,

ASpromannerSQUA, cntrASpromanner, cntrSSpromanner)



Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self professionalism x value self responsibility)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .343 .118 .095 .82771 .118 5.257 5 197 .000

2 .392 .153 .109 .82129 .036 1.619 5 192 .157

Step 1: (cntrSoSpromanner, cntrSSpromanner, SoSpromannerSQUA, SSpromannerSQUA,

SoSpromannerSSpromanner)


SoSpromannerSSpromanner), (cntrV3, SV3SQUA, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3)

Model Summary 1-2 (value self responsibility x social self professionalism)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .265 .070 .047 .84962 .070 2.984 5 197 .013

2 .392 .153 .109 .82129 .083 3.765 5 192 .003


Step 2: (cntrV3, SV3SQUA, cntrSV3, V3SQUA, V3SV3), (cntrSoSpromanner, cntrSSpromanner,

SoSpromannerSQUA, SSpromannerSQUA, SoSpromannerSSpromanner)

295


Servicescape A on Style and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape A on Recognition

for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self style x value self recognition)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .488 .238 .218 .76976 .238 12.224 5 196 .000

2 .633 .400 .369 .69158 .163 10.364 5 191 .000

Step 1: (ISstyleSSstyle, ISstyleSQUA, SSstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle, cntrISstyle)

Step 2: (ISstyleSSstyle, ISstyleSQUA, SSstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle, cntrISstyle), (cntrV5, SV5SQUA, V5SV5,

V5SQUA, cntrSV5)

Model Summary 1-2 (value self recognition x ideal self style)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .548 .300 .282 .73755 .300 16.812 5 196 .000

2 .633 .400 .369 .69158 .100 6.385 5 191 .000


Step 2: (cntrV5, SV5SQUA, V5SV5, V5SQUA, cntrSV5), (ISstyleSSstyle, ISstyleSQUA, SSstyleSQUA,

cntrSSstyle, cntrISstyle)



for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self style x value self recognition)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .483 .233 .213 .77214 .233 11.907 5 196 .000

2 .628 .394 .362 .69522 .161 10.154 5 191 .000

Step 1: (ASstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle, cntrASstyle, SSstyleSQUA, ASstyleSSstyle)

Step 2: (ASstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle, cntrASstyle, SSstyleSQUA, ASstyleSSstyle), (cntrV5, SV5SQUA,

V5SV5, V5SQUA, cntrSV5)




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .548 .300 .282 .73755 .300 16.812 5 196 .000

2 .628 .394 .362 .69522 .094 5.919 5 191 .000


Step 2: (cntrV5, SV5SQUA, V5SV5, V5SQUA, cntrSV5), (ASstyleSSstyle, cntrASstyle, SSstyleSQUA,

ASstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle)

296



for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self style x value self recognition)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .487 .237 .217 .77026 .237 12.157 5 196 .000

2 .623 .388 .356 .69877 .151 9.431 5 191 .000

Step 1: (SoSstyleSSstyle, cntrSoSstyle, SSstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle, SoSstyleSQUA)

Step 2: (SoSstyleSSstyle, cntrSoSstyle, SSstyleSQUA, cntrSSstyle, SoSstyleSQUA), (cntrV5, SV5SQUA,


Model Summary 1-2 (value self recognition x social self style)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .548 .300 .282 .73755 .300 16.812 5 196 .000

2 .623 .388 .356 .69877 .088 5.472 5 191 .000


Step 2: (cntrV5, SV5SQUA, V5SV5, V5SQUA, cntrSV5), (SoSstyleSSstyle, cntrSoSstyle, SSstyleSQUA,

cntrSSstyle, SoSstyleSQUA)

297

Version 2: Servicescape B


Servicescape B on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape B on Life




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .665 .443 .429 .6694264 .443 33.049 5 208 .000

2 .749 .561 .540 .6012133 .119 10.975 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .679 .460 .448 .6586719 .460 35.506 5 208 .000

2 .749 .561 .540 .6012133 .101 9.331 5 203 .000









Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .656 .430 .416 .6771099 .430 31.364 5 208 .000

2 .753 .566 .545 .5978105 .136 12.768 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .679 .460 .448 .6586719 .460 35.506 5 208 .000

2 .753 .566 .545 .5978105 .106 9.902 5 203 .000




298






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .654 .428 .414 .6782263 .428 31.124 5 208 .000

2 .746 .557 .535 .6044197 .129 11.780 5 203 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self life enjoyment x social self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .679 .460 .448 .6586719 .460 35.506 5 208 .000

2 .746 .557 .535 .6044197 .096 8.803 5 203 .000





Servicescape B on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape B on Pleasant

and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .661 .437 .423 .6724678 .437 31.999 5 206 .000

2 .759 .576 .554 .5911957 .138 13.106 5 201 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .673 .452 .439 .6632736 .452 34.042 5 206 .000

2 .759 .576 .554 .5911957 .123 11.659 5 201 .000




299



and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .651 .424 .410 .6802011 .424 30.344 5 206 .000

2 .759 .576 .555 .5906799 .152 14.435 5 201 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .673 .452 .439 .6632736 .452 34.042 5 206 .000

2 .759 .576 .555 .5906799 .124 11.749 5 201 .000






and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .650 .422 .408 .6813802 .422 30.096 5 206 .000

2 .758 .575 .553 .5918889 .152 14.400 5 201 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self pleasant and pleasure x social self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .673 .452 .439 .6632736 .452 34.042 5 206 .000

2 .758 .575 .553 .5918889 .122 11.537 5 201 .000




300


Servicescape B on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape B on Sense of

Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .665 .443 .429 .6694264 .443 33.049 5 208 .000

2 .721 .519 .496 .6292892 .077 6.476 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .587 .345 .329 .7258504 .345 21.894 5 208 .000

2 .721 .519 .496 .6292892 .175 14.746 5 203 .000






Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .656 .430 .416 .6771099 .430 31.364 5 208 .000

2 .718 .516 .492 .6315241 .086 7.222 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .587 .345 .329 .7258504 .345 21.894 5 208 .000

2 .718 .516 .492 .6315241 .171 14.355 5 203 .000




301



Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .654 .428 .414 .6782263 .428 31.124 5 208 .000

2 .717 .514 .490 .6327847 .086 7.189 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .587 .345 .329 .7258504 .345 21.894 5 208 .000

2 .717 .514 .490 .6327847 .169 14.136 5 203 .000





Servicescape B on Professionalism and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape B on

Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self professionalism x value self responsible)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .367 .134 .113 .8357471 .134 6.426 5 207 .000

2 .531 .282 .246 .7705996 .147 8.296 5 202 .000


cntrSSpromanner)






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .447 .199 .180 .8037037 .199 10.316 5 207 .000

2 .531 .277 .246 .7705996 .082 4.633 5 202 .001




302



Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self professionalism x value self responsible)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .365 .133 .112 .8363267 .133 6.360 5 207 .000

2 .531 .282 .247 .7703636 .149 8.393 5 202 .000


cntrSSpromanner)






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .447 .199 .180 .8037037 .199 10.316 5 207 .000

2 .531 .282 .247 .7703636 .083 4.661 5 202 .000






Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self professionalism x value self responsible)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .367 .134 .114 .8357097 .134 6.430 5 207 .000

2 .528 .279 .244 .7720180 .145 8.113 5 202 .000








Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .447 .199 .180 .8037037 .199 10.316 5 207 .000

2 .528 .279 .244 .7720180 .080 4.468 5 202 .001




303


Servicescape B on Style and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape B on Recognition




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .608 .370 .355 .7116164 .370 24.460 5 208 .000

2 .699 .489 .464 .6487313 .119 9.456 5 203 .000



V5SQUA, cntrSV5)




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .579 .335 .319 .7311889 .335 20.970 5 208 .000

2 .699 .489 .464 .6487313 .154 12.247 5 203 .000









Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .582 .338 .322 .7294025 .338 21.277 5 208 .000

2 .690 .476 .450 .6573254 .137 10.623 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .579 .335 .319 .7311889 .335 20.970 5 208 .000

2 .690 .476 .450 .6573254 .140 10.874 5 203 .000




304






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .582 .339 .323 .7291429 .339 21.322 5 208 .000

2 .692 .478 .453 .6556904 .139 10.842 5 203 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .579 .335 .319 .7311889 .335 20.970 5 208 .000

2 .692 .478 .453 .6556904 .143 11.131 5 203 .000




305

Version 3: Servicescape C


Servicescape C on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape C on Life




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .599a .359 .343 .62863 .359 22.063 5 197 .000

2 .682b .465 .437 .58159 .106 7.631 5 192 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .527a .277 .259 .66751 .277 15.112 5 197 .000

2 .682b .465 .437 .58159 .188 13.501 5 192 .000









Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .603a .364 .348 .62617 .364 22.547 5 197 .000

