Serv Bus (2009) 3:293–307

DOI 10.1007/s11628-009-0068-4

ORIGINAL PAPER

Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty:

impact of in-flight service quality

Myungsook An Æ Yonghwi Noh

Received: 24 June 2009 / Accepted: 25 June 2009 / Published online: 11 July 2009
Ó Springer-Verlag 2009

Abstract The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the in-flight
service quality on airline customer satisfaction and loyalty. This study analyzed the
data from passengers of two classes: prestige (business) and economy. The results
suggest that there are different factors of in-flight service quality that are important
according to the customer seat class. In the case of the prestige class, there were six
service quality factors of importance: alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverage,
responsiveness and empathy, reliability, assurance, presentation style of food, and
food quality; while the economy class showed five important service quality factors:
responsiveness and empathy, food quality, alcoholic beverage, non-alcoholic bev-
erage, and reliability. These findings imply that airline companies’ in-flight service
should have different delivery strategies based on the customer seat class.

Keywords Service quality
Customer satisfaction
Customer loyalty

Airline companies
In-flight service

1 Introduction

Today, the service industry has become the most important segment of the world
economy (Lee et al. 2007). In the USA, the service industry constitutes around 60%
of the annual GDP and nearly 70% of new jobs, leading the worldwide expansion of
the service industry (Mckee 2008). Thus, many researchers have studied service
quality and tried to identify the factors which affect customer satisfaction and

M. An
Y. Noh (&)
Department of Management, 209 College of Business Administration, University of Nebraska,
P.O. Box 880491, Lincoln, NE 68588-0491, USA
e-mail: acipco@hanmail.net
M. An
e-mail: sigechu@hanmail.net

123
294 M. An, Y. Noh

loyalty in various industries to increase service performance (Parasuraman et al.

1988a; Carman 1990; Cronin and Taylor 1992; Asubonteng et al. 1996; Davis 1999;
Lee and Cunningham 2001; Jones et al. 2002; Santos 2003). However, there is a
paucity of research on the service quality of the airline industry, despite the fact that
the airline industry traditionally has a high level of competition, a situation which
makes airline companies strive to find ways to improve their service quality to gain
competitive advantage.
The most direct airline service to customers is in-flight service by flight
attendants, as passengers tend to evaluate airlines based on their degree of
satisfaction with the in-flight service (Park et al. 2004). Accordingly, improving
the in-flight service quality is one of the most critical success factors of airline
companies, more specifically, in-flight meal service is a major determinant of the
in-flight service. There were some important previous studies which tried to
identify service quality factors in the airline industry (Ostrowski 1993; Sultan and
Simpson 2000; Tsaur et al. 2002; Chang 2002; Mazzeo 2003; Park et al. 2004; Ito
and Lee 2004; Chen and Chang 2005; Lioua and Tzeng 2007; Bruecknera and
Girvin 2008). Nevertheless, there have been a limited number of empirical studies
on the importance of in-flight service quality. The purpose of this study was to
ascertain the importance of in-flight service quality, focusing on in-flight food and
beverage service of airline companies to improve customer satisfaction and
loyalty.
This paper is organized as follows: in the next section, we present a brief
literature review on general service quality and airline services. Then, we present a
theoretical model to identify airline service quality factors on the basis of previous
research and an interview survey instrument is prepared. The result of the survey of
passengers of one of the major international airline companies is presented. We
classify the primary factors of in-flight food and beverage service according to the
passenger seat class and analyze the relationships among its quality, customer
satisfaction, and loyalty. Finally, we conclude the paper with the implications of the
results, limitations of the study, and future research needs.

2 Review of relevant literature

2.1 Service quality

Service quality has been studied over the years by many researchers. Garvin (1984)
defined service quality as the subjectively perceived quality of service received by
customers. Grönroos (1984) stated that service quality is the outcome of an
evaluation process in which the consumer compares his or her expectations with the
perception of the services that he or she has received. On the basis of previous
studies, Parasuraman et al. (1985) reviewed and summarized service quality in three
themes ‘‘first, service quality is more difficult for the consumer to evaluate than
goods quality; second, service quality perceptions result from a comparison of
consumer expectations with actual service performance; third, quality evaluations
are not made solely on the outcome of a service, and they also involve evaluations

