Tour Operators Service Quality

325

Tourism Analysis Vol 17 pp 325ndash342 1083-542312 $6000 + 00Printed in the USA All rights reserved DOI httpdxdoiorg103727108354212X13412775927907Copyright copy 2012 Cognizant Comm Corp wwwcognizantcommunicationcom

Tour operaTorsrsquo service QualiTy and efficacy

of saTisfacTion MeasureMenT

FAng Meng erCAn (SIrAkAyA) TUrk AnD VOlkAn AlTInTASdagger

School of Hotel restaurant and Tourism Management College of Hospitality Sport and retail Management University of South Carolina Columbia SC USA

daggerInternational Degree Programme in Tourism Management Bremen University of Applied Sciences Bremen germany

The purpose of this research is to assess the service quality determinants of tour operators and exam-ine the efficacy of these evaluations on overall trip satisfaction when customer mood is introduced as a moderating variable The overall hypothesis of the article is that touristsrsquo assessments of services and satisfaction may not be free of bias but may depend on emotional states (such as mood) during the evaluation stage The study used a sample of german tourists who traveled to the Mediterranean region of Turkey The findings of the study lend support to previous literature that suggests touristsrsquo moods influence overall trip satisfaction Specifically mood had significant interaction effects with intangible components of tour operations such as staff and tour guidesrsquo services as well as attitudes of locals in predicting the overall trip satisfaction ratings Theoretical and practical implications are discussed within the general framework of consumer behavior and research ideas are provided to help guide further research in the area

key words Tour operation Service quality Customer satisfaction Mood Moderating effect

Address correspondence to Fang Meng PhD Assistant Professor School of Hotel restaurant and Tourism Management Center of economic excellence in Tourism and economic Development College of Hospitality Sport and retail Management University of South Carolina Columbia SC 29208 USA Tel 803-777-0631 Fax 803-777-6427 e-mail fmenghrsmscedu

Introduction

Customer satisfaction has been an important research topic for the past two decades mainly because of tourismrsquos experiential nature Accurate measurement of service quality and customer sat-isfaction is critical for the management of a suc-cessful tourism business Traditionally marketing literature has viewed consumer satisfaction as a

cognitive process involving semantic meanings of product and service attributes (Bettman 1979 greenwald amp leavitt 1984) In recent years researchers have increasingly paid attention to the role of affect and emotionsmood in customer satis-faction studies Studies in consumer behavior show that the evaluation of services places objects or ideas is directly related to mood (affective) states of consumers consumers tend to provide more

326 Meng TUrk AnD AlTInTAS

favorable evaluations while in positive mood states and less favorable assessments in negative mood states (gouaux 1971 Isen Shalker Clark amp karp 1978 e Johnson amp Tversky 1983 knowles grove amp Burroughs 1993 Miniard Bhatla amp Sirdehmunkh 1992) Other studies indicate that the moods customers experience in a specific con-sumption situation are important components of consumer satisfaction and serve as significant pre-dictors of future consumer behavior (Dube amp Menon 2000 Mano amp Oliver 1993 Mayr amp Zins 2011 McQuitty Finn amp Wiley 2000 Westbrook amp Oliver 1991)

Consumer behaviorists and marketers have extensively examined the nature and role of cus-tomer satisfaction in a variety of service settings however the influence of emotional states (such as mood) on service evaluation and postconsumption behavior has been largely neglected or given scant attention (Huang 2010 liljander amp Mattsson 2002 Mattila amp Wirtz 2000) Accumulated evi-dence in recent years suggests that such emotional states indeed bias research outcomes and associated management responses (Sirakaya Petrick amp Choi 2004) A review of customer satisfaction studies indicate that most researchers remain oblivious to the findings emerging from this line of research by neglecting the collection and analysis of additional data related to affective states of customers Invest-ment in additional data collection and appropriate adjustment of ratings in the presence of bias are paramount to successful management of operations as well as employee reward programs The notion that such additional efforts in data collection and analyses can be relatively cumbersome cannot negate the potential benefits of obtaining accurate assessments of business performance

Tourism activities are experiential and involve emotional aspects in many occasions Since tour-ism operations exhibit a high degree of interaction between service employees and tourists custom-ersrsquo moods could be influenced by services and attitudes of front-line employees (Mattila amp enz 2002) In fact the complexity process nature and variability of services cause customersrsquo moods to fluctuate during the evaluation stage (liljander amp Mattsson 2002) making study outcomes less reli-able This is especially true in a packaged tour situ-ation in which tourists have the closest interactions

with travel agents tour guides airlines and destina-tion service providers for the entire trip compared to other forms of travel Therefore touristsrsquo moods and emotions can affect service quality evaluations satisfaction and even subsequent travel intentions In other words although tourists might have just received the same service in kind and quality the mood states of tourists could result in different eval-uation scores and future return intentions

In order to generate a more accurate understand-ing of the nature and context of tourist satisfaction there is a need to examine the importance and the role of mood on service evaluations especially in all-inclusive packaged tour settings where such studies are scant at best The research objectives of this particular study are threefold 1) to determine service quality dimensions of tour operations in an all-inclusive package trip context 2) to explore the effect of tour operatorrsquos service quality dimensions on consumerrsquos overall trip satisfaction and 3) to examine how mood influences the nature and mag-nitude of the relationship between tour operation service evaluations and overall trip satisfaction A pioneering and perhaps the most comprehensive study in tourism by Sirakaya et al (2004) in this area examined the effect of mood in a cruise travel context and reported partial mood effect However scarce research has been undertaken on moodrsquos moderating role on customer satisfaction and the nature of service quality determinants of all-inclu-sive tour operations In this regard the present study contributes to a growing body of knowledge on the efficacy of mood states for the research and management of tourism services

literature review and research Model

Service Quality and Satisfaction Related to Tour Operations

Within the emerging body of literature of ldquocus-tomer satisfactionrdquo and ldquoservice qualityrdquo a number of studies have been conducted regarding postpur-chase service evaluation and the impact of such evaluations on consumersrsquo future purchase behav-ior (McDougall amp levesque 1994 Oliver 1980 Parasuraman Zeithaml amp Berry 1985 1988 1994 Parasuraman Berry amp Zeithaml 1991) Service quality has been considered a critical factor for the success of experience-based businesses such as

TOUr OPerATOrSrsquo SerVICe QUAlITy 327

recreation tourism and hospitality (Crompton Mackay amp Fesenmaier 1991 Fick amp ritchie 1991 lewis amp Chambers 1989 Mackay amp Crompton 1988 1990 Oh amp Parks 1997 Ostrowski OrsquoBrien amp gordon 1993 Pyo 2007 Saleh amp ryan 1991) Among the numerous studies that differentiate between goodsrsquo quality and ser-vice quality Parasuraman et alrsquos series of studies (1985 1988 1991 1994) are widely recognized as seminal Commonly referred to as PZB these authors demonstrated that services are distin-guished from goods based on four characteristics which are widely known as intangibility perish-ability heterogeneity and inseparability of produc-tion and consumption These characteristics of services underscore the importance of the interac-tion between a provider and its customers during service delivery and have thus been the foci of research and management of tourism operations (ekinci 2003 Qu ryan amp Chu 2001 Vogt amp Fesenmaier 1995)

Service transactions require interaction between multiple parties (customers service delivery staff management and so on) and are perceptual in nature Among the popular conceptions of service quality models the PZB model asserts that the evaluation of service quality is to a large extent based on customersrsquo expectations (ie what should be delivered) and perceived performance of the ser-vice (ie what was delivered) across multiple par-ties (Parasuraman et al 1985 1988 1994) The discrepancies or ldquogapsrdquo between expectations and perceptions are generally used by customers and marketers to determine the quality characteristics of service transactions SerVQUAl the instru-ment proposed by PZB was tested and refined by other researchers in various tourism service sectors such as airlines hotels restaurants and ski areas (see eg Chi amp Qu 2009 Fick amp ritchie 1991 lewis amp Chambers 1989 Saleh amp ryan 1991)