2 .682b .465 .437 .58163 .101 7.266 5 192 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .527a .277 .259 .66751 .277 15.112 5 197 .000

2 .682b .465 .437 .58163 .188 13.494 5 192 .000




306






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .603a .363 .347 .62641 .363 22.499 5 197 .000

2 .685b .470 .442 .57917 .106 7.689 5 192 .000

Step 1: (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociabilitySQUA, SSsociabilitySQUA, cntrSoSsociability, cntrSSsociable)

Step 2: (SoSsocSSsoc, SoSsociableSQUA, SSsociableSQUA, cntrSoSsociable, cntrSSsociable), (cntrV1,


Model Summary 1-2 (value self life enjoyment x social self sociable)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .527 .277 .259 .66751 .277 15.112 5 197 .000

2 .685 .470 .442 .57917 .192 13.935 5 192 .000





Servicescape C on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape C on Pleasant

and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .588 .346 .329 .62904 .346 20.602 5 195 .000

2 .657 .431 .401 .59418 .085 5.710 5 190 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .493 .243 .224 .67658 .243 12.520 5 195 .000

2 .657 .431 .401 .59418 .188 12.568 5 190 .000




307



and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .592 .351 .334 .62659 .351 21.070 5 195 .000

2 .656 .430 .400 .59490 .079 5.265 5 190 .000







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .493 .243 .224 .67658 .243 12.520 5 195 .000

2 .656 .430 .400 .59490 .187 12.445 5 190 .000






and Pleasure for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self pleasant and pleasure)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .592 .350 .334 .62687 .350 21.015 5 195 .000

2 .658 .433 .403 .59308 .083 5.570 5 190 .000




Model Summary 1-2 (value self pleasant and pleasure x social self sociability)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .493 .243 .224 .67658 .243 12.520 5 195 .000

2 .658 .433 .403 .59308 .190 12.755 5 190 .000




308


Servicescape C on Sociability and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape C on Sense of

Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .605 .366 .350 .62175 .366 22.63

2

5 196 .000

2 .637 .406 .375 .60955 .040 2.584 5 191 .027







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .425 .181 .160 .70672 .181 8.658 5 196 .000

2 .637 .406 .375 .60955 .225 14.493 5 191 .000






Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .609 .371 .355 .61941 .371 23.099 5 196 .000

2 .641 .411 .380 .60700 .040 2.619 5 191 .026







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .425 .181 .160 .70672 .181 8.658 5 196 .000

2 .641 .411 .380 .60700 .230 14.937 5 191 .000




309



Belonging for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self sociability x value self sense of belonging)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .610 .372 .356 .61877 .372 23.227 5 196 .000

2 .643 .413 .382 .60611 .041 2.656 5 191 .024







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .425 .181 .160 .70672 .181 8.658 5 196 .000

2 .643 .413 .382 .60611 .232 15.094 5 191 .000





Servicescape C on Professionalism and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape C on

Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (ideal self professionalism x value self responsibility)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .348 .121 .098 .73834 .121 5.365 5 195 .000

2 .495 .245 .205 .69324 .124 6.240 5 190 .000


cntrSSpromanner)






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .428 .183 .162 .71177 .183 8.740 5 195 .000

2 .495 .245 .205 .69324 .062 3.113 5 190 .010




310



Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (actual self professionalism x value self responsibility)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .313 .098 .075 .74784 .098 4.246 5 195 .001

2 .476 .227 .186 .70163 .128 6.307 5 190 .000


cntrSSpromanner)






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .428 .183 .162 .71177 .183 8.740 5 195 .000

2 .476 .227 .186 .70163 .043 2.136 5 190 .063






Responsibility for the Servicescape Preference Model Summary 1-1 (social self professionalism x value self responsibility)



Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .343 .117 .095 .73981 .117 5.189 5 195 .000

2 .486 .236 .196 .69730 .119 5.901 5 190 .000








Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .428 .183 .162 .71177 .183 8.740 5 195 .000

2 .486 .236 .196 .69730 .053 2.636 5 190 .025




311


Servicescape C on Style and Value Self-Congruity with the Servicescape C on Recognition




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .449 .201 .181 .70200 .201 9.880 5 196 .000

2 .511 .261 .223 .68382 .060 3.112 5 191 .010



V5SQUA, cntrSV5)




Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .396 .157 .135 .72126 .157 7.294 5 196 .000

2 .511 .261 .223 .68382 .105 5.410 5 191 .000









Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .390 .152 .130 .72330 .152 7.032 5 196 .000

2 .474 .224 .184 .70081 .072 3.556 5 191 .004







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .396 .157 .135 .72126 .157 7.294 5 196 .000

2 .474 .224 .184 .70081 .067 3.321 5 191 .007




312






Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .427 .182 .162 .71027 .182 8.744 5 196 .000

2 .500 .250 .211 .68909 .068 3.447 5 191 .005







Std Error

of the

Estimate

R2

Change

F value

of R2

Change


of R2 change

1 .396 .157 .135 .72126 .157 7.294 5 196 .000

2 .500 .250 .211 .68909 .093 4.745 5 191 .000




313

7 REFERENCE

Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing

Research, 34(3), 347-356.

Aaker, J. L. (1999). The malleable self: The role of self-expression in

persuasion. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 45-57.

Aaker, J. L., Benet-Martinez, V., & Garolera, J. (2001). Consumption symbols

as carriers of culture: A study of Japanese and Spanish brand

personality constucts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

81(3), 492-508.

Adams-Webber, J. R. (1996). Cognitive complexity. In R. Corsini & A. J.

Auerbach (Eds.), Encylopedia of Psychology. New York: John Wiley &

Sons.

Adams-Webber, J. R. (2003). Prototypicality of self and differentiating among

others in terms of personal constructs. Journal of Constructivist

Psychology, 16(4), 341-347.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and

interpreting interactions. Newbury Park CA: Sage.

Ailawadi, K. L., Neslin, S. A., & Gedenk, K. (2001). Pursuing the value-

conscious consumer: Store brands versus national brand promotions.

Journal of Marketing, 65(1), 71-89.

Akhter, S. H., Andrews, J. C., & Durvasula, S. (1994). The influence of retail

store environment on brand related judgements. Journal of Retailing

and Consumer Services, 1(2), 67-76.

Allen, M. W. (2002). Human values and product symbolism: Do consumers

form product preference by comparing the human values symbolized

by a product to the human values that they endorse? Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, 32(12), 2475-2501.

Allen, M. W., & Ng, S. H. (1999). The direct and indirect influences of human

values on product ownership. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20(1),

5-39.

Anderson, E. W., & Mittal, V. (2000). Strengthening the satisfaction-profit

chain. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 107-120.

Aquino, K., & Reed II, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423-1440.

314

Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005). Consumer culture theory (CCT):

Twenty years of research. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 868-

882.

Aron, A., Steele, J. L., Kashdan, T. B., & Perez, M. (2006). When similars do

not attract: Tests of a prediction frm the self-expansion model.

Personal Relationships, 13(4), 387-396.

Arrindell, W. A., & van der Ende, J. (1985). An empirical test of the utility of

the observations-oo-variables ratio in factor and components analysis.

Applied Psychological Measurement, 9(2), 165-178.

Arthur, W., Jr., Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., & Doverspike, D. (2006). The use of

person-organization fit in employment decision making: An assessment

of its criterion-related validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4),

786-801.

Atwater, L. E., Ostroff, C., Yammarino, F. J., & Fleenor, J. W. (1998). Self-

other agreement: does it really matter? Personnel Psychology, 51(3),

577-598.

Avila, D., & Purkey, W. (1972). Self-theory and behaviorism: A

rapprochement. Psychology in the Schools, 9(2), 124-126.

Bäckström, K., & Johansson, U. (2006). Creating and consuming experiences

in retail store environments: Comparing retailer and consumer

perspectives. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 13(6), 417-

430.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1975). Marketing as exchange. Journal of Marketing, 39(4),

32-32.

Baker, J. (1987). The role of the environment in marketing services: The

consumer perspective. In J. A. Czepiel, C. A. Congram & J. Shanahan

(Eds.), The Service Challenge: Integrating for Competitive Advantage

(pp. 79-84). Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Baker, J., Levy, M., & Grewal, D. (1992). An experimental approach to

making retail store environmental decisions. Journal of Retailing,

68(4), 445-446.

Bannister, D. (2003). Personal construct theory and politics and the politics of

personal construct theory. In F. Fransella (Ed.), International

Handbook of Personal Construct Psychology. Chichester, England ;

Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons.

315

Bardi, A., & Schwartz, S. H. (2003). Values and behavior: strength and

structure of relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,

29(10), 1207-1220.