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 295

of the process of service delivery.’’ The above has been widely accepted as the basic
definition of service quality and has also been applied to other areas of research.
Two main conceptualizations of service quality exist. One is based on a
disconfirmation approach, and the other on a performance-only approach. Early
researchers adopted the disconfirmation model, which seeks to estimate the size gap
between the customer expectations and their actual perceptions (Santos 2003).
Parasuraman et al. (1985) suggested that consumers’ evaluation of service quality is
based on the gap between their expectations and performance. With this approach,
Parasuraman et al. (1988b) developed their widely applied multi-dimensional
service quality measurement tool, SERVQUAL. It consists of five factors (tangibles,
reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy) and contains a two-part, 22
scale items regarding expectations and performance.
These five factors have been tested through numerous empirical studies in
various industries by many researchers. Carman (1990) investigated the validity of
these five factors and stated that these factors cannot be applicable to all service
industries without any modification although they are well organized. Likewise, the
SERVQUAL model has been proved to be applicable to different industries through
some modifications (Asubonteng et al. 1996).
Although SERVQUAL has been widely applied in a variety of industries, some
criticism exists in the literature of the disconfirmation approach. Cronin and Taylor
(1992), who revealed a higher R2 in a performance-only measure as an alternative
approach, stated that a performance-based measure of service quality might be an
improved means of measuring the service quality construct. The expectation–
perception framework is of questionable validity because it has conceptual and
definitional problems such as the conceptual definition of expectations and
measurement validity of expectation (Teas 1993). The normality of a stimulus
tends to be estimated by comparing it to the evoked norm after the fact, rather than
to prior expectation (Kahneman and Miller 1986). A trade-off between perceived
price and perceived quality leads to perceived value, and perceived value is a
primary factor influencing purchase intention (Chang and Albert 1994). A
performance-only measure is superior to the disconfirmation approach because
the former is more reliable and defensible than the latter (Page and Spreng 2002).
This study used the five service quality factors of Parasuraman et al. (1988b;
hereafter PZB)—tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy—
and Cronin and Taylor’s (1992) performance-only measure, to investigate factors
influencing in-flight service quality of airline companies.

2.2 Concept of airline companies’ service

It is important to conceptualize the characteristics of airline service so as to

accurately estimate it. The airline service is a concept representing all kinds of
services provided by airlines. In clarifying and establishing the concept of airline
companies’ service, Chang (2003) designated the airlines’ work as a service store
based on the model proposed by Davis (1999), which identified four types of service
firms by two task dimensions as shown in Fig. 1.

123
296 M. An, Y. Noh

Fig. 1 Four types of service business by Davis (1999)

The services provided by airline companies have both fixed and flexible
characteristics (Chang et al. 2003). The fixed characteristics are subject to seat size,
cargo storage, type of airplane, and airplane maintenance. The flexible character-
istics of airline service include the in-flight meal service which has both tangible
traits and intangible services from departure to arrival such as the service by flight
attendants.
Airline customers tend to be loyal to particular airline companies due to the traits
of airline service such as mileage programs. Even customers who are not satisfied
with service quality can keep on using a particular airliner rather than switching to
other airliner (Jones et al. 2002). In addition to service quality perceptions,
transaction and switching cost factors also have a significant impact on service
loyalty (Lee and Cunningham 2001).
The recognition of airline service quality is much harder than that of other service
companies such as financial institutions whose work processes consist of separate
but interrelated tasks of one organization. However, airline services are performed
simultaneously by a variety of processes by many entities such as TSA, airport
authority, catering companies, etc (Chang et al. 2003). Therefore, a seamless
coordination of a variety of activities by many organizations is needed for the
improvement of the airline service quality.

2.3 In-flight meal service quality

The representative service of airline companies is in-flight service. For any business
delivering service in interactive encounters with customers, personalization—‘‘the
social content of interaction between service or retail employees and their
customers’’—is for perceived service quality and customer satisfaction (Mittal
and Lassar 1996). Unwelcome service failure such as delays often generate strong
negative impacts from customers (Butcher and Kayani 2008). Because in-flight
service is directly provided to passengers through interactive encounters with
customers, the passengers are likely to be sensitive to the quality of this service.
Thus, the image of an airlines may be directly related to the quality of in-flight
service, even more so than for other types of service.
Among in-flight services, in-flight meal service has a great deal of importance
for the evaluation of the airline companies’ service quality, due to the fact that it
takes the largest amount of time interacting directly with customers. Accordingly,

