The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0007-070X.htm
BFJ
119,3
468
Received 5 August 2016
Revised 20 October 2016
Accepted 22 October 2016
British Food Journal
Vol. 119 No. 3, 2017
pp. 468-496
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0007-070X
DOI 10.1108/BFJ-08-2016-0349
What drives experiential loyalty?
A case study of Starbucks coffee
chain in Taiwan
Hung-Che Wu
Business School, Nanfang College of Sun Yat-sen University,
Guangzhou City, China
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify the dimensions of experiential quality and examining the
interrelationships among experiential quality, experiential satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust and
experiential loyalty using a multi-dimensional and hierarchical model as a framework perceived by coffee
chain customers.
Design/methodology/approach – The data used in this study were based on a sample of 428 customers at
Starbucks in Taipei City of Taiwan. Data were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory
factor analysis.
Findings – The findings reveal that there are four primary dimensions and 13 sub-dimensions of experiential
quality in a coffee chain. In addition, the results indicate that affective quality is identified as the most
primary dimension of experiential quality perceived by coffee chain customers. Experiential quality
significantly influences perceived value and experiential trust, respectively. Also, experiential satisfaction is
influenced by perceived value, experiential quality and experiential trust. Furthermore, experiential
satisfaction and experiential trust are determinants of experiential loyalty.
Originality/value – This is the first study identifying experiential quality, experiential satisfaction,
perceived value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty in the context of coffee chains.
Keywords Perceived value, Dimensions of experiential quality, Experiential loyalty,
Experiential satisfaction, Multi-dimensional and hierarchical model
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Pine and Gilmore (1999) indicate that a coffee chain is one of the industries affected by an
experience economy. As for the highly competitive coffee shop market, according to the
operators in the coffee chain, the market size is at least NT$25 to NT$30 billion annually
(Hung, 2012). The coffee market size is expanding, and the competition among coffee chains
has become highly intense (Fang, 2012). In general, Taiwanese see coffee as something they
can enjoy in everyday life. They can relax or negotiate a business in a coffee shop of their
choices, depending on their taste and the shop’s accessibility. Coffee was an unusual
beverage among Taiwanese until the market took a turn in 1980 when McDonald’s entered
the market and brought American coffee with it. In the same period, Doutor, the Japanese
self-serve coffee shop, started the espresso trend which was followed by Barista Coffee, the
local coffee chain, but later lost the majority of the market to an international coffee giant,
Starbucks (Samukkeetham, 2010). Starbucks is one of the largest and most successful coffee
chains in Taiwan (Kable, 2016; Kuo, 2016). This coffee chain, which was established in 1971,
is the world’s largest coffee chain with its headquarters located in Seattle, USA (Tu et al.,
2012). Subsequently, Starbucks in Taiwan was officially established on January 1, 1998 by a
joint venture of Starbucks Coffee International, and it has opened 350 Starbucks coffee
shops until 2015 (Kuo, 2016). Nowadays, Starbucks faces more competitive than usual coffee
chains in Taiwan, such as 85°C, Dante, Barista Coffee and Mr. Brown Café (Tu et al., 2012).
Experiencing coffee chains, like other hospitality activities, has been viewed to a
great extent as an experiential consumption. Therefore, the quality coffee chain
customers perceive is much more associated with their experiences during the process of
dining than services per se provided by coffee chains (Chen and Chen, 2010; Wu, 2013, 2014). What drives
Unlike service quality, however, there are still few studies shedding light on the experiential experiential
quality of specific hospitality participation such as dining in the coffee chain (Chen and loyalty?
Chen, 2010; Wu, 2013, 2014). In order to enable customers to return or revisit the coffee
chain, increasing experiential loyalty has become an important issue in the hospitality
industry (Wu and Ai, 2016b, c; Yuan et al., 2015).
Wu and Li (2014) argue that experiential quality influences experiential satisfaction, 469
which in turn results in experiential loyalty. Perceived value has been argued to play a
mediating role between experiential quality and experiential satisfaction; namely, the higher
the experiential quality the higher the perceived value, and the higher the perceived value
the higher the experiential satisfaction (Wu et al., 2011). Hennig-Thurau and Klee (1997)
propose that delivery of high quality is necessary for developing and nurturing trust, which
in turn, results in satisfaction. Wu and Ai (2016b) have found that trust has a strong effect
on loyalty. However, few studies examine experiential quality for coffee chains, including
diverse psychological and physical aspects among experiential quality, experiential
satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty from the perspective
of coffee chain customers (Hutchinson et al., 2009).
The experiential quality framework proposed by several studies (Wu and Ai, 2016b, c;
Wu and Li, 2014; Wu et al., 2014; Wu, Ai and Cheng, 2016; Wu, Cheng and Ai, 2016; Wu, Li
and Li, 2016) is the theoretical foundation for this study. According to the framework, four
dimensions of experiential quality need to be considered. These are the service delivery
(interactions between employees and customers), service environment, service product (the
outcome of the service) and service affect. There is evidence indicating the importance of
these dimensions in the context of coffee chains (e.g. Adinegara and Turker, 2016; Doukoure
and Supinit, 2016; Shin et al., 2015; Yuan et al., 2015). The experiential quality literature
indicates that these primary experiential quality dimensions should be viewed as higher-
order constructs with various sub-dimensions (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Dabholkar et al.,
1996; De Rojas and Camarero, 2008; Wu and Li, 2014). There is support in the hospitality
marketing literature for breaking down the experience into smaller discrete and distinct
elements (Yuan et al., 2015). This study extends previous research on experiential quality, in
which only a second-order structure is tested. The study also provides a direct measure of
perceived experiential quality in the context of coffee chains. The primary and sub-
dimensions of quality have been identified for a variety of industries using multi-
dimensional and hierarchical modeling as a robust and testable framework (Clemes et al.,
2009; Wu, 2013, 2014; Wu, Li and Li, 2016). However, Wu and Li (2014) indicate that little
research has paid attention to identifying the primary and sub-dimensions of experiential
quality for coffee chains using a multi-dimensional and hierarchical model. Also, none of the
studies have explored the relative importance of the primary and sub-dimensions of
experiential quality as perceived by customers when they evaluate their service experiences
in a coffee chain (Yuan et al., 2015). Therefore, the three research objectives of this study are:
(1) to identify the dimensions of experiential quality as perceived by coffee chain customers;
(2) to examine the relationships among experiential quality, experiential satisfaction,
perceived value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty as perceived by coffee
chain customers using a multi-dimensional and hierarchical modeling framework; and
(3) to identify the least and most important dimensions of experiential quality as
perceived by coffee chain customers.

This study makes the following contributions by satisfying the three research objectives.
First, this study conceptualizes and measures customers’ perceptions of experiential quality
in a coffee chain using a multi-dimensional and hierarchical approach. This approach helps
BFJ to overcome some of the weaknesses of traditional measurement methods, such as
119,3 SERVQUAL (a disconfirmation-based measure of service quality) and SERVPERF
(a performance-based measure of service quality). Therefore, it provides a more accurate
approach to assessing experiential quality in the hospitality industry. Second, this study
contributes to the marketing literature by providing an examination of several services
marketing constructs. This is an important contribution because it provides a better
470 understanding of customers’ perceptions of experiential quality, experiential satisfaction,
perceived value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty in the context of coffee chains.
Third, from a practical perspective, this research provides further insight for coffee chain
management to better understand experiential loyalty by using the proposed model,
providing useful information to marketing managers who are designing the products and
services for coffee chains. The study’s finding will provide coffee chain management with a
clear understanding of relevant dimensions of experiential quality because they derive from
coffee chain customers’ perspectives so that management will know exactly how to make a
choice about the best way to allocate scarce resources.

Conceptual background
Service quality
Service quality is a concept that has aroused considerable interest and debate in the research
literature because of the difficulties in both defining and measuring it with no overall
consensus emerging on either (Wisniewski, 2001). Service quality is defined as the difference
between customer expectations of service and perceived service (as a basis for SERVQUAL).
Service quality is commonly acknowledged as an antecedent of customer satisfaction and
loyalty (Parasuraman et al., 1994). Heskett et al. (2008) indicate that satisfaction is improved by
enhancing service quality and satisfaction drives loyalty and company profitability.

Criticism of the measurement of service quality

Brady and Cronin (2001) suggest that service quality is a multi-dimensional concept. One of
the most popular scales, SERVQUAL, used in services marketing, was developed by
Parasuraman et al. (1985, 1988). In general, this scale is based on the perception gap between
the received service quality and the expected service quality, and has been widely adopted
for explaining the customer perception of service quality. Originally ten dimensions of
service quality were proposed (reliability, responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy,
communication, credibility, security, understanding the consumer and tangibles).
Later, these were reduced to five (reliability, responsiveness, empathy, assurances and
tangibles). However, many researchers have been skeptical about whether SERVQUAL can
be applied in other service industries (Cronin and Taylor, 1992).
The SERVPERF scale is a performance-based approach considered an alternative
method for measuring service quality (Cronin and Taylor, 1992). This scale has gained an
increasing level of prominence among marketing theorists. Theoretically, SERVPERF is
superior to SERVQUAL (Cronin and Taylor, 1992, 1994). However, Cronin and Taylor (1994)
argue that SERVPERF should explain more of the variance in an overall measure of service
quality than SERVQUAL. In addition, Nadiri and Hussain (2005) fail to confirm the five
dimensions (reliability, tangibles, responsiveness, assurance and empathy) of SERVPERF in
the service industry.

Experiential quality
Crompton and Love (1995) refer to experiential quality as involving “not only the attributes
provided by a supplier, but also the attributes brought to the opportunity by the customer”
(p. 12). Service quality places emphasis on the perspective of the service the enterprise
provides its visitors. In contrast, experiential quality focuses on the judgment initiated by What drives
customers regarding service quality they perceive. Perceptions of experiential quality are experiential
subjective (Graefe and Fedler, 1986) and are the product of individuals’ socio-demographic loyalty?
(Fedler and Ditton, 1986) and psychological perspectives (Driver and Cooksey, 1977).
Numerous studies have focused on the components of experiential quality. Table I presents
a summary of previous studies revealing the dimensions of experiential quality. Therefore,
several studies (e.g. Chen and Chen, 2010; Wan and Cheng, 2011; Wu and Ai, 2016a, c; 471
Wu and Li, 2014; Wu, Li and Li, 2016; Yuan et al., 2015) indicate that experiential quality
should be measured based on a multi-dimensional and hierarchical model to appropriately
measure perceptions of experiential quality.
Experiential satisfaction
From the experiential perspective, experiential satisfaction is the satisfaction experienced
from the service content under a specific transaction. In general, customers compare their
experiences with their prior expectations, which cause positive or negative disconfirmation.
The emotional responses resulting from positive or negative disconfirmation form the basis
for satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Bigné et al., 2005). Ekinci (2003) and Wu and Li (2014)
indicate that the evaluation of experiential quality results in experiential satisfaction.
Previous studies have focused exclusively on the quality of products or services (Fornell
et al., 1996), whereas this study considers experiential quality as a key role in increasing
experiential satisfaction (Wu, Li and Li, 2014).
Perceived value
Zeithaml (1988) defines perceived value as “the consumer’s overall assessment of the utility
of a product or service based on perceptions of what is received and what is given” (p. 14).
Wu, Li and Li (2016) consider perceived value as a key determinant of satisfaction. Chen and
Chen (2010) and Wu and Li (2014) propose that experiential quality appears to be a
significant predictor of perceived value and that among heritage tourists, perceived value
influences experiential quality and satisfaction positively and directly. Despite experiential
quality gaining an assumed status as a major element influencing customers’ perceived
value in previous studies and prior researchers’ demonstration of the relationships between
quality and perceived value by the means-end chain, the applicability of the theoretical
relationships to the sector of coffee chains remains scarce.

