This article was downloaded by: [Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México] On: 13 June 2012, At: 18:46 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20 Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience: Results and Implications of an Empirical Investigation MİKE RİMMİNGTON a & ATİLA YÜKSEL b a School of Hotel and Restaurant Management, Oxford Brookes University, UK b Leisure Industries Research Centre, Sheffield Hallam University, Science Park Unit 1, S1 2LX, Sheffield, UK Available online: 26 Jul 2011 To cite this article: MİKE RİMMİNGTON & ATİLA YÜKSEL (1998): Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience: Results and Implications of an Empirical Investigation, Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 9:1, 37-57 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.1998.9686958 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms- and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
Transcript
This article was downloaded by: [Universidad Autónoma del Estado deMéxico]On: 13 June 2012, At: 18:46Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Anatolia: An InternationalJournal of Tourism andHospitality ResearchPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20
Tourist Satisfaction andFood Service Experience:Results and Implications of anEmpirical InvestigationMİKE RİMMİNGTON a & ATİLA YÜKSEL b
a School of Hotel and Restaurant Management,Oxford Brookes University, UKb Leisure Industries Research Centre, SheffieldHallam University, Science Park Unit 1, S1 2LX,Sheffield, UK
Available online: 26 Jul 2011
To cite this article: MİKE RİMMİNGTON & ATİLA YÜKSEL (1998): Tourist Satisfactionand Food Service Experience: Results and Implications of an Empirical Investigation,Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 9:1, 37-57
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.1998.9686958
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up todate. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should beindependently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liablefor any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damageswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith or arising out of the use of this material.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Anatolla: An lntemational Journal of lwrlwn and Hospltdlty Rexarch Vdume 9. Number 1. pp. 37-57. 1998
Copyright 0 1998 anatolla hinted in Turkey. All rights resewed
1300-4220/98 $20.00 + 0.00
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience: Results and Implications
of an Empirical Investigation
MiKE RiMMiNGTON School of Hotel and Restaurant Management, Oxford Brookes Unlverslty UK
ATilA YuKSEL Leisure IndusMes Research Centre
Shemeld Hallam University. Science Park Unit I . S I 2 M Shemeld
UK.
ABSTRACT
The main aim of this study is to ascertain causes of tourist dis/satisfaction and specifically to in- vestigate whether the food service experience holds any significant effect in determining satis- faction and behavioural intentions. Touristsi perceptions of the facilities and services that they have experienced are assessed in order to determine what brings satisfaction, intention to rec- ommend and intention to return. What impacts on dissatisfaction is also investigated. The results indicated that holiday satisfaction is a multifaceted concept consisting of 16 dimensions. The re- sults further revealed that the food service experience is a critical factor which is salient in its po- tential to cause both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. The study concludes that the food service experience represents both a threat and an opportunity for destination managers as it has the ca- pability of promoting as well as damaging a destinationis image.
Key words: tourist satisfaction, food service experience, performance, critical factors
Atila Yiiksel (contact author) is a research assistant in Adnan Menders University in Turkey and is currently pursuing his Ph.D at Sheffield Hallam University, UK. He holds a Masteris in Tourism Management received from the University of Wales, Cardiff, UK. His major research interests focus upon tourist satisfaction, quality improvement at food and beverage facilities and destination management. Address correspondence to: Leisure Industries Research Centre, Science Park Unit 1, S12LX Sheffield, UK.
Mike Rimmington, MBA (Hospitality), is a Course Director, School of Hotel and Restaurant Management, Oxford Brookes University, UK
The authors gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Dr Sheela Agarwal and Fisun i Yiiksel, Sheffield Hallam Universitv Introduction
Volume 9 0 Number 1 0 Summer 1998 0 37
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Lxperience
INTRODUCTION The concept of customer satisfaction is essential to the effective delivery of services. Successful application of this concept may potentially give com- petitive advantage through generating benefits such as differentiation, in- creased customer retention and a positive word-of-mouth recommendation (Yiiksel and Rimmington 1997). In an increasingly competitive business en- vironment, the concept of customer satisfaction represents a vital ingredient in the recipe for success since it acts as a critical factor in achieving a differential advantage over competitors.Assae1 (1987:47), for instance, states that isatisfaction reinforces positive attitudes toward a brand, leading to a greater likelihood that the same brand will be purchased again "dissatisfaction creates a negative attitude toward a brand and lessens the likelihood of buying the same brand again". Correspondingly, Pearce (1988) stresses that, depending on the degree of their &/satisfaction, tourists may either return, recommend a destination to other tourists, or may not return and express negative com- ments and damage the reputation of the destination. In parallel with Pearceis comments, Maddox (1985:2) suggests that destination managers need to focus on providing high quality tourist experiences as ithe consequences of cus- tomer dissatisfaction can be sudden and harsh'.
It appears that the sigruficance of tourist satisfaction in generating return business and creating positive word-of-mouth recommendations has been recognised by those involved in tourism and hospitality research. However, in spite of this widespread appreciation, a complete understanding of the formation of tourist satisfaction within the context of multiple holiday en- counters has yet to be extensively researched (Chadee and Mattsson 1996). This could be attributed largely to the fact that, in spite of increasing efforts in recent years, there have been only relatively few studies undertaken on tourist satisfaction assessment. In addition, the focus of past research has been lim- ited, to a great extent, to the examination of the applicability of customer sat- isfaction models. That is, it has been more to do with theory than practice. As a consequence, it can be argued that there little is known about the individual aspects which influence overall satisfaction with the holiday experience and the extent of their influence. In particular, although it has been recognised as an integral part of the tourist industry and tourist experience, the extent to which the food service experience impacts on overall satisfaction, repeat business and word-of-mouth recommendation has not been fully addressed. The examination of nature of the relationship between service dimensions, satisfaction and behaviourd intentions is needed in order to improve the un- derstanding and management of customer satisfaction (Mazursky 1989).
Given the paucity of research in this area, this study aims to extend tourist satisfaction assessment research by providing new insights into the formation of tourist overall &/satisfaction. The focus of the study is involved with
38 0 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yuksel- Mike Rimrnlngton
multiple tourist encounters at Turkish holiday destinations. Utilising a factor analytical approach based on data obtained from a survey carried out with tourists at an international Airport in Turkey, this paper firstly sets out to as- certain the prime factors affecting tourist satisfaction with holiday destina- tions as well as repeat visit intention and word-of-mouth recommendation. Secondly, with particular emphasis on the impact of food service experience, this paper aims to identlfy the nature of and their extent of influence on overall satisfaction and behavioural intentions. The findings presented here will enlighten destination authorities about the holistic nature of tourist satis- faction and the influence of individual components in its formation as well as fill an empirical vacuum in research.