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 297

in-flight meal service should be planned carefully to satisfy the customer’s

expectations from the selection of menu to efficient and courteous service.
This study deals only with in-flight meal service quality among six quality
dimensions used by Chang (2003) because it occupies the largest amount of flight
attendants’ time with passengers. Thus, the identification of quality factors of in-
flight meal service is essential for improving the overall customer service quality.
Cho et al. (2001) accepted PZB’s model for evaluating service quality of airline
companies. This study also adopts PZB quality factors and adds other new quality
factors including the characteristics of in-flight food and beverage service. The PZB
intangible service factors such as reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and
empathy can be the decisive factors for in-flight meal service, because the meal
service by flight attendants is similar to the general service performed by a physical
worker and transmitted through the performer’s attitude. Therefore, this study
develops service quality factors of in-flight meal service on the basis of PZB and the
traits of in-flight food and beverage service.

3 Research design and methodology

3.1 Research model

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors which impact the in-flight service
quality and to investigate which of those factors influence the customer satisfaction
and loyalty. Figure 2 presents the research model.

Fig. 2 Research model

123
298 M. An, Y. Noh

3.2 Definition of variables

We adopted the factors suggested by PZB (1988b). However, we excluded the

tangible factor from PZB and adopted only reliability, responsiveness, assurance,
and empathy because the tangible factor does not fit well with the characteristics of
in-flight food and beverage service quality. In addition to PZB factors, we
developed new evaluation items such as food quality, alcoholic beverage quality,
and non-alcoholic beverage quality to clearly reflect the characteristics of in-flight
food and beverage service. The research model variables are defined as follows:
(1) Reliability: ability to conduct promised services credibly and accurately.
(2) Responsiveness: intention to provide services promptly to customers.
(3) Assurance: temperament or quality of employees to inspire knowledge,
courtesy, belief, and reliability.
(4) Empathy: consideration for customers’ needs and interests in customers.
(5) Food quality: intrinsic food quality such as taste, freshness, and menu;
extrinsic forms of food including presentation, sanitation, and temperature.
(6) Alcoholic beverage quality: the degree to which customers become satisfied
with alcoholic beverages provided on board such as whisky, wine, beer, and
after dinner drinks.
(7) Non-alcoholic beverage quality: the degree to which customers become satisfied
with non-alcoholic beverages provided in aircraft such as water, juice, and tea.
A set of questions for each factor was developed according to the definitions
described above. The questions used to measure variables were based on the seven
point Likert scale.
Customer satisfaction is based on customers’ perception about the service quality
and performance, which is an emotional response. Customer loyalty means the
desire to reuse the service of the company, which includes the willingness to use the
same airline company even when its ticket price is relatively higher than
competition and to recommend the airline company to others.

3.3 Instrument design

To evaluate the service quality of in-flight food and beverage service, the
questionnaire was developed based on the 22 items of PZB and 11 additional items
for the traits of in-flight food and beverage service. We also developed 16 items to
evaluate customer satisfaction about the service and loyalty to the airline company.

3.4 Sample and data collection

This study investigates the factors which consist of in-flight food and beverage
services and the influence of those identified factors on the customer satisfaction and
loyalty. The data were collected from the passengers of a leading global airline
company headquartered in South Korea. Even though airline passengers’ expec-
tation and perception can vary by nationality as shown by Sultan and Simpson
(2000), this airline is considered to be a model company in the air transport industry

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 299

Table 1 Sample demographics

Demographic characteristics Frequency Percent (%)

Gender
Male 310 62.8
Female 161 32.6
No answer 23 4.6
Age
Under 20 9 1.8
21–30 95 19.2
31–40 171 34.7
41–50 143 28.9
51–60 52 10.7
Over 60 24 4.6
Annual income ($)
Under 30,000 107 21.7
30,000–50,000 160 32.4
50,000–70,000 84 17.0
Over 70,000 126 25.5
No answer 17 3.4
Total 494 100.0

in terms of its business scale and global air-routes. All passengers were the
customers using the North America–Korea route or the Europe–Korea route which
need more than 10 h of flight time. A total of 150 questionnaires were collected
from the prestige (business) class and 370 questionnaires from the economy class.
We excluded 25 incomplete questionnaires and used a total of 494 usable
questionnaires—139 from the prestige class and 355 from the economy class.