Dimensions of experiential quality Sources

Entertainment, education and community Cole and Scott (2004)

Immersion, surprise, participation and fun Kao et al. (2008)
Physical surroundings, service providers, other customers, Chang and Horng (2010)
customer’s companions and the customers themselves
Hedonism of product category, involvement, product complexity Lemke et al. (2011)
and relationality
Customer processes, other customers, physical environment, Pareigis et al. (2011)
contact personnel, provider processes and wider environment
Learning, enjoyment and escape Altunel and Erkut (2015)
Interaction quality, physical environment quality and outcome De Rojas and Camarero (2008)
quality
Interaction quality, physical environment quality, outcome quality Wu and Ai (2016a, c), Wu and Li (2014)
and access quality and Wu, Li and Li, (2014)
Interaction quality, physical environment quality, outcome quality, Wu, Ai and Cheng (2016); Wu, Cheng Table I.
access quality and administration quality and Ai, 2016 A list of the existing
Interaction quality, physical environment quality, outcome quality, Wu, Li and Li (2016) dimensions of
administration quality and perceived enjoyment experiential quality
BFJ Experiential trust
119,3 Britton and Rose (2004) define trust as “one party’s confidence in the other relationship
members reliability, durability, and integrity, and the belief that its actions are in the best
interest of and will produce positive outcomes for the trusting party” (p. 43). Wu (2013) shows
that customers are best cared for in a service setting where the quality of service experience
is understood, common problems in service delivery treated and that the customer is
472 accompanied through the service experience. Such a setting requires an appreciation of the
challenges to experiential trust resulting from the special characteristics of the customer-service
provider relationship. Experiential trust generally helps customers to feel control even in
situations where the quality of service is hard to grasp (Leiphart and Barnes, 2005).
In fact, service providers attempt to establish trust and confidence among customers
through service offerings (Wu and Ai, 2016b). When customers trust service providers, they
will expect to increase satisfaction and loyalty toward the organization (Kassim and
Abdullah, 2008). Earning experiential trust is a main contributor to loyalty (Nguyen et al.,
2013). When customers experience the service and then trust the service provider, they will
continually use the service and even recommend the service to others (Wu and Ai, 2016b).

Experiential loyalty
Based on the studies of Cronin and Taylor (1992) and Wu and Ai (2016b), experiential
loyalty has been measured by: positive word-of-mouth; recommendation to others;
repurchase intention; and high tolerance for price premium. In this study, the first three
measures have been considered to be adopted to depict the traits of experiential loyalty
(Wu and Li, 2014). The existing literature proposes that quality and satisfaction are
important antecedents of loyalty, indicating that quality and satisfaction play a critical role
in influencing loyalty (Wu and Ai, 2016b). Satisfaction is improved by enhancing quality,
and satisfaction then drives loyalty and organizational profitability (Heskett et al., 2008).
Caruana (2002) concludes that satisfaction plays a mediator role in the effect of quality on
loyalty. Wu and Ai (2016b) find that experiential quality influences experiential loyalty
through experiential satisfaction.

Research model and hypothesis development

Despite widespread research (Carman, 1990), the theories and appropriateness of service
quality measures including the SERVQUAL and SERVPERF scales are subject to ongoing
debate (Cronin and Taylor, 1994; Zeithaml et al., 1993). In light of the aforementioned
criticisms of SERVQUAL and SERVPERF, the multi-dimensional and hierarchical method is
applied to measure experiential quality. Brady and Cronin (2001) and Wu and Ai (2016b)
argue that this method can be applied to explain the complexity of the perception progress
better than prior conceptualizations. Therefore, this study applies a multi-dimensional and
hierarchical structure as a basic framework to develop the conceptual model adapted from
several studies (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Dabholkar et al., 1996; Wu and Ai, 2016b). The multi-
dimensional and hierarchical model reflects the proposition that customers form their
perceptions of each of the sub-dimensions and pertaining primary dimensions: interaction
quality, physical environment quality, outcome quality and affective quality, in order to form
an overall experiential quality perception. The customer perception of experiential quality
influences value and experiential trust, respectively. Subsequently, experiential quality,
perceived value and experiential trust influence experiential satisfaction. Finally, experiential
loyalty is influenced by experiential satisfaction and experiential trust. Figure 1 illustrates the
research model. The sub-dimensions are not initially specified, but are derived empirically
from the sample data. The proposed sub-dimensions of experiential quality in the research
model have been identified by an extensive review of the hospitality literature and using the
results obtained in focus group interviews.
 H14 (+)
Experiential loyalty
Experiential satisfaction

H10 (+)

H12 (+) H15 (+)

Perceived value H13 (+) Experiential trust

H9 (+)

H11 (+)

Experiential quality

H5 (+) H6 (+) H7 (+) H8 (+)

Physical environment Outcome Affective

Interaction quality
quality quality quality Primary Dimensions

H1a (+) H1b (+) H1c (+) H1d (+) H2a(+) H2b(+) H2c(+) H2d(+) H2e(+) H2f(+) H2g(+) H3a(+) H3b(+) H3c(+) H4a(+) H4b(+)

Proposed Sub-dimensions
AT BE EX PS AA FB CL TL FA DE LO VA WT SF HA EX

Notes: AT, Attitude; BE, behavior; EX, expertise; PS, problem-solving; AA, atmosphere and aesthtics; FB, food and beverages; CL,
cleanliness; TL, temperature/lighting; FA, facility; DE, design; LO, location; VA, valence; WT, waiting time; SF, social factors; HA,
happiness; EX, excitement
loyalty?
experiential

473
What drives

Figure 1.
A conceptual model
BFJ Interaction quality
119,3 Interaction quality focuses on how the service is delivered (Brady and Cronin, 2001). Services
are intangible and often inseparable from the service provider to the customer, and
interpersonal interactions often exert the greatest influence on customers’ perceptions of
experiential quality (Brady and Cronin, 2001). Interaction quality in our model consists of four
sub-dimensions: attitude, behavior, expertise and problem-solving. First of all, attitude refers
474 to an employee’s traits (e.g. friendliness and helpfulness) (Clemes et al., 2009; Czepiel et al.,
1985). Second, behavior is referred to as the manifest function that influences the customer
perception of interaction quality (Clemes et al., 2009; Czepiel et al., 1985). Third, expertise has
been identified as the degree to which the interaction is affected by the employee’s
task-oriented skills (Crosby et al., 1990; Czepiel et al., 1985). Finally, problem-solving focuses on
the ability of the employee to handle patrons’ problems and complaints (Dabholkar et al., 1996;
Wu and Mohi, 2015). These sub-dimensions are presumed to positively influence interaction
quality. Therefore, the first hypothesis is proposed:
H1. The interaction quality sub-dimensions will positively affect interaction quality
perceptions.

Physical environment quality

Physical environment quality, is a constructed facility where service delivery occurs, as
opposed to the natural or social environment, and represents the second primary dimension in
the proposed conceptual research model (Bitner, 1992). Wu (2013) finds that there is a positive
relationship between perceptions of the physical surroundings and overall perceived
experiential quality in the hospitality industry. The literature and focus group interviews have
identified seven sub-dimensions of physical environment quality: atmosphere and aesthetics,
food and beverage, cleanliness, temperature/lighting, facility, design and location. In terms of
the first sub-dimension, atmosphere refers to the conscious design of space to create certain
effects in customers to increase their purchase likelihood (Kotler, 1973) while aesthetics is
referred to as how the product looks, feels, sounds, tastes or smells, a matter of personal
preferences (Ojasalo, 2010). The second sub-dimension, food and beverage, is defined in terms
of degree of excellence’ none of these measures serve as adequate indices of food and beverage
(Cardello, 1995). The third sub-dimension, cleanliness, is defined as being from dirt or pollution,
or similarly, from disease or infectious agents (Spiegelberg, 2006). As for the fourth sub-
dimension, temperature is referred to as the concept of cold and hot (Wang et al., 2013) while
lighting refers to both indoor and outdoor lighting which is the most common form of lighting
(Kim et al., 2012). The fifth sub-dimension, facility, refers to the equipment, machinery,
employee appearance, etc., or the man-made physical environment, popularly known as the
“servicescapes” (Kuldeep et al., 2014). The sixth sub-dimension, design, refers to the functional
and aesthetic components of the facility (Bitner, 1992; Brady and Cronin, 2001; Theodorakis
et al., 2009). The last sub-dimension, location, involves the provision of an overall distribution
blueprint for the region (Coltman, 1989). These sub-dimensions are presumed to positively
influence physical environment quality. Thus, the second hypothesis is formulated:
H2. The physical environment quality sub-dimensions will positively affect physical
environment quality perceptions.

Outcome quality
Outcome quality focuses on the outcome of the service act, indicating what customers gain
from the service; in other words, whether outcome quality satisfies customers’ needs and
wants (Rust and Oliver, 1994). Wu and Li (2014) argue that outcome quality plays an
important role in determining perceptions of overall experiential quality. Outcome quality in
the model is comprised of three sub-dimensions: valence, waiting time and social factors. What drives
The first sub-dimension, valence, refers to customers’ post consumption evaluation whether experiential
the service outcome is good or bad, regardless of their evaluation of any other aspect of the loyalty?
service experience (Brady and Cronin, 2001). The second sub-dimension, waiting time, refers
to the amount of time that customers spend waiting in line for service (Hornik, 1982;
Katz et al., 1991). The third sub-dimension, social factors, means positive social experiences
that result from the social gratification of being with others who also enjoy the same activity 475
(Milne and McDonald, 1999). These sub-dimensions are presumed to positively influence
outcome quality. Therefore, the third hypothesis is proposed:
H3. The outcome quality sub-dimensions will positively affect outcome quality perceptions.