Customer satisfaction is a closely related con-struct to service quality and has received substan-tial attention from researchers and industry practitioners alike Tourism experience is the ulti-mate product that the industry sells and promotes to customers The outcome of the tourism experience is highly dependent on the quality of tour opera-tions offered to tourists and is represented and evaluated by ldquotangiblerdquo facilitiesamenities and the

ldquointangiblerdquo service encounters (Oh amp Parks 1997 Sirakaya Petrick amp Choi 2004) This categoriza-tion of tour service performance is in accordance with gronroosrsquos (1984) two sets of quality dimen-sions technical and functional quality Technical quality refers to the core productsservices a cus-tomer receives (eg hotel rooms recreational and entertainment facilities) whereas functional qual-ity refers to how well the service is delivered or the customerrsquos perception of contacts with various ser-vice staff Additional research findings suggest that service evaluation includes a functional component (the content of the service) and a performance delivery component (the delivery process) (Czepiel Solomon Surprenant amp gutman 1985) Therefore customer satisfaction is a function of the perception of the totality of a consumption experience which includes the ldquowhatrdquo and ldquohowrdquo aspects of services and is influenced by factors such as social interac-tions motivations mood preexisting andor post-attitudes as well as special events (Baker amp Crompton 2000 Bolton amp Drew 1991)

Within the tourism system tour operations constitute ldquothe dominating feature of the holiday marketrdquo (Burkart amp Medlik 1981) and directly influence the determinants of quality (Atilgan Akinci amp Aksoy 2003 Batman amp Soybali 1999) research examining the role that tour operators play in delivering satisfactory tourism experiences has been extensively studied in the past indeed service quality and customer satisfaction with tour operations has been examined by a number of researchers including but not limited to scholars such as Hudson Hudson and Miller (2004) Hjalager (2001) Hsu and lee (2002) Orsquoneill Williams MacCarthy and groves (2000) Bowen (2001) Atilgan et al (2003) and geva and goldman (1989) In a group package tour setting functions and services of tour providers including the tour guides and other staff can be crucial fac-tors in determining customer satisfaction (see Cohen 1985 Schmidt 1979 Wang Hsieh amp Huan 2000) For example geva and goldmanrsquos 1989 study identified four dimensions of tourist expectations and satisfaction related to all-inclu-sive tours instrumental aspects (hotels meals and local services) social activities (group membersrsquo relationships and entertainment) tour guidersquos per-formance and personal experience Bowen (2001)


explored the antecedents of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction on long-haul inclusive tours This study found six antecedents of satisfaction including expectation performance disconfirma-tion attribution emotion and equity among which performance was reported to have the greatest effect on customer satisfaction In Millan and estebanrsquos study (2004) the authors developed a six-dimensional measurement scale of satisfaction with travel agency services service encounters empathy reliability service environment effi-ciency of advice and additional attributes The per-ceived quality of all-inclusive tours also depends largely on the tour operation staffrsquos service quality (Ap amp Wong 2001 Zhang amp Chow 2004) which involves the concept of emotional labor (Van Dijk Smith amp Cooper 2011 Wong amp Wang 2009) In sum consistent with what Oliver (1997) suggested more than a decade ago research in customer satisfaction with tour operations indicates both cognitive and emotional attributes are essential components of post-purchase evaluations (Brunner-Sperdin Peters amp Strobl 2012)

Mood and Consumer EvaluationsSatisfaction

There is a plethora of marketing and tourism studies on service quality and customer satisfac-tion however most research if not all is based on the general premise that tourists are able to reflect their cognition accurately and free of bias (Bejou edvaardsson amp rakowski 1996 Chi amp Qu 2009 Danaher amp Arweiler 1996 leBlanc 1992 Teye amp leclerc 1998 yucelt amp Marcella 1996) Accord-ing to Peterson and Wilson (1992) the majority of responses in all self-reported customer satisfaction surveys indicate that customers seem largely satis-fied and the distribution of scores is negatively skewed This positivity bias or negatively skewed satisfaction rating may lead to the real question that should be asked ldquoto what extent do customersrsquo self-reports of satisfaction reflect the lsquotruersquo satis-faction ratings of tourism operations Are there any other variables that systematically or artificially influence customer satisfaction ratingsrdquo (Peterson amp Wilson 1992 p 62)

There are a limited number of studies in the general service literature that examine the impact of affective states such as mood and emotions

generated by leisure consumption experiences and even fewer studies focus on the moderating impact of mood states on tourist satisfaction (eg Sirakaya et al 2004 Zins 2002) For tourism operators and managers it is important to examine the mood state of a customer during a service encounter as well as the mood he or she is in while formally evaluating the service In-depth understanding of moodrsquos impact might help detect touristsrsquo true states of mind and generate a capacity to maintain enhance or repair customersrsquo mood states and related ser-vice experiences through various management and contextual means

In this study mood is defined as ldquoa type of mild transient and generalized affective state reflecting onersquos feelings at a specific moment and situationrdquo in accordance with most commonly used defini-tions in the marketing literature (see eg Comer 1980 Curren amp Harich 1994 gardner 1985 Hornik 1993 Isen Clark amp Schwartz 1976 knowles grover amp Burroughs 1993 Park lennon amp Stoel 2005 Swinyard 1993) According to the literature mood and emotions are different in terms of duration and the degree of arousal however they are widely used interchangeably in practical consumer research due to the difficulty of differen-tiating between the short moment of an intense emotion and subsequent longer-lasting positive or negative mood states (Bagozzi gopinath amp nyer 1999 liljander amp Mattsson 2002 Mattila amp Wirtz 2000) Mood has been reported to affect an individualrsquos memory information processing and evaluations (Bagozzi et al 1999 gardner 1985) and can be pervasive and may redirect judgment thoughts decision making and actions (Isen 1984 Mattila amp Wirtz 2000 Vohs Baumeister amp loewenstein 2007)

Customer satisfaction itself can be conceptual-ized as an emotional response to direct product experiences emerging studies in the realm of con-sumer behavior (Han amp Back 2007 knowles et al 1993 lee Back amp kim 2009 Miniard Bhatla amp Sirdeshmukh 1992) have consistently demon-strated that mood can be influenced by service pro-vidersrsquo behavior or service environment thus to some extent they can be reflective of how consum-ers feel about their encounters with service provid-ers (ruyter amp Bloemer 1999 Saacutenchez-garciacutea amp Curraacutez-Peacuterez 2011)


A limited number of studies have empirically tested the hypothesis that customers in a positive mood are likely to evaluate service performance more positively than customers in a negative mood (Bagozzi et al 1999 gardner 1985 liljander amp Mattsson 2002) For example Bagozzi et al (1999) classified the influence of mood states on memory into three broad categories retrieval effect encoding effect and state-dependent learn-ing Affectmood had a statistically significant effect on the retrieval of information A person in a ldquopositive mood staterdquo at the time of encoding can exhibit superior recall of positive materials rather than neutral and negative ones (nasby amp yando 1982 Teasdale amp russell 1983) Similarly knowles et al (1993) found that inducing people into positive mood states can have significant effect on their recall memory the subjects recalled sig-nificantly more information than those in a nega-tive mood In terms of the encoding effect a person who is in a positive mood state at the time of learn-ing can recall positive materials more readily at a later point in time regardless of the mood state at the time of recall (Mattila 1998 nasby amp yando 1982) People also tend to recall learned materials more easily when the mood state at recall matches that at encoding (Bower amp Cohen 1982 Mackie amp Worth 1991)

liljander and Mattsson (2002) commented that existing empirical studies of mood effects have been conducted in laboratory settings (such as classroom) where subjectsrsquo moods were induced artificially the mood lasted a short period of time and may not reflect real-world situations (gardner 1985 Hornik 1993 knowles groves amp Pickett 1999) Other studies have tested the interaction between mood and evaluations of shopping experi-ences (Swinyard 1993) mood in extended service settings and its relationship with satisfaction and loyalty (ruyter amp Bloemer 1999) and moodrsquos effect on evaluations of instructors and courses (Comer 1980 Munz amp Munz 1997)

Mixed results have also been reported regarding the mood effect on consumersrsquo evaluation and sat-isfaction Miniard et al (1992) revealed that mood can influence postconsumption brand attitudes and that such effects are moderated by the affective intensity of the consumption experience However the authors reported that mood effects did not exist

when consumption evoked very strong positive or negative responses no mood effect was found in knowles et alrsquos study (1999) where the authors tested the effect of mood on PZB SerVQUAl dimensions Moreover the majority of the studies also suggest that moodrsquos effect on memory recall storage and evaluation is asymmetrical meaning that individuals in positive moods react to market-ing stimuli more positively than those in neutral or negative states (Bagozzi et al 1999) In the same study Bagozzi et al (1999) reported that familiar-ity with the evaluated object may eliminate any mood effects indicating that mood effects might be nonexistent or at least diminished for services that are provided repeatedly (liljander amp Mattsson 2002) According to Mattila and Wirtz (2000) con-flicting research results and the scarcity of empiri-cal field research on the moderating role of mood on service evaluation and customer satisfaction calls for more studies especially in the less-studied tourism field

