Visual Servicescape Aesthetics and Consumer Experience

Journal of Services Marketing
Effects of visual servicescape aesthetics comprehension and appreciation on consumer experience

Ingrid Y. Lin
Article information:
To cite this document:
Ingrid Y. Lin , (2016),"Effects of visual servicescape aesthetics comprehension and appreciation on consumer experience",
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 7 pp. -
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JSM-08-2015-0258
Downloaded on: 18 September 2016, At: 12:43 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 23 times since 2016*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2016),"Servicescape attributes and consumer well-being", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 7 pp. -
Downloaded by United Arab Emirates University At 12:43 18 September 2016 (PT)
(2016),"Does anthropomorphism influence customers’ switching intentions in the self-service technology failure context?",
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 7 pp. -
(2016),"Co-production of service experiences: insights from the cultural sector", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss 7
pp. -
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:232579 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

1
Effects of Visual Servicescape Aesthetics Comprehension and Appreciation on

Consumer Experience
Introduction
Creating a pleasant service environment and understanding what drives customers’ satisfaction
and willingness to pay a premium price have become major keys to service management
practices. Consumers are exposed to many brands, media messages, communication channels,
and product and service choices. This wealth of information creates a poverty of attention and
lack of differentiation that tends to lead consumers to make brand choices based on visual
aesthetic values, which may ultimately determine their satisfaction, willingness to pay more, and
purchasing decisions (Schmitt and Simonson, 1997; Bloch et al., 2003). Consequently, hotel
developers and operators are starting to focus on non-cookie-cutter designs for the servicescape
to form the brand’s unique personality and identity in the eyes of potential customers.
A servicescape is the physical setting where service exchange or transactions occur
(Bitner, 1992). Numerous studies have examined the effect of one or two attributes (e.g., color,
music, scent, lighting) on customers’ emotions, perceived service quality, satisfaction, and/or
behaviors (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974; Bitner, 1992; Valdez and Mehrabian, 1994; Wakefield
and Blodgett, 1996; Turley and Milliman, 2000; Reimer and Kuehn, 2005; Lin, 2004, 2010; Lin
and Worthley, 2012; Miles, et al., 2012; Durna, et al., 2015). However, little is known about
what accounts for an individual’s comprehension, appreciation, or relationship with a specific
servicescape. Limited studies have examined consumers’ visual servicescape aesthetics
comprehension and appreciation (VSACA)--how individuals’ simultaneous cognitive and
psychological appraisal of a servicescape reflect their subsequent cognitive schema (e.g.,
perceived perceptual experience quality (PPEQ)); emotions (e.g., pleasure, arousal); the
cognitive activity (e.g., satisfaction) that is later affected by that emotion (Lazarus, 1999); and
finally, behavioral intentions (e.g., willingness to pay more). The current research examines
these relationships (see Figures 1a and 1b).
VSACA is defined as an individual’s comprehension, appreciation, and determination of
the meaning of a servicescape through simultaneous cognitive and emotional processing of
visual cues within the servicescape (Bloch et al., 2003; Lazarus, 1999). Understanding the role
of VSACA is important because the aesthetic component is embedded within a servicescape and
aesthetics are known to provide many benefits for organizations: create loyalty, allow for
premium pricing, reduce information clutter, and save costs while increasing productivity
(Schmitt and Simonson, 1997). The existing knowledge about servicescape aesthetics can be
improved by modifying Bloch et al.’s, (2003) centrality of visual product aesthetics (CVPA)
scale to measure VSACA and to understand how consumers evaluate servicescape aesthetics and
arrive at satisfaction or a purchase intention. The ability to assess VSACA will also provide
insights into possible differences in reactions to servicescape design across different market
segments, cultures, and time (e.g., Galbraeth et al., 1995). These insights can guide hotel
2
providers in designing servicescapes that are unique and authentic and that coincide with the host
culture.
The notion of customer experience and determining whether a hotel servicescape is
beautiful is highly linked with individuals’ perceived value (Helkkula et al., 2012). The
customer experience involves the cognitive, affective, emotional, social, and physical responses
to any direct or indirect contact with the service provider, environment, brand, or products across
multiple points (Lin and Liang, 2011; McColl-Kennedy, 2015); it is the process and the totality
of the cognitions given by perception (Ariffin et al., 2013; Durna et al., 2015), all the cues that
are perceived, understood, and remembered from what the person has observed or encountered
within a servicescape. Aesthetics are a combination of cognition (the mind) and emotions in
relation to the sense of beauty. Comprehension is the capacity to perceive and understand.
Appreciation is the act of giving things their proper value. VSACA captures all of these aspects
of a consumer’s experience.
It is important to understand how customers comprehend or appreciate both what makes a
hotel servicescape beautiful and what it means to them: the degree to which they associate
themselves with a superior hotel servicescape, the degree of their acumen in evaluating a holistic
visual servicescape, their knowledge of servicescape design and décor, and their responses to
unique servicescape designs as a holistic VSACA construct. The purpose of this study is to
decrease the gap related to this understanding by measuring individuals’ VSACA. Specifically,
this study aims (1) to extend previous servicescape research (e.g., Lin, 2004; Durna et al., 2015)
by modifying Bloch et al.’s (2003) CVPA measurement scale and applying it in the context of an
experiential product (a hotel servicescape) to derive the VSACA construct and to examine how it
affects individuals’ PPEQ, pleasure, and arousal and (2) to understand what drives customer
satisfaction and willingness to pay higher prices, in other words, to examine the validity of a
proposed structural model that encompasses the mediation effects of PPEQ, pleasure, and arousal.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. The next sections contain a review of the
literature related to servicescapes and aesthetics. The conceptual development and theoretical
framework along with the hypotheses are then explained, followed by the methodology, the
results, and a discussion of the theoretical and managerial implications. The final section
includes the limitations and possible future research.
Literature Review
This literature review contains a brief summary of current servicescape studies (from 2010 to
2016) and the relevant literature related to aesthetics. Appendix C provides a table summarizing
recent servicescape studies.
Servicescapes
A servicescape encompasses visual and non-visual elements. These combined elements give
consumers their first impression and affect their perceptions, emotions, evaluation, and behaviors
(Lin, 2010). Inferences about non-visual experiences of a hotel lobby are often based on the
3
lobby’s initial visual appearance (Bloch et al., 2003) or on online photos or video clips (Kim and
Mattila, 2011). In addition, visual cues are considered the most obvious environmental cues
when ordinary individuals first walk into a hotel servicescape (Lin, 2010). For these reasons,
this experimental study focuses on the holistic visual elements of a specific hotel lobby setting.
A hotel lobby is chosen as the servicescape to measure individuals’ VSACA because it

usually contains the first tangible cues that guests encounter, before they interact with the hotel
service agent or evaluate the hotel and its intangible services (Lin, 2004). It is also, typically, the
last area that guests encounter when leaving the hotel property. As Countryman and Jang (2006)
noted, guests can experience diverse aspects of a servicescape in the lobby area.
Research provides sufficient evidence that a pleasant servicescape can benefit service
organizations by acting as a differentiator among them (McGoldrick and Pieros, 1998). The
physical “packaging” of the service sends quality cues to guests (Hoffman and Bateson, 2006)
and is a visible manifestation of the intangible services that an inexperienced audience relies on
to judge the organization’s competence (Harris and Ezeh, 2008). Garland et al. (2004) stated that
physical surroundings help to promote respect and indicate care for the customers and relieve
their stress. Lovelock (2011) also mentioned that a servicescape can reduce service failure and
enhance the service delivery process. However, the question remains as to how consumers
determine whether a servicescape is well designed.
Turley and Milliman (2000) provided a comprehensive literature review of studies in

