Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian
values, satisfaction and behavioral intentions
in the fast-casual restaurant i...
Citation
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Relationships
among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction
and behavio...
Contents
Ⅰ
Ⅱ
Ⅲ
Ⅳ
Ⅴ
Ⅵ
3
Conclusion
Introduction
4
Background
Literature Review
Gap
Purpose of the Study
Background
5
Explanations for traditional product acquisition
may not fully reflect the totality of consumer
behavior.
Som...
6
Literature Review
The fast-casual dining segment, which falls between
the “quick service” and “ full service” segments, ...
7
Utilitarian consumer behavior is described as a
functional or task-related standpoint and may be
thought of as work.
(Ba...
8
The researcher defined customer satisfaction as “ an
evaluation rendered that the (product) experience
was at least as g...
Gap
9
The role and relative importance of instrumental
characteristics versus hedonic aspects will likely
vary across cont...
Purpose of the Study
10
To explore the relationships among consumer
service value (hedonic and utilitarian values),
custom...
Literature Review
11
Value, satisfaction and
behavioral intentions
Hypotheses
12
Value, satisfaction and behavioral
intentions
Many researchers agree that value has a significant
influence on customer...
13
Value, satisfaction and behavioral
intentions
The researchers evidenced the significant impact of
customer satisfaction...
Hypotheses
H1. Perceived value has positive impact on customer
satisfaction in the fast-casual restaurant segment.
H1a: He...
Hypotheses
H2. Perceived value has positive impact on behavioral
intentions in the fast-casual restaurant segment.
H2a: He...
16
Hypotheses
H3: Customer satisfaction has a positive impact on
behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant
segme...
17
H5: The perceived utilitarian value has a stronger
influence on behavioral intentions than perceived
hedonic value in t...
18
Methodology
Participants
Instrument
Data Analysis
19
20
Question
extremely
disagree
disagree
somewhat
disagree
neither
agree
some
what
agree
agree
extremely
agree
Service at
t...
21
Data Analysis
Confirmatory factor analysis
To identify whether the measurement variables
reliably reflected the hypothe...
22
Data Analysis
The Sobel test
To test the mediating role of customer satisfaction
for the linkage between hedonic or uti...
23
Result
Descriptive information for questions
Correlations, the squared correlations, and
average variance extracted (AV...
Questions Mean SD
Hedonic value I ate out at a fast-casual restaurant since I could have
good feeling
Eating-out at the fa...
Questions Mean SD
Customer satisfaction I was pleased to dine in at the fast-casual restaurant
The overall feeling I got f...
Measure
Hedonic
value
Utilitarian
value
Customer
satisfaction
Behavioral
intention
AVE
Composite
reliability
1. Hedonic va...
Hypothesized path Coefficient t-value Results
H1a. Hedonic value → Customer satisfaction 0.30 3.65** Supported
H1b. Utilit...
Hedonic
Value
Behavioral
Intentions
Customer
Satisfaction
Utilitarian
Value
0.13* (2.12)
0.74** (9.23)
0.28** (3.16)
0.30*...
29
Conclusion
30
The proposed model could well predict
consumers’ behavioral intentions to revisit the
fast-casual restaurant and talk p...
31
Critiques and Suggestions
32
The researchers choose students as their
participants . The sampling is not
representative of all the population.
It wi...
33
Thank you
for listening.
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

10122607 陳俐君 (relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast casual restaurant industry)

731 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
731
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
60
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

10122607 陳俐君 (relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast casual restaurant industry)