Research Model

Based on the aforementioned findings in the lit-erature Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual frame-work of the study Accordingly the study proposes two hypotheses

Hypothesis 1 The evaluation of tour operatorsrsquo service quality impacts touristsrsquo overall trip satisfaction

Hypothesis 2 Touristsrsquo mood states moderate the nature and the magnitude of the relationship between the evaluation of tour operatorrsquos service quality and touristsrsquo overall satisfaction

The research framework suggests touristsrsquo moods have a moderating rather than a mediating effect A moderating variable influences the direc-tion andor strength of the relationship between the independent variables (in this study evaluation of tour operatorrsquos service quality) and the dependent variable (ie tourist overall trip satisfaction) A mediating effect on the other hand implies a causal relationship between the independent and depen-dent variables (Baron amp kenny 1986) The evi-dence in the relevant literature more strongly


suggests mood has a moderating rather than a mediating effect on touristsrsquo evaluations of tour operations and their overall satisfaction

The research framework also includes proxy variables such as return intentions and word of mouth and implies exogenous relationships between touristsrsquo overall trip satisfaction and their return intentions (Hypothesis 3a) and word of mouth (Hypothesis 3b) However it is not the pur-pose of the study to assess relationships among all outcome variables and these two variables have been added only to establish the validity of the main outcome variable (overall trip satisfaction) Therefore these two hypotheses are not tested in this particular study More compelling evidence in the literature would be needed to suggest these rela-tionships are significant and are beyond the scope of this article

Methodology

Study Variables and Measures

Study constructs and the survey instrument were developed based on the literature review of the related concepts The independent variablemdashtour-istsrsquo evaluations of service quality of tour opera-tionsmdashwas measured using a 36-item 5-point likert-type scale (geva amp goldman 1989 1991 Weiermair amp Fuchs 1999) The travelers were asked to report their prior expectations of the trip quality and indicate the extent of tour operatorsrsquo perfor-mance related to their expectations The scale ranged

from ldquo1 = performed worse than my expectationrdquo to ldquo5 = performed better than my expectationrdquo

The dependent variable for this study is overall trip satisfaction (OTS) and was operationalized by asking respondents to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed with six-item questions regard-ing the overall vacation experience (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree) (Fornell Johnson Anderson Cha amp Bryant 1996 M D Johnson gustafsson Andreassen lervik amp Cha 2001) The overall trip satisfaction scale was comprised of six questions Vacation in Turkey ldquogave me unique or special momentsrdquo ldquohad special meaning to merdquo ldquowas as good as I expectedrdquo ldquowas satisfying to merdquo ldquostands out as one of my best experiencesrdquo and ldquowas worth the price I paid for itrdquo To establish validity two correlates of satisfaction in this study were behavioral intention items touristsrsquo intention to return (ldquoHow likely is that you could come back to spend your vacation in Turkey in the futurerdquo) and word of mouth (ldquoHow likely is that you would recommend Turkey to your friends and relativesrdquo) measured on a scale ranging from 1 = highly unlikely to 6 = highly likely

The mood scale was used to investigate the manipulation effect of mood on service evaluation of tour operations (adapted from the Peterson amp Sauber 1983 mood short form) The scale consisted of four likert-type scale items ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree Sociodemographic information of travelers such as gender age educa-tion household income occupation and family

Figure 1 research framework


status were also collected to provide more back-ground information on the respondents

Data Collection and Sample

Data were collected using a self-administered survey method Questionnaires were distributed to a collaborating Turkish tour operator who adminis-tered the questionnaire survey to the tour groups they received A contact tour guide along with other tour guides in the collaborating tour com-pany helped to collect data in the Mediterranean region of Turkey which is described as the Turkish riviera The survey instrument contained the study variables along with other information requested by the company The questionnaires were first translated into german by professional translators and then back to english by one of the authors who is bilingual The translation was then checked for accuracy meaning and grammar by a select group of company tour guides who are fluent in german At the company headquarters tour guides partici-pated in training seminars during which data col-lection procedures were explained and half of the monetary incentive (euro100) for their role in collect-ing data was distributed At the end of the 7-day stay (6 nights) and immediately before departure from Turkey to germany the tour guides distrib-uted and collected the surveys A systematic ran-dom sampling procedure was employed for selecting the tour buses each day the company manages around three to ten busloads of all-inclu-sive vacationers (ranging from 15ndash40 people) from germany The researchers were given the list of arrival and pick-up times according to inbound flight schedules of the companyrsquos chartered air-planes Although a statistically random method of sample selection was intended by alternating the pick-up days and times randomization in a truly statistical sense was not possible because of the short time frame of the data collection (2 months) and varying volume of tourist arrivals during each season Moreover since the tour guides could not be controlled in terms of how they distributed and collected the surveys the randomization process might have been skewed As such events beyond the control of the researchers might have under-mined the intended sampling scheme Thus the obtained surveys may not truly represent customers

of the company within a year Incentives were also offered to participating vacationers tourists were automatically entered into a drawing for a mini vacation (airfare and accommodation only) in Turkey for a week during the following year prizes were later distributed via a notarized drawing A sample of 500 all-inclusive travelers was identified to fill out a structured questionnaire Of these a total of 365 useable questionnaires were applied to the data analysis indicating a response rate of 73 which is sufficient to continue analysis without a nonresponse bias

Statistical Analysis

Data analyses consisted of several steps First data were explored for errors distribution and out-liers and the demographic characteristics of the respondents were provided Second the principal component extraction method with Varimax rota-tion (exploratory factor analysis) was applied to delineate the underlying domains of 36-item ser-vice quality appraisals of tour operations Third factor analysis was used to test the dimension of the mood scale and overall trip satisfaction scale and Cronbachrsquos alpha coefficient was applied to test the reliability of the two scales (Churchill 1979) Fourth composite scores for the tour operatorrsquos service quality dimensions mood scale and overall trip satisfaction scale were computed as model variables Fifth correlation analysis was performed to examine the correlations among all independent variables and the dependent variable Finally a two-stage regression analysis was utilized to test the moderating effect of mood on the relationship between tour operation service evaluation and overall trip satisfaction A comparison was further-more conducted between low (bad) and high (good) mood groups in terms of tour operation service evaluation and trip satisfaction

results and Discussion

Profile of Respondents

The sample of the tourist respondents was com-posed of 454 males and 546 females and the majority of the respondents were middle-aged or senior people (433 were 46ndash64 years of age and 31 were 65 years or older) with a median age of


56 Half of the respondents (517) were employed and 368 were retired About 48 of the respon-dents had less than 13 years of education and 661 of them had an annual household income of less than euro30000 (only 78 made euro60000 annu-ally or more) Most respondents were on a 7-day all-inclusive trip to Turkey and they were experi-enced international travelers with an average of five international trips within the past 5 years (see Table 1)

Service Quality Evaluation of Tour Operations

Principal component analysis with a varimax rotation was used to determine the underlying dimensions of the 36 items measuring service

quality of tour operations (see Table 2) A cut-off point of 045 was used to include items in the inter-pretation of factors Seven attribute items were eliminated from the scale due to insufficient load-ings (less than 045) or cross-loadings As a result four factors were identified as ldquoempathyFriend-linessrdquo ldquoStaffTour guides Behaviorrdquo ldquoTourist FacilitiesAmenitiesrdquo and ldquolocal TourAttitudesrdquo The four factors explained 5794 of the total vari-ance and Cronbachrsquos alpha reliability coefficients were moderately high ranging from 069 to 092 Factor 1 ldquoEmpathyFriendlinessrdquo (Cronbachrsquos α = 092) explained 4042 of the variance in the model Factor 2 ldquoStaffTour guides Behaviorrdquo (Cronbachrsquos α = 092) explained 777 of the vari-ance Factor 3 ldquoTourist FacilitiesAmenitiesrdquo (Cronbachrsquos α = 077) explained 537 of the vari-ance whereas Factor 4 ldquolocal TourAttitudesrdquo (Cronbachrsquos α = 069) explained an additional 439 of the variance in the data set A composite score was calculated for each of the factors by aver-aging the scale items for the subsequent regression analysis which examined the impact of mood on service quality evaluations of the tour operators