Affective quality
Affective quality is defined as the ability to cause a change in core affect (Russell and Pratt,
1980). The perception of the affective quality of all the stimuli typically impinges at any one time
(how pleasant, unpleasant, exciting, boring, upsetting, or soothing each is), then influences
subsequent reactions to those stimuli (Russell and Pratt, 1980). The existing literature has
identified two sub-dimensions of affective quality: happiness and excitement. The first sub-
dimension, happiness, is defined as “a judgment made by customers regarding the extent to
which the focal brand/company makes a significant contribution to his or her quality of life”
(Merunka and Sirgy, 2011, p. 21). The second sub-dimension, excitement, is defined as a
combination of high pleasure and high arousal, and contentment as a combination of high
pleasure and low arousal (Liljander and Bergenwall, 1999). These two sub-dimensions are
assumed to positively influence affective quality. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis is proposed:
H4. The affective quality sub-dimensions will positively affect affective quality
perceptions.

Overall perceived experiential quality

Several researchers (e.g. Brady and Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2009; Russell and Pratt, 1980;
Wu and Cheng, 2013; Wu and Li, 2014) indicate that overall perceived experiential quality is
influenced by four primary dimensions: interaction quality, physical environment quality,
outcome quality and affective quality. The following hypotheses have been formulated to
examine the effects of the primary dimensions on overall experiential quality as perceived
by coffee chain customers:
H5. The quality of service interactions will positively influence overall experiential
quality perceptions.
H6. The quality of the physical environment will positively influence overall experiential
quality perceptions.
H7. The quality of the service outcome will positively influence overall experiential
perceptions.
H8. The quality of the service affect will positively influence overall experiential
quality perceptions.

The relationships among the higher-order constructs: experiential quality, experiential

satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty
In the research of the relationship between quality and perceived value in the retailing
industry, most of the empirical studies have pointed out that experiential quality positively
BFJ influences perceived value (Wu and Li, 2014). While it is contended that perceived value has
119,3 a direct impact on how satisfied customers are with a supplier (Anderson et al., 1994) and
that satisfaction depends on perceived value (Ravald and Grönroos, 1996), little attention
has been paid to perceived value in the coffee chain sector (Yu and Fang, 2009). Thus, the
following hypotheses are proposed as follows:
H9. Experiential quality will positively influence perceived value.
476 H10. Perceived value will positively influence experiential satisfaction.
Morgan and Hunt (1994) assume that when the customer believes an organization to be
reliable, responsive and empathetic they are likely to view the service provider as having a
high degree of integrity from which experiential trust is likely to develop. Rortveit et al.
(2015) indicate that experiential trust imposes a positive influence on satisfaction. Therefore,
the following hypotheses are proposed:
H11. Experiential quality will positively influence experiential trust.
H12. Experiential trust will positively influence experiential satisfaction.
Wu and Li (2014) contend that experiential quality has a positive influence on experiential
satisfaction. Several studies in the service sector have empirically validated the link between
satisfaction and loyalty such as customer retention and word-of-mouth (Hu et al., 2009;
Wu, 2013). Hart and Johnson (1999) indicate that one of the conditions of true loyalty is total
satisfaction. Corbitt et al. (2003) indicate a strong positive effect of trust on loyalty in case of
telecommunications sector. Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed as follows:
H13. Experiential quality will positively influence experiential satisfaction.
H14. Experiential satisfaction will positively influence experiential loyalty.
H15. Experiential trust will positively influence experiential loyalty.

Importance of the dimensions of experiential quality

Several researchers (Clemes et al., 2009; Wu and Li, 2014, 2015) demonstrate that
customers perceive that the dimensions of experiential quality are not equally important,
and that some experiential quality dimensions are more or less important than others.
The following hypothesis is designed to measure the comparative importance of the
experiential quality dimensions:
H16. Customers’ perceptions of (a) each of the primary dimensions and (b) each of the
sub-dimensions will differ in their importance.

Research design and method

Questionnaire development
This study involves a two-stage design consisting of qualitative and quantitative studies.
The first stage consists of focus group interviews to gain in-depth insights into overall
service experiences in a coffee chain of Taiwan. Zikmund et al. (2007) indicate that a typical
focus group should consist of one interviewer and six to ten participants. Therefore,
three focus group interviews were conducted in this study. The members in each group
interview consisted of ten people who had experienced the services offered by a coffee chain
in Taiwan (e.g. Starbucks) and then were invited to participate into this study. During the
focus group interview, all of the focus group members were required to identify the factors
they considered most influential in their overall assessment of the quality of their service
experience in a coffee chain of Taiwan. After the focus group interviews were completed, the
researchers identified two sub-dimensions of physical environment quality (temperature/ What drives
lighting and location) that were not identified in the literature review (the section of physical experiential
environment quality). The factors identified in the focus groups were combined with a loyalty?
review of the relevant literature to identify variables, assist in item generation and
recommend the dimensionality of experiential quality in a coffee chain of Taiwan. This
process resulted in an initial pool of 62 experiential quality items (see Table II).
The second stage focused on self-administered questionnaires consisting of six sections. The 477
first four sections included the statements of interaction quality, physical environment quality,
outcome quality and affective quality. These items were grouped in accordance with each of the
primary dimensions, as perceived by the focus group participants. The fifth section included
questions of experiential quality, experiential satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust and
experiential loyalty. The measured items using a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from
7 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). The final section collected demographic information.
The questionnaire was developed by reviewing the related consumer behavior studies of other
researchers plus advice from services marketing researchers and coffee chain managers in order
to ensure its content validity. The suggested minor changes were implemented after the
questionnaires were pilot-tested with 50 respondents who had been to a coffee chain in Taiwan.

Data collection
Starbucks dominates Taiwan’s coffee consumption. Starbucks’ unique style and established
trend of high-quality coffee from different regions has attracted people’s attention and
commingled with their lifestyles (Lin, 2004). In general, the integrity of research data can be
affected if the respondents are reluctant to participate (Tseng, 2016). Therefore, purposive
sampling was used in order to ensure that respondents had high willingness to participate in
the research. The questionnaire was anonymous, mainly distributed to the customers aged
over 18 who had been to one representative Starbucks in Taipei City (Taiwan’s largest city)
between February 15 and April 15, 2016. The customers who just left this coffee chain were
asked whether they were willing to respond to the questionnaires distributed by the surveyors.
The distribution of questionnaires was conducted only during daytime by a group of trained
college students from National Taiwan University during the period from February 15 to April
15, 2016. The reason for choosing this Starbucks for sample collection is that the number of
customers is large and it is suitable for measuring the customer’s perception of experiential
quality, experiential satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust, experiential loyalty, and
the dimensions of experiential quality, as suggested by several studies (Lin, 2004; Yuan et al.,
2015). After completing filling in the questionnaires, small incentives (i.e. coupons for
Starbucks) were given to the participants as appreciation of their contribution.
Out of 505 questionnaires distributed, 460 (91.1 percent) were retuned; 32 incomplete
returned were discarded. The total usable sample of 428 represents an overall response rate
of 93.0 percent. The usable responses were above the minimum sample size of 345 suggested
by Hair et al. (2010). The descriptive statistics of the sample are summarized in Table III.
The female respondents (54.9 percent) were slightly more than male ones (45.1 percent).
Most of the respondents were single (63.1 percent) and aged between 18 and 27 years old
(30.8 percent). In terms of respondents’ level of education and occupation, a majority of
respondents graduated from college or university (43.5 percent) and worked as service staff
(21.3 percent). As for respondents’ monthly income before tax, the largest group was
between NT$20,001 and NT$40,000 (roughly US$645 and US$ 1,290) (36.2 percent).

Results
Measurement development and estimation
The exploratory factor analyses were undertaken using a principal component factor analysis
approach with the VARIMAX orthogonal rotation. This was applied to the 62 individual item
 BFJ

478
119,3

Table II.

eigenvalues,

percentage of
percentage of

and cumulative
Factor loadings,

sub-dimensions of
of scaled items for
explained variance
explained variance

experiential quality
Percentage of Cumulative
Sub- Factor explained percentage of
dimension Item Statement loadings Eigenvalues variance explained variance

Employees’ EB1 The employees understand that I rely on their professional knowledge to satisfy
behavior (EB) my needs 0.79 2.99 7.54 15.63
EB2 The behavior of the employees gives me trust 0.73
EB3 The behavior of the employees allows me to trust their services 0.70
EB4 I can rely on the employees taking actions to address my needs 0.69
EB5 The employees always provide the best service for me 0.65
EB6 The employees are able to answer my questions quickly 0.58
Employees’ EPS1 The employees are able to handle my complaints directly and immediately 0.82 1.06 4.38 61.81
problem- EPS2 The employees understand the importance of resolving my complaints 0.80
solving (EPS) EPS3 I can count on the employees knowing their jobs/responsibilities 0.65
EPS4 When I have a problem, the employees show a sincere interest in solving it 0.59
Employees’ EA1 I can depend on the employees being friendly 0.88 1.12 4.96 57.44
attitude (EA) EA2 The attitude of employees demonstrates their willingness to help me 0.77
EA3 The attitude of employees shows me that they understand my needs 0.58
Cleanliness CC1 The counter is clean 0.70 1.33 5.34 41.88
and comfort CC2 The temperature is pleasant and comfortable 0.70
(CC) CC3 The employees look clean and neat 0.69
CC4 The restroom is clean 0.68
CC5 The dining table is clean 0.63
CC6 The lighting around the coffee shop is adequate at night 0.63
Tangibles TA1 There are fashionable color schemes (e.g. wall painting) 0.84 25.97 8.09 8.09
(TA) TA2 There is attractive interior décor (e.g. pictures and flowers) and pleasant surroundings 0.82
TA3 There is attractive décor and ambience 0.78
TA4 There is lighting creating a comfortable atmosphere 0.72
TA5 There is suitable background music 0.51
TA6 I really enjoy the atmospherea 0.48
TA7 There are comfortable seats that are easy to move arounda 0.41
TA8 The tables are good quality and very comfortablea 0.39
TA9 There is comfortable temperaturea 0.35
TA10 The coffee shop is aesthetically attractivea 0.34
Location (LO) LO1 The retail stores around the coffee shop are conveniently located 0.80 1.79 6.82 29.87
LO2 The layout serves my purposes/needs 0.65

(continued )
 Percentage of Cumulative
Sub- Factor explained percentage of
dimension Item Statement loadings Eigenvalues variance explained variance