To this end, the first section of this paper provides a brief literature review relating to tourist satisfaction and to the sigruficance of food service provision and the food service experience. In addition, although this research does not aim to compare and contrast the ability of different satisfaction measurement techniques, a brief review of satisfaction measurement frameworks is in- cluded to provide a rationale for the measurement technique that is used. The research methodology employed in this study is presented in the next section. The findings are then discussed and suggestions are made for a future re-
search agenda on customer satisfaction.
TOURIST SATISFACTION According to Bloemer and Poiesz (1989:45) satisfaction can be seen as "the af- fective outcome with a cognitive comparison of the present situation relative to any one or combination of several reference points which may be inherent in the past, in the future, in other persons, or in some personal or external norm". Similarly, the World Tourism Organisation defines satisfaction as "a psychological concept involving the feeling of well-being and pleasure that results from obtaining what one hopes from an appealing product and/ or service" (WTO 1985).
Although only a few studies have been carried out on the assessment of tourist satisfaction, results of these studies indicate that satisfaction is a mul- tifaceted concept consisting of a number of independent components or di- mensions. A number of researchers (for example, Pizam, Neuman and Reichel 1978) suggest that overall tourist satisfaction may be evaluated along two di- mensions; the instrumental performance and the expressive performance. In- strumental performance relates to the physical performance of the product such as cleanliness and noise level. In contrast, the expressive performance corresponds to the "psyckological " level of performance (for example, comfort, hospitality and relaxation). Some researchers argue that tourist satisfaction with the psychological performance of a product is extremely important. For instance, based on a study of tourism in India, Ohja (1982) reports that there
Volume9 0 Number I 0 Summer 1998 0 39
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
iounsr sanstaction and tood Service Lxperience
were tourists who were satisfied despite some problems with the physical product offered, yet there were tourists who were dissatisfied with the best physical product. Drawing on this study, Ohja concludes that tourist satisfac- tion does not come only from good sights but from behaviour one encounters, from the information one gets, from the efficiency with which needs are served. Discussing the relative significance of these two dimensions, Reisinger and Turner (1997) remark that even the best physical product can not com- pensate for psychological dissatisfaction. The relative sigruhcance attached to each of these two dimensions; however, may vary from individual to in- dividual or from situation to situation. Tourist satisfaction is not a universal phenomenon and not everyone gets the same satisfaction out of the same holiday experience (Pizam 1994).
It is also important to note that unlike material products and pure services, the holiday experience is an amalgam or an assemblage of products and services. This assemblage, in fact, is a blend of different tangible and intangible prod- ucts brought together. Therefore, it is possible to argue that satisfaction with a holiday experience could be a sum total of satisfactions with the individual attributes of all the products and services that compose of the holiday ex- perience (Pizam 1994). In addition, Pizam, Neuman and Reitchel (1978) state that as the tourist product consists of many sub-products such as activities and events, including accommodation, food and beverage purchases, excursions, participation in recreation and entertainment and so on, a ihalo effect" may occur in the development of tourist satisfaction. That is, satisfaction or dis- satisfaction with one of the components leads to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the total tourism product. This suggests that it is vital to examine tourist satisfaction with each of the components. Indeed, identification of the holiday components responsible for dis/satisfaction appears to be prerequisites for effective destination management and taking effective actions.
FOOD SERVICE EXPERIENCE Given that the nature of total tourist product is composed of various tangible and intangible characteristics, it is likely that tourist satisfaction will ac- cumulate through numerous interactions and encounters that is experienced during the holiday (Pizam 1994). Within this context, it is argued that food and beverage facilities and food service experiences may contribute ex- tensively to tourist satisfaction with the entire holiday. If so it is instrumental and important in engendering tourist loyalty and word-of-mouth rec- ommendation.
The sigruficance of food service in the tourist industry and in the formation of overall holiday satisfaction has been recognised by a number of researchers (for example, Acheson 1990; Belisle 1983; Elmont 1996; Finkelstein 1989; Fox and Sheldon 1986; Kruczala 1986; Marris 1986; Ross 1995; Smith 1983). Re
40 0 Anatolla: An International journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yuksel - Mike Rimrnington
ferring to the US tourist industry, for instance, Elmont (1996) emphasises that the food service industry is an integral part of the tourist industry as it is the prime generator of jobs and income. Similarly, Fox and Sheldon (1988) report that expenditure on food service accounts for one quarter of the consumeris travel budget, generates the largest number of jobs and is one of the largest earners of receipts in the entire travel industry. From an economic perspective, Belisle (1983) argues that as food accounts for approximately onethird of tourist expenditure, the proportion of food imports can affect the economic and social impact of tourism. Kruczala (1986) argues that food service facilities are indeed important assets of the tourist industry. In Poland, for instance, basic catering facilities providing a regional menu fulfil the role of visitor at- tractions at regional, national and even at international level (Kruczala 1986). Given the significance of food service in tourism, Elmont (1995) comments that governments in developing countries should embrace international tourism, but they should not underestimate the importance of food service as part of that development.
Criticising the limited attention being paid by academia to the examination of the role of the food service experience, Smith (1983) states that eating out is an important part of the tourist experience. In parallel with Simthis point of view, Acheson (1990: 225) states that ihowever, food plays little or no part in the choice of a holiday destination, except for individual travellers to countries like France, Italy or more distantly, India, where it may well be an integral part of the holiday experience and for short break visitors to country house hotels”. Similarly, Polacek (1986) comments that the main motivation for participation in tourism and recreation over weekends or longer vacations is, in addition to the need for rest and relaxation, the desire to escape the everyday routine, to experience a different environment, activity, and, lust but not least, also diet. Polacek further suggests that the motivational function of gastronomy in tourism, despite the fact that only secondary importance is attached to it, should not be disregarded.