The Mood ScaleAmong the four items of mood scale the data of

two items (ldquoFor some reason I am not very com-fortable right nowrdquo and ldquoAt this moment I feel edgyrdquo) were reversed to align with the rest of the scale items Factor analysis with principles compo-nent extraction method was then used to extract the mood scale from these four items A cut-off point of 045 was used to include items in the interpreta-tion of the mood factor As expected all items loaded on one factor reflecting the homogeneity of mood descriptors and confirming the scale devel-oped by Peterson and Sauber (1983) The Cronbachrsquos alpha reliability coefficient was 072 and the four items explained nearly 556 of the total variance in the original data set with an eigenvalue of 222 The grand mean of 367 for these items indicated that respondents were overall in a moderately highpositive state when they were evaluating their tour experience and tour opera-torsrsquo performance (see Table 3) A composite score was calculated for subsequent analyses (again the two reversed items were used in the data computation)

Table 1Demographics and Travel Characteristics of the respondents (N = 317)

Characteristics Sample

Statistics

gender Male 454 Female 546Age 16ndash29 years 80 30ndash45 years 177 46ndash64 years 433 65 years and older 310Annual household income (before taxes) less than euro9999a 145 euro10000ndash29999 516 euro30000ndash59999 252 euro60000 or more 87education level less than high school 372 High school degree 105 learned professionb 289 Technical school 118 Four-year college or university degree 76 graduate degree 23 Other 16employment status employed 517 Full-time homemaker 52 retired 368 Unemployed 33 Student 29Average (median) international trips taken in the past 5 years 5Average (median) nights spent in Turkey 7

aAs of August 2009 the exchange rate of US$ is 071bThree to 4 years of professional education after +10 years of basic education


Overall Trip Satisfaction

Factor analysis with principles component extraction method was used to extract the overall vacation satisfaction scale from six items A cut-off point of 045 was used to include items in the interpretation of the mood factor All items loaded on one factor reflecting the homogeneity of sat-isfaction descriptors The Cronbachrsquos alpha

reliability coefficient was 086 and the six items explained nearly 586 of the total error variance in the original data set with an eigenvalue of 352 The grand mean of 364 for these items indi-cated that respondents were overall in a moder-ately satisfactory state when they were evaluating their overall vacation satisfaction (see Table 4) Again a composite score was calculated for sub-sequent analyses

Table 2exploratory Factor Analysis With Varimax rotation

Scales

Factor loadings

Mean SD F1 F2 F3 F4 α

Factor 1 empathyFriendliness 3202 607 092 Attending my needs promptly 340 083 075 Interested in solving my problems 343 084 074 Understanding my specific needs 338 083 073 Staff made traveling more enjoyable 371 083 068 Coach (guides attendance guides interpretation coachrsquos seating arrangement etc) 374 097 068 Pretour briefing (references to shopping food fees etc) 333 102 067 Visiting scenic spots (manner and content of the guidersquos interpretation of scenic-spots additions or deductions of scenic-spots) 376 098 067 got things right first time 340 076 066 Staff (travel guide) never too busy to respond 387 083 064Factor 2 StaffTour guides Behavior 3597 596 092 Delivered services on time 352 072 074 knowledgeable staff 371 077 072 Staff consistently courteous 383 078 072 Behavior of staff gave confidence 352 075 062 Staff made me feel secure 363 074 062 Staff always willing to help 381 072 062 Travelersrsquo best interests at heart 358 080 059 Individualized attention to travelers 345 083 055 Staff kept customers informed 340 080 050 no excessive waiting time 351 087 048Factor 3 Tourist FacilitiesAmenities 2107 322 077 Transfers (to and from airport hotels etc) 367 074 068 Accommodations (hotel rooms hotel facilities) 353 083 066 restaurants (quality consideration to dietary habits etc) 351 085 062 good facilities 365 074 059 Bus was highly suitable 354 079 053 Airplanersquos seating arrangement (custom and immigration procedures baggage handling etc) 319 081 045Factor 4 local TourAttitudes 1249 501 069 Optional tour (content and addition of optional tours treatment of nonparticipating customers fees etc) 294 089 069 Attitude of locals toward visitors 333 084 063 Individual shopping (quality availability manner of shopping product refunds etc) 319 079 061 Tips (the manner of tip collection by the guide etc) 304 063 059eigenvalue 1172 225 156 127explained variance by factors () 4042 777 537 439

Items measured on a 5-point likert scale kMO measure of sampling adequacy = 094 Barlettrsquos test of significance p = 001 Total variance extracted by the four factors is 5794


Moderating Effect of Mood on Tour Operation Evaluation and Trip Satisfaction

The factor scores were used in regression analy-sis to test the moderating impact of mood on the relationship between the service quality of the tour operators and overall trip satisfaction In other words service evaluation factors were used in the regression analysis model and the mood scale served as a moderator variable This method is standard practice when factors are to be used as inputs for another analysis (see Sirakaya 1997 Sirakaya Petrick amp Choi 2004) The following equation summarizes the computed relationship between the variables in the regression model

OTS = α + β1Factor 1 + β2Factor 2 + β3Factor 3

+ β4Factor 4 + β5Mood + β6(Mood Factor 1)

+ β7(Mood Factor 2) + β8(Mood Factor 3)

+ β9(Mood Factor 4) + ε

where OTS = touristsrsquo trip satisfaction α = inter-cept β1 β5 = regression weights of main effects (Factor 1ndash4 and Mood) β6 β9 = regression weights of independent variablesmoderators inter-action ε = error

Table 5 contains means standard deviations and a correlation matrix for the variables included in this study There were low but statistically

Table 3Factor Analysis of Mood Items (N = 317)

Factor MoodFactor

loadingMean Score eigenvalue

explained Variance

reliability Coefficient

Factor 222 5558 072 Currently I am in good mood 079 395 For some reason I am not very comfortable right now (r) 075 355 As I answer these questions I feel very cheerful 073 368 At this moment I feel edgy (r) 070 350grand mean 367Total variance explained 5558kMO = 0657Bartlettrsquos test of sphericity p = 0000

Items measured on a 5-point likert scale (1 = strongly disagree 5 = strongly agree) (r) = reversed item

Table 4Factor Analysis of Overall Trip Satisfaction Items (N = 303)

Factor Overall Trip SatisfactionFactor


explained Variance α

Factor 352 5858 086Vacation in Turkey was as good as I expected 082 37 was worth the price I paid for it 077 36 stands out as one of my best experiences 076 31 was satisfying to me 075 377 had special meaning to me 075 368 gave me unique or special moments 074 390grand mean 364Total variance explained 5858kMO = 0845Bartlettrsquos test of sphericity p = 0000

Items measured on a 5-point likert scale (1 = strongly disagree 5 = strongly agree)


significant correlations between the mood scale the dependent variable and other variables as hypothesized by the relevant literature The mood scale was positively correlated with overall trip sat-isfaction (r = 025 p lt 0001) Factor 1 (r = 027 p lt 0001) Factor 2 (r = 021 p lt 0001) Factor 3 (r = 016 p lt 001) and Factor 4 (r = 001 p gt o05) The interaction terms (Mood Factor1 Mood Factor2 Mood Factor3 and Mood Factor4) were also positively correlated with over-all trip satisfaction (r = 049 r = 049 r = 043 r = 051 p lt 000 respectively) Overall trip satisfac-tion was significantly correlated with intention to return (r = 058 p lt 0001) and word of mouth (r = 048 p lt 0001) confirming the construct validity of this measure The above assessment of the cor-relations among the independent variables as well as between the dependent variable and independent variables showed that the low multicollinearity assumption was met in the regression analysis

regression analysis was then conducted to assess the moderating effect of mood status in evaluating tour operation quality and overall trip satisfaction This statistical technique was used to perform mod-erated regression analysis to test for the incremen-tal effect of independent variables (Tabachnick amp Fidell 1996) regression analysis was performed in two stages At the first stage the four latent vari-ables (factor) of tour operation service quality as well as mood status were included in the regression analysis At the second stage the interaction terms (the product of mood status and each of the four tour operation service factors) were added into the regression model The moderating effect of mood exists when the interaction terms are found to be statistically significant in the regression or a change in R2 is statistically significant between analysis stage 1 and 2 A preliminary screening of the data for multivariate normality multicollinear-ity and heteroscedasticity suggested that the model did not violate the Gauss-Markov regression assumptions Therefore identified parameters can be regarded as ldquobest linear unbiased and effi-cientrdquo (gujarati 1988)