retail settings from 1975 to 1997 relating to how atmospheric stimuli (e.g., floor display, music
tempo, colors, lighting, product quality, and retail density) influence employees’ or consumers’
emotions, perceptions, and shopping behaviors. These studies provided substantial evidence that
these atmospheric stimuli directly affect individuals’ emotions and behaviors. A summary of 23
current (from 2010 to 2016) published servicescape studies is presented in Appendix C.
As Appendix C shows, the most up-to-date servicescape literature still heavily adopts
servicescape characteristics, specific atmospheric attributes, ethnic servicescapes, and individual
perceptions of service environments as independent variables; attitudes, pleasure, arousal,
purchase intentions, satisfaction, and behaviors are common dependent variables. In comparison
to earlier studies, servicescape research has advanced in several ways. First, many researchers
have included a mediator or moderator in the research model (e.g., Walsh et al., 2011; Hyun and
Kang, 2014; Durna et al., 2015; Wong and Prentice, 2015). Second, researchers have
investigated servicescape attributes as an intervening variable and incorporated the Big Five
personality traits as an independent variable (Lin and Worthley, 2012; Jani and Han, 2014) and
vice versa (Jani and Han, 2015). Third, researchers have studied the effect of servicescapes in
different contexts, ranging from hotels and restaurants to airlines and conventions. Fourth, with
regard to research design and methodology, researchers have most commonly used field survey
research; few researchers (Elliot et al., 2013; Siu et al., 2012) have incorporated both qualitative
and quantitative methods, and laboratory or field experimental design (e.g., Lin, 2010;
Demoulin, 2011; Wardono et al., 2012; Lin and Worthley, 2012).
Despite the contributions and advancements in current research, however, studies of how
consumers comprehend or appreciate specific servicescapes or consumers’ VSACA in relation to
4
their subsequent experiences are still scarce. A review of the research did not reveal any studies
that have investigated the effect of consumers’ cognitive comprehension and emotional
appreciation within a hotel servicescape setting from the VSACA perspective. This study
develops and investigates a more comprehensive model examining these relationships.
Aesthetics
The classic principle that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” helps us postulate that aesthetics
enhance the quality of life (Schmitt and Simonson, 1997; Bruyn, n.d.) both for individuals and
for society (Bloch et al., 2003). Marketing researchers have acknowledged that everything
individuals consume can at some level be viewed through aesthetic lenses (Schmitt and
Simonson, 1997; Meyers-Levy and Zhu, 2010) and that aesthetics can affect how a product is
comprehended and valued (Forty, 1986). Although the concept of aesthetics has been widely
studied with product goods (Bloch et al., 2003; Kumar and Garg, 2010; Compton and Hoffman,
2013), limited studies have incorporated aesthetic comprehension or appreciation with
experiential products (Bloch et al., 2003). Kumar and Garg (2010) explained that there are two
meanings of aesthetics: One concerns form and appearance and the other concerns art and
representation. A hotel lobby servicescape entails combinations of all these: form, appearance,
art, and fashion.
Previous studies of product goods or fashion have shown that visual aesthetics influence
consumer perceptions (Bloch, 1995; Dumaine, 1991; Schmitt and Simonson, 1997). For
example, Yamamato and Lambert (1994) indicated that appearance significantly influences
choices for industrial products. Venkatesh et al. (2010) investigated how female consumers’
attitudes and preferences relating to bodily appearance are linked to their perceptions of fashion
aesthetics. Townsend and Sood (2012) found that organizations can charge a price premium for
highly aesthetic products for which consumers rate design as more important than price. Hollins
and Pugh (1990) discovered that the relationship between the consumer and the product is highly
dependent on the product’s appearance. Very often when consumers make their hotel selection
online or via walk-in, their decisions are based predominantly on visual servicescape aesthetic
value (e.g., viewing online photos or videos of the hotel lobby or guest rooms). The ability to
view the physical environment prior to purchase reduces perceived risk and, therefore, has a
positive impact on purchase intention (Kim and Mattila, 2011; Reichheld and Schefter, 2000).
Thus, even though both visual and non-visual attributes may contribute to individuals’ aesthetic
comprehension, Schmitt and Simonson (1997) affirmed that the most prevalent elements are
visual and that all perception starts with the eye. In addition, based on psychological research
(Erdelyi and Kleinbard, 1978), pictures are highly distinctive and thus may be recalled for a long
time.
Conceptual Development and Theoretical Framework

This study is built upon several prominent psychological theories: (1) The centrality of visual
product aesthetics (CVPA) (Bloch et al., 2003), (2) the theory of consumption values (McGuire,
1999), (3) cue utilization (Olson and Jacoby, 1972), (4) the Elaborative Likelihood Model
(Holbrook, 1986; Cacioppo and Petty, 1980), (5) the concept of holistic perception or Gestalt
(Bitner, 1992), (6) field theory (Lewin, 1936, 1951), and (7) the S-O-R paradigm (Donovan and
Rossiter, 1982). The present study mainly extends and applies Bloch et al.’s (2003) centrality of
visual product aesthetics (CVPA) theory, which comprises four dimensions—personal and social
5
value, acumen, responses, and design determinacy—to derive the visual servicescape aesthetics
comprehension and appreciation (VSACA) construct.
Bloch et al. (2003) are the first in the marketing literature to establish a scale measuring
the overall centrality of visual product aesthetics (CVPA). The present study modifies Bloch et
al.’s (2003) CVPA scale to fit the experiential context of the hotel servicescape. Examining the
effect of individuals’ VSACA differs from examining the effect of one or two specific
servicescape attributes on customers’ experience because various facets of an individual’s
cognitive activity are embedded within the VSACA construct. “The CVPA has the potential to
influence the weight that visual aesthetics hold in a purchase decision as well as preferences for
brands and products that satisfy aesthetic needs” (Bloch et al., 2003, p. 552). Similarly, this
study proposes that VSACA has a direct, significant impact on customer experience. The goal is
to examine the causal relationships among individuals’ VSACA, PPEQ, pleasure, arousal,
satisfaction, and behavioral intention (willingness to pay more or a premium).
The theory of consumption values (McGuire, 1999) helps to explain the primary value-
adding elements that drive the choice of a specific hotel servicescape. If the design and delivery
of a hotel lobby are related to what customers’ value, marketing strategies will be successful
(McGuire, 1999). The consumption value theory provides a clearer explanation of the
underlying consumer decision-making process (Yeonsoo et al., 2002; Phau et al., 2014).
Therefore, the consumption value theory helps to explain why the value dimension is embedded
within the VSACA construct and how it can help explain customers’ appreciation of visual
servicescape aesthetics.
Cue utilization theory (Olson and Jacoby, 1972) supports the idea that the visual
elements embedded within the VSACA provide a basis for developing various aesthetic
responses or impressions of the hotel lobby. Acumen reflects an ability to recognize, categorize,
and evaluate a servicescape design (Bloch et al., 2003). Holbrook (1986) postulated that some
consumers favor visual over verbal processing. Individuals who favor more visual processing
may rely more on visual aesthetic elements. Cacioppo and Petty (1980), who developed the
Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion, noted that the amount of thoughtful attention that
people invest in decision-making varies. For example, when deciding which hotel to book, a
consumer may not have enough time or mental capacity to fully analyze important aspects of
persuasive arguments in the advertising. In these instances, people tend to rely on other cues,
such as visual aesthetic cues from videos or brochures (Cafferata and Tybout, 1989). When much
thought goes into reading the fine print in a brochure or analyzing every possible hotel brand in
the market place before booking a room, the consumer is relying on central route cues.
Conversely, when consumers book a hotel room simply by looking at photos or videos online,
putting little thought or effort into analyzing all the brands in the market, they are using
peripheral route cues (Hamilton, 2004). Cue utilization theory helps to explain how individuals
comprehend visual servicescape aesthetics.
Many previous servicescape studies have emphasized the importance of the concept of
Gestalt, in that individuals holistically determine their responses to or behaviors in the
environment (Bitner, 1992; Lin, 2004). In the context of this study, individuals comprehend
6
visual hotel lobby servicescape aesthetics holistically instead of paying attention to one specific
attribute. All visual elements within the lobby help form a holistic image of the hotel.
Field theory helps to further link individuals’ behavioral intention of willingness to pay
with the hotel servicescape environment (Lewin, 1936, 1951). Veitch and Arkkelin (1995) also
indicate that the person-environment relationship stems from both physical and social variables
in reciprocal relationships with behavior, a description which applies to a hotel lobby setting.
The stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) model also supports the mediation effects of
individuals’ PPEQ and emotional responses (Donovan and Rossiter, 1982) on the relationship
between VSACA and satisfaction, and the mediation effects of satisfaction on the relationship
between PPEQ, pleasure, or arousal and satisfaction. VSACA processing affects consumers’
PPEQ, emotional responses, evaluation, and willingness to pay more. Lazarus (1991) theorized
that psychological processing of an event—simultaneous cognitive and affective processing of

activities (VSACA)—causally precedes an emotion (pleasure or arousal) or a cognitive schema
(e.g., PPEQ) in the flow of a psychological event, and that emotion or cognitive schema affects
subsequent cognitive activity (e.g., satisfaction).
Visual servicescape aesthetic comprehension and appreciation (VSACA)