Ryan (1997 62), in a qualitative study of tourists “comments on satisfymg and dissatisfymg aspects of their holiday experiences, reports that iat first sight the itemfbod (italics added) can be attributed to physiological needs, but in the case of goodfood many respondents were linking it with aspects of cul- ture and a way of living, and hence n goodfood and ambience in which it was enjoyed becomes much more than the satisfaction of a basic psychological need“. Correspondingly, Finkelstein (1989: 59) argues that when dining out, in addition to the prosaic need for bodily substance, icustomers may pursue a variety of needs and desires; customers may look for a sense of excitement as they change routines, a feeling of participation in the ongoing stream of social life as they carry out their affairs within the proximity of others, and a sense of self enhancement which is derived from conspicuous consumption and the display of fiscal strength”. In parallel with Ryanis finding and Finkelsteinis
V o l u m e 9 0 Number I 0 Summer 1998 0 41
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience
argument, Marris (1986:17) comments that for many people in the world, and for most of the time " it is true that people eat to live, just to stay alive .... but other times and especially for people on holiday, there are occasions when people really do live to eat ..... people on holiday, look for places where the meal will be an experience to be enjoyed, an experience to be anticipated with excitement, to be relished in the fulfilment and to be remembered with satis- faction".
This brief review of literature suggests that high service quality within the food service context is able to contribute to feelings of overall satisfaction and thmiSr6eing of tourists as it seems to have the capacity to provide some of the most positive memories of a vacation (Ross 1995). On the other hand, the rc\'oi .e is also possible. Poor service quality in the food service context can ovei hke all of the pleasant memories surrounding the holiday experience (Ross 1995). This suggests that, unless properly managed, the food service experience has the potential to induce high level of dissatisfaction with the entire holiday. It can negatively impact on the image of a destination and hamper return business. Given all the above, identifying the extent to which the food service experience impacts on overall holiday satisfaction and be- havioural intentions has considerable implications for destination authorities aiming to enhance tourist satisfaction.
TOURIST SATISFACTION MEASUREMENT The measurement of customer satisfaction in the most realistic way is a pre- requisite for the accurate prediction of tourist behaviour and the development of a robust theory. Whilst early research considered the satisfaction construct as a form of attitude, considerable research in the 1980s revealed that satis- faction is notably more complex and that there are numerous measurement issues (Cooper et a1 1989). Various competing theories and methodologies of satisfaction have been developed, most notably the expectancydisconfirma- tion paradigm (EDP) and its variants (Cooper et a1 1989). The EDP, a de- rivative of adaptation level theory, states that customers compare actual product and service perfomiance with prior expectations. If expectations are met or exceeded, the consumer is satisfied or highly satisfied. If perceived performance falls short of expectations, dissatisfaction results (Oliver 1980). In the tourist satisfaction context, this suggests that tourist satisfaction is the re- sult of the interaction between a touristis experience at the destination area and the expectations s/he had about that destination (Pizam et a1 1978). When the weighted sum of total experiences are compared to expectation results in feelings of gratification, the tourist is satisfied; when tourists feel displeasure they are dissatisfied.
The conceptualisation of tourist satisfaction as a comparison between touristsi expectations and touristsi experiences has been employed in a num-
42 0 Anatolla: An International Journal of Tourlsm and Hospitality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yuksel- Mike Rirnrnington
ber of tourism studies (for example, Hughes 1991; Pizam and Milman 1993; Weber 1997). Notwithstanding its growing popularity, the EDP has received considerable theoretical and operational criticisms. For instance, measuring expectations prior to service experience was reported to be problematic as prior expectations might be modified during the service encounter and used in the process of comparison. It is also argued that the importance attached to pretrip expectations may change during the trip and a new set of expectations may be formed as a result of experiences during the holiday (Weber 1997). Thn implies that as the tourists progress from one encounter to the next, say from reception to the room, there may be a modification in the expectations about room services due to the performance of the previous encounter (Da- naher and Mattsson 1994). It is also argued that events that are completely unanticipated prior to the trip may become sigruficant contributors to overall holiday satisfaction (Weber 1997). Similarly, Boulding et al (1993:9) ac- knowledge that ia personis expectations just before a service contact can differ from the expectations held just after the service contact because of the in- formation that enters the system between service encounters". Botterill(1987 140) further comments that i...the unpredictability of tourism events seems to lie at the heart of vacational experience". Given these reported problems in- herent in the application of the dis/confirmation model, it appears that its methodology is questionable and problematic to employ. Therefore, based on its match with human cognitive process, ease of application and potentially high construct validity (Crompton and Love 1995; Engeset and Heide 1997; Meyer and Westerbarkey 1996; Yuksel, Rimmington and Yi.ikse1 1997), this study adopts the use of performance alone in assessing and idenhfymg the relative influence of individual dimensions on tourist satisfaction.
RESEARCH INSTRUMENT A research instrument was developed with the intention of asking touristsi opinions about the prime components of their vacations. Components such as accommodation, food and beverage, hospitality, the environment, cost of vacationing and activities were investigated. The research instrument com- prised of a number of items (n=112) grouped into three major areas: general information about the respondent and holiday, the ratings on 67 holiday at- tributes, and ratings on overall holiday satisfaction and behavioural in- tentions. Respondents were also given ample space to make any further writ- ten comments (compliments and complaints).
The respondents were required to assess the performance on a 7-point se- mantic differential scales of facilities and services (67 destination attributes). The study adopted the use of a single overall measure of tourist satisfaction. Although some researchers contend that satisfaction should be measured by combination of attributes, the ease of use and empirical support for an overall
Volume9 0 Number 1 0 Summer 1998 0 43
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Servlce Experlence
measure of satisfaction led to its selection (Halstead 1989). The study em- ployed the "Delight-Terrible" scale for measuring overall tourist satisfaction as it has been reported to be the most reliable satisfaction scale (Maddox 1985). Similarly, respondentsi overall satisfaction with food and beverage, return intention and word-of-mouth recommendation were assessed by single over- all measures. One of the main purposes of gauging overall satisfaction with the entire holiday and with behavioural intentions was to assess the relative importance of holiday components in determining the level of tourist satis- faction. A single question concerning overall satisfaction with food and bev- erage was asked in order to assess its relationship with overall holiday satis- faction and behavioural intentions. In order to provide valid information on the questionnaire design, wording and measurement scales, a pilot test was carried out with twelve prospective tourists. The pilot test revealed that there were no major problems of question clarity and appropriateness of the items.
PROCEDURE As this survey aimed to cover the prime components of tourist holiday satis- faction, the best time to question tourists was just before they left Turkey. Given this fact, the Dalaman Airport, an international airport situated in the Aegean Region of Turkey, was chosen for the research. This was an extremely good time and place to conduct the survey, as by this time the departing tourist had checked in, been through Customs and Immigration, had bought their souvenirs, and often had time to spare (Danaher and Arweiler 1996). Tourists were favourably disposed to answer questions about their vacations, possibly because the interview coincided with a time when they were already reflecting upon their holiday.