regarding the first stage of analysis the model testing of the relationship between main effects (service quality Factor 1 2 3 4 and Mood) and total trip satisfaction was statistically significant (R2 = 040 F = 3328 p lt 0001) explaining 403

of the variation in the model At the second stage of analysis four interaction terms (Mood Factor1 Mood Factor2 Mood Factor3 and Mood Factor4) were added to the main effects model and the result was statistically significant (R2 = 043 F = 2026 p lt 0001) explaining 429 of the vari-ation in the model The change in R2 from the main effects model to the full model was significant (ΔR2 = 003 p lt 005) indicating that the moderat-ing effects of mood on tour operatorrsquos service eval-uation explained a significant amount of variance with respect to overall trip satisfaction In the model the main effects Factor 2 ldquoStaffTour guide Behaviorrdquo (β2 = 121 t = 257 p lt 005) and Mood (β5 = 059 t = 203 p lt 005) were significant Among the four interaction terms for the main effects (Factor 1 2 3 and 4) two interaction termsmdashMood Factor 2 ldquoStaffTour guide Behav-iorrdquo (β7 = minus179 t = minus242 p lt 005) and Mood Factor 4 ldquoLocal TourAttitudesrdquo (β9 = 113 t = 201 p lt 005)mdashaccounted for a significant amount of incremental variance pointing to a significant moderating effect of mood related to tour operation service evaluations (see Table 6)

Therefore based on the regression analysis results the overall model contained two main effects (Factor 2 ldquoStaffTour guide Behaviorrdquo and Mood) and two interaction effects (Mood Factor 2 ldquoStaffTour guide Behaviorrdquo and Mood Factor 4 ldquolocal TourAttitudesrdquo) It indicated a significant direct and indirect mood effect when predicting customersrsquo overall trip satisfaction The full regres-sion equation can be described as

Touristsrsquo overall trip satisfaction [OTS]

= 121[β2]StaffTour guide Behavior

+ 059[β5]Mood ndash 179[β7]Mood

StaffTour guide Behavior

+ 113[β9]Mood local TourAttitudes

The β7 coefficient for the product term suggests that the interaction effect of mood Factor 2 (ldquoStaffTour guide Behaviorrdquo) was the most impor-tant predictor of overall trip satisfaction followed by the main effect of stafftour guide behavior (β2 = 121) Stafftour guide behavior and mood as indi-vidual variables which have main effects are both


Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05


positively associated with touristsrsquo overall tour sat-isfaction For the product term Mood local TourAttitudes as respondents move to better mood states (ie a unit increase in mood) the slope for evaluation of local tourattitudes on customersrsquo overall tour satisfaction (OTS) would increase by 113 units (the positive slope for Factor 4 ldquolocal TourAttituderdquo becoming incrementally stronger and more positive ie the slope becomes steeper) Similarly a unit increase in the evaluation of the local tourattitude attribute would make the slope for the effect of mood on OTS to increase by 113 units In other words the mood effect is greater at high levels of satisfaction with local tourattitudes than at low levels and the satisfaction with local tourattitudes effect on OTS is stronger for good mood conditions than bad ones Conversely in terms of the interaction effects of the product term Mood StaffTour guide Behavior as respondents move to worse mood states (ie one unit decrease in mood) the slope for the evaluation of stafftour guide behavior on OTS would decrease by 179 units indicating that mood effect is greater at low levels of satisfaction with stafftour guide than at high levels In other words if dissatisfied with the

stafftour guide tourists in bad moods tended to give lower overall satisfaction scores (negative β7 coefficient for interaction term) than tourists in bet-ter mood conditions while if satisfied with the local tourattitudes tourists in better moods gave higher OTS scores (positive β9 for interaction term) than those in lower mood states

In order to further verify the moderating impact of mood a simple effects analysis was conducted to assess the influence of the different levels of the moderating variable (ie mood status) on touristsrsquo overall trip satisfaction Study respondents were divided into two groups using k-means cluster analysis based on the four original mood items Two clusters were identified and named as High (good) Mood group (N = 145) and low (Bad) Mood group (N = 172) (all the F values were sig-nificant at 0000 level indicating significant differ-ences between the two groups on each of the four mood items) next regression analyses were per-formed for the highlow mood groups across tour operation Factor 2 (StaffTour guide Behavior) and Factor 4 (local TourAttitudes) That is trip satisfaction was regressed using these two indepen-dent variables separately for participants in each of the highlow mood groups for comparison (see Table 7) The results showed that the effect of Factors 2 and 4 were significant in both the low (bad) mood group (R2 = 041 F = 4082 p lt 0001) and high (good) mood group (R2= 030 F = 3104 p lt 0001) Furthermore the beta coefficients for

Table 6effects of Mood on Overall Trip Satisfaction (n = 253)

VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change

Stage 1 analysis 040 3328 0000 Factor 1 034 472 Factor 2 008 098 Factor 3 006 082 Factor 4 024 368 Mood (factor) 010 185Stage 2 analysis 043 2026 0000 Factor 1 035 084 Factor 2 121 257 Factor 3 014 039 Factor 4 minus058 minus140 Mood (factor) 059 203 Mood Factor 1 minus004 minus007 Mood Factor 2 minus179 minus242 Mood Factor 3 minus012 minus020 Mood Factor 4 113 201

Dependent variable = overall trip satisfaction Factor 1 = empathyFriendliness Factor 2 = StaffTour guides Behav-ior Factor 3 = Tourist FacilitiesAmenities Factor 4 = local TourAttitudes Stage 1 analysis adjusted R2 =039 Stage 2 analysis adjusted R2 = 041p lt 0001 p lt 005

Table 7Moderating effects of Mood on Overall Trip Satisfaction Comparison of High (good) and low (Bad) Mood groups

low Mood group (N = 145)

High Mood group (N = 172)

Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4

Beta coefficient (β) 048 021 023 037t-Value 537 237 239 392R2 0409 0303F change 4082 3104Sig F change 0000 0000

Dependent variable = overall trip satisfaction Factor 2 = StaffTour guide Behavior Factor 4 = local TourAttitudesp lt 0001 p lt 005


Factors 2 and 4 were significant in both lowhigh mood groups

The value of beta coefficients in the two mood groups were different however indicating that ldquoStaffTour guide Behaviorrdquo and ldquolocal TourAttitudesrdquo had different importance in evaluating overall trip satisfaction when tourists were in low (bad) or high (good) mood states For tourists in a bad mood state StaffTour Guide Behavior (β = 048 t = 537 p lt 0001) was a more significant predictor of trip satisfaction than local TourAttitudes (β = 021 t = 237 p lt 005) Conversely when tourists were in a relatively better mood Local TourAttitudes (β = 037 t = 392 p lt 0001) was a more significant predictor of trip satisfaction than StaffTour Guide Behavior (β = 023 t = 237 p lt 005) This result validates the above conclu-sion concerning the interaction effect of Mood StaffTour guide Behavior and Mood local TourAttitudes on overall tour satisfaction

Conclusion

The primary purpose of this study was to exam-ine the moderating effect of mood on the relation-ship between service evaluation of tour operations and overall tourist satisfaction The study tested the research hypothesis ldquotouristsrsquo mood states incre-mentally influence their response on overall trip satisfaction ratingsrdquo The results of this study in line with Sirakaya et alrsquos (2004) findings demon-strate that individualsrsquo relatively bad or good mood states are reflected in their respective tour operation service evaluations when forming an overall satis-faction with the entire trip Mood and stafftour guide behavior is positively associated with overall tour satisfaction ratings Mood combined with the two factors ldquoStaffTour guide Behaviorrdquo and ldquolocal TourAttitudesrdquo has significant interaction effects on touristsrsquo overall trip satisfaction Furthermore touristsrsquo mood states generate differ-ent satisfaction scores in their evaluations of encountered services and experiences When dis-satisfied with the staff and tour guide tourists in bad moods tend to give lower overall satisfaction scores than tourists in good mood conditions whereas when they feel satisfied with the local tour experience and attitudes of the locals toward them tourists in good moods would give higher

overall trip satisfaction scores than those in bad mood states

Among the four major components of tour oper-ation service quality (ie the four factors in this study) tour operator staff and services as well as local tour and attitudes of locals were significant predictors of overall trip satisfaction Specifically for tourists in lower or bad mood states tour opera-tor staff and tour guide behavior played a more sig-nificant role in predicting overall trip satisfaction than local tour and attitude of locals Conversely when tourists had higher or better mood states evaluations of local tour and attitude of locals was a more significant predictor of overall trip satisfac-tion than tour operator staff and tour guide behav-ior The findings indicate that service components of tour operations are weighed differently in tour-istsrsquo minds depending on their mood status Apparently tourists cared more about the service from the staff and tour guides when they were in low (bad) mood states however when they were in high (good) mood states interactions with the locals counted more in the satisfaction evaluation