The VSACA construct captures the general significance of visual servicescape aesthetics rather
than preferences for or attitudes toward a particular aesthetic style, as does Bloch et al.’s (2003)
CVPA, and encompasses simultaneous processing of cognition and affect: some appreciation or
affective states are driven by individuals’ comprehension (cognition), while individuals’
appreciation (affect) of the visual aesthetics also impacts their value judgments and acumen
(cognition). The VSACA construct helps us understand an individual’s level of appreciation
regarding visual aesthetics within a servicescape.
The basic servicescape components that trigger individuals’ visual senses include
lighting, colors, furniture, artifacts, layout, and design (Kotler, 1973). Individuals react
immediately and subconsciously to visual inputs. While this research explores the effects of
individual VSACA on the end result of behavioral intentions, it is important to account for
consumers’ psychological and emotional processing and evaluation (Lin, 2004; Namasivayam
and Mattila, 2007). Affect, emotion, and cognition interact with and complement one another
(Norman, 2004).
Emotion and Cognition

Emotion includes cognition (Lazarus, 1991; Lin, 2004). The emotional system changes
how the cognitive system operates (Norman, 2004). Thoughts, action tendencies, bodily
changes, and the subjective feel of the emotions are additional components of cognition that
contribute to knowledge and appraisal (Lazarus, 1991). According to Mehrabian and Russell
(1974), “A person’s feelings at any time can be characterized by three dimensions: his
personality, temporary conditions such as hunger, and environmental stimuli” (p. 55). Applying
Lazarus’s (1991) theory that cognitive activity causally precedes an emotion into the current
research framework, means that individuals’ VSACA encompasses some type of cognitive
activity and emotional appreciation of the servicescape layout and design, followed by the
determination of the individual’s PPEQ of the environment, pleasure, and arousal and a
subsequent cognitive activity of evaluation. The causal cognitive activity continues into the
7
emotional response itself as an integral feature (Lazarus, 1991); hence, customers’ satisfaction
level helps guide their behavioral intentions.
Hypothesis Development
VSACA and Perceived Perceptual Experience Quality (PPEQ)
The servicescape sets up customers’ expectations for service quality and influences their
evaluations of other factors that determine perceived quality (Reimer and Kuehn, 2005). Hotel
style also has a significant impact on customers’ impression of the hotel lobby (Countryman and
Jang, 2006). PPEQ, the immediate perceptual response resulting from customer participation in
VSACA, is conceptualized as consumers’ responses to desired social-psychological benefits
(Chen and Chen, 2010). It refers mainly to a specific contact with the visual servicescape which
contributes to the visual aesthetic experience (Chan and Baum, 2007). The PPEQ measurement
is supported by the concept of experience quality (e.g., hedonics and recognition) (Otto and
Richie, 1996). Hedonics refers to whether individuals enjoy the layout and design of the
servicescape. Design is a significant contributor to perception and behavioral intentions (Hooper
et al., 2012). Recognition explains how individuals associate the servicescape with themselves
and whether the servicescape is consistent with what they want (Chen and Chen, 2010). The
more capable they are of recognizing superior design in a servicescape, the higher their PPEQ.
The cognitive-emotional interactions within VSACA suggest the following hypothesis:
H1a: Individuals’ VSACA has a significant direct effect on PPEQ.
VSACA and Emotions

Looking at an attractive object increases our sense of well-being even if only momentarily, and
artwork and objects within a servicescape can furnish stimuli for positive emotions (Norman,
2004; Compton and Hoffman, 2013), which are known to broaden the thought process and
facilitate creative thinking (Isen, 1993). Ittleson (1973) explained that affective meaning is
generally viewed as the first level of response to the environment. Lin (2010) showed that a
particular servicescape affects emotion, which includes both pleasure and arousal. Pleasure
refers to the hedonic quality of stimuli (Russell and Pratt, 1980; Russell, 1989; Feldman, 1995;
Dube and Morin, 2001) and is characterized as extending along a single dimension from extreme
displeasure to extreme pleasure (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974). Arousal is defined as a basic
subjective state ranging from sleep to frantic excitement, and its expression depends on time,
place, and situation (Berlyne, 1960, 1967). VSACA causes arousal through the novelty,
complexity, variability, and stimulus intensity of the visual aesthetics. Accordingly:
H1b: Individuals’ VSACA has a significant direct effect on pleasure.
H1c: Individuals’ VSACA has a significant direct effect on arousal.
Perceived Perceptual Experience Quality (PPEQ) and Satisfaction
Investigation of the relationship between PPEQ and customer satisfaction has shown that while
strongly correlated, the two constructs are different. While satisfaction reflects the customers’
feelings about multiple encounters and experiences with the service organization, service quality
may be tempered by perceptions of value or by others’ experiences, which may be less positive
8
(Sureshchandar et al., 2002). People who perceive the quality as poor, medium, or high have
poor, medium, or high satisfaction levels, respectively. Therefore, customer satisfaction depends
greatly on quality perception: an increase in one is likely to lead to an increase in the other
(Surehchandar et al., 2002).
In this case, PPEQ is more abstract than customer satisfaction and is likely to be
influenced by the attributes of visual aesthetics (Bitner and Hubert, 1994). Rutes et al. (2001)
note that the success of a good servicescape design depends on balancing the visual impact and
the functionality of the space. A variety of visual attributes in a hotel lobby, such as the lighting,
floors, furniture, artwork, and color of the walls, are all grouped together to form individuals’
comprehensive PPEQ.
Overall satisfaction can be defined as a post-consumption evaluative judgment

concerning a product or a service (Yuksel and Rimmington, 1998). Overall satisfaction refers to
a cumulative construct summing satisfaction with a specific product (e.g., servicescape) and
various other facets of the company (Gabarino and Johnson, 1999). The overall rating reflects a
general attitude toward the specific product or service. It is more like an evaluation stored in
one’s memory than an on-the-spot evaluation (Gilbert and Veloutsou, 2006). Such an overall
evaluation is stable over time (Auh et al., 2003; Gilbert and Veloutsou, 2006). A summative
single-item overall measure of satisfaction, therefore, is straightforward and convenient and is
typical of the human cognitive process (Yuksel and Rimmington, 1998; Leisen and Vance, 2001).
Although some researchers contend that satisfaction should be measured by a combination of
attributes (Erevelles and Levitt, 1992; Getty and Thomson, 1994; Babakus and Boller, 1997), the
empirical support for a summative overall measure of satisfaction (Halstead, 1989; Yuksel and
Rimmington, 1998) led to its use in this study. Accordingly,
H2a: PPEQ has a significant direct effect on satisfaction.
Emotions and Satisfaction
Studies have shown links between emotions of pleasure and arousal on satisfaction (Wirtz et al.,
2000; Fiang and Wang, 2006; Lin, 2010; Lin and Liang, 2012). Mehrabian and Russell (1974)
postulate that “an individual’s preference for an environment is closely related to his or her
preferred arousal level, and he is likely to prefer situations where pleasure is enhanced” (p. 30).
Donovan and Rossiter (1982) found that in pleasant environments, satisfaction, enjoyment,
shopping time, and spending increase as arousal increases. Fiang and Wang (2006) discovered
that the effect of both pleasure and arousal on satisfaction was stronger in the hedonic service
context than in the utilitarian service context.
Wirtz et al. (2007) suggested that when the environmental stimuli correspond with an
individual’s target arousal level, the individual’s level of satisfaction is enhanced. Mattila and
Wirtz (2001) found that matching the arousal levels of ambient scent and background music
enhances consumer satisfaction with a shopping experience. Lin and Worthley (2012)
demonstrated that the emotional response variable pleasure directly influences consumers’
overall satisfaction. In the context of this study, satisfaction is an overall evaluation based on an
9
individual’s positive VSACA of a hotel lobby. It is a customers’ fulfillment response (Oliver,