  1. 1. Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry Presenter: Anne Chen Instructor: Dr. Pi-Ying Teresa Hsu Date: March 17, 2014 1
  2. 2. Citation Ryu, K., Han, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality, 22(3), 416-423. 2
  3. 3. Contents Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅲ Ⅳ Ⅴ Ⅵ 3 Conclusion
  4. 4. Introduction 4 Background Literature Review Gap Purpose of the Study
  5. 5. Background 5 Explanations for traditional product acquisition may not fully reflect the totality of consumer behavior. Some scholars have shown new interest in the hedonic aspects of consumption behavioral. (Arnold &Reynolds, 2003)
  6. 6. 6 Literature Review The fast-casual dining segment, which falls between the “quick service” and “ full service” segments, has been a contemporary trend in the foodservice industry. (Anderson, 2003; Sloan, 2002; Tillotson, 2003) Quick service • Fast, efficient, take-out-ready foods at affordable prices Full service • That offers fine dining with a wide selection of foods and beverages, and table service.
  7. 7. 7 Utilitarian consumer behavior is described as a functional or task-related standpoint and may be thought of as work. (Babin et al., 1994; Batra & Ahtola, 1990) Hedonic value can be defined as being “ more subjective and personal than its utilitarian counterpart and resulting more from fun and playfulness than from task completion”. (Babin et al., 1994) Literature Review
  8. 8. 8 The researcher defined customer satisfaction as “ an evaluation rendered that the (product) experience was at least as good as it was supposed to be”. (Hunt, 1997) Behavioral intention can be described as a state likelihood to return to the restaurant and to recommend it to family, friends, and others in the future. (Oliver, 1996) Literature Review
  9. 9. Gap 9 The role and relative importance of instrumental characteristics versus hedonic aspects will likely vary across contexts. There has been no investigation of whether customers in this fast-casual restaurant segment are primarily driven by emotional or practical value.
  10. 10. Purpose of the Study 10 To explore the relationships among consumer service value (hedonic and utilitarian values), customer satisfaction and behavioral intention in the fast-casual restaurant segment
  11. 11. Literature Review 11 Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions Hypotheses
  12. 12. 12 Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions Many researchers agree that value has a significant influence on customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions. (Chen & Tsai, 2007; Lee et al., 2007; Pura, 2005) The researchers found that customer satisfaction is significantly related to two specific intention constructs: intentions as expectations and intentions as wants. (Soderlund & Ohman, 2005)
  13. 13. 13 Value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions The researchers evidenced the significant impact of customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions, including revisit, recommendation, and positive word-of-mouth intentions. (Namkung & Jang, 2007)
  14. 14. Hypotheses H1. Perceived value has positive impact on customer satisfaction in the fast-casual restaurant segment. H1a: Hedonic value of dining experiences has a positive impact on customer satisfaction. H1b: Utilitarian value of dining experiences has a positive impact on customer satisfaction. 14
  15. 15. Hypotheses H2. Perceived value has positive impact on behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant segment. H2a: Hedonic value of dining experiences has a positive impact on behavioral intentions. H2b: Utilitarian value of dining experiences has a positive impact on behavioral intentions. 15
  16. 16. 16 Hypotheses H3: Customer satisfaction has a positive impact on behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant segment. H4: The perceived utilitarian value has a stronger influence on customer satisfaction than perceived hedonic value in the fast casual restaurant segment.
  17. 17. 17 H5: The perceived utilitarian value has a stronger influence on behavioral intentions than perceived hedonic value in the fast-casual restaurant segment. Hypotheses
  18. 18. 18 Methodology Participants Instrument Data Analysis
  19. 19. 19
  20. 20. 20 Question extremely disagree disagree somewhat disagree neither agree some what agree agree extremely agree Service at the fast- casual restaurant was quick □  □ □ □ □ □ Instrument (1 = extremely disagree; 7= extremely agree)
  21. 21. 21 Data Analysis Confirmatory factor analysis To identify whether the measurement variables reliably reflected the hypothesized latent variable Structural equation modeling To determine the adequacy of the constructs of the model and test the hypotheses
  22. 22. 22 Data Analysis The Sobel test To test the mediating role of customer satisfaction for the linkage between hedonic or utilitarian value and behavioral intentions in a SEM model