The mean score of the mood scale in this study was 367 indicating that overall touristsrsquo moods were slightly higher than the expected average in a normal curve and in the raw mood scores only a very small portion of the respondents reported low moods Therefore this study evaluated the effect of a relatively lower mood condition rather than extremely low mood state Further research should be conducted in settings where respondents are pre-sented with scenarios in which a true differentia-tion between bad and superior mood conditions is made possible

This particular study has both theoretical and practical implications research findings on the influence of mood on tourist evaluations and satis-faction ratings provide useful information for both researchers and marketers The findings suggest that mood can be a nuisance variable that influ-ences consumer satisfaction ratings Consumersrsquo emotional and mood states may moderate the rela-tionships among variables and give a biased result when satisfaction scores are either high or low Therefore when conducting consumer behavior studies a neutral state is preferred researchers may need to add emotional states as part of the research design and control for its moderating effect in


analysis in order to ensure true and unbiased satis-faction ratings The study findings provide support that mood states have an effect on how tour opera-tion services are assessed and how bad or good moods in particular influence overall trip satisfac-tion These finding suggests that tourism and hospi-tality researchers should take affective states such as mood and emotions into consideration in service evaluation and customer satisfaction studies

The study also has practical implications for management and marketing in the tourism industry Based on the studyrsquos findings that mood can influ-ence touristsrsquo trip satisfaction ratings tour opera-tors should be aware that satisfaction scores may not accurately reflect the true performance of employees and quality of serviceproducts but are influenced by touristsrsquo emotion and mood states Therefore when examining satisfaction ratings management may need to include mood assessment measures in the questionnaires and make adjust-ments in the satisfaction evaluations accordingly It is important to differentiate between the low-end scores and highly positive responses by separately analyzing the responses of tourists who express dis-satisfaction and those from satisfied customers due to the mood effect The results of this study also suggest potential ways in which tour operators and travel agents can increase satisfaction by improving their understandings of the complexity of tourist moodsemotions For example to achieve overall trip satisfaction for everyone tour operators need to pay more attention to the staff and tour guidesrsquo ser-vices rendered to those tourists in low or bad moods while focusing on providing quality local tour experiences to tourists in high (good) moods

This study has limitations which may put restric-tions on the implications of its findings According to Peterson and Wilson (1992) there are a number of variablesmdashlife satisfaction organizational vari-ables attitudes toward the tourism product per-sonal values and agemdashthat may influence the evaluation of tourism products and services and overall satisfaction Mood is only one of the vari-ables that could bias the assessment ratings based on psychological influence Future studies could focus on other variablesrsquo moderating effects on tour operation service evaluations and trip satisfaction Another interesting implication of the current research is the reciprocal relationship between

mood and tour operation service evaluations as mood can affect tour operation assessments and at the same time mood can be influenced by various encounters during tour operation service delivery and arrangement

Future research may examine the effect of mood on predetermined factors of satisfaction such as excitement factors or other postexperience percep-tions including loyalty to the same tour operator repeat visitation intentions and so on Mood was found to have impact on information encoding and imageimpression formation people tend to store the memory of the mood related to the initial stage of impression formation of a person or object and retrieve the evaluations influenced by previous moods when assessing the same personobject (Curren amp Harich 1994) Therefore in line with other researchersrsquo propositions such as Mattila (1998) and Sirakaya et al (2004) touristsrsquo moods should be examined not only at the postconsump-tion phase but during the prepurchase stages of decision making when images and consideration sets are formed Thus time series and experimental studies may be extremely important for understand-ing the true nature and impact of mood states on consumption behavior

references

Ap J amp Wong k k F (2001) Case study on tour guid- ing Professionalism issues and problems Tourism Management 22 551ndash563

Atilgan e Akinci S amp Aksoy S (2003) Mapping service quality in the tourism industry Managing Service Quality 13(5) 412ndash422

Bagozzi r gopinath M amp nyer P (1999) The role of emotions in marketing Journal of the Academy of Marketing Service 27 184ndash206

Baker D A amp Crompton J l (2000) Quality satisfaction and behavioral intentions Annals of Tourism Research 27(3) 785ndash804

Baron r M amp kenny D A (1986) The moderator-medi-ator variable distinction in social psychological research Conceptual strategic and statistical considerations Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51(6) 1173ndash1182

Batman O amp Soybali H H (1999) An examination of the organizational characteristics of selected german travel companies in Turkey International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 11(1) 43ndash50

Bejou D edvardsson B amp rakowski J (1996) A critical incident approach to examining the effects of service failures on customer relationships the case of Swedish


and US airlines Journal of Travel Research 35(1) 35ndash40

Bettman J r (1979) An information processing theory of consumer choice reading MA Addison-Wesley

Bolton r n amp Drew J H (1991) A multistage model of customersrsquo assessments of service quality and value Journal of Consumer Research 17 375ndash384

Bowen D (2001) Antecedents of consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction (CSD) on long-haul inclusive tours A reality check on theoretical considerations Tourism Management 22 49ndash61

Bower g amp Cohen P (1982) emotional influences in memory and thinking Data and theory In M Clark amp S Fiske (eds) Affect and cognition (pp 291ndash331) Hillsdale nJ lawrence erlbaum

Brunner-Sperdin A Peters M amp Strobl A (2012) It all about the emotional state Managing touristsrsquo experi-ences International Journal of Hospitality Management 31 23ndash30

Burkart A J amp Medlik S (1981) Tourism Past present and future london Heinemann

Chi g amp Qu H (2009) examining the relationship between touristsrsquo attribute satisfaction and overall satisfaction Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management 18(1) 4ndash25

Churchill g A (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs Journal of Marketing Research 16 64ndash73

Cohen e (1985) The tourist guide The origins structure and dynamics of a role Annals of Tourism Research 12(1) 5ndash29

Comer J (1980) The influence of mood on student evalua-tions of teaching The Journal of Educational Research 73 229ndash232

Crompton J Mackay k amp Fesenmaier D (1991) Identifying dimensions of service quality in public recre-ation Journal of Parks Recreation Administration 9(3) 15ndash27

Curren M amp Harich k (1994) Consumersrsquo mood state The mitigating influence of personal relevance on prod-uct evaluations Psychology amp Marketing 11 91ndash107

Czepiel J A Solomon M r Surprenant C F amp gutman e g (1985) Service encounters an overview In J A Czepiel M r Solomon amp C F Surprenant (eds) The service encounter Managing employeecustomer inter-action in service business (pp 3ndash15) lexingon MA DC Heath and Company

Danaher P amp Arweiler n (1996)Customer satisfaction in the tourist industry A case of visitors to new Zealand Journal of Travel Research 35(1) 89ndash93

Dube l amp Menon k (2000) Multiple roles of consump-tion emotions in post-purchase satisfaction with extended service transactions International Journal of Service Industry Management 11(3) 287ndash304

ekinci y (2003) An investigation of the determinants of customer satisfaction Tourism Analysis 8(24) 193ndash196

Fick g r amp ritchie J r (1991) Measuring service qual-ity in the travel and tourism industry Journal of Travel Research 30 2ndash9