1997). The discussion above suggests the following research hypotheses:
H2b: Pleasure has a significant direct effect on satisfaction.
H2c: Arousal has a significant direct effect on satisfaction.
Satisfaction and Willingness to Pay More
Studies have demonstrated the direct relationship between satisfaction and behavioral intentions
to revisit and recommend to others (Chen and Chen, 2010), and willingness to pay more (Lee et
al., 2010). Customer satisfaction can positively influence purchase volume and loyalty (Cronin,
et al., 2000) and repurchase intentions (Rust and Williams, 1994). Lee et al. (2010) found that
satisfaction with a hotel’s overall image can contribute to more favorable behavioral intentions
such as positive word of mouth, willingness to pay a premium, and intention to revisit. A happy
customer is less likely to spread negative word-of-mouth (Szymanski and Henard, 2001) or to
search for information on alternatives and resist close relationships with the service provider
(Anderson and Srinivasan, 2003). The causal cognitive activity continues into the emotional
response itself as an integral feature (Lazarus, 1991); hence, customers’ satisfaction level helps
guide their behavioral intentions. Accordingly:
H3: Satisfaction has a significant direct effect on willingness to pay more.
Perceived Perceptual Experience Quality (PPEQ), Pleasure, and Arousal as Mediators
Emotions (e.g., pleasure and arousal) and PPEQ are included as potential mediators because
emotions are known to change the way the human mind solves problems. Individuals’ PPEQ is
shaped by the service environment, which can affect their subsequent overall satisfaction with
the servicescape and their behavioral intentions (Hooper et al., 2012). Usually, individuals react
emotionally to a situation before they assess it cognitively; however, sometimes cognition comes
first because the human mind has an ability to imagine and to plan for the future (Lazarus, 1991).
When this happens, thought and cognition unleash emotion, and in turn are changed themselves
(Norman, 2004). Accordingly,
H4a: Perceived perceptual experience quality mediates the relationship between VSACA and
satisfaction.
H4b: Pleasure mediates the relationship between VSACA and satisfaction.
H4c: Arousal mediates the relationship between VSACA and satisfaction.
Methodology
Pilot Tests
Two pilot tests preceded the main experiment to help define the visual environmental stimuli of
the independent variable (VSACA) operationally. The first pilot test helped to select two
unambiguous hotel design styles, with the appropriate visual stimuli. Video clips of five styles
(contemporary/simplistic; classic/traditional; renaissance/romantic; boutique/trendy; and
10
resort/tranquil) were created using Eiseman’s (1998) color combinations to appropriately match
the style with furniture, artifacts, layout, and design. Eighteen undergraduate and graduate
students majoring in hospitality and tourism studies at a U.S. university were randomly selected
for participation in the pilot study. Each participant viewed all five videos in no particular order.
After viewing each video clip, participants rated, on a scale of one to seven (from 1=strongly
disagree to 7=strongly agree), the extent to which the clip represents one of the five styles. The
two hotel lobby style/ambience servicescapes that scored the highest mean were selected for the
manipulation and experimentation: the boutique/trendy style and the classic/traditional style.
These two styles were incorporated in the actual experiment.
The second pilot test, the manipulation check, was to ensure that the independent variable
(VSACA) hotel design style represents what it is intended to represent. Video clips were
prepared for each treatment (boutique vs. classic), and fifteen undergraduate student volunteers
viewed both boutique and classic hotel lobby videos, in random order. After viewing each video,
they rated, on a scale of one to seven (from 1=strongly disagree to 2=strongly agree), the extent
to which each video clip represents what it is supposed to represent. The results show that the
boutique and classic hotel lobbies do represent the two styles (See Appendix A for a description
of the visual design components of the manipulation used in the videos). The questions and
results of the manipulation check are included in Table 1.
--INSERT TABLE 1 HERE----
Expert Panel
All videos were designed by a licensed interior designer and were reviewed by an expert panel of
five professional interior designers to ensure internal validity. Review by the expert panel
helped to ensure that all the visual design attributes that were manipulated were aesthetically
appropriate, realistic, and congruent with the appropriate servicescape style (See Appendix A).
The videos were created using architecture design software.
Design and Procedure of the Main Experiment
For testing the theoretical model, two videos were developed to determine whether subjects
might respond quite differently to different settings: (1) a boutique-style hotel lobby and (2) a
classic-style lobby. Aronson et al., (1990) suggest that providing a realistic setting (mundane
realism) for an experiment is important. The video files were transformed into QuickTime clips
and then inserted into an online questionnaire.
Participants were randomly assigned to watch a video of either a boutique style hotel
lobby or a classic style hotel lobby and were given specific instructions prior to watching the
video. After viewing the two-and-a-half-minute video clip, participants immediately completed
a questionnaire online. The proposed theoretical model, depicted in Figures 1a and b, was then
tested against the data.
----INSERT Figure 1a and Figure 1b HERE----
Table 2 presents the means and standard deviations of model variables and Table 3 presents the
correlation matrix of the variables used to measure the latent constructs.
11
----INSERT Tables 2 and 3 HERE----

Subjects
A random sample of about 600 individuals over the age of 18 was drawn from a nationwide
(USA) list purchased from a third-party commercial list service. After preliminary analysis,
about 12 percent were eliminated because of unusable responses or missing data. The final
analysis was of data from 550 participants, 218 males and 332 females. Of the participants, 55.6
percent have a bachelor’s degree or higher education, 27.1 percent are ages 51 to 69, 36.4
percent are ages 34 to 50, and 33.5 percent are between 15 and 33. In addition, to ensure that the
selected subjects were representative of the population, had experienced staying at a similar type
of hotel, and were able to evaluate VSACA, we asked several preliminary questions. The results
are presented in Appendix B.
Measures
Previously established scales were modified slightly and the strongest observed indicators were
used to estimate the six latent variables in the theoretical model depicted in Figure 1a. All
observed items are listed in Table 2. Cronbach’s alpha for the constructs coefficients ranged
between 0.88 and 0.96, with the majority above 0.90 (see Table 2). Average variance extracted
for each construct is also presented to demonstrate discriminate validity.
Visual Servicescape Aesthetic Comprehension and Appreciation (VSACA): A 10-item
scale measuring VSACA was replicated from a modified form of Bloch et al.’s (2003) CVPA
scale used to assess the overall level of significance of visual aesthetics for a particular consumer
in relation to products. According to Bloch et al. (2003), the CVPA emerged as a
unidimensional construct composed of perceived value attached to superior product design
execution, ability to understand and evaluate product design, and the level of response to product
aesthetics. The VSACA scale was modified to appropriately measure the overall level of the
significance of visual aesthetics in individuals’ relationships with the hotel lobby servicescape on
a scale of 1=Strongly disagree to 7=Strongly agree. The modification consisted of slightly
changing the wording of each item to fit the context of a hotel lobby instead of a product without
changing the meaning of the item and also sustaining the construct validity of the measurement
scale. Hence, after modifying the wording, we simply applied the scale items to measure
VSACA.
Perceived perceptual experience quality (PPEQ) is a 3-item scale measuring an
individual’s overall response after viewing the hotel lobby servicescape video clip on a Likert
scale of 1=Strongly disagree to 7=Strongly agree.
Pleasure/arousal is measured on a scale of 1 to 7 by an established semantic differential
scale created by Mehrabian and Russell (1973, 1974), with six items each. Two items were
deleted from the arousal scale because of high error in defining the construct.
Satisfaction is measured using the overall satisfaction measure on a scale of 1=
Completely dissatisfied to 7=Completely satisfied (Halstead, 1989; Yuksel and Remmington,
1998; Leisen and Vance, 2001).
12
Willingness to pay more is measured on a 7-point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree to

7=Strongly agree) by three items modified from Lee et al. (2010). The third statement (Wtopay3)
was eliminated because of its high correlation with Wtopay2.
Data Analysis
The current model was developed in two stages using structural equation modeling (SEM). First,
a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to test the hypothesized structure between
observed indicators and latent constructs against the data (Model 1). This analysis provides an
initial test of the instrument’s validity and reliability in defining the latent constructs through the
observed variables. High statistically significant factor loadings and corresponding low residuals
support the instrument’s validity (Heck, 2007). Second, the proposed direct and mediating
structural effects were tested as specified in Figures 1a and 1b and Model 2. The analyses were
conducted using maximum likelihood estimation with robust standard errors and the MPlus 7.31
software.
Preliminary analyses determined where subjects’ responses might be quite different with
respect to one or the other setting. The two models compared each hotel setting in terms of the
patterns of results. A similar number of participants viewed each video (boutique=280 subjects
and classic=270 subjects) and the resulting model fit indices were very similar (CFI
boutique=0.912 and CFI classic=0.921), suggesting the hypothesized model fits both types of
hotel lobbies very well. In addition, with respect to the final SEM model results (Model 2), the
pattern of statistically significant factor loadings defining the constructs and the pattern of effects
between the constructs were consistent in size and direction (positive or negative). The pattern of
the statistical significance of the paths in each group (13 of the 16 paths) was also consistent with
the pattern in Model 2 (the structural model). Because of the similarity of this preliminary
evidence, the information from the two video samples was combined.
Results
Model 1 presents the CFA results first to confirm the validity and reliability of the indicators
used to measure the six constructs: VSACA, PPEQ, pleasure, arousal, satisfaction, and
willingness to pay more. Table 2 provides the mean and standard deviations for all 26 manifest
variables. The adequacy of the model was assessed using several common fit indices (Bryne,
2012). Although the chi-square coefficient is often reported, it has the undesirable property of
being affected by sample size, and with large samples can lead to rejecting models that fit well.
Therefore, other indices are often used to assess model fit. The comparative fit index (CFI)
assesses the relative improvement in fit against a baseline null (or poor-fitting) model. Models
near or above 0.95 are generally considered adequate (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The root-mean-
square-error-of-approximation (RMSEA) measures the discrepancy per degree of degrees of
freedom in the model, with values near 0.08 or lower often considered an adequate fit (Heck,
2007). The standardized root-mean-square-residual (SRMR) provides an overall summary of the
magnitude of the standardized residuals. Values near 0.05 or less are considered evidence of an
adequate fit (Heck, 2007). Given these guidelines, the CFA results show an adequate fit of the
proposed measurement model to the data (CFI=0.92, TLI=0.912, RMSEA=0.069, SRMR=0.05).
13
All the standardized factor loadings (Table 2) are substantive, that is, with loadings generally of
0.7 or higher; and all z-tests are above 1.96 with a statistical significance of p<.05.
Structural model and model testing