Beatty, S. E., Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. (1991). Personal values and gift-

giving behaviors: A study across cultures. Journal of Business

Research, 22(2), 149-157.

Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer

Research, 15(2), 139-168.

Belk, R. W., Bahn, K. D., & Mayer, R. N. (1982). Developmental recognition

of consumption symbolism. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 4-17.

Belk, R. W., Ger, G., & Askegaard, S. (2003). The fire of desire: A multisited

inquiry into consumer passion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3),

326-351.

Bell, P. A., Greene, T. C., Fisher, J. D., & Baum, A. (2001). Environmental

Psychology (5th ed.). Sydney: Harcourt College Publishers.

Bell, R. C. (2003). The Repertory Grid Technique In F. Fransella (Ed.),

International handbook of personal construct psychology. England:

John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Bellizzi, J. A., Crowley, A. E., & Hasty, R. W. (1983). The effects of color in

store design. Journal of Retailing, 59, 21-45.

Bellizzi, J. A., & Hite, R. E. (1992). Environmental color, consumer feelings,

and purchase likelihood. Psychology & Marketing, 9(5), 347-364.

Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression Diagnostics:

Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity. New York:

Wiley.

Berman, B., & Evans, J. R. (1995). Retail Management: A Strategic Approach

(6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Berry, L. L., & Clark, T. (1986). Four ways to make services more tangible.

Business, 36(4), 53-54.

Bettman, J. R., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1991). Consumer decision

making Handbook of consumer behavior (Vol. 35(2), pp. 50-84):

Prentice Hall.

Bhat, S., & Reddy, S. K. (1998). Symbolic and functional positioning of

brands. Journal of Consumer Marketing 15(1), 32-43.

316

Bilsky, W., & Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Values and personality. European

Journal of Personality, 8(3), 163-181.

Birdwell, A. E. (1964). A Study of the Influence of Image Congruence on

Consumer Choice. Ph. D., University of Texas.

Bitner, M. J. (1986). Consumer responses to the physical environment in

service settings. In M. Venkatesan, D. M. Schmalensee & C. Marshall

(Eds.), Creativity in Services Marketing (pp. 89-93). Chicage American

Marketing Association.

Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The effects of physical

surroundings and employee responses. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 69-

82.

Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on

customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71.

Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H., & Tetreault, M. S. (1990). The service encounter:

Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents. Journal of

Marketing, 54(1), 71-84.

Blair, J., & Presser, S. (1992). An experimental comparison of alternative

pretest techniques: a note on preliminary findings. Journal of

Advertising Research, 32(2), 2-5.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method.

Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Boddy, C. (2005). Projective techniques in market research: valueless

subjectivity or insightful reality. International journal of market

research, 47(3), 239-254.

Bollen, K. A., & Jackman, R. W. (1990). Regression diagnostics: An

expository treatment of outliers and influential cases. In J. Fox & J. S.

Long (Eds.), Modern Methods of Data Analysis. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage.

Bolton, R. N. (1998). A dynamic model of the duration of the customer's

relationship with a continuous service provider: The role of satisfaction.

Marketing Science, 17(1), 45-65.

Bono, J. E., & Colbert, A. E. (2005). Understanding responses to multi-source

feedback: The role of core self-evaluations. Personnel Psychology,

58(1), 171-203.

317

Booms, B. H., & Bitner, M. J. (1982). Marketing services by managing the

environment. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,

23(1), 35-39.

Borin, N., Farris, P. W., & Freeland, J. R. (1994). A model for determining

retail product category assortment and shelf space allocation. Decision

Sciences, 25(3), 359-359.

Bove, L. L., & Smith, D. A. (2006). Relationship strength between a customer

and service worker. Services Marketing Quarterly, 27(3), 17-34.

Box, G. E. P., & Draper, N. R. (1987). Empirical Model-Building and

Response Surfaces. Brisbane: John Wiley & Sons.

Brady, M. K., & Cronin, J. J. (2001). Customer orientation: Effects on

customer service perceptions and outcome behaviors. Journal of

Service Research, 3(3), 241-251.

Brangule-Vlagsma, K., Pieters, R. G. M., & Wedel, M. (2002). The dynamics

of value segments: modeling framework and empirical illustration.

International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(3), 267-285.

Broadbent, G., Bunt, R., & Jencks, C. (1980). Signs, Symbols and

Architecture. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Brown, S. (1995). Sources and status of marketing theory. In M. J. Baker & O.

Badot (Eds.), Marketing : Theory and Practice (pp. 23-39).

Basingstoke: Macmillan Business.

Brunsø, K., Scholderer, J., & Grunert, K. G. (2004). Closing the gap between

values and behavior--a means-end theory of lifestyle. Journal of

Business Research, 57(6), 665-670.

Burr, V., & Butt, T. (1992). An Invitation to Personal Construct Psychology.

London: Whurr.

Burton, M. L., & Nerlove, S. B. (1976). Balanced designs for triads tests: Two

examples from English. Social Science Research, 5(3), 247-267.

Butt, T. (2008). George Kelly: the Psychology of Personal Constructs. New

York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Byrne, D. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within

the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,

14(3), 417-431.

318

Cable, D. M., & Edwards, J. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary

fit: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 89(5), 822-834.

Caldwell, N., & Coshall, J. (2002). Measuring brand associations for museums

and galleries using repertory grid analysis. Management Decision,

40(4), 383-392.

Cardador, M. T., & Pratt, M. G. (2006). Identification Management and Its

Bases: Bridging Management and Marketing Perspectives Through a

Focus on Affiliation Dimensions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing

Science, 34(2), 174-184.

Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L., & Sekaran, U. (2001). Applied Business

Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Milton, Australia:

John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2010). Personality: Theory and Research (11th

ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Cestre, G., & Darmon, R. Y. (1998). Assessing consumer preferences in the

context of new product diffusion. International Journal of Research in

Marketing, 15(2), 123-135.

Chartrand, Tanya L., Huber, J., Shiv, B., & Tanner, Robin J. (2008).

Nonconscious Goals and Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer

Research, 35(2), 189-201.

Chon, K. S. (1992). The role of destination image in tourism: an extension.

The Tourist Review, 2, 2-7.

Churchill, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of

marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16(1), 64-73.

Churchill, G. A. (1996). Basic Marketing Research (3rd ed.). Sydney: The

Dryden Press.

Churchill, G. A., & Iacobucci, D. (2005). Marketing Research :

Methodological Foundations. Mason, Ohio: Thomson/South-Western.

Cieurzo, C., & Keitel, M. A. (1999). Ethics in qualitative research. In M.

Kopala & L. A. Suzuki (Eds.), Using Qualitative Methods in

Psychology (pp. 63-75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation

Analyses for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

319

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied Multiple

Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed.).

Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Comrey, A. L., & Lee., H. B. (1992). A First Course In Factor Analysis.

Hillsdale, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature Review (3rd

ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory

and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.

Coshall, J. T. (2000). Measurement of tourists' images: The repertory grid

approach. Journal of Travel Research, 39(1), 85-89.

Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor

analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most form your

analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9.

Cova, B., & Dalli, D. (2009). Working consumers: The next step in marketing

theory? Marketing Theory, 9(3), 315-339.

Creighton, M. (1998). The Seed of creative lifestyle shopping: Wrapping

consumerism in Japanese store layouts. In J. F. J. Sherry (Ed.),

Servicescapes: The Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets.

Chicago: NTC Business Books.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and

Mixed Methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE

Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed

Method Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

d'Astous, A., & Lévesque, M. (2003). A scale for measuring store personality.

Psychology & Marketing, 20(5), 455-469.

Darby, M. R., & Karni, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of

fraud. Journal of Law and Economics, 16(1), 67-88.

Deshpande, R. (1983). ''Paradigms lost'': On theory and method in research in

marketing. Journal of Marketing, 47(4), 101-101.

DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (2nd

ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

320

Dibley, A., & Baker, S. (2001). Uncovering the links between brand choice

and personal values among young British and Spanish girls. Journal of

Consumer Behaviour, 1(1), 77-93.

Dijkstra, K., Pieterse, M. E., & Pruyn, A. T. H. (2008). Individual differences

in reactions towards color in simulated healthcare environments: The

role of stimulus screening ability. Journal of Environmental

Psychology, 28(3), 268-277.

Dittmar, H. (1992). The Social Psychology of Material Possessions: to have is

to be. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Dolich, I. J. (1969). Congruence relationships between self images and

product brands. Journal of Marketing Research, 6(1), 80-80.

Donoghue, S. (2000). Projective techniques in consumer research. Journal of

Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences, 28, 47-53.

Donovan, R. J., Rossiter, J. R., Marcoolyn, G., & Nesdale, A. (1994). Store

atmosphere and purchasing behavior. Journal of Retailing, 70(3), 283-

294.