Fornell C Johnson M D Anderson e W Cha J amp Bryant B e (1996) The American customer satisfac-tion index nature purpose and findings Journal of Marketing 60 7ndash18

gardner M (1985) Mood states and consumer behavior A critical review Journal of Consumer Research 12 281ndash300

geva A amp goldman A (1989) Changes in the perception of a service during its consumption A case of organized tours European Journal of Marketing 23(12) 44ndash52

geva A amp goldman A (1991) Satisfaction measurement in guided tours Annals of Tourism Research 18 177ndash 185

gouaux C (1971) Induced affective states and interper-sonal attraction Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 20 37ndash43

greenwald A g amp leavitt C (1984) Audience involve-ment in advertising Four levels Journal of Consumer Research 11(1) 581ndash592

gronroos C (1984) A service quality model and its market-ing implications European Journal of Marketing 18(4) 36ndash44

gujarati n (1988) Basic econometrics (2nd ed) new york Mcgraw Hill

Han H amp Back k J (2007) Assessing customersrsquo emo-tional experiences influencing their satisfaction in the lodging industry Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 23(1) 43ndash56

Hjalager A (2001) Quality in tourism through the empow-erment of tourists Managing Service Quality 11 287ndash295

Hornik J (1993) The role of affect in consumersrsquo temporal judgment Psychology amp Marketing 10 239ndash255

Hsu C H amp lee e (2002) Segmentation of senior motor-coach travelers Journal of Travel Research 40 364ndash 373

Huang S (2010) A revised importancemdashPerformance analysis of tour guide performance in China Tourism Analysis 15(2) 227ndash241

Hudson S Hudson P amp Miller g A (2004) The mea-surement of service quality in the tour operating sector A methodological comparison Journal of Travel Research 42 305ndash312

Isen A (1984) Toward understanding the role of affect in cognition In T Srull amp r Wyer (eds) Handbook of social cognition (pp 179ndash236) new Jersey lawrence erbaum Associates Inc

Isen A Clark M amp Schwartz M (1976) effects of suc-cess and failure on childrenrsquos generosity Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 27 239ndash247

Isen A Shalker T Clark M amp karp l (1978) Affect accessibility of material in memory and behavior A cognitive loop Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36 1ndash12

Johnson e amp Tversky A (1983) Affect generalization and the perception of risk Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45 20ndash31

Johnson M D gustafsson A Andreassen T W lervik l amp Cha J (2001) The evolution and future of national


customer satisfaction index models Journal of Economic Psychology 22 217ndash245

knowles P grove S amp Burroughs W (1993) An experi-mental examination of mood effects on retrieval and evaluation of advertisement and brand information Journal of Academy of Marketing Service 21 135ndash142

knowles P grove S amp Pickett g (1999) Mood versus service quality effects on customersrsquo responses to service organizations and service encounters Journal of Service Research 2 187ndash199

leBlanc g (1992) Factors affecting customer evaluation of service quality in travel agencies An investigation of customer perceptions Journal of Travel Research 30(4) 10ndash16

lee y k Back k J amp kim J y (2009) Family restau-rant brand personality and its impact on customerrsquos emotion satisfaction and brand loyalty Journal of Hospitality amp Tourism Research 33(3) 305ndash328

lewis r amp Chambers r (1989) Marketing leadership in hospitality Foundations and practices new york Vnr

liljander V amp Mattsson J (2002) Impact of customer pre-consumption mood on the evaluation of employee behavior in service encounters Psychology amp Marketing 19(10) 837ndash860

Mackay k J amp Crompton J l (1988) A conceptual model of consumer evaluation of recreation service qual-ity Leisure Sciences 7 41ndash49

Mackay k amp Crompton J (1990) Measuring the quality of recreation services Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 8(3) 47ndash56

Mackie D amp Worth l (1991) Feeling good but not thinking straight The impact of positive mood on per-suasion In J Forgas (ed) Emotion and social judg-ments (pp 201ndash219) Oxford Pergamon

Mano H amp Oliver r l (1993) Assessing the dimension-ality and structure of the consumption experience evaluation feeling and satisfaction Journal of Consumer Research 20(3) 451ndash466

Mattila A S (1998) An examination of consumersrsquo use of heuristic cues in making satisfaction judgments Psychology amp Marketing 15 477ndash501

Mattila A S amp enz C A (2002) The role of emotions in service encounters Journal of Service Research 4(4) 268ndash277

Mattila A S amp Wirtz J (2000) The role of preconsump-tion affect in postpurchase evaluation of services Psychology amp Marketing 17 587ndash605

Mayr T amp Zins A (2011) Correcting for response style effects on service quality measures Tourism Analysis 16(4) 461ndash470

McDougall g amp levesque T (1994) A revised view of service quality dimensions An empirical investigation Journal of Professional Services Marketing 11 189ndash209

McQuitty S Finn A amp Wiley J B (2000) Systematically varying consumer satisfaction and its implications for product choice Academy of Marketing Science Review 10 294ndash307

Millan A amp esteban A (2004) Development of a multi-ple-item scale for measuring customer satisfaction in travel agencies services Tourism Management 25 533ndash 546

Miniard P Bhatla S amp Sirdehmukh D (1992) Mood as a determinant of postconsumption product evaluations Mood effects and their dependency on the affective intensity of the consumption experience Journal of Consumer Psychology 1 173ndash195

Munz D amp Munz H (1997) Student mood and teaching evaluations Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 12 233ndash242

nasby W amp yando r (1982) Selective encoding and retrieval of affectively valent information Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43 1244ndash1253

Oh H amp Parks S C (1997) Customer satisfaction and service quality A critical review of the literature and research implications for the hospitality industry Hospitality Research Journal 20 (3) 35ndash64

Oliver r l (1980) A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions Journal of Marketing Research 17(4) 460ndash469

Oliver r (1993) Cognitive affective and attribute bases of the satisfaction response Journal of Consumer Research 20 418ndash430

Oliver r (1997) Satisfaction A behavioral perspective on the consumer new york Mcgraw-Hill

Orsquoneill M A Williams P MacCarthy M amp groves r (2000) Diving into service qualitymdashThe dive tour oper-ator perspective Managing Service Quality 10(3) 131ndash140

Ostrowski P l OrsquoBrien T V amp gordon g l (1993) Service quality and customer loyalty in the commercial airline industry Journal of Travel Research 32 16ndash24

Park J lennon S J amp Stoel l (2005) On-line product presentation effects on mood perceived risk and pur-chase intention Psychology amp Marketing 22 695ndash719

Parasuraman A Berry l l amp Zeithaml V A (1991) refinement and reassessment of the SerVQUAl scale Journal of Retailing 67(4) 420ndash450

Parasuraman A Zeithaml V A amp Berry l l (1985) A conceptual model of service quality and its implica-tions for future research Journal of Marketing 49 41ndash50

Parasuraman A Zeithaml V A amp Berry l l (1988) SerVQUAl A multiple-item scale for measuring con-sumer perceptions of service quality Journal of Retailing 64 12ndash40

Parasuraman A Zeithaml V A amp Berry l l (1994) Alternative scales for measuring service quality A com-parative assessment based on psychometric and diagnos-tic criteria Journal of Retailing 70(3) 201ndash230

Peterson r amp Sauber M (1983) A mood scale for survey research Proceedings of the American Marketing Associationrsquos Educatorsrsquo Conference (pp 409ndash414) Chicago AMA

Peterson r amp Wilson W (1992) Measuring customer sat-isfaction Fact and artifact Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 20 61ndash71


Pyo S (2007) DeA application for the tourist satisfaction management Tourism Analysis 12(3) 201ndash211

Qu H ryan B amp Chu r (2001) A study of travelersrsquo satisfaction levels in Hong kong three hotel market seg-ments Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism 1(3) 65ndash83

ruyter k amp Bloemer J (1999) Customer loyalty in extended service settings International Journal of Service Industry Management 10 320ndash336

Saleh F amp ryan C (1991) Analyzing service quality in the hospitality industry using the SerVQUAl model The Services Industry Journal 11 324ndash343

Saacutenchez-garciacutea I amp Curraacutes-Peacuterez r (2011) effects of dissatisfaction in tourist services The role of anger and regret Tourism Management 32 1397ndash1406

Schmidt C J (1979) The guided tour Insulated adventure Urban Life 7(4) 441ndash467

Sirakaya e (1997) Attitudinal compliance with ecotourism guidelines Annals of Tourism Research 24 919ndash950

Sirakaya e Petrick J amp Choi H (2004) The role of mood on tourism product evaluations Annals of Tourism Research 31 517ndash539

Swinyard W (1993) The effects of mood involvement and quality of store experience on shopping intentions Journal of Consumer Research 20(2) 271ndash280