Table 4 presents the model fit index for the proposed measurement CFA model (Model 1) and
the structural model (Model 2). Model 2 examines the hypotheses that VSACA directly affects
PPEQ, pleasure, and arousal; PPEQ, pleasure, and arousal directly influence satisfaction; and
satisfaction directly influences willingness to pay more. Model 2 also tests the validity of the
mediation effects of perceived experience, pleasure, and arousal on the relationship between
VSACA and satisfaction. Based on theory, two additional direct paths were also tested: the
direct effect of (1) VSACA on satisfaction and (2) VSACA on willingness to pay more. The fit
statistics for Model 2 indicate an acceptable fit (CFI=0.924, RMSEA=0.06, SRMR=0.07)
between the hypothesized model and the data (Hu and Bentler, 1999). Arousal items 4 and 5
were eliminated because of correlated errors between them. The majority of the additional non-
hypothesized structural paths in Model 2 are statistically significant, suggesting a significant
direct relationship between VSACA and willingness to pay more (p<.001) and between arousal
and willingness to pay more (p<.001). However, the direct effect of VSACA on satisfaction is
not supported (p>.05). The standardized coefficients for Model 2 are presented in Table 5.
---INSERT TABLES 4 and 5 HERE---
Most of the hypothesized paths are statistically significant. The results indicate that the
direct effects of VSACA and PPEQ (Estimate=0.514; Est/SE=12.86), VSACA and pleasure
(Estimate=0.591; Est/SE=14.43), and VSACA and arousal (Estimate=0.603; Est/SE=14.88) are
all statistically significant at p<.001; hence H1a-c are all supported. Similarly, H2a: PPEQ to
satisfaction (Estimate=0.276; Est/SE=2.25) is statistically significant at p<.05. H2b: Pleasure to
satisfaction (Estimate=0.725; Est/SE=5.64) is statistically significant at p<.001. However, H2c,
the path from arousal to satisfaction, is not statistically significant (p=0.142). As for H3, there
was a statistically significant direct effect of satisfaction on willingness to pay more
(Estimate=0.303; Est/SE=6.17) at p<.001.
The mediation effect of PPEQ on the relationship between VSACA and satisfaction is
statistically significant (Estimate=0.142; Est/SE=2.21; p<.05); hence, H4a is supported. H4b:
The mediation effect of pleasure on the relationship between VSACA and satisfaction is also
supported (Estimate= 0.429; Est/SE=5.21; p<.001). However, H4c: The mediation effect of
arousal on the relationship between VSACA and satisfaction is not statistically significant; hence
H4c is not supported (p=0.147).
As for findings not originally hypothesized, the results indicate that the direct effect of
arousal on willingness to pay more is statistically significant (Estimate=0.298; Est/SE=4.72;
p<.001). The direct effect between VSACA and willingness to pay more is also statistically
significant (Estimate=0.221; Est/SE=3.568; p<.001). As for mediation effects, there is a
statistically significant mediation effect of satisfaction on the relationship between PPEQ and
willingness to pay more (Estimate=0.096; Est/SE=2.05, p<.05). The mediation effect of
satisfaction on the relationship between pleasure and willingness to pay more (Estimate=0.25;
Est/SE=4.62, p <.001) is also statistically significant. However, the mediation effect of
14
satisfaction on the relationship between arousal and willingness to pay is not statistically
significant (p > 0.05).
Discussion
In this study, appearance represents the central channel for the formation of consumer-
servicescape relationships. As such, this study addresses the servicescape research gap by
developing a more comprehensive model that operationalizes and measures the VSACA
construct. This approach extends the CVPA (Bloch et al., 2003) to derive the VSACA and its
distinct effect on an experiential product, consumers’ PPEQ, pleasure, arousal, satisfaction, and
willingness to pay more.
Aesthetics comprehension entails the overall level of appreciation or significance in a

consumer’s relationship with the product (Bloch et al., 2003). Past servicescape research has
recommended specific attributes to create a pleasant servicescape. This study advances previous
findings and recommendations with a more in-depth investigation of individuals’ level of
comprehension and appreciation of visual servicescape aesthetics; in other words, how hotel
servicescapes make them feel about themselves, what displays of artifacts appear to have
superior designs, and what “beauty” in a hotel design means to the consumer. In addition,
measuring individuals’ VSACA enables us to understand consumers’ responses.
Theoretical Implications
The current study contributes to the marketing literature in several important ways. First, it is
one of the first empirical studies that applies the CVPA scale in the context of a hotel
servicescape, measures consumers’ VSACA, and analyzes how it affects their experiences. The
results support Bloch et al.’s (2003) suggestion that the CVPA scale can be used in the context of
experiential products. Further, individuals’ VSACA positively and directly relates to PPEQ,
pleasure, arousal, and willingness to pay more. Interestingly, the results show that VSACA does
not have a direct effect on individuals’ overall satisfaction. However, individuals’ PPEQ and
pleasure mediate the relationship between VSACA and satisfaction, consistent with the S-O-R
theory in that the visual aesthetics (S) and the response of satisfaction (R) is mediated by PPEQ
and pleasure level (O). The statistical significance of the proposed model is also consistent with
Lazarus’s (1991) theory that the cognitive aspect can causally precede an emotion that affects
subsequent cognitive activity. Individuals’ VSACA (psychological processing of simultaneous
cognitive and emotional activities) can precede their PPEQ and emotions (pleasure, arousal) and
subsequently influence their overall evaluation or satisfaction.
Second, the findings add to the original proposed research model in terms of
demonstrating the direct effect of VSACA on behavioral intentions (willingness to pay more)
without necessarily being funneled through emotions and evaluation. Third, the finding that the
proposed direct effect between VSACA and satisfaction is not supported implies that consumers’
overall evaluation or satisfaction is highly dependent on their perception and the emotional
response of pleasure. Thus, individuals’ overall satisfaction must be funneled through either
positive PPEQ or pleasure. As for what drives consumers’ willingness to pay, this study found a
direct influence of arousal and VSACA, consistent with Bloch et al. (2003).
15
Managerial Implications
Given that a hotel lobby servicescape provides the first impression of the hotel (Lin, 2004) and
that VSACA has the potential to increase hotels’ revenue, we recommend including more visual
art and aesthetics that are likely to induce customers’ pleasure and arousal level. Similarly,
showing potential guests other tangible facilities (hotel spa facilities, guest rooms, ballrooms)
may enhance their PPEQ, pleasure, arousal, satisfaction, and more importantly, their
consumption and willingness to spend more. Hotel operators can incorporate emotional design
tactics into creating a pleasant servicescape; for example, stimulating visual cues such as iconic
artwork, a signature color, or brightly colored furniture, to enhance individuals’ pleasure level
and willingness to pay more. Hotel operators can also introduce novel or limited-edition visual
displays, customized furniture, or a themed art gallery to enhance customers’ arousal level. The
results also suggest that developers may not need to use the most expensive materials in order to
create an aesthetically sound hotel lobby but can lure customers through innovative servicescape
design aesthetics.
Limitations and Future Research
Several limitations in this study should be noted. First, the results can be generalized only to an
upscale (100 rooms or fewer), full-service boutique style or classic style hotel lobby. Second,
the current research framework focuses on the holistic visual aesthetics of a hotel lobby; future
studies can apply the current model to settings other than the lobby area and to non-visual
servicescape aesthetics. The results can be compared across different countries or cultures and
across individual differences.
Third, the results indicate the weak nature of arousal in the model. It is possible that the
virtual situation limited the effects of the specific stimuli. Future research can examine a similar
model in real-life settings. In addition, the already-established scales can be modified to measure
arousal more accurately. Fourth, the current VSACA scale focuses on visual aesthetics
comprehension and appreciation. The VSACA scale could also include non-visual elements that
are important to the international hotel business such as culture or service rituals, staff uniforms,
and innovative uses of technology.
Finally, questions remain about the temporal sequence underlying cognition and
emotions. Studies of the causal relationships between VSACA and individuals’ cognitive and
emotional responses are very limited in the context of experiential products or the service
industry. “The most successful hotel interiors transform a sojourn into an unforgettable
experience, however brief…” (Penner et al., 2013, p. viii). We must not forget the cognitive
emotional appraisals of consumers, their VSACA, when designing an aesthetically sound hotel
servicescape. After all, what counts is the beauty that lies in the eyes of the beholders—the
customers.
16
References
Anderson, R.E. and Srinivasan, S.S. (2003), “E-satisfaction and e-loyalty: a contingency
framework”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 20 No.2, pp. 123-38.
Ariffin, A.A.M., Nameghi, E.N., Zakaria, N.I. (2013), “The effect of hospitableness and
servicescape on guest satisfaction in the hotel industry”, Canadian Journal of
Administrative Sciences, Vol. 30 No.2, pp. 127-137.
Aronson, E., Ellsworth, P.G., Carlsmith, J.M., and Gonzales, M.H. (1990), Methods of research
in social psychology, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Auh, S., Court-Salisbury, L., and Johnson, M. (2003), “Order effects in customer satisfaction
modeling”, Journal of Marketing Management, 19(3-4), pp. 379-400.
Babakus, E. and Boller, G.W. (1992), “An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 253-268.
Berlyne, D.E. (1960), Conflict, arousal, and curiosity, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Berlyne, D.E. (1967), “Arousal and reinforcement”, in Levine, D. (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on
Motivation, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE, pp. 1-110.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), “Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and
employees”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, pp. 69-82.
Bloch, P.H. (1995), “Seeking the ideal form: product design and consumer response”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 59 July, 16-29.
Bloch, P.H., Brunel, F.F., and Arnold, T.J. (2003), “Individual differences in the centrality of
visual product aesthetics: Concept and measurement”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 551-565.
Bruyn, S.T. (n.d.). http://www.2.bc.edu/~bruyn/Theoretical.html. (Retrieved on July 2, 2015).
Byrne, B.M. (2012), Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and
programming, Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, New York, NY.
Cacioppo, J.T. and Petty, R.E. (1980), “The elaborate likelihood model of persuasion”, in
Kinner, T.C. (Ed.), NA-Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 11, Association for
Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 673-675.
Cafferata, P. and Tybout, A. (1989), Cognitive and affective responses to advertising,

Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.
Chan, J.K.L. and Baum, T. (2007), “Ecotourists’ perception of ecotourism experience in lower
17
Kinabatangan, Sabah, Malaysia”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 15 No.5, pp. 574-
590.
Chen, C.F. and Chen, F.S. (2010), “Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and
behavioral intentions for heritage tourists”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31, pp. 29-35.
Compton, W.C. and Hoffman, E. (2013), Positive psychology: The science of happiness and
flourishing. Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA.
Countryman, and Jang, S. (2006), “The effects of atmospheric elements on customer

impression: the case of hotel lobbies”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 534-545.
Cronin, J.J., Jr., Brady, M.K., and Hult, G.T.M. (2000), “Assessing the effects of quality, value,
and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 193-217.
Demoulin, N.T.M. (2011), “Music congruency in a service setting: The mediating role of
emotional and cognitive responses”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol.
18, pp. 10-18.
Donovan, R.J. and Rossiter, D.L. (1982), “Store atmosphere: an environmental psychology
approach”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 58, pp. 34-57.
Dube, L. and Morin, S. (2001), “Background music pleasure and store evaluation intensity
effects and psychological mechanisms”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 54, pp. 107-
113.
Dumaine, B. (1991), “Design that sells and sells and…” Fortune (March11), pp. 86-94.
Durna, U., Dedeoglu, B.B., and Balikcioglu, S. (2015), “The role of servicescape and image
perceptions of customers on behavioral intentions in the hotel industry”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 1728-1748.
Eiseman, L. (1998), Colors for Your Every Mood, Capital Books, Sterling, VA.
Elliot, E.A., Cherian, J., and Casakin, H. (2013), “Cultural metaphors: Enhancing consumer
pleasure in ethnic servicescapes”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66, pp. 1004-1012.
Erdelyi, M.H. and Kleinbard, J. (1978), “Has Ebbinghaus decayed with time? The growth of
recall (hypermnesia) over days”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning
and Memory, Vol. 4, pp. 275-289.
Erevelles, S. and Leavitt, C. (1992), “A comparison of current models of consumer

satisfaction/dissatisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction, and
Complaining Behavior, Vol. 5, pp. 104-114.
18
Feldman, L.A. (1995), “Valence focus and arousal focus: Individual differences in the structure
of affective experience”, Journal of personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 69, pp. 153-
166.
Fiang, Y. and Wang, C.L. (2006), “The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction: the
moderation of service contexts”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 20 No.4, pp. 211-
218.
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.
Forty, A. (1986), Objects of Desire. Pantheon Books, New York, NY.
Gabarino, E. and Johnson, M. (1999), “The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment
in customer relationships”, Journal of Marketing, April, pp. 70-87.
Galbraith, C.S., Siguaw, J.A., and Lim, H.H. (1995), “Aesthetic consumption differences in
Asian-American and Anglo subcultures: implications for segmentation and positioning
strategies”, Journal of Non-Profit and Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 4/4, pp. 3-24.
Garland, R., Macpherson, T., and Haughey, K. (2004), “Rugby fan attraction factors”, Marketing
Bulletin, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 1-12.
Gee, C.Y. (2010), World of Resorts: From Development to Management, American Hotel and
Lodging Education Institute, Lansing, MI.
Getty, J.M. and Thompson, K.N. (1994), “The relationship between quality, satisfaction, and
recommending behavior in lodging decision”, Journal of Hospitality and Leisure
Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 3-22.
Gilbert, G.R. and Veloutsou (2006), “A cross-industry comparison of customer satisfaction”,

Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 20 No.5, pp. 298-308.
Halstead, D. (1989), “Expectations and disconfirmation beliefs as predictors of customer

satisfaction, repurchase intention, and complaining behavior: an empirical study”,
Journal of Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behaviour, Vol. 2,
pp. 17-21.
Hamilton, V.L. (2004), “Identification as a challenge to dual-process theories of persuasion”, in

Eagly, A.H., Baron, R.M., and Hamilton, V.L. (Eds.), The social psychology of group
identity and social conflict: theory, application, and practice, APA Decade of Behavior
Volumes, US: American Psychological Association, xix, 308, pp. 65-76.
Han, H. (2013), “Effects of in-flight ambience and space/function on air travelers’ decision to
19
select a low-cost airline”, Tourism Management, Vol. 37, pp. 125-135.
Harris, L.C. and Ezeh, C. (2008), “Servicescape and loyalty intentions: An empirical
investigation”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 No.3/4, pp. 390-422.
Heck, R. (2007), “Examining the relationship between teacher quality as an organizational

property of schools and students’ achievement and growth rates”, Educational
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 399-432.
Helkkula, A., Kelleher, C., and Pihlstrom, M. (2012), “Characterizing value as an experience-
implications for researchers and managers”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 15 No.1,
pp. 59-75.
Heung, V.C.S. and Gu, T. (2012), “Influence of restaurant atmospherics on patron satisfaction
and behavioral intentions”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31,
pp. 1167-1177.
Hoffman, K.D. and Bateson, J.E. (2010), “Services marketing: Concepts, strategies, & cases”,
Cengage Learning.
Holbrook, M. (1986), “Aims, concepts, and methods for the representation of individual
differences in esthetic responses to design features”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol.
13 No. 3, pp. 337-347.
Hollins, B. and Pugh, S. (1990), Successful product design: What to do and when. Butterworth-
Heinemann.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., and Mullen, M.R. (2013), “The servicescape as an antecedent to
service quality and behavioral intentions”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 271-280.
Hyun, S. and Kang, J. (2014), “A better investment in luxury restaurants: Environmental or non-
environmental cues?”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 39, pp. 57-
70.
Isen, A.M. (1993), “Positive affect and decision making”, in Lewis, M. and Haviland, J. (Eds.),
Handbook of Emotion, Guilford Press, New York, pp. 261-277.
Ittleson, W.H. (1973), “Environment perception and contemporary perceptual theory”, in