The survey was carried out with 400 tourists during a three-week period in September 1997. Given the flight time and language (English only), 35 tour- ists refused to participate and 29 of the returned questionnaires were in- complete. Of all the respondents, 45 YO were male and 55% were female, and 70% were first-time visitors and 30 Yo were repeat visitors. The majority of re- spondents were British, SO%, followed by Germans, Benelux, Scandinavian, Italian and others.
INSTRUMENT RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY Although construct validity lies at the very heart of measurement quality as it is most directly related to the question of what the measurement is in fact measuring (Churchill 1979; Yi 1990), explanations conceming the validity of the instruments used in hospitality and tourism research are almost absent from studies published in tourism and hospitality journals (Oh and Parks 1997). Given its critical role, the analysis section starts with presenting the results of reliability and construct validity of the research instrument.
44 0 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourlsm and Hospitality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atlla Yuksel - Mike Rimmlngton
Performance Scale
Overall satisfaction
Likelihood to return
Likelihood to recommend
The scale was first subjected to a reliability analysis to assess the quality of the measure. Cronbachis alpha was used to assess the reliability of the meas- urement scale. The total scale reliability was high, 0.95, indicating that the sample of the items performed well in capturing the measured construct (Nunnaly 1967). Following the reliability test, the construct validity of the scale was assessed. To be considered as having a good construct validity, the scale must have convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity (Church- ill 1979). Convergent validity of a measure is the extent to which the measure correlates or "converges" with other measures designed to measure the same concept, indicating that a variable is not just an accident (Cronin and Taylor 1992), while discriminant validity is another theoretically based method of measuring the underlying truth in a given area (Churchill 1979). For a survey to have discriminant validity, the correlation between two different measures of the same variable should be higher than the correlation between the meas- ure of that variable and those of any other variables (Churchill 1979). Nom- ological validity of a measure is the extent to which the measure correlates in a theoretically predicted way with a measure of a different but related con- struct. In order to help assess convergent, discriminant and nomological va- lidity, the authors used an overall customer satisfaction measure and two b e havioural intention measures. Pearson Product Moment Correlation and Multiple Regression procedures were employed to examine the construct va- lidity (Crompton and Love 1995; Cronin and Taylor 1992; Dorfman 1979; Parasuraman et al1991).
The convergent validity of the performance scale in determining tourist satisfaction was supported as the scale correlated relatively high (0.65, pc0.01) with the overall measure of tourist satisfaction. An examination of the cor- relation results (see Table 1) further demonstrates that the scale has nom- ological validity as the correspondence between the models and the two be- havioural intentions was as predicted. The Discriminant validity of the scale was also supported as the correlation between the two measures of satisfac- tion was higher than the correlation between the scale and other variables. Relatively high score of R2 (%68) also provides additional support for the
Correlation Values Multiple Regression Values
0.6475 0.82 (R2 = .68)'
0.5487
0.5771
All significant at 0.01 level. 'R2 for d l 6 7 attributes
Volume9 0 Number 1 0 Summer 1998 0 45
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourlst Satlsfactlon and Food Service Experlence
ability of performance scale to explain the variance in the overall satisfaction scale. The results of the reliability and validity tests suggest that the scale used in the research measured what it intended to measure, thus allowing the re- searcher to proceed with the subsequent analysis.
HOLIDAY DIMENSIONS The analysis of the prime holiday dimensions and their extent of influence on total holiday satisfaction and behavioual intentions involved the use of Mul- tivariate Analysis, in this case, factor and multiple regression analysis (Da- naher and Haddrelll996). The purpose of using factor analysis in this study was to create correlated variable composites from the original attributes rat- ings, and to obtain a relatively small number of variables which explain most of the variance among the attributes. The derived factor scores were then ap- plied to the subsequent multiple regression analysis. Pizam et a1 (1978) sug- gest that factor analysis is particularly useful in measuring tourist satisfaction since the tourism product is made up of many interrelated components, each of which requires a separate measure of satisfaction. The Principal Com- ponents and Orthogonal (Varimax) rotation methods were employed in the factor analysis so as to sununarise most of the on@ information to a mini- mum number of factors for prediction reasons (Heir et al 1995). The ap- propriateness of the factor analysis was examined by correlation, measures of sampling adequacy (MSA) and the reliability alpha to ensure that the factor analysis is appropriate to the data (Heir et al1995).
The criteria for the number of factors to be extracted were based on the Ei- genvalue, the percentage of variance, the significance of factor loading and the assessment of structure (Heir et a1 1995). Only the factors with Eigenvalue equal or greater than one were considered sigmficant (Heir et al1995). The rationale for considering factors significant whose Eigenvalue were equal or greater than one was that these factors were able to account for the variance of at least a single variable (Lewis 1984). The solution that accounted for at least 60% of the total variance was considered as a satisfactory solution (Lewis 1984). A variable was considered to be significant and was included in a fac- tor, when its factor loading was greater or equal to 0.50 (Lewis 1984). Although lower criteria are often used for factor loading, the higher criteria was selected to ensure that the items included in the questionnaire were not in- appropriately categorised (Wuest et al1996).
The p q o s e of regression analysis in this study was to explore how holiday dimensions derived from the factor analysis related to the dependent variable of itotal satisfaction” which ranges from delighted to terrible (Danaher and Haddrelll996). Lewis (1985: 84) comments that i regression analysis is one statistical technique we can use to delve into the problem of identdying how decisions are made or judgements reached’. Regression analysis is suggested as being a practical and powerful tool that can be referred to in gathering
46 0 Anatolla: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospltality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atlla Yfiksel- Mike Rlmmington
critical information for a variety of management decisions (ibid.). The purpose of using overall satisfaction as a dependent variable in this study was to idenbfy the relative importance of the dimensions derived from the factor analysis in determining or predicting a touristis overall satisfaction with the holiday. Subsequent Multiple Regression analyses were run to identify the influence of the individual factors on return intentions and likeliness to rec- ommend holidays to the others.