3.5 Data analysis

To identify the factors influencing service quality and identify the relationships
between these factors and customer satisfaction and loyalty, various statistical tools
were employed. First, frequency analyses were used to get the demographic
information about the sample as shown in Table 1. Second, reliability and factor
analyses were performed to identify the factors that influence service quality and
finally, regression analysis was used to identify the relationship between these
factors and customer satisfaction and loyalty.

4 Result and discussion

4.1 Demographic characteristics of the sample group

The sample used for this study consists of 494 respondents. The sample is classified
by gender, age, and annual income as shown in Table 1. The gender ratio indicates

123
300 M. An, Y. Noh

that about two-thirds of the passengers in the sample are males. The majority of
passengers in the sample are in the 31–50 age group (63.6%), indicating that they
are primarily business people with relatively high income. This is especially true for
Korean passengers, considering the current Korean per capita GDP of $20,000.
The most preferred food of passengers was Korean food as the data were
collected from a Korean airline. As for the main destination, the ratio of the
passengers using the North America–Korea route was similar to the ratio of the
passengers using the Europe–Korea route.

4.2 Factor analysis and reliability analysis

This study classified the collected data into prestige class and economy class
because passengers’ age, level of income, and occupations are considered to
influence the evaluation of service quality. Prestige class passengers generally have
higher income and are in managerial positions in their organizations, and also their
age tends to be older than economy class passengers. Therefore, we can expect that
prestige class passengers have much more experience in high quality food and
beverages than economy class passengers, and as a result, they might evaluate in-
flight meal service much more sensitively than economy class passengers. Thus, we
performed factor analysis by separating the data into two groups. As shown in
Table 2, the results were different between the two groups as expected. We drew six
factors from the prestige class passengers and five factors from the economy class,
respectively.

4.2.1 Factor analysis and reliability analysis—the prestige class

The results of factor and reliability analyses of the prestige class are shown in
Tables 2 and 3 (six factors over Eigen value one). The sum of variances of these six
factors was 69.4% of the total variance, and the variance rate of each factor was
under 20%. We obtained discrimination validity because each factor had an
exclusive concept. Convergence validity was also derived from the items which
collectively explain each factor. The results of factor analysis measured correctly
what we wanted to evaluate because it had both construct validity and convergence
validity. We used the evaluation items of PZB (1988b) regarding intangible service

Table 2 Result of factor

Prestige class Economy class
analysis—prestige class and
economy class
Factors
Alcoholic and non-alcoholic Responsiveness and empathy
beverage
Responsiveness and empathy Food quality
Reliability Alcoholic beverage
Assurance Non-alcoholic beverage
Presentation style of food Reliability
Food quality

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 301

Table 3 Result of reliability test

Prestige class Economy class

Factor Eigen Variance Factor Eigen Variance

value ratio value ratio

Alcoholic beverage and 5.394 16.35 Responsiveness 8.096 24.53

non-alcoholic beverage and empathy
Responsiveness and empathy 5.343 32.53 Food quality 4.272 37.47
Reliability 3.824 44.12 Alcoholic beverage 4.058 49.77
Assurance 2.974 53.13 Non-alcoholic beverage 3.261 59.65
Presentation style of food 2.748 61.46 Reliability 3.119 69.10
Food quality 2.611 69.37

quality and we also applied items developed by specialists of airline companies

regarding the quality of in-flight food and beverage service. Thus, contents validity
is assured. These validities were also analyzed for the economy class data in the
same way.
In PZB’s (1988b) five factors, four are intangible service factors (i.e., reliability,
responsiveness, assurance, and empathy). The result of factor analysis of the
prestige class data was quite consistent with the result of PZB (1988b) research,
because it showed three factors of responsiveness and empathy, reliability, and
assurance. As for the quality of in-flight food, two factors were separately found—
presentation style of food such as amount, sanitation, shape, and temperature and
food quality such as taste, freshness, and menu. This means that the prestige class
passengers do not recognize food quality as one factor. They recognize differences
between the presentation style of food and food quality, which is recognizable only
after tasting the food.
Another interesting finding was that evaluation items about alcoholic beverage
and non-alcoholic beverage were grouped and derived as one quality factor. This
means that for the prestige class passengers both alcoholic and non-alcoholic
beverages are universally available in that seat class. Thus, they are grouped as one
type of beverage. It can be conjectured that prestige class passengers think of
alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverage as the same sort of beverage, since they have
much experience in consuming both types of drinks.