Donthu, N., & Yoo, B. (1998). Cultural influences on service quality

expectations. Journal of Service Research, 1(2), 178-186.

Doyle, P. B., & Gidengil, B. Z. (1977). A review of in-store experiments.

Journal of Retailing, 53(2), 47-62.

Dudey, M. (1990). Competition by choice: The effect of consumer search on

firm location decisions. The American Economic Review, 80(5), 1092-

1104.

Edvardsson, B., & Enquist, B. (2011). The service excellence and innovation

model: lessons from IKEA and other service frontiers. Total Quality

Management & Business Excellence, 22(5), 535-551.

Edwards, J. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior

research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior

and Human Decision Processes, 58(1), 51-100.

Edwards, J. R. (2002). Alternatives to difference scores: Polynomial

regression analysis and response surface methodology. In F. Drasgow

& N. Schmitt (Eds.), Measuring and Analyzing Behavior in

Organizations : Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis (Vol.

xxvi, pp. 350-400). San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass.

Edwards, J. R. (2007). Polynomial regression and response surface

methodology. In C. Ostroff & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Perspectives on

321

Organizational Fit (pp. 361-372). New York ; London: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Edwards, J. R., & Cable, D. M. (2009). The value of value congruence.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 654-677.

Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression

equations as an alternative to difference scores in organisational

research. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1577-1613.

Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (1999). Work and family stress and well-

being: An examination of person-environment fit in the work and

family domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, 77(2), 85-129.

Edwards, S., & Shackley, M. (1992). Measuring the effectiveness of retail

window display as an element of the marketing mix. International

Journal of Advertising, 11, 193-202.

Ekinci, Y., & Riley, M. (2003). An investigation of self-concept: actual and

ideal self-congruence compared in the context of service evaluation.

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10(4), 201-214.

Elliott, R. (1997). Existential consumption and irrational desire. European

Journal of Marketing, 31(3/4), 285-296.

Elliott, R., & Wattanasuwan, K. (1998). Consumption and the symbolic

project of the self. In B. G. Englis & A. Olofsson (Eds.), European

Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. 3, pp. 17-20). Provo, UT:

Association for Consumer Research.

Elsbach, K. D. (2003). Relating physical environment to self-categorizations:

Identity threat and affirmation in a non-territorial office space.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(4), 622-654.

Ennis, R., & Zanna, M. P. (1993). Attitudes, advertising, and automobiles: A

functional approach. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 662-666.

Epstein, S. (1973). The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory.

American Psychologist, 28(5), 404-416.

Epstein, S. (1985). The implications of cognitive-experiential self-theory for

research in social psychology and personality. Journal for the theory of

social behaviour, 15(3), 283-310.

Epstein, S. (1989). Values from the perspective of cognitive-experiential self-

theory. In N. Eisenberg, J. Reykowski & E. Staub (Eds.), Social and

322

Moral Values: Individual and Societal Perspectives (pp. 3-22).

Hillsdale, New Jersey Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ericksen, M. K., & Sirgy, M. J. (1992). Employed females' clothing

preference, self-Image congruence, and career anchorage. Journal of

Applied Social Psychology, 22(5), 408-422.

Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K., & Barr, T. F. (2005). Perceived retail crowding

and shopping satisfaction: the role of shopping values. Journal of

Business Research, 58(8), 1146-1153.

Eroglu, S. A., & Machleit, K. A. (1990). An empricial examination of retail

crowding: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Retailing, 66(2),

201-221.

Eroglu, S. A., Machleit, K. A., & Chebat, J.-C. (2005). The interaction of

retail density and music tempo: Effects on shopper responses.

Psychology and Marketing, 22(7), 577-589.

Escalas, Jennifer E., & Bettman, James R. (2005). Self-construal, reference

groups, and brand meaning. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3),

378-389.

Everett, P. B., Pieters, R. G. M., & Titus, P. A. (1994). The consumer-

environment interaction: An introduction to the special issue.

International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11(2), 97-105.

Feather, N. T. (1995). Values, valences, and choice: The influence of values

on the perceived attractiveness and choice of alternatives. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1135-1151.

Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2002). Kelly: Psychology of Personal Constructs. In J.

Feist & G. J. Feist (Eds.), Theories of Personality (5th ed., pp. 551).

Sydney: The Mc-Graw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Finegan, J. E. (2000). The impact of person and organizational values on

organizational commitment. Journal of Occupational & Organizational

Psychology, 73(2), 149-169.

Fishbein, M. (1963). An investigation of the relationships between beliefs

about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations,

16(3), 233-239.

Fishbein, M. (1967). A behavior theory approach to the relations between

beliefs about an object and the attitude toward the object. In M.

Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement (pp. 389-

400). New York: John Wiley.

323

Fishburn, P. C. (1970). Utility Theory for Decision Making. VA: Research

Analysis Corp Mclean.

Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and

refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological

Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 7(3),

286-299.

Fox, J. (1991). Regression Diagnostics. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Fransella, F. (Ed.). (2003). International Handbook of Personal Construct

Psychology. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Fransella, F., Bell, R., & Bannister, D. (2004). A Manual for Repertory Grid

Technique (2nd ed.). West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Friedmann, R. (1986). Psychological meaning of products: Identification and

marketing applications. Psychology & Marketing, 3(1), 1-15.

Gagnon, J. P., & Osterhaus, J. T. (1985). Resarch note: effectiveness of floor

displays on the sales of retail products. Journal of Retailing, 61(1), 104-

116.

Gecas, V. (1982). The self-concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 8(August),

1-33.

Gecas, V. (2000). Value identities, self-motives, and social movements. In S.

Stryker, T. J. Owens & R. W. White (Eds.), Self, Identity, and Social

Movements (Vol. 13, pp. 370). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota

Press.

Gengler, C. E., Klenosky, D. B., & Mulvey, M. S. (1995). Improving the

graphic representation of means-end results. International Journal of

Research in Marketing, 12(3), 245-256.

Gilboa, S., & Rafaeli, A. (2003). Store environment, emotions and approach

behaviour: Applying environmental aesthetics to retailing. The

International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research,

13(2), 195-211.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face to Face Behaviour.

Garden City, New York: Anchor Books.

Goizueta, R. S. (2004). The symbolic realism of U.S. latino/a popular

catholicism. Theological Studies, 65, 255-274.

324

Goldsmith, R. E. (2002). Explaining and predicting consumer intention to

purchase over the Internet: An exploratory study. Journal of Marketing

Theory and Practice, 10(2), 22-28.

Graeff, T. R. (1996a). Image congruence effects on product evaluations: The

role of self-monitoring and public/private consumption. Psychology &

Marketing, 13(5), 481-500.

Graeff, T. R. (1996b). Using promotional messages to manage the effects of

brand and self-image on brand evaluations. Journal of Consumer

Marketing, 13(3), 4-18.

Grayson, K., & Martinec, R. (2004). Consumer perceptions of iconicity and

indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market

offerings. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 296-312.

Grewal, D., Gopalkrisnan, R. I., Gotlieb, J., & Levy, M. (2007). Developing a

deeper understanding of post-purchase perceived risk and behavioural

intentions in a servicesetting. Journal of the Academy of Marketing

Science, 35(2), 250-258.

Griffith, D. A., & Myers, M. B. (2005). The performance implications of

strategic fit of relational norm governance strategies in global supply

chain relationships. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(3),

254-254-269.

Grönroos, C. (1982). An applied service marketing theory. European Journal

of Marketing, 16(7), 30-41.

Grossbart, S., Hampton, R., Rammohan, B., & Lapidus, R. S. (1990).

Environmental dispositions and customer response to store

atmospherics. Journal of Business Research, 21(3), 225-241.

Grossbart, S., Mittelstaedt, R. A., Curtis, W. W., & Rogers, R. D. (1975).

Environmental sensitivity and shopping behavior. Journal of Business

Research, 3(4), 281-294.

Grubb, E. L. (1965). Consumer perception of 'self-concept' and its relation to

brand choice of selected product types. In S. D. Bennett (Ed.),

Marketing and Economic Development (pp. 419-424). Chicago:

American Marketing Association.

Grubb, E. L., & Grathwohl, H. (1967). Consumer self-concept, symbolism and

market behavior: A theoretical approach. Journal of Marketing, 31(4),

22-27.

Grubb, E. L., & Stern, B. L. (1971). Self-concept and significant others.

Journal of Marketing Research, 8(3), 382-385.

325

Grunert, K. G., & Grunert, S. C. (1995). Measuring subjective meaning

structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and

methodological problems. International Journal of Research in

Marketing, 12(3), 209-225.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Paradigmatic controversies,

contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.

Lincoln (Eds.), The Landscape of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp.

255-286). Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications.

Guthrie, E. R. (1952). The Psychology of Learning. Oxford, England: Harper.