RESULTS OF FACTOR ANALYSIS The Eigenvalues suggested that a 16 factor solution explained 69.1% of the overall variance before rotation. The overall significance of the correlation matrix was O.OOO0 with a Barlett test of Spherity value of 9250.5358. It in- dicated that the data matrix had sufficient correlation to the factor analysis (Hair et a1 1995). The Kaiser-Meyer-Okin overall measure of sampling ad- equacy was 0.88, which was meritorious (Hair et a1 1995) suggesting that data was appropriate to factor analysis. Varimax rotation was used to produce orthogonal factors to achieve simpler and theoretically meaningful solutions. From the Orthogonal (Varimax) rotated factor matrix, 16 factors with 58 var- iables were defined by the original 67 variables, that loaded most heavily (loading 0.50) on them (Table 2). It could be said that the analysis produced a clean factor structure with relatively higher loadings on the appropriate factors. Most variables loaded heavily on one factor, but did not load heavily on others. It reflected that there was minimal overlap among these factors and all factors were independently structured. The communality of each variable was relatively high ranging from 0.54 to 0.83. It indicated that the variance of the original values was captured fairly well by the 16 factors (Hair et al1995).
The 16 factor structured in a relatively more workable and meaningful number of composite dimensions, which could be more easily interpreted and used for the further regression analysis. Each factor was named based on the common characteristics of the variables it included (Table 2). A composite reliability of a construct was calculated to measure the internal consistency of each factor. The results showed that the reliability coefficients for factors ex- ceeded the recommended level of 0.50 (ranging from 0.53 to 0.90) (Nunnaly 1967). After the rotation, the 16 factors explained 69.1% of variance. It might be concluded that these 16 dimensions were perceived as particularly im- portant by the sample of tourists making holiday in Turkey at that time.
INFLUENCE OF DIMENSIONS ON SATISFACTION The results of multiple regression of the 16 holiday dimensions against the dependent variables (overall satisfaction, return intention and recommenda- tion) are displayed in Tables 3,4 and 5. The regression equation characteristics of overall holiday satisfaction indicated R2 of 0.53, indicating that 53% of the
Volume9 0 Number I 0 Summer 1998 0 47
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Servlce Experlence
Table 2. hdor Components, Loadings and Reliability
Factorl: FDod /Beverage Quality
0 Tastiness d food served in the area
0 auastydtoodand~((.71911) 0 Accuracy d the temperature d
food s e ~ e d (.63W) 0 PoNw d food (.68601) 0 Presentation of dlshes (.73088) 0 Hyeeruc prepambbn d food (67355) 0 Variety of menu (.73581) 0 Availability d dshes liked (.79621) 0 Avaibbiity d badbbnal food
(.golly
(.74243)"
(.52161)
Factor 4: Horpbllty (.arsO) 0 Cwrtesy of residents (.72264) 0 Cwflesyofempbyees(.62907) 0 Willingness of employees to help
0 Willingness d residents to help
0 Fdendlness of people (.76867) 0 Safety in the area (59303)
(.71162)
(.71420)
Factor 7: Prlw/vaiue (.7893)
accommodation (.79515)
charges at aocomnodatii (.75821)
0 PI& of food and drink Served at
0 Value of the food services for price
Factor 1 0 Convenlenca (3343) 0 L m t i d the restaurantbars
(.62217)
0 Operating h w n of the restaurantbars at accommodation (.71917)
Factor 1 3 Warn sport8
0 Availability d water sports (79969)
Factor 16: Weather
0 The weather conditions in the area (.72063)
Factor 2: Servke Quality (.8730)
0 Effideney of check-in and checkml at the ammmodabn (55674)
0 Friendliness of service at my accommodation (.76588
0 Efficiency of service at accommodation (.72101)
0 Respoosiveness 01 staff to request (.67910)
0 Respiveness of staff to canplaint (.69331)
0 Corrpelency d slaff(.79014)
Factor 5: Tourbt facilities (6683) 0 Effciency of s e w at lounsl
facilities (.76332) 0 Courtesy of services at tourist
facilities (.65173) 0 Wailing time for service at tourist
facilities (.73237) 0 Quality d services at tourist
facilities (.71473) 0 Convenience operating hours at
tourist facilities (.54344) 0 Accuracy of bill and tariffs at tourist
facilities (578%)
Factor 8: Entertainment (.6965)
0 Quality,and availability of entertainment (55747)
0 Availability of tours and cruises (.66284)
0 Quality and availability of restauranls (.65914)
Factor 11: Communication (.7438) 0 Ease of c m u n h t i o n in ywr
language in the area (.61139) 0 Canmunication in ywr language
with the staff (.68806)
Factor 1 4 Transportation 0 Efficiency and timeliness of public
transport ( .El%)
0 Cleanlinessofthe acwmnodation(.82772)
0 Cleanliness of restaurant at accommodation(.60639)
0 Cleanliness of he mom ( . E r n ) 0 The physical c a m of
accommodation (.78732) 0 W t y of f a c i l i dlered at
accommodabon (.62273) 0 Comfortoflheroom(.78631)
d water and electriaty
Fador 6: Berchlrnvironmbnt in the
0 CLkIinessdthebeachandsea
0 Availability of fadlities at the beach
area (-7633)
in the area (.75691)
(.67954)
0 CroWdlwelinlhearea(.52265) 0 The natural e n v i r m n t in the
area (59490) 0 Canfort of sunbathing on the
beach (.59056)
Factor S Quietneu (.7498)
0 Noise level at restaurantbars d aaxxmodabon (.72149)
0 Noise level at acconrodam (.72695)
Factor 1 2 Security (6991) 0 Safety at hotel (.WE) 0 Security d room (.50578)
Factor 1 5 Airport Wvicas 0 E f f i c i e r ~ y d W - i n a n d d ~ & a t
at the Airport (.74114)
48 0 A n a t o l l a : An l n t e r n a t l o n a i J o u r n a l of T o u r l s r n a n d H o s p l t a l l t y R e s e a r c h
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yiiksel - Mike Rlmmlngton
variation could be explained by this equation. The F-ratio of 23.84 was sig- nificant (Prob. < 0.0000). The relatively high measure of variance R2 (0.53) in- dicates that the predictor variables perform well in explaining the variance in overall satisfaction and the highly sigruhcant F ratio indicates that the results of the equation could hardly have occurred by chance (behavioural scientists consider an R2 of 0.50 to .60 quite good) (Lewis 1984). In order to have an ac- curate interpretation of this studyis predictor variables, a stepwise regression procedure was employed (Hair et al1995). In this procedure, the first variable entered into the equation was the one that accounts for the most variance in the dependent variable (Table 3). The remaining variables were entered one at a time in descending order of the amount of remaining variance they ex- plain. The procedure was discontinued when the adding of a variable resulted in an insigruficant increase in R2 .