LO3 The coffee shop is in a convenient location 0.65

LO4 It is relatively easy for me to reach the coffee shop 0.64
LO5 The layout makes it easy for customers to move around 0.56
Equipment EQU1 There are noticeable sprinkler systems 0.69 1.49 6.67 36.54
(EQU) EQU2 There are accessible fire exits 0.65
EQU3 The lighting of parking areas around the coffee shop is adequate at night 0.58
EQU4 The equipment is in good condition 0.51
EQU5 Staying at the coffee shop is quieta 0.48
Food and FB1 There is a wide variety of coffee products 0.74 1.27 5.33 47.21
beverages FB2 There is a variety of food and desserts 0.73
(FB) FB3 There is a variety of beverage types other than coffee 0.68
FB4 There is attractive and tempting food and beverages 0.62
FB5 The food and beverages can satisfy my need 0.52
Valence (VA) VA1 When I leave the coffee shop, I always feel that I have received what I wanted 0.85 1.13 5.27 52.48
VA2 I feel good about what I get from the coffee shop 0.82
VA3 I usually have a good feeling when I leave the coffee shop 0.79
VA4 I would evaluate the outcome of staying at the coffee shop favorably 0.72
Waiting time WT1 The employees understand that waiting time is important to me 0.75 2.18 7.42 23.05
(WT) WT2 The employees provide service to the customers punctually 0.69
WT3 The employees show its interest in accelerating the service 0.59
WT4 The employees try to minimize my waiting time 0.53
WT5 Overall, the waiting time for service is reasonablea 0.47
Sociability SO1 I have made social contacts 0.88 1.91 4.22 66.03
(SO) SO2 I feel a sense of belonging with other customers 0.88
SO3 I am provided with opportunities for social interaction 0.82
Happiness HA1 I feel happy to stay at the coffee shop 0.84 1.82 2.61 72.24
(HA) HA2 Staying at the coffee shop greatly contributes to my happiness 0.83
HA3 The money spent for staying at the coffee shop is worth it 0.76
Excitement EX1 Staying at the coffee shop is interesting 0.61 1.43 3.59 69.62
(EX) EX2 Staying at the coffee shop is pleasant 0.52
a
EX3 Staying at the coffee shop is exciting 0.48
Notes: All items were scored on seven-point Likert scales with 1 being strongly disagree and 7 being strongly agree unless stated otherwise. The scaled items for the
sub-dimensions of service quality were extracted by the VARIMAX orthogonal rotation. aItems with factor loadings of less than 0.50 were deleted based on measurement
scale refinement procedure
loyalty?
experiential

479
What drives

Table II.
BFJ Demographic characteristics Options Frequency Percentage
119,3
Gender Male 193 45.1
Female 235 54.9
Marital status Single 270 63.1
Married 158 36.9
Age 18-27 132 30.8
480 28-37 113 26.4
38-47 73 17.1
48-57 61 14.3
58 or above 49 11.4
Educational level Secondary school or below 45 10.5
High school 72 16.8
Vocational/technical school 84 19.6
College or university 186 43.5
Graduate school or above 41 9.6
Occupation Management/administrative
staff 78 18.2
White collar 34 7.9
Professional 42 9.8
Salesperson 64 15.0
Service staff 91 21.3
Housewife 14 3.3
Student 52 12.1
Self-employed 21 4.9
Unemployed 17 4.0
Retired 9 2.1
Other 6 1.4
Monthly income before tax (NT ¼ New Taiwan)a o NT$20,000 and less 128 29.9
NT$20,001-NT$40,000 155 36.2
NT$40,001-NT$60,000 71 16.6
NT$60,001-NT$80,000 32 7.5
Table III. NT$80,001-NT$100,000 29 6.8
Demographic profile W NT$100,000 13 3.0
of sample Notes: n ¼ 428. aTWD$31 ¼ US$1

responses as perceived by focus group participants to represent the sub-dimensions of

experiential quality. The data set was randomly divided into two sub-samples of equal size:
sample one and sample two. The data in sample one was used and then analyzed using
exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The examination of the scree plot and latent root criterion
and the researcher’s interpretation of the factor solution indicate that 13 dimensions should be
extracted from original 16 dimensions. Items loading highly on each factor were examined
carefully so that only those with consistent meanings and a high loading on a single factor were
retained for measuring the factors. After the orthogonal rotation was conducted, eight items
whose factor loadings were less than 0.50 were removed from EFA. These eight excluded items
often refer to variables that may not play an important or significant role in the evaluations of
experiential quality. These items included TA6, TA7, TA8, TA9, TA10, EQU5, WT5 and EX3
(see Table II). The revised EFA was conducted on the remaining 54 items. The 13 retained
factors had eigenvalues greater than one. In addition, those factors explained a cumulative total
of 72.24 percent of the variance in the data, indicating that a cumulative percentage of variance
explained being greater than 50 percent is the criterion used in determining the number of
factors. After EFA was conducted, the sub-dimensions were identified and renamed:
employees’ behavior (six items); employees’ problem-solving (four items); employees’ attitude
(three items); cleanliness and comfort (six items); tangibles (five items); location (five items);
equipment (four items); food and beverage (five items); valence (four items); waiting time (four What drives
items); sociability (three items); happiness (three items); and excitement (two items). All factor experiential
loadings for the retained items are above 0.50 (see Table II). loyalty?
Convergent and discriminant validity of the measures
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the validity by applying structural
equation modeling (SEM). The data in sample two was used and then analyzed using CFA.
Cronbach’s coefficient α estimates for the 13 sub-dimensions of experiential quality ranged
481
between 0.72 and 0.87, exceeding the minimum value of 0.70. This study then applied the
standardized factor loadings and average variance extracted (AVE) of each construct to
verify the convergent validity. For each construct, the standardized factor loading was
above the threshold value of 0.50 and the AVE estimate was higher than the threshold value
of 0.50. The composite reliability (CR) for each construct is used to verify the convergent
reliability. The CR was greater than the recommended value of 0.60. These results revealed
that the instrument had good convergent validity.

Results of the measurement model test

The overall fit of the measurement models was adequate. The χ2/df ratios (3.18) were lower
than the threshold value of 5.0 while the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
value (0.07) was less than 0.08. The standardized root mean residual (SRMR) value (0.04)
was equivalent to or less than the recommended threshold value of 0.08. Several indices
(e.g. CFI, GFI, IFI and NNFI estimates) were greater than the recommended threshold value
of 0.90. The AGFI (0.89) exceeding the recommended threshold value of 0.80.

Results of structural equation analyses

The overall fit measures of the structural model suggest that the hypothesized
model provides an acceptable fit to the data. The χ2 difference test is used to examine the
model difference between the two groups. The χ2/df ratios (2.25) were lower than the
threshold value of 5.0. Therefore, the result indicates that there is no model difference
between two groups (Δx2 o3.84, p W0.05). The fit statistics (RMSEA ¼ 0.05, SRMR ¼ 0.05,
CFI ¼ 0.96, GFI ¼ 0.93, IFI ¼ 0.93, NNFI ¼ 0.95, AGFI ¼ 0.91) suggest a satisfactory fit in
light of the extremely high statistical power of the model.
To assess customers’ perceptions of the four primary dimensions and extracted
13 sub-dimensions of experiential quality, the measurement items to measure primary and sub-
dimensions were adapted from several studies (e.g. Brady and Cronin, 2001; Caro
and Garcia, 2008; Chen et al., 2011; Clemes, Brush and Collins, 2011; Clemes, Gan and Ren,
2011: Dabholkar et al., 1996; Ko and Pastore, 2005; Wu, 2013; Wu and Hsu, 2012; Wu and Ko,
2013; Wu and Li, 2014, 2015). The measurement items of the experiential quality, experiential
satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty constructs were
adopted on the basis of several researchers’ results (e.g. Brady and Cronin, 2001; Wu and Ai,
2016a, b; Wu and Li, 2014; Wu, Li and Li, 2014) (see Table IV). The full questionnaire can be
obtained on request. Though the sub-dimensions are treated as separate constructs, it is
recognized that they are not mutually exclusive. It is therefore necessary to test whether there
is sufficient discrimination between them. Also, it is important to investigate whether
experiential quality and experiential satisfaction are empirically separate constructs. In some
cases, previous studies have been unable to find discriminant validity between them
(e.g. Spreng and Singh, 1993). The Fornell and Larcker (1981) test was used. This examines
whether the AVE for each construct is higher than the squared correlation between that
construct and any other construct in the model. In all cases, the tests demonstrate discriminant
validity. In concurrence with Dabholkar et al. (2000), experiential quality and experiential
satisfaction are distinct constructs although they are moderately correlated.
BFJ Construct Item Statement
119,3
Interaction quality IQ1 Overall, I would say the quality of my interaction with the employees is excellent
IQ2 The interaction I have with the employees is of a high standard
IQ3 I feel good about the interaction I have with the employees at the coffee shop
Physical PEQ1 I believe that the physical environment is excellent
environment quality PEQ2 The physical environment is of a high standard
482 PEQ3 I am impressed with the quality of the coffee shop’s physical environment
Outcome quality OQ1 I feel good about what the employees provide to their customers
OQ2 I always have an excellent experience while staying at the coffee shop
OQ3 The quality of service I receive is excellent
Affective quality AQ1 Staying at the coffee shop is arousing
AQ2 Staying at the coffee shop is delightful
AQ3 Staying at the coffee shop is relaxing
AQ4 Staying at the coffee shop is entertaining
Experiential quality EQ1 I believe that visiting the coffee shop is going to provide the customer with a
great dining experience
EQ2 The quality of the coffee shop could be considered superior when compared to
other coffee shops
EQ3 Staying at the coffee shop is a pleasant experience
Experiential ES1 Staying at the coffee shop goes beyond my expectations
satisfaction ES2 I think I did the right thing when I experienced the service of the coffee shop
ES3 It is worthwhile to be at the coffee shop
Perceived value PV1 Compared to time I spend, staying at the coffee shop is worthy
PV2 Compared to the efforts I make, staying at the coffee shop is worthy
PV3 I feel happy about my choice of staying at the coffee shop
Experiential trust ET1 The coffee shop really takes care of my needs as a customer
Table IV.
Scaled items for ET2 I am sure that the employees of the coffee shop would do everything to satisfy
primary dimensions of my need
experiential quality, ET3 I have great confidence in the employees of the coffee shop
experiential ET4 I believe that the price/quality ratio offered at the coffee shop is very reasonable
satisfaction, perceived Experiential loyalty EL1 I will spread positive word-of-mouth about the coffee shop
value, experiential EL2 I want to continue as a customer of the coffee shop
trust and experiential EL3 Even if close friends recommended another coffee shop, my preference for the
loyalty coffee shop would not change