Gutman, J. (1982). A means-end chain model based on consumer

categorization processes. Journal of Marketing, 46(2), 60-72.

Gutman, J. (1991). Exploring the nature of linkages between consequences

and values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 143-148.

Gutman, J. (1997). Means-end chains as goal hierarchies. Psychology &

Marketing, 14(6), 545-516.

Hair, J. F. J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L.

(2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Australia Pearson

Education Australia PTY, Limited.

Halstead, D. (1999). The use of comparison standards in customer satisfaction

research and management: A review and proposed typology. Journal of

Marketing Theory and Practice, 7(3), 13-26.

Halton, E., & Rumbo, J. D. (2007). Membrane of the self: Marketing,

boundaries, and the consumer-incorporated self. Research in Consumer

Behavior, 11, 297-318.

Harrell, G. D., Hutt, M. D., & Anderson, J. C. (1980). Path analysis of buyer

behavior under conditions of crowding. Journal of Marketing Research

17(1), 45-51.

Harris, E. G., & Fleming, D. E. (2005). Assessing the human element in

service personality formation: Personality congruency and the Five

Factor Model. Journal of Services Marketing, 19(4), 187-198.

Harris, L. C., & Ezeh, C. (2008). Servicescape and loyalty intentions: an

empirical investigation. European Journal of Marketing, 42(3/4), 390-

422.

Hattie, J. (1992). Self-Concept. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Publishers.

326

Heckman, M. A., Sherry, K., & De Mejia, E. G. (2010). Energy Drinks: An

Assessment of Their Market Size, Consumer Demographics, Ingredient

Profile, Functionality, and Regulations in the United States.

Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 9(3), 303-

317.

Helgeson, J. G., & Supphellen, M. (2004). A conceptual and measurement

comparison of self-congruity and brand personality. International

Journal of Market Research, 46(2), 205-233.

Henry, P. (2002). Systematic variation in purchase orientations across social

class. Journal of Consumer Marketing 19(5), 424-438.

Herek, G. M. (1986). The instrumentality of attitudes: toward a neofunctional

theory. Journal of Social Issues, 42(2), 99-114.

Heskett, J. L., Jones, T. O., Loveman, G. W., Sasser Jr, W. E., & Schlesinger,

L. A. (1994). Putting the service-profit chain to work. Harvard

Business Review, 72(2), 164-170.

Hewitt, J. P. (2007). Self and Society: A Symbolic Interactionist Social

Psychology (10th ed.). Sydney: Pearson Education, Inc.

Hightower, R., Brady, M. K., & Baker, T. L. (2002). Investigating the role of

the physical environment in hedonic service consumption: An

exploratory study of sporting events. Journal of Business Research,

55(9), 697-707.

Hirsch, A. R. (1995). Effects of ambient odors on slot-machine usage in a Las

Vegas casino. Psychology and Marketing, 12(7), 585-594.

Hirschman, E. C. (1980). Attributes of attributes and layers of meaning.

Advances in Consumer Research, 7, 7-12.

Hitlin, S. (2003). Values as the core of personal identity: Drawing links

between two theories of self. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66 (2), 118-

137.

Holahan, C. J. (1986). Environmental psychology. Annual Review of

Psychology, 37, 381-407.

Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of

consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of

Consumer Research, 9(1), 132-140.

Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (2000). The Self We Live By: Narrative

Identity in a Postmodern World. New York: Oxford University Press,

Inc.

327

Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities.

Reading, Massachusetts: Addision-Wesley.

Holt, D. B. (1997). Poststructuralist lifestyle analysis: Conceptualizing the

social patterning of consumption in postmodernity. Journal of


Holt, D. B., & Thompson, C. J. (2004). Man-of-action heroes: The pursuit of

heroic masculinity in everyday consumption. Journal of Consumer

Research, 31(2), 425-440.

Hong, J. W., & Zinkhan, G. W. (1995). Self-concept and advertising

effectiveness: the influence of congruency, conspicuousness, and

response mode. Psychology and Marketing, 12 (1), 53-77.

Hopkinson, G. C., & Pujari, D. (1999). A factor analytic study of the sources

of meaning in hedonic consumption. European Journal of Marketing,

33(3/4), 273 - 294.

Horton, F. E. (1968). Location factors as determinants of consumer attraction

to retail firms. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,

58(4), 787-801.

Howard, J. A. (1995). Social cognition. In K. Cook, G. A. Fine & J. S. House

(Eds.), Sociological Perspectives on Social Psychology (pp. 90-117).

Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Huang, W.-H. (2008). The impact of other-customer failure on service

satisfaction. Journal of Service Management, 19(4 ), 521-536.

Huber, F., Vollhardt, K., Matthes, I., & Vogel, J. (2010). Brand misconduct:

Consequences on consumer–brand relationships. Journal of Business

Research, 63(11), 1113-1120.

Hudson, R. (1974). Images of the retailing environment: An example of the

use of the repertory grid methodology. Environment and Behavior,

6(4), 470-494.

Hui, M. K., & Bateson, J. E. G. (1991). Perceived control and the effects of

crowding and consumer choice on the service experience. Journal of


Hunt, S. D. (1992). For reason and realism in marketing. Journal of

Marketing, 56(2), 89-102.

Ibrahim, H., & Najjar, F. (2008). Assessing the effects of self-congruity,

attitudes and customer satisfaction on customer behavioural intentions

328

in retail environment. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26(2), 207-

227.

Ittner, C. D., & Larcker, D. F. (1998). Are nonfinancial measures leading

indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer

satisfaction. Journal of Accounting Research, 36(Suppl.), 1-35.

Jamal, A. (2004). Retail banking and customer behaviour: A study of self-

concept, satisfaction and technology usage. the International Review of

Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 14(3), 357-379.

Jamal, A., & Al-Marri, M. (2007). Exploring the effect of self-image

congruence and brand preference on satisfaction: the role of expertise.

Journal of Marketing Management, 23(7/8), 613-629.

Jamal, A., & Goode, M. (2001). Consumers and brands: A study of the impact

of self-image congruence on brand preference and satisfaction.

Marketing Intelligence and Planning 19(7), 482-492.

Jang, S., & Namkung, Y. (2009). Perceived quality, emotions, and behavioral

intentions: Application of an extended Mehrabian–Russell model to

restaurants. Journal of Business Research, 62(4), 451-460.

Jankowicz, D. (2004). The Easy Guide to Repertory Grids. West Sussex,

England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Kahle, L. R. (Ed.). (1983). Social Values and Social Change: Adaptation to

Life in America. N.Y.: Pracger.

Kahle, L. R. (Ed.). (1996). Social Values and Consumer Behavior: Research

from the List of Values, Vol. 8. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates,.

Kahle, L. R., Beatty, S. E., & Homer, P. (1986). Alternative measurement

approaches to consumer values: The list of values (LOV) and values

and life style (VALS). Journal of Consumer Research, 13(3), 405-409.

Kahle, L. R., Rose, G., & Shoham, A. (2000). Findings of LOV throughout the

world, and other evidence of cross-national consumer psychographics:

Introduction. Journal of Euromarketing, 8(1-2), 1-13.

Kalliath, T. J., Bluedorn, A. C., & Strube, M. J. (1999). A test of value

congruence effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(7), 1175-

1198.

Kamakura, W. A., Mittal, V., De Rosa, F., & Mazzon, J. A. (2002). Assessing

the service-profit chain. Marketing Science, 21(3), 294-317.

329

Kamakura, W. A., & Novak, T. P. (1992). Value-system segmentation:

Exploring the meaning of LOV. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(1),

119-132

Kasper, H., Helsdingen, P. V., & Gabbott, M. (2006). Services Marketing

Management - A Strategic Perspective (2nd ed.). England: John Wiley

& Sons Ltd.

Kassarjian, H. H. (1977). Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of


Kassarjian, H. H., & Sheffet, M. J. (1991). Personality and consumer

behavior: An update. In H. H. Kassarjian & Robertson (Eds.),

Perspective in Consumer Behavior (pp. 281-303). Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kaya, N., & Epps, H. H. (2004). Relationship between color and emotion:A

study of college students. College Student Journal, 38(3), 396-405.

Kelly, G. A. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York:

Routledge.

Kelly, G. A. (1969). The language of hypothesis: man's psychological

instrument. In B. Maher (Ed.), Clinical Psychology and Personality:

The Selected Papers of George Kelly. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Kelly, G. A. (1991). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York:

Routledge.

Kelly, G. A. (2003). A brief introduction to Personal Construct Theory. In F.

Fransella (Ed.), International Handbook of Personal Construct

Psychology. Chichester, England ; Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley & Sons.