Ittleson, W.H. (Ed.), Environment and Cognition, Seminar Press, New York, pp. 1-19.
Jani, D. and Han, H. (2014), “Personality, satisfaction, image, ambience, and loyalty: Testing
their relationships in the hotel industry”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 37, pp. 11-20.
Jani, D. and Han, H. (2015), “Influence of environmental stimuli on hotel customer emotional
20
loyalty response: Testing the moderating effect of the big five personality factors”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 44, pp. 48-57.
Kim, D. and Purdue, R.R. (2013), “The effects of cognitive, affective, and sensory attributes on
hotel choice”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 35, pp. 246-257.
Kim, S.S. and Mattila, A.S. (2011), “An examination of electronic video clips in the context of
hotel websites”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 30, pp. 612-618.
Kotler, P. (1973), “Atmospherics as a marketing tool”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49, pp. 48-64.
Kumar, M. and Garg, N. (2010), “Aesthetic principles and cognitive emotion appraisals: How
much of the beauty lies in the eye of the beholder”? Journal of Consumer Psychology,
Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 485-494.
Lam, L.W., Chan, K.W., Fong, D., and Lo, F. (2011), “Does the look matter? The impact of
casino servicescape on gaming customer satisfaction, intention to revisit, and desire to
stay”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 30, pp. 558-567.
Lazarus, R.S. (1991), Emotion and adaptation, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
Lee, H.C., Chen, W.W., and Wang, C.W. (2015), “The role of visual art in enhancing perceived
prestige of luxury brands”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 26 No.4, pp. 593-606.
Lee, J.S., Hsu, L.T., Han, H., and Kim, Y. (2010), “Understanding how consumers view green
hotels: How a hotel’s green image can influence behavioral intentions”, Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 901-914.
Lee, J.H. and Hwang, J.H. (2011), “Luxury marketing: The influences of psychological and
demographic characteristics on attitudes toward luxury restaurants”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 30, pp. 658-669.
Leisen, B. and Vance, C. (2001), “Cross-national assessment of service quality in the

telecommunication industry: evidence from the USA and Germany”, Managing Service
Quality, Vol. 11 No.5, pp. 307-317.
Lewin, K., (1936), Principles of topological psychology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New
York, NY.
Lewin, K. (1951), Field theory in Social Science. Harper, New York, NY.
Lin, I.Y. (2004), “Evaluating a servicescape: the effect of cognition and emotion”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 23, pp. 163-178.
Lin, I.Y. (2010), “The interactive of Gestalt situations and arousal seeking tendency on
customers’ emotional responses: Matching color and music to specific servicescapes”,
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 294-304.
21
Lin, I.Y. and Worthley, R. (2012), “Servicescape moderation on personality traits, emotions,
satisfaction, and behaviors”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31,
pp. 31-42.
Lin, J.S.C. and Liang, H.Y. (2011), “The influence of service environments on customer emotion
and service outcomes”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 350-372.
Lovelock, C. (2011), “Services marketing”. 7th Ed. Upper Saddle River, Pearson Publishing.
Mattila, A.S. and Wirtz, J. (2001), “Congruency of scent and music as a driver of in-store
evaluations and behavior”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77 No. 3, pp. 273-289.
McColl-Kennedy, J.R., Gustafsson, A., Faakkola, E., Klaus, P., Radnor, Z.J., Perks, H., and
Friman, M. (2015), “Fresh perspectives on customer experience”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 29 No.6/7, pp. 430-435.
McGoldrick, P.J. and Greenland, S.J. (1992), “Competition between banks and building societies
in the retailing of financial services”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp.
169-179.
McGuire, L. (1999), Australian services marketing and management, MacMillan, Melbourne.
Mehrabian, A., and Russell, J.A. (1973), “A measure of arousal seeking tendency”, Environment
and Behavior, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 315-333.
Mehrabian, A., and Russell, J.A. (1974), An approach to environmental psychology. MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Meyers-Levy, J., and Zhu, R. (2010), “Gender differences in the meanings consumers infer from
music and other aesthetic stimuli”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp.
495-507.
Miles, P., Miles, G., and Cannon, A. (2012), “Linking servicescape to customer satisfaction:
exploring the role of competitive strategy”, International Journal of Operations and
Production Management, Vol. 32 No.7, pp. 772-795.
Namasivayam, K. and Mattila, A.S. (2007), “Accounting for the joint effects of the servicescape
and service exchange on consumers’ satisfaction evaluations”, Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Research, Vol. 31 No.1, pp. 3-18.
Norman, D.A. (2004), Emotional Design. Basic Books, a member of the Perseus
Books Group, New York, NY.
Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, McGraw-Hill,

Boston, MA.
22
Olson, J.C. and Jacoby, J. (1972), “Cue utilization in the quality perception process”, In SV-
Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research,
eds. M. Venkatesan, Association for Consumer Research, Chicago, IL.
Orth, U.R., Heinrich, F., and Malkewitz, K. (2012), “Servicescape interior design and
consumers’ personality impressions”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 26 No.3, pp.
194-203.
Otto, J.E. and Richie, J.R.B. (1996), “The service experience in tourism”, Tourism Management,
Vol. 17 No.3, pp. 165-174.
Penner, R.H., Adams, L., and Robinson, S.K.A. (2013), Hotel design planning and
development, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY.
Phau, I., Quintal, V., and Shanka, T. (2014), “Examining a consumption values theory approach
of young tourists toward destination choice intentions”, International Journal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 125-139.
Ponnam, A. and Balaji, M.S. (2014), “Matching visitation-motives and restaurant attributes in
casual dining restaurants”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 37, pp.
47-57.
Reichheld, F.F. and Schefter, P. (2000), “E-Loyalty”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78 No. 4,
pp. 105-113.
Reimer, A. and Kuehn, R. (2005), “The impact of servicescape on quality perception”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 No.7/8, pp. 785-808.
Russell, J.A. (1989), “Measures of emotions”, in Plutchik R. and Kellerman, H. (Eds.), Emotion:
theory, research and experience: the measurement of emotions, Vol. 4, Academic Press,
New York, pp. 145-170.
Russell, J. and Pratt, G. (1980), “A description of the affective quality attributed to

environments”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 311-
322.
Rust, R.T. and Williams, D.C. (1994), “How length of patronage affects the impact of customer
satisfaction on repurchase intention?”, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction,
and Complaining Behavior, Vol. 7, pp. 107-113.
Rutes, W.A., Penner, R.H., Adams, L. (2001), Hotel Design: Planning and Development, W.W.
Norton and Company, Inc., New York, NY.
Ryu, K., Lee, H.R., and Kim, W.G. (2010), “The influence of the quality of the physical
environment, food, and service on restaurant image, customer perceived value, customer
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 200-223.
23
Schmitt, B., and Simonson, A. (1997), Marketing aesthetics: The strategic management of
brands, identity, and image, The Free Press Simon and Schuster, New York, NY.
Shapiro, M. and Gomez, M.I. (2013), “Customer satisfaction and sales performance in wine
tasting rooms”, International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 26 No.1, pp. 45-
60.
Siu, N.Y.M., Wan, P.Y.K., and Dong, P. (2012), “The impact of the servicescape on the desire to
stay in convention and exhibition centers: The case of Macao”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 31, pp. 236-246.
Surehchandar, G.S., Rajendran, C., and Anantharaman, R.N. (2001), "The relationship between
service quality and customer satisfaction – a factor specific approach", Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol.16 No. 4, pp.363-379
Szymanski, D.M. and Henard, D.H. (2001), “Customer satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the
empirical evidence”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp.
16-35.
Townsend, C. and Sood, S. (2012), “Self-affirmation through the choice of highly aesthetic
products”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 39, pp. 415-428.
Turley, L.W., and Milliman, R.E. (2000), “Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: A review
of the experimental evidence”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49, pp. 193-211.
Valdez, P. and Mehrabian, A. (1994), “Effects of color on emotions”, Journal of Experimental