To test the hypotheses in the conceptual research model, this study applies SEM through
AMOS 7.0. Each path estimate based on the relationships among experiential quality,
experiential satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust, experiential loyalty, and
primary and sub-dimensions of experiential quality in the path model was subsequently
tested using CFA to prove SEM built in Figure 1.
H1 predicts that the sub-dimensions of the primary interaction quality (employees’
behavior, employees’ problem-solving and employees’ attitude) positively affect perceived
interaction quality. This hypothesis is fully supported by the results. Perceptions of
employees’ behavior (b ¼ 0.84, p o0.001), employees’ problem-solving (b ¼ 0.78, p o0.001)
and employees’ attitude (b ¼ 0.84, p o 0.001) positively affect interaction quality.
The sub-dimensions explain 62.0 percent of the variation in perceived interaction quality.
H2 assumes that the sub-dimensions of the primary physical environment quality
(cleanliness and comfort, tangibles, location, equipment, food and beverage) positively
influence perceived physical environment quality. This hypothesis is fully supported by the
results. Perceptions of cleanliness and comfort (b ¼ 0.69, p o0.001), tangibles (b ¼ 0.70,
p o0.001), location (b ¼ 0.68, p o0.001), equipment (b ¼ 0.65, p o0.001) and food and
beverage (b ¼ 0.75, p o0.001). The sub-dimensions explain 64.4 percent of the variation in
perceived physical environment quality.
 H3 predicts that the sub-dimensions of valence, waiting time and sociability positively What drives
influence outcome quality. This hypothesis is fully supported by the results. experiential
Perceptions of valence (b ¼ 0.83, p o 0.001), waiting time (b ¼ 0.75, p o 0.001) and loyalty?
sociability (b ¼ 0.82, p o 0.001). The sub-dimensions explain 60.4 percent of the variation
in perceived outcome quality.
H4 assumes that the sub-dimensions of happiness and excitement positively influence
affective quality. The results support the hypothesis that perceptions of happiness (b ¼ 0.82, 483
p o0.001) and excitement (b ¼ 0.85, p o0.001) positively affect customers’ perceptions of
the overall affective quality. The sub-dimensions explain 48.6 percent of the variation in
perceived affective quality.
H5 through H8 predict that the positive effects of the primary dimensions of experiential
quality affect overall experiential quality. The results support the hypotheses that perceptions
of interaction quality (b ¼ 0.80, po0.001), physical environment quality (b ¼ 0.86, po0.001),
outcome quality (b ¼ 0.83, po0.001) and affective quality (b ¼ 0.89, po0.001) positively
influence customers’ perceptions of overall experiential quality. The primary dimensions
explain 71.0 percent of the variation in overall experiential quality.
H9 postulates the positive effect of overall experiential quality on perceived value.
This hypothesis is supported by the results. Overall experiential quality (b ¼ 0.58, p o0.001)
is a significant predictor of perceived value. This variable explains 33.9 percent of the
variance in perceived value.
H10, H12 and H13 predict the positive effects of perceived value, experiential trust and
overall experiential quality on experiential satisfaction. The results support all hypotheses.
Perceived value (b ¼ 0.14, p o0.001), experiential trust (b ¼ 0.46, p o0.001) and overall
experiential quality (b ¼ 0.42, p o0.001) are significant predictors of customer satisfaction.
These three variables explain 87.6 percent of the variance in experiential satisfaction.
H11 predicts the positive effect of overall experiential quality on experiential trust.
The result supports this hypothesis. Overall experiential quality (b ¼ 0.88, p o0.001)
positively influences experiential trust. This variable explains 77.1 percent of the variance in
experiential trust.
H14 and H15 assume the positive effects of experiential satisfaction and experiential trust
on experiential loyalty. The results support the hypotheses that experiential satisfaction
(b ¼ 0.09, po0.1) and experiential trust (b ¼ 0.63, po0.01) positively influence experiential
loyalty. Both of the variables explain 50.4 percent of the variance in experiential loyalty.
H16 proposes that customers perceive the four primary dimensions of experiential
quality to be more or less important, and that the sub-dimensions also differ in their
importance to their related primary dimensions. The results show that affective quality
(b ¼ 0.89) is the most important primary dimension, followed by physical environment
quality (b ¼ 0.86), outcome quality (b ¼ 0.83) and interaction quality (b ¼ 0.80). The different
levels of b fully support H16a. However, the varied standardized coefficients of the
sub-dimensions indicate that H16b is also fully supported.
Each path estimate based on the relationships among experiential loyalty, experiential
quality, experiential satisfaction, perceived value, experiential trust, and primary and
sub-dimensions of experiential quality in the path model was subsequently tested using
CFA to prove SEM built in Figure 2.

Discussions
The findings of this study support a hierarchical structure of experiential quality in a coffee
chain consisting of four primary dimensions: interaction quality, physical environment quality,
outcome quality and affective quality (supporting H5 through H8). The findings also support
the presence of a multi-dimensional structure of experiential quality for coffee chains
(supporting H1 through H4). Specifically, based on the empirical results of this study, the
 BFJ

484
119,3

Figure 2.
A path model
Experiential satisfaction 0.19(2.93)* Experiential loyalty

0.14(3.10)****

0.46(6.09)*** 0.63(7.08)**

Perceived value 0.42(6.00)*** Experiential trust

0.58(9.00)*** 0.88(11.52)***

Experiential quality

0.80(15.22)*** 0.86(11.45)*** 0.83(12.68)*** 0.89(13.13)****

Physical environment Outcome quality Affective quality

Interaction quality
quality Primary Dimensions

0.69 0.70 0.75 0.83 0.75 0.82

0.84 0.78 0.88 0.68 0.65 0.82 0.85
(12.77)*** (12.82)*** (16.32)*** (16.68)*** (18.18)*** (19.44)***
(17.88)*** (17.95)*** (19.47)*** (12.43)*** (11.95)*** (13.65)*** (18.43)***