Table 3. F~xfors Determining Overnll Wiction
Wn-Whm: 1.89187
Volume 9 Number 1 Summer 1998 49
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience
The t-statistic test was used for testing whether the 16 independent factors contributed information to the prediction of the dependent variable ioverall holiday satisfaction". In this study, if the t-value of an independent variable was found to be sigruficant at a 0.05 level, that variable was considered in the model. ten out of the 16 factors emerged as significant (sig. T < 0.05) in- dependent variables in the regression analysis.
The results of regression analysis showed that each coefficient carried pos- itive signs, as expected (see Table 3). This indicated that there was a positive relationship between those variables and the dependent variable ioverall hol- iday satisfaction". It also suggested that the overall holiday satisfaction of a tourist depended largely on these factors. They were, therefore, the de- terminant factors or the best predictors of overall holiday satisfaction. It could be concluded that the overall holiday satisfaction increases when there is an increase in these dimensions.
The relative importance of attributes was first examined by comparing the magnitude of regression coefficients. The first dimension with the greatest ef- fect on overall satisfaction was Hospitality (= 0.35, hob. < 0.0000) followed by Hygiene/ Accommodation (= 0. 34, hob.< 0.0000), Staff/Service quality (= 0.33, Prob.< 0.0000), Food/Beverage Quality (= 0.32, hob.< 0.0000 ) and Convenience (= 0.30, Prob. c 0.0000). Secondly, the magnitude of each of the independent variablesi t-statistics was used as an indicator of relative im- portance as some authors, such as Bring (1994), argue that the beta coefficients may not give a very reliable measure of the relative importance of regression independent variables. An examination of the t-values revealed an identical descending order of factors contributing to overall holiday satisfaction.
Given the relative factor weights (Beta2 ), it could be said that Hospitality dimension (Bets= 0.10) was almost six times as powerful in determining sat- isfaction as the Beach/Environment in the area (Beta2 = 0.016). The hospitality dimension was almost eight times as powerful as Price/value of services (Beta2 = 0.012) in influencing satisfaction. In addition, Food and Beverage (Beta2 = 0.086) has almost seven times as much impact on determining satis- faction as Price/value of services (Beta2 = 0.012). Further, the results predicted that, the probability of a touristis overall holiday satisfaction changes by 2.28 (0.34 + 0.34 + 0.33+ 0.32 + 0.30 + 0.17 + 0.14 + 0.12 + 0.11 + 0.11) for each unit change in the ten variables. The units refer to one unit on the seven point scale. It could be argued that an increase in these variables results in an in- crease in overall satisfaction.
The values of variance of inflation (VIF) and tolerance for each variable, and the tests of the extent of multi-collinearity and collinearity, indicated that there was no multi-collinearity in the model (Hair et a1 1995). No VIF value ex- ceeded 10.0, and the values of tolerance showed that no case did collinearity explain more than 10% of the any predictor variableis variance. The Durbin-
50 0 Anatolla: An international Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atlla Ytiksel- Mike Wmmington
Watson value was 1.829 indicating that there was no residual correlation in the model (Hair et a1 1995). The results were validated by dividing the sample into two sub-samples to estimate the regression model for each sub-sample, and comparing the results (ibid.). Comparing overall model fit demonstrated that a high level of similarity of the results in terms of R2 ( overall = 0.53; split-sample 1= 0.51; split-sample 2= 0.55), the standard error (overall = 0.77; split-sample 1= 0.74; split-sample 2= 0.85), and individual coefficients (Probs. c 0.05).
In addition, a subsequent multiple regression analysis was run to idenbfy factors leading to dissatisfaction. Dissatisfied respondentsi (n=35) ratings on overall satisfaction were regressed on the factor scores. The following factors; convenience, the food/beverage quality, the hygiene/accommodation, the weather, and the beach/environment emerged as signrficant factors (pcO.05) contributing to dissatisfaction.
INFLUENCE OF DIMENSIONS ON BEHAVIOURAL INTENTIONS In order to understand the factors that contribute most to likeliness to return and to recommend, the respondentsi ratings on return and recommendation were regressed on the factor scores. It would be comforting for service pro- viders to find a similar set of attributes coming out as being important as in the previous regression (Table 3), otherwise it would be difficult to decide how best to proceed with performance improvement programme (Danaher and Haddrelll996). Results of the regression analysis are presented in Tables 4 and 5.
The results in Table 4 indicate that the most sigruhcant factor affecting touristsi return intention was food and beverage quality ( 6.373, p<O.oooO), followed by hospitality, service quality, hygiene/accommodation, quietness, beach/environment, convenience and tourist facilities. An examination of Beta2 scores suggests that food/beverage quality (Beta2 = 0.127) was almost eight times as powerful as tourist facilities in the area (Beta2 = 0.016) in de- termining repeat visit. The food/beverage quality factor has almost four times as much impact on return intentions as the quality of beach and sur- rounding environment in the area (Beta2 = 0.033).
The results in Table 5 suggest that the factor with the greatest impact on word of mouth recommendation was the hospitality (5.501, pcO.oo00) fol- lowed by food/beverage quality, service quality, beach/environment, hy- giene accommodation and convenience. A close examination of Beta2 scores reveal that hospitality (Beta2 = 0.088) was almost two times as powerful as quality of the beach/environment in the area (Beta2 = 0.046) in recommending destination to others. In addition, the Beta scores suggest that food/beverage quality (Beta2 = 0.086) has almost two times as much impact on tourist word of mouth recommendation as the quality of the beach/environment in the area.
Volume9 0 Number 1 0 Summer 1998 0 51
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience
The results predicted further that the probability of a touristis likeliness to return and likeliness to recommend changes by 2.11 and 1.48 respectively for each unit change in the variables. The units refer to one unit on the seven point scale. It could be argued that an increase in these variables results in an in- crease in likelihood to return and likelihood to recommend the holiday ex- perience to others.
In addition, the impact of satisfaction with food and beverage on total hol- iday satisfaction and behavioural intentions was assessed empirically by ex- amining the association between the respondentsi score on satisfaction with food and beverage and their scores on overall holiday satisfaction and other dependent variables (see Table 6). It was hypothesised that a high satisfaction with food/beverage would increase the overall satisfaction with holiday, likeliness of repeat visit and word-of-mouth recommendation. On the other hand, dissatisfaction with food and beverage would lead to a low level of overall satisfaction with the holiday.