Kerlinger, F. H. (1964 ). Foundations of Behavioral Research: Educational

and Psychological Inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Kleine III, R. E., Kleine, S. S., & Kernan, J. B. (1993). Mundane consumption

and the self: A social-identiity perspective. Journal of Consumer

Psychology, 2(3), 209-235.

Knez, I. (2001). Effects of colour of light on nonvisual psychological

processes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(2), 201-208.

Knippenberg, D. v., Knippenberg, B. v., Cremer, D. D., & Hogg, M. A.

(2004). Leadership, self, and identity: A review and research agenda.

The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 825-856.

330

Kotler, P. (1973). Atomospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of Retailing,

49(4), 48-64.

Kozinets, Robert V. (2001). Utopian enterprise: Articulating the meanings of

star trek‘s culture of consumption. Journal of Consumer Research,

28(1), 67-88.

Kozinets, Robert V., & Handelman, J. M. (2004). Adversaries of

consumption: Consumer movements, activism, and ideology. Journal

of Consumer Research, 31(3), 691-704.

Kozinets, Robert V., Sherry, J. F. J., Storm, D., Duhachek, A., Nuttavuthisit,

K., Deberry-Spence, B., & eaucte. (2004). Ludic agency and retail

spectacle. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 658-672.

Kressmann, F., Sirgy, M. J., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., Huber, S., & Lee, D.-J.

(2006). Direct and indirect effects of self-image congruence on brand

loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 59(9), 955-964.

Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its

Methodology (2nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005).

Consequences of individuals' fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-

job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit.

Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281-342.

Kucukemiroglu, O. (1999). Market segmentation by using consumer lifestyle

dimensions and ethnocentrism: An empirical study. European Journal

of Marketing, 33(5/6), 470-487.

Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten

thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65-100.

Leather, P., Beale, D., Santos, A., Watts, J., & Lee, L. (2003). Outcomes of

environmental appraisal of different hospital waiting areas.

Environment and Behavior, 35(6), 842-869.

Lee, N., & Lings, I. (2008). Doing Business Research: A Guide to Theory and

Practice London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Lehrner, J., Eckersberger, C., Walla, P., Pötsch, G., & Deecke, L. (2000).

Ambient odor of orange in a dental office reduces anxiety and improves

mood in female patients. Physiology and Behavior, 71(1-2), 83-86.

Leigh, J. H., & Gabel, T. G. (1992). Symbolic Interactionism: Its effects on

consumer behavior and implications for marketing strategy. Journal of

Services Marketing, 6(3), 5-16.

331

Leigh, T. W., Peters, C., & Shelton, J. (2006). The consumer quest for

authenticity: The multiplicity of meanings within the MG subculture of

consumption. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(4),

481-493.

Levy, S. J. (1999). Symbols for sale (1959). In D. W. Rook (Ed.), Brands,

Consumers, Symbols, and Research (pp. 203-212). Thousand Oaks,

Calif: Sage Publications.

Lewis, B. R. (1991). Service quality: An international comparison of bank

customers' expectations and perceptions. Journal of Marketing

Management, 7(1), 47-62.

Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical Analysis with Missing Data.

Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Livingston, S. (2003). Projective techniques uncover real consumer attitudes.

Retrieved February 13, 2012 http://tlgonline.com/sharon/articles/1.asp

Loveman, G. W. (1998). Employee satisfaction, customer loyalty, and

financial performance. Journal of Service Research, 1(1), 18-31.

Maio, G. R. (2010). Mental representations of social values. In M. P. Zanna

(Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 42, pp. 1-43).

Burlington: Academic Press.

Malhotra, N. K. (1981). A scale to measure self-concepts, person concepts,

and product concepts. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(4), 456-464.

Malhotra, N. K. (1988). Self concept and product choice: an integrated

perspective. Journal of Economic Psychology, 9(1), 1-28.

Malhotra, N. K., Hall, Shaw, & Oppenheim. (2006). Marketing Research: An

Applied Orientation. Frenchs Forest, N.S.W.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(2), 63-78.

Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social

psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337.

Marsden, D., & Littler, D. (2000a). Exploring consumer product construct

systems with the repertory grid technique. Qualitative Market

Research: An International Journal, 3(3), 127-144

Marsden, D., & Littler, D. (2000b). Repertory grid technique – An interpretive

research framework. European Journal of Marketing, 34(7), 816-834.

http://tlgonline.com/sharon/articles/1.asp

332

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research (4th

ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper &

Row.

Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative Researching. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Publiscations Ltd.

Mattila, A. S., & Wirtz, J. (2001). Congruency of scent and music as a driver

of in-store evaluations and behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 273-

289.

McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W., & Koenig, H. F. (2002). Building brand

community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1), 38-54.

McCarthy, J. D., & Hoge, D. R. (1984). The dynamics of self-esteem and

delinquency. American Journal of Sociology, 90(2), 396-410.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of

personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81-90.

McGrath, M. A. (1998). Dream on: projections of an ideal servicescape. In J.

F. J. Sherry (Ed.), Servicescapes: The Concept of Place in

Contemporary Markets. Chicago: NTC Business Books.

Mehrabian, A. (1977). Individual differences in stimulus screening and

arousability. Journal of Personality, 45(2), 237-250.

Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental

Psychology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Miller, W. L., & Crabtree, B. F. (2004). Depth interviewing. In S. N. Hesse-

Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to Qualitative Research: A

Reader on Theory and Practice New York: Oxford University Press,

Inc

Milliman, R. E. (1982). Using background music to affect the behavior of

supermarket shoppers. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 86-91.

Mindak, W. A. (1961). Fitting the semantic differential to the marketing

problem. Journal of Marketing, 25(4), 28-33.

Mitchell, T. R. (1985). An evaluation of the validity of correlational research

conducted in organisations. Academy of Management Review, 10(2),

192-205.

333

Mittal, V., & Kamakura, W. A. (2001). Satisfaction, repurchase intent, and

repurchase behavior: Investigating the moderating effect of customer

characteristics. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(1), 131-142.

Muñiz Jr, A. M., & Schau, H. J. (2005). Religiosity in the abandoned apple

newton brand community. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 737-

747.

Naoi, T., Airey, D., Iijima, S., & Niininen, O. (2006). Visitors‘ evaluation of

an historical district: Repertory Grid Analysis and Laddering Analysis

with photographs. Tourism Management, 27(3), 420-436.

Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling

Procedures:Issues and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Newman, A. J. (2007). Uncovering dimensionality in the servicescape:

Towards legibility. The Service Industries Journal, 27(1), 15-28.

Nguyen, N. (2006). The collective impact of service workers and servicescape

on the corporate image formation. International Journal of Hospitality

Management, 25(2), 227-244.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-

Hill.

O'Cass, A., & Grace, D. (2008). Understanding the role of retail store service

in light of self-image–store image congruence. Psychology and

Marketing, 25(6), 521-537.

O'Cass, A., & McEwen, H. (2004). Exploring consumer status and

conspicuous consumption. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(1), 25-

39.

O‘Shaughnessy, J., & O‘Shaughnessy, N. J. (2002). Marketing, the consumer

society and hedonism. European Journal of Marketing, 36(5/6), 524 -

547.

Oldenburg, R. (1999). The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops,

Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a

Community. New York: Marlowe & Company.

Olson, J. C., & Reynolds, T. J. (1983). Understanding consumers' cognitive

structures: Implications for advertising strategy. In L. Percy & A.

Woodside (Eds.), Advertising and Consumer Psychology (Vol. I).

Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

334

Oppewal, H., & Timmermans, H. (1999). Modeling consumer perception of

public space in shopping centers. Environment and Behavior, 31(1), 45-

65.

Orth, U. R., McDaniel, M., Shellhammer, T., & Lopetcharat, K. (2004).

Promoting brand benefits: The role of consumer psychographics and

lifestyle. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 21(2), 97-108.

Ownbey, K. L., Davis, K., & Sundel, H. H. (1994). The effect of location

variables on the gross rents of neighborhood shopping centers. Journal

of Real Estate Research, 9(1), 111-123.

Pan, Y., & Siemens, J. C. (2011). The differential effects of retail density: An

investigation of goods versus service settings. Journal of Business

Research, 64(2), 105-112.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model

of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of

Marketing, 49(4), 41-51.

Parish, J. T., Berry, L. L., & Lam, S. Y. (2008). The effect of the servicescape

on service workers. Journal of Service Research, 10(3), 220-238.

Patterson, P. G., & Smith, T. (2003). A cross-cultural study of switching

barriers and propensity to stay with service providers. Journal of

Retailing, 79(2), 107-120.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Peter, J. P. (1981). Construct validity: A review of basic issues and marketing

practices. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(2), 133-145.

Piacentini, M., & Mailer, G. (2004). Symbolic consumption in teenagers'

clothing choices. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3(3), 251-262.