Pertaining Sub-dimensions
EB EPS EA CC TA LO EQU FB VA WT SO HA EX

Notes: EB, Employees’ behavior; EPS, employees’ problem-solving; EA, employees’ attitude; CC, cleanliness and comfort; TA, tangibles;
LO, location; EQU, equipment; FB, food and beverages; VA, valence; WT, waiting time; SO, sociability; HA, happiness; EX, excitement.
Standardized path coefficient (t-value). *p<0.1; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001
multi-dimensional and hierarchical model of experiential quality for coffee chains consists of What drives
13 first-order dimensions, four second-order dimensions and five higher-order constructs. experiential
The results of the EFA reduced the 16 sub-dimensions originally proposed to 13 loyalty?
sub-dimensions using a multi-dimensional and hierarchical approach. The 13 sub-dimensions
factored in this study for coffee chains are similar in content to the dimensions identified by
other researchers that have focused on the hospitality industry (Brady and Cronin, 2001;
Yuan et al., 2015). However, some of the sub-dimensions are different in content from the 485
sub-dimensions identified for the higher education sector (Clemes et al., 2008, 2013), the
healthcare industry (Dagger et al., 2007), the recreational sports industry (Clemes, Brush and
Collins, 2011; Ko and Pastore, 2005), the accommodation industry (Clemes et al., 2009; Clemes,
Gan and Ren, 2011; Wu and Ko, 2013; Wu, Ai and Cheng, 2016), the hot spring industry
(Wu et al., 2015), the travel and tourism industry (Caro and Garcia, 2008; Wu, Li and Li, 2016),
the event industry (Gottlieb et al., 2011), the transport industry (Caro and Garcia, 2007; Wu and
Cheng, 2013; Wu et al., 2011), the golfing industry (Wu and Ai, 2016b), the gaming industry
(Wu, 2014; Wu and Hsu, 2012), the quick service restaurant industry (Wu, 2013), the
telecommunications industry (Clemes et al., 2013; Lu et al., 2009), the food festival sector (Wong
et al., 2015; Wu and Ai, 2016a; Wu, Wong and Cheng, 2014) and Brady and Cronin’s (2001)
study across four service industries (fast-food, photograph developing, amusement parks and
dry cleaning). These findings support the contention of Clemes et al. (2009) that different
dimensional structures across service industries have been identified.
The 13 sub-dimensions factored in this study for coffee chains are similar in content to
the dimensions identified by other researchers that have focused on the hospitality industry
(e.g. Chen and Hu, 2010; Sam and Dhanya, 2012; Shin et al., 2015; Yu and Fang, 2009).
However, the 13 sub-dimensions also differ in content and number from those for the
hospitality studies undertaken in Taiwan (e.g. Hung, 2012; Tu et al., 2012; Yuan et al., 2015).
The different sub-dimensional factor structure identified in this study for coffee chains
supports the view that the dimensionality of the experiential quality construct depends on
the customer experience. These results also support the claims that industry- and cultural-
specific measures of experiential quality need to be developed to identify different
dimensional structures (e.g. Brady and Cronin, 2001; Wong et al., 2015; Wu and Li, 2014).
The hypothesized paths (H9 through H15) relating to experiential quality, perceived value,
experiential trust, experiential satisfaction and experiential loyalty in the conceptual model are
confirmed. These findings indicate that experiential quality, perceived value and experiential
trust positively influence experiential satisfaction. Therefore, these findings are consistent
with the contentions of earlier studies (Clemes et al., 2009; Wu, 2013; Wu and Li, 2014) that
experiential quality, perceived value and experiential trust are supported as direct
determinants of experiential satisfaction in the hospitality industry. Also, this result reveals
that experiential quality positively influences perceived value. This finding agrees with the
contentions of early studies (Clemes et al., 2009; Wu and Li, 2014) that experiential quality has
been identified as an important indicator of perceived value in the hospitality industry.
Alternatively, this result indicates that experiential quality has a positive influence on
experiential trust. This finding concurs with the contention of Wu and Ai (2016b) that quality
has been found to be an antecedent of experiential trust. Finally, these results indicate that
both experiential satisfaction and experiential trust are antecedents of experiential loyalty.
This result is consistent with the finding of Wu and Ai (2016b) that experiential satisfaction
and experiential trust are key determinants of experiential loyalty.
The results for H16 proposing the least and most important experiential quality
dimensions, as perceived by coffee chain customers, are identified. Each of the sub-dimensions
varies in terms of their importance to the four primary dimensions (see Figure 1). Affective
quality is identified as the most important dimension of experiential quality. This finding
supports the contention of Russell and Pratt (1980) that affective quality is perceived as the
BFJ most important dimension when people provide their overall assessment of experiential quality.
119,3 Affective quality is composed of two significant sub-dimensions, namely, happiness (b ¼ 0.82)
and excitement (b ¼ 0.85). Excitement is the most significant sub-dimension of affective quality.
This finding is consistent with the contention of Wu and Ai (2016b) that excitement has been
considered to an important factor which influences customers to determine whether they will
return or revisit coffee chains. Alternatively, this finding agrees with De Keyser and Lariviere
486 (2014), who propose that excitement is an important component of affective quality perceived
by coffee chain customers.
Physical environment quality is identified as the second most important dimension of
experiential quality perceived by coffee chain customers. These results are consistent with
the contentions of several researchers (Wu and Ai, 2016b; Wu and Ko, 2013; Wong et al.,
2015; Wu et al., 2011) that physical environment quality has been considered to be one of the
important attributes of experiential quality. Physical environment quality is made up of five
significant sub-dimensions, namely, food and beverage (b ¼ 0.75), tangibles (b ¼ 0.70),
cleanliness and comfort (b ¼ 0.69), location (b ¼ 0.68) and equipment (b ¼ 0.65). This result
supports the contention of Chen and Hu (2010) that food and beverage has been considered
to influence the customer perception of physical environment quality in a coffee chain.
Moreover, this study identifies tangibles and cleanliness and comfort as significant sub-
dimensions of physical environment quality, supporting the proposition of Waxman (2006)
that tangibles and cleanliness and comfort have been identified as important determinants
of quality as perceived by coffee chain customers. In addition, the study’s result agrees with
the proposition of Paryani (2011) that the location in a coffee chain is furnished with
comfortable seating, providing outlets for electronic equipment, and a blanket no-smoking
policy ensures that all customers are comfortable in the physical environment. Finally, this
finding concurs with the contention of Paryani (2011) that equipment has been considered to
be an important part of constituting the physical environment in a coffee chain.
Outcome quality is confirmed to be the third most important dimension of experiential
quality perceived by coffee chain customers. This finding supports Powpaka’s (1996)
contention that outcome quality is perceived as a determinant of overall quality. Valence
(b ¼ 0.83) is perceived as the most important sub-dimension of outcome quality, followed by
sociability (b ¼ 0.82) and waiting time (b ¼ 0.75). This finding is consistent with the
contention of Chen and Hu (2010) that valence is perceived as an important factor by coffee
chain customers. In addition, this result agrees with the proposition of Waxman (2006) that
even though designing for sociability is important, designers should note that not all
customers in a coffee chain choose to interact, yet many receive the benefits that one may
expect from a social experience. Finally, this finding is consistent with the contention of
Paryani (2011) that a major customer complaint is the long lines waiting for coffee drinks in
a coffee chain. Coffee chains should open new locations close to busy locations in order to
relieve the wait in lines and increase service rates.
Interaction quality is perceived as the fourth most important dimension of experiential
quality. In this study, a majority of customers who have stayed in the coffee chain are Asian
people rather than Western people. This finding supports the contention of Hofstede et al.
(2010) that Asian cultures are collectivist whereas western cultures are individualist. In
addition, the study’s result agrees with the contention of Donthu and Yoo (1998) that
collectivistic people do not expect service providers to respect and care about them and
show empathy and attention compared with individualistic customers. Interaction quality is
composed of three significant sub-dimensions, namely, employees’ attitude (b ¼ 0.88),
employees’ behavior (b ¼ 0.84) and employees’ problem-solving (b ¼ 0.78). These results
support Hung’s (2012) contention that the staff’s problem-solving directly affects customers’
acknowledgment of the particular coffee store, and the staff’s attitude and behavior also
reflect on customers’ manners.
Implications What drives
Theoretical implications experiential
To the researcher’s best knowledge, this study is a pioneer in applying a concept of loyalty?
experiential quality to the coffee chain context. This study presents a comprehensive
evaluation of coffee chain customers’ perceptions of experiential quality by developing and
estimating a multi-dimensional and hierarchical model. The results of this study support the
use of a multi-dimensional and hierarchical approach for conceptualizing and measuring 487
coffee chain customers’ perceptions of experiential quality, like the models developed by
several researchers (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Dabholkar et al., 1996; Wu and Ai, 2016a, b, c;
Wu and Li, 2014; Wu, Ai and Cheng, 2016; Wu, Cheng and Ai, 2016; Wu, Li and Li, 2016).
The results of the measurement model tests indicate that all measurement models for
measuring experiential quality and its dimensions have a good model fit. In addition, the
results of the reliability and validity tests indicate that the measurement scales for
measuring experiential quality and its dimensions reveal adequate reliability and validity.
This study provides a theoretical framework for understanding the relationships among
five important marketing constructs (experiential quality, experiential satisfaction, perceived
value, experiential trust and experiential loyalty). The result of this study reveals that
experiential quality has a direct and significant impact on perceived value. The positive
relationship that is identified between experiential quality and perceived value may be
interpreted as the higher the experiential quality as perceived by coffee chain customers, the
more willing customers are to pay higher prices and spend more time for their coffee chains.
Also, experiential quality is empirically tested and confirmed as having a positive impact on
experiential trust. The positive relationship identified between experiential quality and
experiential trust may be interpreted as the higher the experiential quality as perceived by
coffee chain customers, the higher confidence in the coffee chain that the customers experience.
This study identifies experiential quality, perceived value and experiential trust as having a
positive effect on experiential satisfaction in the context of coffee chains. This may be
interpreted as experiential quality, perceived value and experiential trust being antecedents of
experiential satisfaction because they play key roles in increasing experiential satisfaction
(Lee et al., 2007; Wu et al., 2014; Wu, Ai and Cheng, 2016). Furthermore, both experiential
satisfaction and experiential trust positively affect experiential loyalty. This may be interpreted
as experiential satisfaction and experiential trust being antecedents of experiential loyalty
because both of them are key determinants of experiential loyalty (Bowden-Everson et al., 2013;
Deng et al., 2010; Wu and Ai, 2016a, b, c). The positive relationship identified between
experiential satisfaction and experiential loyalty may be interpreted as satisfied customers
experiencing high levels of experiential loyalty to return or revisit the coffee chain after paying
high prices and spend more time experiencing high levels of quality in the coffee chain that
produces a good image in their minds. In addition, the positive relationship identified between
experiential trust and experiential loyalty may also be interpreted as it being likely that
customers will experience high levels of loyalty to return or revisit the coffee chain after giving
great service experience with confidence in everything the coffee chain provides.
This study identifies the comparative importance of the four primary dimensions in coffee
chain customers’ overall evaluation of perceived overall experiential quality. Among the four
primary dimensions, affective quality is the most important primary dimension of experiential
quality, followed by physical environment quality, outcome quality and interaction quality.
The study’s results provide empirical evidence for the notion that affect that results in visiting
often has the greatest effect on customers’ perceptions of experiential quality (Russell, 2003).
However, the interpersonal interactions that occur during service delivery have the attitudinal
effect on customers’ perceptions of experiential quality, because service providers and
customers in a coffee chain are seldom concerned about how they interact with each other.
A coffee shop is generally a cafe-like foodservice establishment which focuses on serving coffee
BFJ and offering a sociable environment for people to gather in small groups or relax
119,3 individually (Goodwin, 2014). This study identifies 13 sub-dimensions pertaining to the four
primary dimensions of experiential quality perceived by coffee chain customers. Among the
13 sub-dimensions, employees’ attitude is the most important sub-dimensions of the interaction
quality primary dimensions while food and beverage is the most important sub-dimensions of
the physical environment quality primary dimensions. In addition, valence and excitement are
488 the most important sub-dimensions of the outcome quality and affective quality primary
dimensions, respectively. These four sub-dimensions seem to be important components of four
primary dimensions of experiential quality. When customers evaluate overall quality of service
experiences in a coffee chain, they may consider these four sub-dimensions as parts of overall
assessment of experiential quality. Therefore, these four sub-dimensions should be seriously
considered when researchers conduct similar studies of coffee chain customers’ perceptions of
experiential quality.

Practical implications
Coffee chain management can use the multi-dimensional and hierarchical model developed in
this study in its strategic planning process as a coffee chain provides a framework for
evaluating customers’ perceptions of their overall service experiences. This study identifies four
primary dimensions of experiential quality and 13 sub-dimensions pertaining to the primary
dimensions. For example, coffee chain management can use excitement from this study to
improve its understanding of the factors that create a relaxing environment and act to increase
customers’ high levels of loyalty. Comprehending what customers in a coffee chain will help
coffee chain management to better understand what its customers want. However, as the
dimensions of experiential quality may vary across industries and cultures, coffee chain
management should note that primary and sub-dimensional structures may need to be factored
for its own specific situation and cultural setting. This information will enable coffee chain
management to accurately measure customers’ perceptions of their service experiences.
The result of this research provides coffee chain management with an improved
understanding of the effect of experiential quality on perceived value and experiential trust,
respectively. The result suggests that increasing experiential quality in a coffee chain can
increase the customer’s perceptions of value and experiential trust. In addition, the findings
of this study provide coffee chain management with a better understanding of the effects
that experiential quality, perceived value (time sacrifice) and experiential trust have on
experiential satisfaction, which in turn results in experiential loyalty. The findings in this
study show that improving the coffee chain customer perception of experiential quality,
value and experiential trust effectively increases levels of experiential satisfaction, and
higher levels of experiential satisfaction would ultimately result in higher levels of
experiential loyalty. In this vein, coffee chain management should invest more efforts into
providing a consistently reliable service experience to satisfy its customers’ demands.
In addition, the findings of this study provide coffee chain management with an improved
understanding of the influence of experiential trust on experiential loyalty. The finding in
this research suggests that improved reliability of the coffee chain enables loyal customers
to revisit or return to the coffee chain or recommend it to their friends or relatives.
Coffee chain management should be aware of the importance customers place on each of the
primary and sub-dimensions of experiential quality. In addition, coffee chain management
should structure management strategies and resource allocation based on the relative
importance of the experiential quality dimensions of its particular target customer market.
In this study, affective quality is the most important primary dimension for favorable
perceptions of overall experiential quality, followed by physical environment quality, outcome
quality and interaction quality. When designing a measurement to evaluate the customer
perception of experiential quality, coffee chain management should recognize that the order of
importance of the primary dimensions of experiential quality may vary across different coffee What drives
chains. In general, coffee chain management should concentrate on the sub-dimensions under experiential
affective quality and improve the performance of coffee chains on the sub-dimensions loyalty?
according to the respondents’ responses to the survey in this study. However, the
sub-dimensions of interaction quality, physical environment quality and outcome quality should
also be resourced, as customers’ overall perceptions of experiential quality while experiencing
the services in a coffee chain do not only depend on the employee and customer relationship, but 489
also on the relationships between customers, the service environment and outcome.
Employees’ attitude is considered to be important for perceptions of interaction quality;
thus particular attention should be paid to the training of the employee’ attitude toward
customers during service delivery. Food and beverage is considered to be important for
perceptions of physical environment quality. Coffee chain management should allocate more
resources to improve food and beverage, putting an effort into providing a variety of food
and beverage to satisfy customers’ demands and understand what kind of food and
beverage the majority of customers prefer to taste while customers are experiencing
services in a coffee chain. Valence has been identified as an important component of
perceptions of outcome quality. The meaning of “valence” sub-dimension produces another
important contribution from the managerial point of view; coffee chain management can use
this sub-dimension alone to obtain a very good measure of overall perceived experiential
quality (Wu and Ai, 2016b). Excitement is considered to play a critical role in comprising
affective quality. In order to attract more customers to a coffee chain, coffee chain
management should provide customers with the activities, promotions and other services
which enable them to feel excited and pleasant. In addition, coffee chain management should
create a relaxing atmosphere to enable customers to feel pleasant.

Research limitations and directions for future research

Although this study provides a number of important contributions to services marketing
theory and for coffee chain management, there are some limitations. First, the sample in this
study, although purposively drawn from the customers who finished staying at one
Starbucks in Taipei City of Taiwan, does not fully represent customers at all of the coffee
chains in Taiwan. Future studies should attempt to examine experiential quality across
different coffee chains in other regions of Taiwan.
Second, this study sought to identify all the factors of experiential quality that influence
customers’ perceptions of experiential quality in a coffee chain. However, there may be some
unrevealed factors influencing customers’ perceptions of experiential quality. Future researchers
should seek to identify additional primary dimensions (e.g. content quality, venue quality,
administrative quality and so on) and sub-dimensions (e.g. amenity, signs, operating time,
reliability and so on) of experiential quality that significantly impact on coffee chain customers’
perceptions of experiential quality that have not been identified in this study.
Third, this study did not analyze the information from demographics sample profiles.
In future studies, it would be advisable to incorporate the possible role of demographic
differences since coffee chain customers’ reactions to the experiential quality dimensions
may vary depending on their demographic characteristics.