52 Anatolla: An International journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research
Table 4. Return Intention
Muhipk R .62142
R*a ,38616
Adjusted RSqumc 361 23
YDndardE~ru ,92115
Awlpsis of V n h u
DF Sum of Iqwrts Maon
Regrenion 8 105.1 5681 13.14461
B h I 197 167.15867 .84852
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yuksel - Mike Rlmmington
Hygene/ktPmmodalin
hwnienrs
((onflantl
Both parametric and non parametric tests revealed that respondents who are dissatisfied with food and beverage rated significantly lower scores (p<0.05) on the overall satisfaction scale (mean= 4.83). On the other hand, re- spondents who are satisfied with food and beverage services rated sig- nificantly higher scores (p<0.05) on the overall holiday satisfaction scale (mean= 6.22). A similar trend was found with respect to the likelihood to re- turn and recommend the holiday to others. Respondents dissatisfied with food and beverage rated significantly lower scores on the scales assessing their return intentions and recommendation (mean= 4.39 and 4.57 respectively). Respondents who indicated satisfaction with the food and beverages rated significantly higher scores on return intention and recommendation scales (mean= 5.76 and 6.12 respectively). The strength and persistence of the linkage between satisfaction with food and beverage and satisfaction with the other offers a great degree of support for the role of the food service experience in affecting overall holiday satisfaction and behavioural intentions.
By assessing how separate factors influence the holistic tourist satisfaction, the results of this study fill a clear gap in the literature and provide destination managers, particularly in Turkey, with invaluable information.
Table 5. Word of Mouth Recommendation
Muhipb R ,57033 RSqwrs ,32528 Adprted R S q u ~ a 30183 Stmdardhor .80444
Table 6. Relatianship between Food Service, Holiday Satisfaction and Behavioural Intentions
The result of factor analysis suggests that the holiday experience involves several independent components. Emerged components in this study were food and beverage quality, service quality, accommodation and hygiene, hospitality, tourist facilities, beach and environment, price and value, en- tertainment, quietness, convenience, communication, safety, water sports, transportation, airport services and the weather. This suggests that the hol- iday experience is an amalgam of services and products. It can be said that tourist satisfaction or dissatisfaction is likely to be accumulated through nu- merous interactions with each of these components during the holiday ex- perience. That is, satisfaction with the individual elements or attributes of all the products and services that compose the holiday experience add up to overall holiday satisfaction .
The multiple regression analysis suggests that ten out of 16 dimensions have a sigruficant level of influence on the formation of overall satisfaction with the entire holiday and a one unit change in the performance of any of these dimensions brings about a unite change in the overall satisfaction gained by visitors. The multiplicity and variety of holiday dimensions means that destination managers must consider the synergy that exists between these di- mensions in order to provide a high quality product and standard of service. This implies that a detailed understanding of the holistic perspective of the holiday experience is essential to manage tourist satisfaction more effectively. That is, for instance, a hotelier should not only be concerned about the per-
formance of hidher own premise, but also with the performance provided in other areas, such as in restaurants, so as to achieve and enhance tourist satis- faction and repeat business. In addition, an examination of the results pre- sented in Tables 3,4 and 5 suggests that there exists almost a similar set of di- mensions impacting on overall satisfaction and behavioural intentions. This suggests that Turkish destination managers need to pay particular attention to such dimensions as hospitality, service quality, food/beverage quality, quiet- ness, hygiene and accommodation, beach and environment and tourist facil- ities so as to compete effectively in todayis tourism market.
SPtbfadb~ w i l l Food od &mqr
DisWiM
Naidmr rotirfi#l nor d i i M
W i
54 Anatolia: An fnternatlonal journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research
O v t d Saliiadioa
4.83 (MY
5.26 (26)
6.22 (279)
R t l m InlelliOl
4.39 (33)
4.80 (26)
5.76 (273)
Ruommoddiol
4.57 (33)
5.19(26)
6.12 (2721
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yilksei - Mike Rimmington
Based on the results of the multiple regression analyses, it could be said that food service experience constitutes an integral part of the overall holiday ex- perience, though it may be true that it generally plays no or little part in the choice of Turkey as a holiday destination. An examination of the results in Table 6 demonstrates that the food service experience has the potential to in- duce both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. This indicates that food service ex- perience has the capacity to provide tourists with some of the highest and lowest points of their total holiday experience. Based on these findings, the food service experience maybe a critical factor that represent both a threat and an opportunity to destination managers. Destination managers and service providers in Turkey are; therefore, advised to endeavour to provide meal ex- periences to be enjoyed and to be remembered with satisfaction. In order to understand what constitutes satisfaction with the food service experience, a comprehensive investigation needs to be undertaken in Turkey.
The findings relating to dimensions and their relative influence; however, cannot be automatically generalised beyond Turkey on the grounds that these dimensions probably may not be universal and depend on the sample, on the destination area, on its facilities, attractions, weather and so forth. They may also be to an extent time specific. However, an appropriate conclusion would appear to be that destinations bearing features similar to those of Turkey could be affected by the same dimensions as identified here.
REFERENCES Acheson, D. (1990). Food -the Vital Ingredient, in Handbook of Totirism, Horwath and Horwath, Macmillan Press, London
Assael, H. (1987) Consumer Behnuioirr and Marketing Action. 3rd edition, Boston, PWS,-Kent
Belisle, J. F. (1963). Tourism and the Food Production in the Caribbean, Annals ofTourism Research,
Bloemer, J. M. M. and Poiesz, T. 8. C (1989) The Illusion of Customer Satisfaction, Iournal ofcon- sunzer Sntisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behaviour, (2): 4348
Botterill, T. D. (1987). Dissatisfaction with a construction of Satisfaction, Annals of Tourism Re- search, 14: 139-141
Boulding, W; Karla, A; Staelin, R; Zeithaml, V.A. (1993). A Dynamic Process Model of service quality, From Expectations to Behavioural Intentions. Journal ofMnrketing Research 30 (February):
Bring, J. (1994). How to standardise regression coefficients, American Statistician, 48 (3): 209-13
Chadee, D and Mattsson, J. (1996). Measuring Customer Satisfaction in Tourist Service En- counters, \oirrrral of Travel and Toirrism Marketing, 4, (4): 97-107
Churchill, A. G. Jr. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs, Iournal of Marketing Rrsenrch, 16, February: 64-73
Cooper, R. N., Cooper, B. M. and Duhan, F. D. (1989). Measurement Instrument Development Using Two Competing Concepts of Customer Satisfaction, Journal of Consumer Sntisfacfionl Dis- sutisfaction and Complaining Behauiour, 2: 28-35
(10): 497-513
7-27
V o l u m e 9 0 Number I 0 Summer 1998 0 55
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Tourist Satlsfaction and Food Service Experlence
Crompton, L. J., and Love, L. L. (1995). The Predictive Validity of Alternative Approaches to Evaluating Quality of a Festival. Journal of Travel Research 34 (1) Summer: 11-25
Crompton, L. J., and Love, L. L. (1995). The Predictive Validity of Alternative Approaches to Evaluating Quality of a Festival, Journal of Travel Research, 34 (l), 11-24
Cronin, J .J. Jr. And Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Ex- tension. Journal ofMarketing 56: 55-68.