Pinto, M. B., & Leonidas, L. (1994). The impact of office characteristics on

satisfaction with medical care: a "before and after" analysis. Health

Marketing Quarterly, 12 (2), 43-54.

Pitts, R. E., & Woodside, A. G. (1991). Special issue: Examining the structure

of personal values and consumer decision making. Journal of Business

Research, 22(2), 91-93.

Purkey, W. W. (1970). Self Concept and School Achievement. Englewood-

Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall, Inc.

335

Rafaeli, A., & Vilnai-Yavetz, I. (2004). Emotion as a connection of physical

artifacts and organizations. Organization Science, 15(6), 671-686.

Rao, S., & Perry, C. (2003). Convergent interviewing to build a theory in

under-researched areas: principles and an example investigation of

Internet usage in inter-firm relationships. Qualitative Market Research:

An International Journal, 6(4), 236 -247.

Rapoport, A. (1990). The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal

Communication Approach (2nd ed.). Tucson: The University of

Arizona Press.

Reed II, A. (2002). Social identity as a useful perspective for self-concept-

based consumer research. Psychology & Marketing, 19(3), 235-266.

Reed II, A. (2004). Activating the self-importance of consumer selves:

Exploring identity salience effects on judgments. Journal of Consumer

Research, 31(2), 286-295.

Reimer, A., & Kuehn, R. (2005). The impact of servicescape on quality

perception. European Journal of Marketing, 39(7/8), 785-808.

Reise, S. P., Waller, N. G., & Comrey, A. L. (2000). Factor analysis and scale

revision. Psychological Assessment, 12(3), 287-297.

Reynolds, N., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1998). The effect of pretest method on

error detection rates. European Journal of Marketing, 32(5/6), 480-498.

Reynolds, T. J., Gengler, C. E., & Howard, D. J. (1995). A means-end analysis

of brand persuasion through advertising. International Journal of

Research in Marketing, 12(3), 257-266.

Reynolds, T. J., & Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis and

interpprtation. Journal of Advertising Research, 28(1), 11-31.

Richins, M. L. (1994). Valuing things: The public and private meanings of

possessions. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), 504-521.

Rochberg-Halton, E. (1984). Object relations, role models, and cultivation of

the self. Environment and Behavior, 16(3), 335-368.

Rokeach, M. (1968). The role of values in public opinion research. The Public

Opinion Quarterly, 32(4), 547-559.

Rokeach, M. (1973). The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.

Rokeach, M. (1979). Understanding Human Values. New York: The Free

Press.

336

Roos, A., & Hugosson, M. (2008). Consumer preferences for wooden and

laminate flooring. Wood Material Science & Engineering, 3(1-2), 29-

37.

Rose, G. M., & Orr, L. M. (2007). Measuring and exploring symbolic money

meanings. Psychology & Marketing, 24(9), 743-761.

Rosenbaum, M. S. (2005). The symbolic servicescape: Your kind is welcomed

here. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(4), 257-267.

Rosenbaum, M. S. (2009). Restorative servicescapes: restoring directed

attention in thrid places. Journal of Service Management, 20(2), 173-

191.

Rosenbaum, M. S., & Massiah, C. (2011). An expanded servicescape

perspective. Journal of Service Management, 22(4), 471-490.

Rosenbaum, M. S., & Montoya, D. Y. (2007). Am I welcome here? Exploring

how ethnic consumers assess their place identity. Journal of Business

Research, 60(3), 206-214.

Rosenbaum, M. S., Ward, J., Walker, B. A., & Ostrom, A. L. (2007). A cup of

coffee with a dash of love: An investigation of commercial social

support and third-place attachment. Journal of Service Research, 10(1),

43-59.

Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the Self. Malabar, Fla.: R.E. Krieger.

Rowe, D. (1996). The importance of Personal Construct Theory. In B. M.

Walker, J. Costigan, L. L. Viney & B. Warren (Eds.), Personal

Construct Theory: A Psycholog for the Future (pp. 9-23). Townsville,

QLD.: The Australian Psychological Society Ltd.

Rucci, A. J., Kirn, S. P., & Quinn, R. T. (1998). The employee-customer-profit

chain at Sears. Harvard Business Review, 76(1), 82-97.

Russell, J. A., & Mehrabian, A. (1978). Approach-avoidance and affiliation as

functions of the emotion-eliciting quality of an environment.

Environment and Behavior, 10(3), 355-387.

Sampson, P. (1972). Using the repertory grid test. Journal of Marketing

Research, 9(1), 78-81.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for

Business Students (4th ed.). Sydney: Pearson Education Limited.

Schlenker, B. R. (1982). Translating actions into attitudes: An identityanalytic

approach to the explanation of social conduct. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),

337

Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 193-247).

New York: Academic Press.

Schlesinger, L. A., & Heskett, J. L. (1991). The service-driven service

company. Harvard Business Review, 69(5), 71-81.

Schouten, J. W. (1991). Selves in transition: symbolic consumption in

personal rites of passage and identity reconstruction. Journal of


Schouten, J. W., & McAlexander, J. H. (1995). Subcultures of consumption:

An ethnography of the new bikers. Journal of Consumer Research,

22(1), 43-61.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values:

Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 Countries. Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1-65.

Schwartz, S. H. (1996). Value priorities and behavior: Applying a theory of

integrated value systems. The Psychology of Values, 8, 119-144.

Schwartz, S. H., & Bardi, A. (2001). Value hierarchies across cultures.

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(3), 268-290.

Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological

structure of human values. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 53(3), 550-562.

Shanock, L., Baran, B., Gentry, W., Pattison, S., & Heggestad, E. (2010).

Polynomial regression with response surface analysis: A powerful

approach for examining moderation and overcoming limitations of

difference scores. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(4), 543-554.

Sherry, J. F. J. (1998a). The soul of the company store: nike town chicago and

the emplaced brandscape. In J. F. J. Sherry (Ed.), Servicescapes: The

Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets (pp. 109-146). Chicago,

Illinois: NTC/Contemporary Publishing Company.

Sherry, J. F. J. (2000). Place, technology, and representation. Journal of


Sherry, J. F. J. (Ed.). (1998b). Servicescapes: The Concept of Place in

Contemporary Markets. Chicago: NTC Business Books.

Shostack, G. L. (1977). Breaking free from product marketing. Journal of

Marketing, 41(000002), 73-80.

338

Sigurdsson, V., Saevarsson, H., & Foxall, G. (2009). Brand placement and

consumer choice: an in-store experiment. Journal of Applied Behavior

Analysis, 42(3), 741-745.

Singleton, R. A., Jr., , & Straits, B. C. (2005). Approaches to Social Research

(5th ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Sirgy, M. J. (1979). Self-Concept in Consumer Behavior. Docotor of

Philosophy Ph.D., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: A critical review.

Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 287-300.

Sirgy, M. J. (1985). Using self-congruity and ideal congruity to predict

purchase motivation. Journal of Business Research, 13(3), 195-206.

Sirgy, M. J., & Danes, J. E. (1982). Self-image/product-image congruence

models: Testing selected models. Advances in Consumer Research, 9,

556-561.

Sirgy, M. J., Grewal, D., & Mangleburg, T. (2000). Retail environment, self-

congruity, and retail patronage: An integrative model and a research

agenda. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 127-138.

Sirgy, M. J., Grewal, D., Mangleburg, T. F., Park, J.-o., & et al. (1997).

Assessing the predictive validity of two methods of measuring self-

image congruence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. ,

25(3), 229-241.

Sirgy, M. J., Johar, J. S., Samli, A. C., & Claiborne, C. B. (1991). Self-

congruity versus functional congruity: Predictors of consumer behavior.

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19(4), 363-375.

Sirgy, M. J., & Su, C. (2000). Destination image, self-congruity, and travel

behavior: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Travel Research,

38(4), 340-352.

Smith, P., & Burns, D. J. (1996). Atmospherics and retail environments: the

case of the "power aisle". International Journal of Retail and

Distribution Management, 24, 7-14.

Solomon, M. R. (1983). The role of products as social stimuli: a symbolic

interactionism perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(3), 319-

329.

Solomon, M. R. (1985). Packaging the service provider. Service Industries

Journal, 5(1), 64-71.

339

Solomon, M. R. (1998). Dressing for the part: The role of costume in the

staging of the servicescape. In J. F. J. Sherry (Ed.), Servicescapes: The

Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets. Chicago: NTC Business

Books.

Solomon, M. R., & Assael, H. (1987). The forest or the trees?: A gestalt

approach to symbolic consumption. In J. Umiker-Sebeok (Ed.),

Marketing and Semiotics: New Directions in the Study of Signs for sale

(pp. 189-218). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter & Co.

Solomon, M. R., & Buchanan, B. (1991). A role-theoretic approach to product

symbolism: Mapping a consumption constellation. Journal of Business

Research, 22(2), 95-109.