References
Adinegara, G.N.J. and Turker, S.P. (2016), “An important-performance analysis of international coffee
outlet service quality: empirical results from coffee outlets in Badung, Bali”, IOSR Journal of
Business and Management, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 38-44.
Altunel, M.C. and Erkut, B. (2015), “Cultural tourism in Istanbul: the mediation effect of tourist
experience and satisfaction on the relationship between involvement and recommendation
intention”, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 213-221.
BFJ Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C. and Lehmann, D.R. (1994), “Customer satisfaction, market share, and
119,3 profitability: findings from Sweden”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 53-66.
Bigné, J.E., Andreu, L. and Gnoth, J. (2005), “The theme park experience: an analysis of pleasure,
arousal and satisfaction”, Tourism Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 833-844.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), “Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 57-71.
490 Bowden-Everson, J.L., Dagger, T.S. and Elliott, G. (2013), “Engaging customers for loyalty in the
restaurant industry: the role of satisfaction, trust, and delight”, Journal of Foodservice Business
Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 52-75.
Brady, M.K. and Cronin, J.J. (2001), “Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality:
a hierarchical approach”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 34-49.
Britton, J.E. and Rose, J. (2004), “Thinking about relationship theory”, in Peppers, D. and Rogers, M.
(Eds), Managing Customer Relationships: A Strategic Framework, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, pp. 38-50.
Cardello, A.V. (1995), “Food quality: relativity, context and consumer expectations”, Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 163-170.
Carman, J.M. (1990), “Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL
dimensions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 33-55.
Caro, L.M. and Garcia, J.A.M. (2007), “Measuring perceived service quality in urgent transport service”,
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 60-72.
Caro, L.M. and Garcia, J.A.M. (2008), “Developing a multi-dimensional and hierarchical service quality
model for the travel agency industry”, Tourism Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 706-720.
Caruana, A. (2002), “Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role of customer
satisfaction”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 Nos 7/8, pp. 811-828.
Chang, T.Y. and Horng, S.C. (2010), “Conceptualizing and measuring experience quality: the customer’s
perspective”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 30 No. 14, pp. 2401-2419.
Chen, C.F. and Chen, F.S. (2010), “Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral
intentions for heritage tourists”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 29-35.
Chen, C.M., Lee, H.T., Chen, S.H. and Huang, T.H. (2011), “Tourist behavioral intentions in relation to
service quality and customer satisfaction in Kinmen National Park, Taiwan”, International
Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 416-432.
Chen, P.T. and Hu, H.H. (2010), “How determinant attributes of service quality influence customer-
perceived value: an empirical investigation of the Australian coffee outlet industry”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 535-551.
Clemes, M.D., Brush, G.J. and Collins, M.J. (2011), “Analyzing the professional sport experience:
a hierarchical approach”, Sport Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 370-388.
Clemes, M.D., Cohen, D.A. and Wang, Y. (2013), “Understanding Chinese university students’
experiences: an empirical analysis”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 391-427.
Clemes, M.D., Gan, C. and Ren, M. (2011), “Synthesizing the effects of service quality, value and
customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions in the motel industry: an empirical analysis”,
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 530-568.
Clemes, M.D., Gan, C.E. and Kao, T.H. (2008), “University student satisfaction: an empirical analysis”,
Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 292-325.
Clemes, M.D., Shu, X. and Gan, C. (2013), “Mobile communications: a comprehensive hierarchical
modelling approach”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 114-146.
Clemes, M.D., Wu, H.C.J., Hu, B.D. and Gan, C. (2009), “An empirical study of behavioral intentions in
the Taiwan hotel industry”, Innovative Marketing, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 30-50.
Cole, S.T. and Scott, D. (2004), “Examining the mediating role of experience quality in a model of tourist
experiences”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 79-90.
Coltman, M.M. (1989), Tourism Marketing, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY. What drives
Corbitt, B.J., Thanasankit, T. and Yi, H. (2003), “Trust and e-commerce: a study of consumer experiential
perceptions”, Electronic Commerce Research & Applications, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 203-215. loyalty?
Crompton, J.L. and Love, L.L. (1995), “The predictive validity of alternative approaches to evaluating
quality of a festival”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 11-24.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1992), “Measuring service quality: a re-examination and extension”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 55-68. 491
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1994), “SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: reconciling performance-based
and perceptions-minus-expectations measurement of service quality”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 125-131.
Crosby, L.A., Evans, K.R. and Cowles, D. (1990), “Relationship quality in services selling: an
interpersonal influence perspective”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 68-81.
Czepiel, J.A., Solomon, M.R., Suprenant, C.F. and Gutman, E.Q. (1985), The Service Encounters:
Managing Employee Customer Interaction in Service Business, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Dabholkar, P.A., Shepherd, D.C. and Thorpe, D.I. (2000), “A comprehensive framework for service
quality: an investigation of critical conceptual and measurement issues through a longitudinal
study”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 139-173.
Dabholkar, P.A., Thorpe, D.I. and Rentz, J.O. (1996), “A measure of service quality for retail stores: scale
development and validation”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 3-16.
Dagger, T.S., Sweeney, J.C. and Johnson, L.W. (2007), “A hierarchical model of health service quality:
scale development and investigation of an integrated model”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 10
No. 2, pp. 123-142.
De Keyser, A. and Lariviere, B. (2014), “How technical and functional service quality drive consumer
happiness: moderating influences of channel usage”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 25
No. 1, pp. 30-48.
De Rojas, C. and Camarero, C. (2008), “Visitors’ experience, mood and satisfaction in a heritage context:
evidence from an interpretation center”, Tourism Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 525-537.
Deng, Z., Lu, Y., Wei, K.K. and Zhang, J. (2010), “Understanding customer satisfaction and loyalty: an
empirical study of mobile instant messages in China”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 289-300.
Donthu, N. and Yoo, B. (1998), “Cultural influences of service quality expectations”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 178-186.
Doukoure, Y. and Supinit, V. (2016), “Measuring customers perceptions of service quality
(SERVQUAL) towards TOM N TOM coffee shop, in Phaya Thai Bangkok, Thailand”,
International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 49-57.
Driver, B.L. and Cooksey, R.W. (1977), “Preferred psychological outcomes of recreational fishing”,
paper presented at the Catch and Release Fishing as a Management Tool: A National
Sportfishing Symposium, Humbolt State University, Arcata, CA, September 7-8.
Ekinci, Y. (2003), “An investigation of the determinants of customer satisfaction”, Tourism Analysis:
An Interdisciplinary Tourism & Hospitality Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 193-196.
Fang, H.Y. (2012), “An exploratory study of consumer perceptions towards coffee shops: the case of
X coffee shop chain”, unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan University of Science and
Technology, Taipei.
Fedler, A.J. and Ditton, R.B. (1986), “A framework for understanding the consumptive orientation of
recreational fishermen”, Environmental Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 221-227.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Fornell, C., Johnson, M.D., Anderson, E.W., Jaesung, C. and Bryant, B.E. (1996), “The American
customer satisfaction index: nature, purpose, and findings”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 4,
pp. 7-18.
BFJ Goodwin, L. (2014), “What is a coffee house?”, available at: http://coffeetea.about.com/od/Coffee-
119,3 Glossary/g/What-Is-A-Coffee-House.htm (accessed May 1, 2016).
Gottlieb, U.R., Brown, M.R. and Drennan, J. (2011), “The influence of service quality and trade
show effectiveness on post-show purchase intention”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45
Nos 11/12, pp. 1642-1659.
Graefe, A.R. and Fedler, A.J. (1986), “Situational and subjective determinants of satisfaction in marine
492 recreational fishing”, Leisure Sciences, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 275-294.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global
Perspective, Pearson Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hart, C.W. and Johnson, M.D. (1999), “Growing the trust relationship”, Marketing Management, Vol. 8
No. 1, pp. 8-19.
Hennig-Thurau, T. and Klee, A. (1997), “The impact of customer satisfaction and relationship quality
on customer retention: a critical reassessment and model development”, Psychology and
Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 8, pp. 737-765.
Heskett, J.L., Jones, T.O., Loveman, G.W., Sasser, W.E. and Schlesinger, L.A. (2008), “Putting the
service: profit chain to work”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86 Nos 7/8, pp. 118-129.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J. and Minkov, M. (2010), Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind,
3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, London.
Hornik, J. (1982), “Situational effects on the consumption of time”, Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 44-55.
Hu, H.H.S., Kandampully, J. and Juwaheer, T.D. (2009), “Relationships and impacts of service quality,
perceived value, customer satisfaction, and image: an empirical study”, The Service Industries
Journal, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 111-125.
Hung, L.M. (2012), “A study of consuming behaviors of budget coffee”, Business and Management
Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 48-61.
Hutchinson, J., Lai, F. and Wang, Y. (2009), “Understanding the relationships of quality, value, equity,
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions among golf travelers”, Tourism Management, Vol. 30
No. 2, pp. 298-308.
Kable (2016), “Starbucks coffee roasting plant, United States of America”, available at: www.
foodprocessing-technology.com/projects/starbucks-roasting/starbucks-roasting2.html (accessed
October 20, 2016).
Kao, Y.F., Huang, L.S. and Wu, C.H. (2008), “Effects of theatrical elements on experiential quality and loyalty
intentions for theme parks”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 163-174.
Kassim, N.M. and Abdullah, N.A. (2008), “Customer loyalty in e-commerce settings: an empirical
study”, Electronic Markets, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 275-290.
Katz, K., Larson, B. and Larson, R. (1991), “Prescription for the waiting in line blues: entertain, enlighten
and engage”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 44-53.
Kim, T.H., Wang, W. and Li, Q. (2012), “Advancement in materials for energy-saving lighting devices”,
Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 13-26.
Ko, Y.J. and Pastore, D.L. (2005), “A hierarchical model of service quality for the recreational sport
industry”, Sport Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 84-97.
Kotler, P. (1973), “Atmospherics as a marketing tool”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 48-64.
Kuldeep, C., Jagdeep, S. and Nisha, C. (2014), “Examining expected and perceived service quality in life
insurance corporation of India”, International Journal of Application or Innovation in
Engineering and Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 274-281.
Kuo, C.E. (2016), “Starbucks upbeat on growth”, available at: www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/
archives/2016/08/01/2003652189 (accessed October 21, 2016).
Lee, K.Y., Huang, H.L. and Hsu, Y.C. (2007), “Trust, satisfaction and commitment: on loyalty to
international retail service brands”, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 161-169.
Leiphart, L.R. and Barnes, M.G. (2005), “The client experience of assertive community treatment: a What drives
qualitative study”, Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 395-397. experiential
Lemke, F., Clark, M. and Wilson, H. (2011), “Customer experience quality: an exploration in business loyalty?
and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 846-869.