  23. 23. 23 Result Descriptive information for questions Correlations, the squared correlations, and average variance extracted (AVE) Structural parameter estimates The Sobel test and results of the structural model
  24. 24. Questions Mean SD Hedonic value I ate out at a fast-casual restaurant since I could have good feeling Eating-out at the fast-casual restaurant was fun and pleasant The dining experience at the fast-casual restaurant was truly a joy During the dining experience at the fast-casual restaurant, I felt the excitement of searching food Although the cost was higher than fast-food restaurants, I liked to eat out at the better place 4.40 5.40 4.96 4.13 5.40 1.22 1.06 1.14 1.36 1.32 Utilitarian value Eating-out at the fast-casual restaurant was convenient Eating-out at a fast-casual restaurant was pragmatic and economical It was a waste of money when eating-out at the fast- casual restaurant Service at the fast-casual restaurant was quick 5.22 4.62 2.66 5.17 1.07 1.12 1.39 1.07 Table I. Descriptive information for questions used in the study 24 One item’s standardized factor loading did not meet the minimum criterion of 0.40.
  25. 25. Questions Mean SD Customer satisfaction I was pleased to dine in at the fast-casual restaurant The overall feeling I got from the fast-casual restaurant was satisfied The overall feeling I got from the fast-casual restaurant put me in a good mood I really enjoyed myself at the fast-casual restaurant 5.41 5.50 5.13 5.21 1.09 1.06 1.22 1.14 Behavioral intentions I would like to come back to the fast-casual restaurant in the future I would recommend the fast-casual restaurant to my friends or others I would more frequently visit the fast-casual restaurant 5.84 5.86 5.11 1.17 1.14 1.27 Note: SD = Standard deviation 25 Table I. Descriptive information for questions used in the study
  26. 26. Measure Hedonic value Utilitarian value Customer satisfaction Behavioral intention AVE Composite reliability 1. Hedonic value 1.00 0.50 0.82 2. Utilitarian value 0.67 (0.45) 1.00 0.43 0.69 3. Customer satisfaction 0.69 (0.48) 0.79 (0.62) 1.00 0.70 0.90 4. Behavioral intention 0.57 (0.32) 0.78 (0.61) 0.87 (0.76) 1.00 0.77 0.91 Notes: All correlations were significant at 0.05 level; Model measurement fit: X2 = 210.85 (df = 83, p<0.001), RMSEA = 0.068, CFI = 0.99, NFI = 0.99 Table II. Measure correlations, the squared correlations, and AVE 26 0.5↑ 0.6↑ There are high relationship among hedonic and utilitarian value, customer satisfaction and behavioral intention. The scale is stable.
  27. 27. Hypothesized path Coefficient t-value Results H1a. Hedonic value → Customer satisfaction 0.30 3.65** Supported H1b. Utilitarian value → Customer satisfaction 0.59 6.31** Supported H2a. Hedonic value → Behavioral intention 0.13 2.12* Supported H2b. Utilitarian value → Behavioral intention 0.28 3.16** Supported H3. Customer satisfaction → Behavioral intention 0.74 9.23** Supported Note: R2 (Customer satisfaction) = 0368; R2 (Behavioral intention) = 0.79; Goodness-of- fit statistics: X2 (83) = 210.82, p < 0.001; X2 ldf = 2.54; RMSEA = 0.068; CFI = 0.99; NFI = 0.99; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 Table III. Structural parameter estimates 27 H1a: Hedonic value of dining experiences has a positive impact on customer satisfaction. H1b: Utilitarian value of dining experiences has a positive impact on customer satisfaction. H2a: Hedonic value of dining experiences has a positive impact on behavioral intentions. H2b: Utilitarian value of dining experiences has a positive impact on behavioral intentions. H3: Customer satisfaction has a positive impact on behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant segment.
  28. 28. Hedonic Value Behavioral Intentions Customer Satisfaction Utilitarian Value 0.13* (2.12) 0.74** (9.23) 0.28** (3.16) 0.30** (3.65) 0.59** (6.31) Notes: *p < 0.05; **p <0.01 Figure 1. The Sobel test and results of the structural model 28 H4: The perceived utilitarian value has a stronger influence on customer satisfaction than perceived hedonic value in the fast casual restaurant segment. H5: The perceived utilitarian value has a stronger influence on behavioral intentions than perceived hedonic value in the fast-casual restaurant segment. 
  29. 29. 29 Conclusion
  30. 30. 30 The proposed model could well predict consumers’ behavioral intentions to revisit the fast-casual restaurant and talk positively about their dining experience about the restaurant, indicating its applicability in the hospitality industries. Conclusion
  31. 31. 31 Critiques and Suggestions
  32. 32. 32 The researchers choose students as their participants . The sampling is not representative of all the population. It will be better to increase wide participants. Besides, intervening variable should be considered in future study, such as time pressure. Critiques and Suggestions
  33. 33. 33 Thank you for listening.

×