4.2.2 Factor analysis and reliability analysis—the economy class

As seen in Table 2, five factors were derived from the economy class passenger
data. As shown in Table 3, the sum of variances of five factors constituted 69.1% of
total variance and each factor’s variance was under 20% of the total variance except
for only responsiveness and empathy (24.5%). These five factors had discrimination
validity because of their exclusive concepts and also had convergence validity.
Accordingly, the evaluation items correctly measured what we intended to measure.
Content validity about evaluation items was the same as explained in the analysis of
the prestige class data.

123
302 M. An, Y. Noh

From four intangible factors of service quality in the PZB (1988b) study,
responsiveness, empathy, and assurance were grouped and derived as one factor
except reliability which was derived as a different factor. It appeared that the
economy class passengers were not as sensitive, in evaluating intangible services, as
the prestige class passengers. This result is not consistent with the result of the PZB
(1988b) study.
In the case of food services, seven evaluation items resulted in one factor. This
result is different from the result of factor analysis for the prestige class, which
showed two separate factors of food service: presentation style of food and food
quality. In addition, the items to evaluate alcoholic beverage and non-alcoholic
beverage were separately derived as two different factors.

4.3 Regression analysis

4.3.1 Regression analysis—the prestige class

Table 4 shows the results of regression analysis in which six factors derived from
factor analysis were used as independent variables and customer satisfaction with
in-flight meal service as the dependent variable. As shown in Table 4, the quality of
alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverage considerably impacts the customer satisfac-
tion. Food quality influences customer satisfaction more than presentation style of
food, a result which means that airline companies should focus on the improvement
of general food quality such as taste, freshness, and menu.
The result of regression analysis for customer loyalty is shown in Table 5. The
factor of responsiveness and empathy significantly impacts customer loyalty, a
result which means that the empathetic services by flight attendants play a crucial
role in choosing airline companies by the passengers. In addition, the prestige class
passengers are thought to have more interest in alcoholic and non-alcoholic

Table 4 Result of regression analysis for customer satisfaction—the prestige class

Variables Coefficient of non- Coefficient t Significance Multi-
standard of standard collinearity

B SE Beta Total VIP

(Constant) 4.918E–02 .068 .726 .470

Alcoholic beverage and .548 .068 .531 8.043 .000 1.000 1.000
non-alcoholic beverage
Food quality .362 .068 .351 5.314 .000 1.000 1.000
Responsiveness and empathy .335 .068 .324 4.906 .470 1.000 1.000
Assurance .255 .068 .247 3.741 .000 1.000 1.000
Presentation style of food .242 .068 .234 3.552 .001 1.000 1.000
Reliability .202 .068 .196 2.969 .004 1.000 1.000
R2 = .664

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 303

Table 5 Result of regression analysis for customer loyalty—the prestige class

Variables Coefficient of non- Coefficient t Significance Multi-
standard of standard collinearity

B SE Beta Total VIP

(Constant) 1.505E–02 .077 .194 .846

Responsiveness and empathy .488 .078 .477 6.298 .000 1.000 1.000
Alcoholic beverage .418 .077 .409 5.401 .000 1.000 1.000
and non-alcoholic beverage
Food quality .325 .078 .318 4.196 .000 1.000 1.000
Assurance .240 .077 .235 3.099 .033 1.000 1.000
R2 = .552

Table 6 Result of regression analysis for the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty—
the prestige class
Variables Coefficient of Coefficient t Significance Multi-collinearity
non-standard of standard

B SE Beta Total VIP

(Constant) -1.600E–02 .080 -.200 .842 R2 = .332

Satisfaction .558 .080 .576 7.014 .000 1.000 1.000

beverage than just food. Table 6 shows the regression result for the relationship
between customer satisfaction with in-flight service and customer loyalty. The
relationship is significant but relatively weak as indicated by the value of R2.

4.3.2 Regression analysis—the economy class

Table 7 shows the result of regression analysis in which five factors were used as
independent variables and customer satisfaction as the dependent variable. Food
quality had the most impact on customer satisfaction. Next to food quality, alcoholic
beverage influences customer satisfaction.
The result of regression analysis for customer loyalty is shown in Table 8. The
result shows that the influence of food quality on customer loyalty is unexpectedly
not greater than alcoholic beverage and intangible service quality. The economy
class passengers seem to feel their loyalty to airline companies more based on
empathetic services by air-flight attendants than in-flight services because they
travel for long hours in the clamped condition. Table 9 presents the result of
regression analysis for the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty.
Again, customer satisfaction with in-flight service and customer loyalty are
significantly related but relatively weak as for the prestige class.