Liljander, V. and Bergenwall, M. (1999), Consumption-based Emotional Responses Related to
Satisfaction, Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki. 493
Lin, E.Y. (2004), “Starbuck’s effect in Taiwan: a study of global consumer culture”, unpublished
master’s thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Lu, Y., Zhang, L. and Wang, B. (2009), “A multi-dimensional and hierarchical model of mobile service
quality”, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 228-240.
Merunka, D.R. and Sirgy, M.J. (2011), “Distinguishing consumer satisfaction from consumer
well-being in brand post-purchase behavior: a positive psychology perspective”, Proceedings for
the Inaugural Conference on Positive Marketing, Center for Positive Marketing, New York, NY,
pp. 21-22.
Milne, G.R. and McDonald, M.A. (1999), Sport Marketing: Managing the Exchange Process, Jones and
Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA.
Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994), “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 20-38.
Nadiri, H. and Hussain, K. (2005), “Perceptions of service quality in North Cyprus hotels”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 469-480.
Nguyen, N., Leclerc, A. and LeBlanc, G. (2013), “The mediating role of customer trust on customer
loyalty”, Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 96-109.
Ojasalo, J. (2010), “E-service quality: a conceptual model”, International Journal of Arts and Sciences,
Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 127-143.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality and its
implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for
measuring consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 12-40.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1994), “Reassessment of expectations as a comparison
standard in measuring service quality: implications for further research”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 111-125.
Pareigis, J., Edvardsson, B. and Enquist, B. (2011), “Exploring the role of the service environment in
forming customer’s service experience”, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences,
Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 110-124.
Paryani, K. (2011), “Product quality, service reliability and management of operations at Starbucks”,
International Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, Vol. 3 No. 7, pp. 1-14.
Pine, B.J. and Gilmore, J.H. (1999), The Experience Economy: Work is Theater and Every Business a
Stage, Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA.
Powpaka, S. (1996), “The role of outcome quality as a determinant of overall service quality in different
categories of services industries: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Services Marketing,
Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 5-25.
Ravald, A. and Grönroos, C. (1996), “The value concept and relationship marketing”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 19-30.
Rortveit, K., Hansen, B., Leiknes, I., Joa, I., Testad, I. and Severinsson, I.E. (2015), “Patients’ experiences
of trust in the patient-nurse relationship-a systematic review of qualitative studies”, Open
Journal of Nursing, Vol. 5, pp. 195-209.
Russell, J.A. (2003), “Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion”, Psychological Review,
Vol. 110 No. 1, pp. 145-172.
BFJ Russell, J.A. and Pratt, G. (1980), “A description of the affective quality attributed to environments”,
119,3 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 311-322.
Rust, R.T. and Oliver, R.L. (1994), “Service quality: insights and managerial implications from the
frontier”, in Rust, R.T. and Oliver, R.L. (Eds), Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and
Practice, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 1-19.
Sam, T. and Dhanya, A. (2012), “Impact of product quality, service quality and contextual experience
494 on customer perceived value and future buying intentions”, European Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 307-315.
Samukkeetham, S. (2010), “How independence coffee house survived in Taiwan coffee war”, Coffee
T&I, Vol. 19, pp. 10-12.
Shin, C.S., Hwang, G.S., Lee, H.W. and Cho, S.R. (2015), “The impact of Korean franchise coffee shop
service quality and atmosphere on customer satisfaction and loyalty”, The East Asian Journal of
Business Management, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 45-57.
Spiegelberg, S. (2006), “ASTM activities for assessing cleanliness of medical devices”, Journal of ASTM
International, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 1-4.
Spreng, R.A. and Singh, A.K. (1993), “An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale and the relationship
between service quality and satisfaction”, in Cravens, D.W. and Dickson, P.R. (Eds), Enhancing
Knowledge Development in Marketing, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 1-16.
Theodorakis, N.D., Koustelios, A., Robinson, L. and Barlas, A. (2009), “Moderating role of team
identification on the relationship between service quality and repurchase intentions
among spectators of professional sports”, Journal of Service Theory and Practice, Vol. 19
No. 4, pp. 456-473.
Tseng, S.M. (2016), “Knowledge management capability, customer relationship management, and
service quality”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 202-221.
Tu, Y.T., Wang, C.M. and Chang, H.C. (2012), “Corporate brand image and customer satisfaction on
loyalty: an empirical study of Starbucks coffee in Taiwan”, Journal of Social and Development
Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 24-32.
Wan, P.Y.K. and Cheng, E.I.M. (2011), “Service quality of Macau’s world heritage site”, International
Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 57-68.
Wang, J., Zhang, Z., Zheng, Y., Zuo, L. and Kim, J.U. (2013), “A multi-tiers service architecture based
diabetes monitoring for elderly care in hospital”, International Journal of Multimedia and
Ubiquitous Engineering, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 387-398.
Waxman, L. (2006), “The coffee shop: social and physical factors influencing place attachment”, Journal
of Interior Design, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 35-53.
Wisniewski, M. (2001), “Using SERVQUAL to assess customer satisfaction with public sector services”,
Journal of Service Theory and Practice, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 380-388.
Wong, J., Wu, H.C. and Cheng, C.C. (2015), “An empirical analysis of synthesizing the effects of festival
quality, emotion, festival image and festival satisfaction on festival loyalty: a case study of
Macau food festival”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 521-536.
Wu, H.C. (2013), “An empirical study of the effects of service quality, perceived value, corporate image
and customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions in the Taiwan quick service restaurant
industry”, Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 364-390.
Wu, H.C. (2014), “The effects of customer satisfaction, perceived value, corporate image and service
quality on behavioral intentions in gaming establishments”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing
and Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 540-565.
Wu, H.C. and Ai, C.H. (2016a), A Study of Experiential Loyalty for the Golfing Industry: Effects of Experiential
Quality, Excitement, Equity, Experiential Satisfaction on Experiential Loyalty, Lambert Deutschland.
Wu, H.C. and Ai, C.H. (2016b), “A study of festival switching intentions, festival satisfaction, festival
image, festival affective impacts, and festival quality”, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 16
No. 4, pp. 359-384.
Wu, H.C. and Ai, C.H. (2016c), “Synthesizing the effects of experiential quality, excitement, equity, What drives
experiential satisfaction on experiential loyalty for the golf industry: the case of Hainan Island”, experiential
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 29, pp. 41-59.
loyalty?
Wu, H.C. and Cheng, C.C. (2013), “A hierarchical model of service quality in the airline industry”,
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 20, pp. 13-22.
Wu, H.C. and Hsu, F.S. (2012), “A multi-dimensional and hierarchical model of service quality in the
gaming industry”, International Journal of Tourism Sciences, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 90-118. 495
Wu, H.C. and Ko, Y.J. (2013), “Assessment of service quality in the hotel industry”, Journal of Quality
Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 218-244.
Wu, H.C. and Li, T. (2014), “A study of experiential quality, perceived value, heritage image, experiential
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, doi: 10.1177/1096348014525638.
Wu, H.C. and Li, T. (2015), “An empirical study of the effects of service quality, visitor satisfaction, and
emotions on behavioral intentions of visitors to the museums of Macau”, Journal of Quality
Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 80-102.
Wu, H.C. and Mohi, Z. (2015), “Assessment of service quality in the fast-food restaurant”, Journal of
Foodservice Business Research, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 358-388.
Wu, H.C., Ai, C.H. and Cheng, C.C. (2016), “Synthesizing the effects of green experiential quality, green
equity, green image and green experiential satisfaction on green switching intention”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 2080-2107.
Wu, H.C., Cheng, C.C. and Ai, C.H. (2016), “A study of exhibition service quality, perceived value,
emotion, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions”, Event Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 565-591.
Wu, H.C., Li, M.M. and Li, T. (2014), “A study of experiential quality, experiential value, experiential
satisfaction, theme park image and revisit intention”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research,
doi: 0.1177/1096348014563396.
Wu, H.C., Li, T. and Li, M.Y. (2016), “A study of behavioural intentions, patient satisfaction, perceived
value, patient trust and experiential quality for medical tourists”, Journal of Quality Assurance
in Hospitality & Tourism, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 114-150.
Wu, H.C., Wong, W.C.J. and Cheng, C.C. (2014), “An empirical study of behavioral intentions in the
food festival: the case of Macau”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 19 No. 11,
pp. 1278-1305.
Wu, H.C., Ai, C.H., Yang, L.J. and Li, T. (2015), “A study of revisit intentions, customer satisfaction,
corporate image, emotions and service quality in the hot spring industry”, Journal of China
Tourism Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 371-401.
Wu, J.H.C., Lin, Y.C. and Hsu, F.S. (2011), “An empirical analysis of synthesizing the effects of service
quality, perceived value, corporate image and customer satisfaction on behavioral intentions in
the transport industry: a case of Taiwan high-speed rail”, Innovative Marketing, Vol. 7 No. 3,
pp. 83-100.
Yu, H. and Fang, W. (2009), “Relative impacts from product quality, service quality, and experience
quality on customer perceived value and intentions”, Total Quality Management & Business
Excellence, Vol. 20 No. 11, pp. 1273-1285.
Yuan, B.J.C., Chang, H.F. and Tzeng, G.H. (2015), “Evaluation of service quality continuous
improvement in coffee shops”, Human Factors and Economics in Manufacturing & Service
Industries, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1988), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and
synthesis of evidence”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 2-22.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1993), “The nature and determinants of customer
expectations of service”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Zikmund, W.G., Ward, S., Lowe, B. and Winzar, H. (2007), Marketing Research: Asia Pacific Edition,
Thomson Learning, Melbourne.
BFJ About the author
119,3 Dr Hung-Che Wu is an Associate Professor at Business School in Nanfang College of Sun Yat-sen
University, China. He holds a PhD in Hospitality and Tourism Marketing and has published in Journal of
the Knowledge Economy, Industrial Management & Data System, Journal of Organizational Change
Management, Innovative Marketing, Tourism Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Tourism & Hospitality Journal,
Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism,
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Tourism Analysis, Journal of Travel Research, Event
496 Management, Journal of Foodservice Business Research, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,
International Journal of Tourism Research, International Journal of Tourism Sciences, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, International Journal of Tourism & Hospitality Administration,
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Journal of China Tourism Research, Tourism and
Hospitality Research, and Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, among others. He is currently
working as one of the editorial board members for the Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research,
International Journal of Business and Management, International Journal of Marketing Studies, Journal of
Tourism & Hospitality Science, Journal of Business and Management, and Business and Management
Studies. His research interests include hospitality and tourism management, service quality, customer
satisfaction, and consumer behavior. Dr Hung-Che Wu can be contacted at: wuhungche66@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.