Tabachnick B amp Fidell l (1996) Using multivariate sta-tistics (3rd ed) new york Harper Collins College Publishers

Teasdale J amp russell M (1983) Differential effects of induced mood on the recall of positive negative and neu-tral words British Journal of Clinical Psychology 22 163ndash171

Teye V amp leclerc D (1998) Product and service delivery satisfaction among north American cruise passengers Tourism Management 19 153ndash160

Van Dijk P A Smith l D g amp Cooper B k (2011) Are you for real An evaluation of the relationship between emotional labor and visitor outcomes Tourism Management 32(1) 39ndash45

Vogt C amp Fesenmaier D r (1995) Tourist and retailers perceptions of services Annals of Tourism Research 22 763ndash780

Vohs k D Baumeister r F amp loewenstein g (2007) Do emotions help or hurt decision making A hedgefox-ian perspective new york russell Sage

Wang k Hsieh A amp Huan T C (2000) Critical service features in group package tour an exploratory research Tourism Management 21 177ndash189

Weiermair k amp Fuchs M (1999) Measuring tourist judg-ment in service quality Annals of Tourism Research 26(4) 1004ndash1021

Westbrook r amp Oliver r (1991) The dimensionality of consumption emotion patterns and consumer satisfac-tion Journal of Consumer Research 18 84ndash91

Wong J y amp Wang C H (2009) emotional labor of the tour leaders An exploratory study Tourism Management 30(2) 249ndash259

yucelt U amp Marcella M (1996) Services marketing in the lodging industry An empirical investigation Journal of Travel Research 34(4) 32ndash38

Zhang H Q amp Chow I (2004) Application of impor-tance-performance model in tour guidesrsquo performance evidence from mainland Chinese outbound visitors in Hong kong Tourism Management 25 81ndash91

Zins A H (2002) Consumption emotions experience qual-ity and satisfaction A structural analysis for complainers versus non-complainers Journal of Travel amp Tourism Marketing 12(23) 3ndash18


favorable evaluations while in positive mood states and less favorable assessments in negative mood states (gouaux 1971 Isen Shalker Clark amp karp 1978 e Johnson amp Tversky 1983 knowles grove amp Burroughs 1993 Miniard Bhatla amp Sirdehmunkh 1992) Other studies indicate that the moods customers experience in a specific con-sumption situation are important components of consumer satisfaction and serve as significant pre-dictors of future consumer behavior (Dube amp Menon 2000 Mano amp Oliver 1993 Mayr amp Zins 2011 McQuitty Finn amp Wiley 2000 Westbrook amp Oliver 1991)

Consumer behaviorists and marketers have extensively examined the nature and role of cus-tomer satisfaction in a variety of service settings however the influence of emotional states (such as mood) on service evaluation and postconsumption behavior has been largely neglected or given scant attention (Huang 2010 liljander amp Mattsson 2002 Mattila amp Wirtz 2000) Accumulated evi-dence in recent years suggests that such emotional states indeed bias research outcomes and associated management responses (Sirakaya Petrick amp Choi 2004) A review of customer satisfaction studies indicate that most researchers remain oblivious to the findings emerging from this line of research by neglecting the collection and analysis of additional data related to affective states of customers Invest-ment in additional data collection and appropriate adjustment of ratings in the presence of bias are paramount to successful management of operations as well as employee reward programs The notion that such additional efforts in data collection and analyses can be relatively cumbersome cannot negate the potential benefits of obtaining accurate assessments of business performance

Tourism activities are experiential and involve emotional aspects in many occasions Since tour-ism operations exhibit a high degree of interaction between service employees and tourists custom-ersrsquo moods could be influenced by services and attitudes of front-line employees (Mattila amp enz 2002) In fact the complexity process nature and variability of services cause customersrsquo moods to fluctuate during the evaluation stage (liljander amp Mattsson 2002) making study outcomes less reli-able This is especially true in a packaged tour situ-ation in which tourists have the closest interactions

with travel agents tour guides airlines and destina-tion service providers for the entire trip compared to other forms of travel Therefore touristsrsquo moods and emotions can affect service quality evaluations satisfaction and even subsequent travel intentions In other words although tourists might have just received the same service in kind and quality the mood states of tourists could result in different eval-uation scores and future return intentions

In order to generate a more accurate understand-ing of the nature and context of tourist satisfaction there is a need to examine the importance and the role of mood on service evaluations especially in all-inclusive packaged tour settings where such studies are scant at best The research objectives of this particular study are threefold 1) to determine service quality dimensions of tour operations in an all-inclusive package trip context 2) to explore the effect of tour operatorrsquos service quality dimensions on consumerrsquos overall trip satisfaction and 3) to examine how mood influences the nature and mag-nitude of the relationship between tour operation service evaluations and overall trip satisfaction A pioneering and perhaps the most comprehensive study in tourism by Sirakaya et al (2004) in this area examined the effect of mood in a cruise travel context and reported partial mood effect However scarce research has been undertaken on moodrsquos moderating role on customer satisfaction and the nature of service quality determinants of all-inclu-sive tour operations In this regard the present study contributes to a growing body of knowledge on the efficacy of mood states for the research and management of tourism services

literature review and research Model

Service Quality and Satisfaction Related to Tour Operations

Within the emerging body of literature of ldquocus-tomer satisfactionrdquo and ldquoservice qualityrdquo a number of studies have been conducted regarding postpur-chase service evaluation and the impact of such evaluations on consumersrsquo future purchase behav-ior (McDougall amp levesque 1994 Oliver 1980 Parasuraman Zeithaml amp Berry 1985 1988 1994 Parasuraman Berry amp Zeithaml 1991) Service quality has been considered a critical factor for the success of experience-based businesses such as




















Research Model








Methodology


























Statistics








Scales

Factor loadings














Factor MoodFactor


explained Variance























Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references



























































































































Research Model








Methodology


























Statistics








Scales

Factor loadings














Factor MoodFactor


explained Variance























Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references











































































































Methodology


























Statistics








Scales

Factor loadings














Factor MoodFactor


explained Variance























Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references



























































































































Statistics








Scales

Factor loadings














Factor MoodFactor


explained Variance























Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references













































































































Scales

Factor loadings














Factor MoodFactor


explained Variance























Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references


















































































































Factor MoodFactor


explained Variance























Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references





















































































































Tabl

e 5

Mea

ns S

Ds

and

Cor

rela

tions

Bet

wee

n V

aria

bles

Var

iabl

eM

eans

SDFa

ctor

1a

Fact

or

2aFa

ctor

3a

Fact

or

4aM

ooda

Moo

d

Fact

or1a

Moo

d

Fact

or2a

Moo

d

Fact

or3a

Moo

d

Fact

or4a

Ove

rall

Trip

Sa

tisfa

ctio

na

Wor

d of

M

outh

a

Inte

ntio

n to

r

etur

n

Fact

or 1

35

60

67Fa

ctor

2 3

60

060

068

8Fa

ctor

3 3

51

054

054

00

680

Fact

or 4

31

20

570

477

061

70

480

Moo

d 3

67

065

026

9

211

016

10

009

Moo

d

Fact

or1

131

83

780

817

055

70

435

030

00

754

Moo

d

Fact

or2

132

13

580

628

077

40

544

040

10

769

086

7M

ood

Fa

ctor

312

94

321

052

10

573

073

20

301

078

00

797

087

5M

ood

Fa

ctor

411

47

295

053

80

608

046

80

722

068

10

755

083

10

760

Ove

rall

Trip

Sat

isfa

ctio

n 3

64

069

057

60

549

045

80

498

025

20

485

048

70

432

051

1W

ord-

of-m

outh

46

11

130

326

037

00

302

031

30

301

038

90

422

039

40

440

057

9In

tent

ion-

to-r

etur

n 4

39

121

026

90

259

025

40

279

020

50

303

031

10

286

034

50

484

067

7

a Cor

rela

tion

is si

gnifi

cant

at t

he 0

01

leve

l (tw

o-ta

iled)

n =

rang

e fr

om 2

87 to

330

p

gt 0

05






VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references













































































































VariablesBeta

Coeff t-Value R2F

ChangeSig F

Change






Factor 2

Factor 4

Factor 2

Factor 4






Conclusion












references











































































































Conclusion












references














































































































references








































































































Tour Operators Service Quality

Documents

Transcript of Tour Operators Service Quality