123
304 M. An, Y. Noh

Table 7 Result of regression analysis for customer satisfaction—the economy class

Variables Coefficient of Coefficient t Significance Multi-
non-standard of standard collinearity

B SE Beta Total VIP

(Constant) -3.771E–03 .032 -.117 .907

Food quality .508 .033 .509 15.582 .000 1.000 1.000
Alcoholic beverage .476 .032 .485 14.850 .000 1.000 1.000
Responsiveness and .419 .032 .424 12.996 .000 1.000 1.000
empathy
Non-alcoholic beverage .274 .032 .279 8.541 .000 1.000 1.000
Reliability .224 .032 .228 6.983 .000 1.000 1.000
R2 = .804

Table 8 Result of regression analysis for customer loyalty—the economy class

Variables Coefficient of Coefficient t Significance Multi-
non-standard of standard collinearity

B SE Beta Total VIP

(Constant) 2.729E-02 .062 .440 .660

Responsiveness and .305 .062 .304 4.925 .000 1.000 1.000
empathy
Alcoholic beverage .282 .062 .281 4.548 .000 1.000 1.000
Reliability .235 .062 .234 3.794 .000 1.000 1.000
Food quality .203 .062 .201 3.258 .001 1.000 1.000
Non-alcoholic beverage .170 .062 .168 2.723 .007 1.000 1.000
R2 = .291

Table 9 Result of regression analysis for the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty—
the economy class
Variables Coefficient of Coefficient of t Significance Multi-collinearity
non-standard standard

B SE Beta Total VIP

(Constant) 2.294E–02 .052 .442 .659 R2 = .327

Satisfaction .567 .052 .571 10.854 .000 1.000 1.000

4.3.3 Implication of regression analysis

The results of six regression analyses on the prestige and economy class data are
presented below.
(1) Prestige class
As shown in Fig. 3, the direct influence of in-flight service quality on customer
loyalty is much greater than the indirect influence through customer satisfaction.

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 305

Fig. 3 Results of regression analysis

(2) Economy class

The influence of in-flight service quality is very important to customer
satisfaction but only meagerly related to customer loyalty. Also, the direct influence
level of in-flight service quality on customer loyalty is less important than the
indirect influence through customer satisfaction. Thus, the direct influence of in-
flight service quality on customer loyalty is more critical in the prestige class rather
in the economy class.

5 Conclusion

This study delineated six service quality factors (i.e., in-flight alcoholic beverage
and non-alcoholic beverage, responsiveness and empathy, reliability, assurance,
presentation style of food, and food quality) for the prestige class service, while the
economy class shows five quality factors (i.e., responsiveness and empathy, food
quality, alcoholic beverage, non-alcoholic beverage, and reliability). Regression
analyses also showed different results between the prestige class and economy class.
These results indicate that the recognition of service quality is somewhat
different according to the seat class, mostly due to the fact that the prestige class
passengers have different demographical backgrounds from the economy class
passengers. The main service quality factors which impact customer satisfaction and
loyalty are also different between the prestige class and economy class.
Generally, people with higher income and positions in their organizations tend to
experience higher quality service and thus are more sensitive to the evaluation of
service quality. This study showed that the recognition of service quality can be
different among those with different income and professional status. Therefore,

123
306 M. An, Y. Noh

airline companies need to differentiate their strategies for different type of

customers.
This study has limitations in terms of external validity because the data were
collected from the passengers of only one airline company. It is very difficult to
survey passengers of various airlines since a survey using a questionnaire is strictly
forbidden in the aircraft according to internal regulations. It is even more difficult to
collect data from the prestige class passengers. Despite this limitation, the results of
the study can be generalized to a degree because the airline company whose
passengers were surveyed has the market share of 65% in those routes in Korea.
As presented in this study, in-flight service quality impacts customer loyalty in
the prestige class more than in the economy class. Therefore, we can conjecture that
the first class passengers would also show different preferences from both the
prestige and economy class passengers. Thus, further research is needed. Also, a
longitudinal study might provide a more rich time-based information about the
changing preferences of different seat class passengers.