Spencer, C. (1981). The new social psychology and its relation to

environmental psychology. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1(4),

329-336.

Stafford, J. E., & Enis, B. M. (1969). The price-quality relationship: An

extension. Journal of Marketing Research, 6(4), 456-458.

Stanton, J. L., & Lowenhar, J. A. (1974). A congruence model of brand

preference: A theoretical and empirical study. Journal of Marketing

Research, 11(000004), 427-433.

Steinman, R., & Karpinski, A. (2009). The breadth-based adjective rating task

(BART) in consumer behavior. Marketing Letters, 20(4), 327-335.

Stern, B. L., Bush, R. F., & Hair, J. F., Jr. (1977). The self-image/store image

matching process: An empirical test. The Journal of Business, 50(1),

63-69.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded

Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Publications.

Strong, C. (1999). The self. In M. Solomon, G. Bamossy & S. Askegaard

(Eds.), Consumer behaviour: A European perspective. Essex, England:

Pearson Education Limited.

Stryker, S. (2000). Identity competition: Key to differential social movement

participation? . In S. Stryker, T. J. Owens & R. W. White (Eds.), Self,

Identity, and Social Movements (Vol. 13, pp. 370). Minneapolis:

University of Minnesota Press.

Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York:

Norton.

340

Summers, T. A., Belleau, B. D., & Xu, Y. (2006). Predicting purchase

intention of a controversial luxury apparel product. Journal of Fashion

Marketing & Management, 10(4), 405-419.

Sundstrom, E. (1986). Work Places: The Psychology of the Physical

Environment in Offices and Factories. New York Cambridge

University Press.

Sundstrom, E. (1991). Work environments: Offices and factories In D. Stokols

& I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Psychology (Vol. 1).

Malabar, Flordia: Keieger Publishing Company.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics.

Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.

Tedeschi, J. T. (1986). Private and public experiences of the self. In R.

Baumeister (Ed.), Public Self and Private Self (pp. 1-20). New York:

Springer-Verlag.

Thang, D. C. L., & Tan, B. L. B. (2003). Linking consumer perception to

preference of retail stores: an empirical assessment of the multi-

attributes of store image. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,

10(4), 193-200.

Tharenou, P., Donohue, R., & Cooper, B. (2007). Management Research

Methods. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.

Thompson, C. J., & Hirschman, E. C. (1995). Understanding the socialized

body: A poststructuralist analysis of consumers' self-conceptions, body

images, and self-care practices. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(2),

139-153.

Thompson, S. C. (1981). Will it hurt less if I can control it? A complex answer

to a simple question. Psychological Bulletin, 90(1), 89-101.

Titus, P. A., & Everett, P. B. (1995). The consumer retail search process: A

conceptual model and research agenda. Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science, 23(2), 106-119.

Tombs, A., & McColl-Kennedy, J. R. (2003). Social-servicescape conceptual

model. Marketing Theory, 3(4), 447-475.

Turley, L. W., & Chebat, J.-C. (2002). Linking retail strategy, atmospheric

design and shopping behaviour. Journal of Marketing Management,

18(1-2), 125-144.

341

Turley, L. W., & Milliman, R. E. (2000). Atmospheric effects on shopping

behavior: A review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business

Research, 49(2), 193-211.

Turner, R. H. (Ed.). (1968). The self-conception in social interaction. NY:

Wiley.

Upah, G. D., & Fulton, J. N. (1985). Situation creation in services marketing.

In J. Czepiel, M. Solomon & C. Surprenant (Eds.), The Service

Encounter (pp. 255-264). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Usunier, J.-C., & Lee, J. A. (2005). Marketing Across Cultures (4th ed.).

Sydney: Pearson Eduation Limited.

van Rompay, T. J. L., Galetzka, M., Pruyn, A. T. H., & Garcia, J. M. (2008).

Human and spatial dimensions of retail density: Revisiting the role of

perceived control. Psychology & Marketing, 25(4), 319-335.

Vandell, K. D., & Carter, C. C. (1993). Retail store location and market

analysis:a review of the research. Journal of Real Estate Literature, 1,

13-45.

Verhoeven, J. W. M., van Rompay, T. J. L., & Pruyn, A. T. H. (2009). The

price facade: Symbolic and behavioral price cues in service

environments. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(4),

604-611.

Vigneron, F., & Johnson, L. W. (1999). A review and a conceptual framework

of prestige-seeking consumer behavior. Academy of Marketing Science

Review, 1999(1), 1-15.

Vinagre, M. H., & Neves, J. (2008). The influence of service quality and

patients' emotions on satisfaction. International Journal of Health Care

Quality Assurance, 21(1), 87-103.

Vinson, D. E., Scott, J. E., & Lamont, L. R. (1977). The role of personal

values in marketing and consumer behaviour. Journal of Marketing,

41(000002), 44-50.

Vogt, W. P. (2011). Sage Quantitative Research Methods. SAGE Publications,

Inc. Thousand Oaks, USA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Wade-Benzoni, K. A., Hoffman, A. J., Thompson, L. L., Moore, D. A.,

Gillespie, l. I., & Bazerman, M. H. (2002). Barriers to resolution in

ideologically based negotiations: The role of values and institutions.

Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 41-57.

342

Wakefield, K. L., & Blodgett, J. G. (1996). The effect of the servicescape on

customers‘ behavioral intentions in leisure service settings. Journal of

Services Marketing, 10(6), 45-61.

Wakefield, K. L., & Blodgett, J. G. (1999). Customer response to intangible

and tangible service factors. Psychology & Marketing, 16(1), 51 - 68.

Walch, J. M., Rabin, B. S., Day, R., Williams, J. N., Choi, K., & Kang, J. D.

(2005). The effects of sunlight on postoperative analgesic medication

use: A prospective study of patients undergoing spinal surgery.

Psychosomatic Medicine, 67, 156-163.

Wall, E. A., & Berry, L. L. (2007). The combined effects of the physical

environment and employee behavior on customer perception of

restaurant service quality. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 48(1), 59-69.

Ward, J. C., & Barnes, J. W. (2001). Control and affect: the influence of

feeling in control of the retail environment on affect, involvement,

attitude, and behavior. Journal of Business Research, 54(2), 139-144.

Ward, J. C., Bitner, M. J., & Barnes, J. (1992). Measuring the prototypicality

and meaning of retail environments. Journal of Retailing, 68(2), 194-

221.

Weishut, D. J. N. (1989). The Meaningfulness of the Distinction between

Instrument and Terminal Values. Master‘s thesis, Hebrew University of

Jerusalem, Israel.

Wheeler, S. C., Petty, R. E., & Bizer, G. Y. (2005). Self-schema matching and

attitude change: Situational and dispositional determinants of message

elaboration. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 787-797.

Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution. Academy

of Management Review, 14(4), 490-495.

Wilska, T.-A. (2002). Me- A consumer? consumption, identities and lifestyles

in today's Finland. Acta Sociologica, 45(3), 195-210.

Winsted, K. F. (1997). The service experience in two cultures: a behavioral

perspective. Journal of Retailing, 73(3), 337-360.

Wojciszke, B. (1989). The system of personal values and behavior. In N.

Eisenberg, J. Reykowski & E. Staub (Eds.), Social and Moral Values:

Individual and Societal Perspectives (pp. 229-251). Hillsdale, New

Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

343

Yammarino, F., & Atwater, L. (1997). Do managers see themselves as others

see them? Implications of self-other rating agreement for human

resources management. Organizational Dynamics, 25(4), 35-44.

Zanoli, R., & Naspetti, S. (2002). Consumer motivations in the purchase of

organic food: A means-end approach. British Food Journal, 104 (8),

643-653.

Zeithaml, V. A. (2000). Service quality, profitability, and the economic worth

of customers: What we know and what we need to learn. Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 67-85.

Zeithaml, V. A., & Bitner, M. J. (2003). Services marketing: Integrating

Cusotmer Focus Across the Firm (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). Problems and

strategies in services marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49(2), 33-46.

Zhang, J., & Bloemer, J. M. M. (2008). The impact of value congruence on

consumer-service brand relationships. Journal of Service Research,

11(2), 161-178.

Zikmund, W. G. (2003). Business Research Methods. Cincinnati, OH:

Thomson/South-Western.

Zikmund, W. G., Ward, S., Lowe, B., & Winzar, H. (2007). Marketing

Research. South Melbourne, Vic: Thomson Learning.

Zinkhan, G. M., & Biswas, A. (1988). Using the repertory grid to assess the

complexity of consumers' cognitive structures. Advances in Consumer

Research, 15(1), 493-497.

servicescape symbolism - eprints.qut.edu.au · servicescape symbolism a thesis submitted to the...

Documents