Danaher, P. J. and Haddrell, V. (1996). A comparison of question scales used for measuring cus- tomer satisfaction. International Journal of Service Industry Management 17 (4): 4-26
Danaher, P. J. and Mattsson, J. (1994). Customer Satisfaction during the Service Delivery Process, European Journal of Marketing, 28 (5): 5-16
Danaher, P. J., and Arweiler, W. (1996). Customer satisfaction in the tourism industry, a case study of visitors to New Zealand. Journal of Trauel Resenrch: 89-93
Dorfman, P. W. (1979). Measurement and Meaning of Recreation Satisfaction: A Case study in camping. Environment and Behuviour 11 (4):483-510
Elmont, S. (1995) . Tourism and Food Service- two sides of the same coin, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quurterly, February: 57-63
Engeset, G. M., Heide, M. (1997). Managing hotel guest satisfaction, towards a more focused ap- proach, The Tourist Review, 2 23-33
Finkelstein, J. (1988). Dining out: A Sociology ofModern Manners. Polity Press, Cambridge
Fox, M. and Sheldon, J. P. (1988) . Food service, a vital part of the tourist industry, journal ofFood
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, New Jer- sey, Prentice Hall Inc
Halstead, D. (1989). Expectations and Disconfirmation Beliefs as Predictors of CS, Repurchase Intentions, and Complaining Behaviour: An Empirical Study, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction / Dissatisfiction and Complaining Behaviour, 2 17-21
Hughes, K. (1991) . Tourist satisfaction: A Guided Tour in North Queensland, Australian Psychol- ogist, 26 (3): 166-171
Kruczala, K. J. (1986). The Role of Catering Facilities in the local and regional tourist facilities complexes, Tourist Rariew, 4 16-25 Maddox, N. R (1965). Measuring Satisfaction with Tourism, Jouml OfTrawI Research, Winter: 2-5
Marris, T. (1986). Does Food Matter, Tourist Review, 4 17-20
Mazursky, D. (1989) . Past Experience and Future Tourism Decisions, Annals of Tourism Research,
Meyer, A. and Westerbarkey, P. (1996). Measuring and Managing Hotel Guest Satisfaction., in Olsen, D. M., Teare, R and Gummesson, E. (Eds.) Service Qualify in Hospitality Organisations, Cassell, New York, NY 185-204
Nunnaly, J. C. (1967). Psychometric Theory, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company
Oh, H. and Parks, C. S. (1997). Customer Satisfaction and Service Quality: A critical Review of the Literature and Research Implications for the Hospitality Industry, Hospitality Research Journal, 20
Ohja, J . M. (1982). Selling Benign Tourism: Case References from Indian Scene, Tourism Recreation Research, June: 23-24
56
Sentice Sjstem~, 4 259-275
16: 333-344
(3): 36-64
0 Anatolla: A n International Journal of Tourlsm and Hospitality Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
idad
Aut
ónom
a de
l Est
ado
de M
éxic
o] a
t 18:
46 1
3 Ju
ne 2
012
Atila Yclksel - Mike Rlrnrnington
Oliver. R. L. (1980). A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents of Satisfaction Decisions, journal of Marketing Research, 1 7 4649.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. and Berry, L. L (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the Servqual scale. journal of Retailing, 67 (4): 420-50
Pearce, P. L. (1988). The lllyssesfactor: Evaluating visitors in tourist scttings. New York, Springer- Verlag
Pizam, A. (1994) .Monitoring customer satisfaction., in Davis, B., and Lockwood, A. (Eds.) Food and Bwerage Management: A selection ofreadings, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., Oxford
Pizam, A. and Milman, A. (1993). Predicting Satisfaction Among First Time Visitors to a Des- tination by Using the Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory, International journal of Hospitality Management, 12: 197-209.
Pizam, A,, Neurnann, Y, and Rcichel, A. (1978) . Dimensions of tourist satisfaction with a des- tination area, Annals ofTourisni Research, July/September: 314-322
Ploacek, M (1986) Eating Habits of Czechoslovak Population and Gastronomy as a Tourism Mo- tivation, Tourist Rwie i i , (4): 22-25
Reisineger, Y., and Turner, L. (1997) . Tourist Satisfaction with Hosts: A Cultural Approach Comparing Thai tourists and Australian Hosts, Pacific Tourism Review, 1: 147-159
Ross, F. G. (1995). Tourist Dissatisfaction with Food service: Service quality typologies among secondary college graduates from a tourism community, journal of Food Service Systenis, 8: 291- 309
Ryan, C. (1997) From Motivations to Assessment, in The Tourist Experience: The New Introdiiction, (ed.) Chris Ryan, Cassell, London
Smith, L. 1. S. (1983) Restaurants and Dining out: Geography of a Tourism Business, Ann& of Tourism Research (lo): 514
Weber, K. (1997) . Assessment of Tourist Satisfaction, Using the Expectancy disconfirmation the- ory, a study of German Travel Market in Australia, Pacific Tourism Review, 1: 35-45
WTO (1985). Identification and Evaluation of those Components of Tourism Services which havea Bearing on Tourist Satisfaction and which can 6e regulnted, and State Measures to Ensurr Adequate Qualit!/ of Tourism Srruices. Madrid: World Tourism Organisation
Wuest, E. S. B, Tas, F. R. and Emenheiser, D. A. (1996).What Do Mature Travellers Perceive As Important Hotel/Motel Customer Services?, Hospitality Research ]aural, 20 (2): 76-93
Yi. Y. (1990), A Critical Review of Consumer Satisfaction, in V. A. Zeithaml (Ed.), Review ofMar- keting, Chicago: American Marketing Association: 68-123
Yuksel, A. and Rimmington, M. (1997), An Integrated Approach to Customer Service Evaluation, Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, Proceedings of the Second Conference on Graduate Education and Graduate Students Research, (2): 31-45
Yuksel, A,; Rimmington, M. and Yuksel, F. (1997) .Concepts of Customer Satisfaction and their Measurement: Results and Implications of an Empirical Investigation, Hospitality Business De- velopment, Conference Proceedings: 123-28.