References

Asubonteng P, Karl J, John E (1996) SERVQUAL revisited: a critical review of service quality. J Serv
Mark 10(6):62–81
Bruecknera J, Girvin R (2008) Airport noise regulation, airline service quality, and social welfare. Transp
Res Part B 42(1):19–37
Butcher K, Kayani A (2008) Waiting for service: modeling the effectiveness of service interventions.
Serv Bus 2(2):153–165
Carman J (1990) Consumer perception of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions.
J Retail 66(1):33–55
Chang D (2002) A study on evaluating Korean international airports’ service quality and critical service
quality factors for customers’ satisfaction. J Korean Soc Qual Manag 30(4):26–43
Chang D (2003) A comparative study of measuring air liners’ service quality. J Korean Soc Qual Manag
31(4):36–54
Chang D (2004) A study of developing the evaluation tools of international airport’s service quality in
Korea. J Korean Soc Qual Manag 32(2):59–76
Chang T, Albert R (1994) Price, product information and purchase intention: an empirical study. J Acad
Mark Sci 22(1):550–561
Chang D, Kim Y, Jeon S (2003) A study on the evaluation of Incheon international airport’s service
quality. Manag Res 32(4):983–999
Chen F, Chang Y (2005) Examining airline service quality from a process perspective. J Air Transp
Manag 11(2):79–87
Cho D, Lim H, Lee G (2001) A study on the combined model of SERVQUAL and QFD for the evaluation
of airline service. J Korean Prod Oper Manag Soc 12(1):63–83
Cronin J, Taylor S (1992) Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension. J Mark 56(3):55–68
Davis T (1999) Different service firms, different core competencies. Bus Horiz 42:23–33
Garvin D (1984) What dose product quality really mean. Sloan Manag Rev 26(1):25–28
Grönroos C (1984) A service quality model and its marketing implication. Eur J Mark 18(4):36–44
Ito H, Lee D (2004) Assessing the impact of the September 11 terrorist attacks on US airline demand.
J Econ Bus 57(1):75–95
Jones M, Mothersbaugh D, Beatty S (2002) Why customers stay: measuring the underlying dimensions of
services switching costs and managing their differential strategic outcomes. J Bus Res 55(6):441–450
Kahneman D, Miller D (1986) Norm theory: comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychol Rev 93(2):136–
153

123
Airline customer satisfaction and loyalty 307

Lee M, Cunningham L (2001) A cost/benefit approach to understanding service loyalty. J Serv Mark
15(2):113–130
Lee S, Ribeiro D, Olson D, Roig S (2007) The importance of the activities of service business in the
economy: welcome to the service business. An international journal. Serv Bus 1(1):1–5
Lioua J, Tzeng G (2007) A non-additive model for evaluating airline service quality. J Air Transp Manag
13(3):131–138
Mazzeo M (2003) Competition and service quality in the US airline industry. Rev Ind Org 22(4):275–296
Mckee D (2008) Services, growth poles and advanced economies. Serv Bus 2(2):99–107
Mittal B, Lassar W (1996) The role of personalisation in service encounters. J Retail 72(1):95–109
Ostrowski P (1993) Service quality and customer loyalty in the commercial airline industry. J Travel Res
32(2):16–24
Page T, Spreng A (2002) Difference scores versus direct effects in service quality measurement. J Serv
Res 4(3):184–192
Parasuraman A, Zeithmal V, Berry L (1985) A conceptual model of service and its marketing implication
for future research. J Mark 49(4):41–50
Parasuraman A, Zeithmal V, Berry L (1988a) Communication an control processes in the delivery of
service quality. J Mark 52(1):33–55
Parasuraman A, Zeithmal V, Berry L (1988b) SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring
consumer perceptions of service quality. J Retail 64(1):12–40
Park J, Robertson R, Wu C (2004) The effect of airline service quality on passengers’ behavioral
intentions: a Korean case study. J Air Transp Manag 10(6):435–439
Santos J (2003) E-service quality: a model of virtual service quality dimensions. Manag Serv Qual
13(3):233–246
Sultan F, Simpson M (2000) International service variants: airline passenger expectations and perceptions
of service quality. J Serv Mark 14(3):188–216
Teas R (1993) Expectations, performance evaluation, and consumers’ perceptions of quality. J Mark
57(4):18–34
Tsaur S, Chang T, Yen C (2002) The evaluation of airline service quality by fuzzy MCDM. Tour Manag
23(2):107–115

123