Psychology, Vol. 123 No. 4, pp. 394-409.
Veitch, R. and Arkkelin, D. (1995), Environmental psychology. Pearson, Upper Saddle River,
NJ.
Venkatesh, A., Joy, A., Sherrry Jr., J.F., and Deschenes, J. (2010), “The aesthetics of luxury
fashion, body and identify formation”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 20,
pp. 459-470.
Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1996), “The effect of the servicescape on customers’
behavioral intentions in leisure service settings”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 10
No.6, pp. 45-61.
Walsh, G., Shiu, E., Hassan, L.M., Michaelidou, N., and Beatty, S.E. (2011), “Emotions, store-
environmental cues, store-choice criteria, and marketing outcomes”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 64, pp. 737-744.
Wardono, P., Hibino, H., and Koyama, S. (2012), “Effects of interior colors, lighting and décor
24
on perceived sociability, emotion and behavior related to social dining”, Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 38, pp. 362-372.
Wirtz, J., Mattila, A.S., and Tan, R.L.P. (2000), “The moderating role of target-arousal on the
impact of affect on satisfaction: An examination in the context of service experience”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 347-365.
Wirtz, J., Mattila, A.S., and Tan, R.L.P. (2007), “The role of arousal congruency in influencing
consumers’ satisfaction evaluations and in-store behaviors”, International Journal of
Service Industry Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 6-24.
Wong, I.A. and Prentice, C. (2015), “Multilevel environment induced impulsive gambling”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68, pp. 2012-2108.
Yamamato, M. and Lambert, D.R. (1994), “The impact of product aesthetics on the evaluation of
industrial products”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 309-
324.
Yeonsoo, L., Jinwoo, K., Inseong, L., and Hoyong, K. (2002), “A cross-cultural study on the
value structure of mobile internet usages: comparison between Korea and Japan”, Journal
of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 227-239.
Yuksel, A. and Remmington, M. (1998), “Customer satisfaction measurement”, Cornell Hotel

and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 60-67.
Figure 1a. Hypothesized Research Model: Direct effects
Perceived
Perceptual
Experience
Quality H2a
H1a
Satisfaction W
Pleasure H2b H3
Visual servicescape H1b to
Aesthetics Comprehension
and Appreciation (VSACA)
H1c H2c
Arousal
Figure 1b. Hypothesized research model: Perceived perceptual experience quality, pleasure, and arousal as
Perceived
Perceptual
Experience
Quality
H4a
aa
Satisfaction
VSACA H4b Pleasure
H4c
Arousal
Table 1. Manipulation Check on Hotel Design Style
____________________________________________________________
MC Questions Hotel Style N Mean
Treatments
The hotel lobby looks Boutique 280 5.02*
fashionable/exciting.
Classic 270 4.71
The hotel lobby looks Boutique 280 4.86*
traditional/calm.
Classic 270 5.31
*Note: Results of independent samples t-tests indicated Boutique and

Classic means were not the same (p < .01).
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics, Standardized Factor Loadings, and Error Terms
Factors AVE* Mean SD Loadings Error
Visual Servicescape Aesthetics Comprehension & 0.63
Appreciation (VSACA)* (α =0.94)
1. Staying at hotels that have superior designs make me feel good 4.65 1.51 0.76 0.43
about myself.**
2. I enjoy seeing displays of artefacts that have superior designs. 4.93 1.34 0.73 0.47
3. A servicescape design is a source of pleasure for me. For example, 4.73 1.44 0.77 0.41
beautiful hotel designs make our world a better place to live.
4. Being able to see subtle difference in hotel servicescape designs is 4.27 1.53 0.85 0.27
one skill that I have developed over time.
5. I see things in a servicescape’s design that other people tend to pass 4.27 1.46 0.81 0.35
over.
6. I have the ability to imagine how a product will fit in with designs 4.14 1.57 0.77 0.41
of other things I already own.

7. I have a pretty good idea of what makes one hotel look better than 4.73 1.39 0.76 0.42
its competitors.
8. Sometimes the way a hotel looks seems to reach out and grab me. 4.81 1.41 0.79 0.38
9. If a hotel’s interior design really “speaks” to me, I feel that I must 4.51 1.53 0.85 0.28
stay at that hotel.
10. When I see a servicescape that has a really great design, I feel a 4.62 1.57 0.84 0.29
strong urge to patronage.
Perceived perceptual experience quality (PPEQ) 0.87
(α =0.95)
1. The experience in this hotel is exactly what I want. 4.80 1.51 0.92 0.16
2. I am satisfied with the experience. 5.10 1.41 0.95 0.09
3. I truly enjoyed this hotel layout and design of the hotel lobby. 5.10 1.45 0.92 0.15
Pleasure (α =0.96) 0.79
1. Unhappy – Happy 5.05 1.38 0.94 0.13
2. Annoyed – Pleased 5.16 1.35 0.96 0.08
3. Unsatisfied – Satisfied 5.15 1.37 0.94 0.12
4. Melancholic – Contended 4.99 1.39 0.86 0.26
5. Despairing – Hopeful 5.15 1.41 0.83 0.31
6. Bored – Relaxed 3.92 1.46 0.80 0.35
Arousal (α =0.89) 0.68
1. Unaroused – Aroused 3.92 1.55 0.81 0.35
2. Relaxed – Stimulated 4.34 1.50 0.91 0.17
3. Calm – Excited 4.41 1.51 0.90 0.20
6. Sleepy – Wide-awake 4.15 1.53 0.67 0.56
Overall satisfaction (α =1.00)*** ------
1. Completely dissatisfied – Completely satisfied 5.02 1.41 1.00 0.00
Willingness to pay more (α =0.89) 0.80
1. It is acceptable to pay more to stay at this type of hotel. 4.37 1.60 0.86 0.28
2. I am willing to pay more to stay at this type of hotel. 4.21 1.64 0.94 0.12
Notes: *Average variance extracted for all constructs were well above generally accepted standards of average
variance (>.50) and considerably larger than shared variance estimates between each construct and the others in the
study (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Hence, we can conclude that the constructs have discriminant validity.
**All items are statistically significant at p < .001.
***Construct is assumed to be perfectly measured since it is measured by a single observed item.
Table 3. Inter-Correlations Among Model Variables

Var. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
1 1.0
2 .69 1.0
3 .71 .70 1.0
4 .61 .58 .67 1.0
5 .56 .53 .56 .80 1.0
6 .53 .50 .54 .74 .78 1.0
7 .54 .55 .53 .65 .65 .65 1.0
8 .56 .59 .58 .62 .58 .57 .66 1.0
9 .62 .55 .60 .70 .66 .60 .63 .71 1.0
10 .63 .60 .62 .66 .61 .57 .63 .74 .86 1.0
11 .46 .45 .41 .40 .34 .37 .34 .37 .43 .42 1.0
12 .43 .45 .39 .35 .30 .34 .32 .36 .36 .38 .87 1.0
13 .39 .44 .38 .36 .31 .33 .33 .39 .36 .37 .85 .88 1.0
14 .49 .55 .48 .42 .36 .40 .36 .43 .44 .44 .79 .82 .78 1.0
15 .47 .52 .45 .42 .36 .40 .38 .43 .40 .41 .79 .83 .80 .92 1.0
16 .47 .52 .45 .43 .38 .41 .39 .42 .40 .40 .78 .83 .79 .86 .92 1.0
17 .45 .45 .44 .40 .37 .38 .31 .37 .40 .39 .71 .77 .71 .80 .80 .81 1.0
18 .49 .48 .48 .48 .43 .43 .37 .39 .44 .44 .71 .69 .67 .77 .77 .76 .78 1.0
19 .40 .40 .39 .33 .27 .27 .28 .35 .35 .34 .70 .73 .72 .74 .75 .74 .74 .71 1.0
20 .39 .29 .37 .41 .39 .35 .26 .27 .37 .33 .38 .32 .31 .37 .35 .35 .37 .47 .28 1.0
21 .47 .41 .44 .45 .42 .41 .31 .35 .41 .39 .50 .46 .44 .52 .49 .49 .48 .55 .38 .77 1.0
22 .49 .45 .48 .51 .49 .48 .39 .41 .50 .47 .58 .54 .52 .58 .56 .56 .52 .61 .41 .69 .81
23 .29 .27 .29 .34 .31 .29 .23 .23 .30 .30 .36 .33 .30 .38 .35 .32 .32 .37 .21 .55 .59
24 .46 .48 .46 .40 .36 .41 .34 .41 .41 .40 .78 .78 .75 .79 .80 .79 .76 .74 .72 .39 .49
25 .45 .39 .42 .39 .41 .39 .28 .36 .47 .43 .50 .45 .46 .48 .47 .48 .47 .52 .39 .47 .51
26 .52 .43 .44 .43 .44 .43 .35 .39 .51 .49 .58 .54 .52 .56 .53 .54 .54 .57 .45 .48 .52
Note: All correlations are statistically significant p<0.01.
Variables are label as follows:
1=VSACA1 6=VSACA6 11=PPEQ1 16=Pleas3 21=Arousal2 26=Wtopay2
2=VSACA2 7=VSACA7 12=PPEQ2 17=Pleas4 22=Arousal3
3=VSACA3 8=VSACA8 13=PPEQ3 18=Pleas5 23=Arousal6
4=VSACA4 9=VSACA9 14=Pleas1 19=Pleas6 24=Satisfy
5=VSACA5 10=VSACA10 15=Pleas2 20=Arousal1 25=Wtopay1
Table 4. Model Fit Indices
Model Fit Index Model 1: Measuring Model 2: Testing
the Latent the Structural
Constructs Relations
χ2 1111.722 1012.997
Df 310 283
CFI 0.923 0.924
TLI 0.912 0.913
RMSEA 0.069 0.068
SRMR 0.05 0.077
Table 5. Structural Model Results
_________________________________________________________________________________
Hypothesized Relationship Estimate Hypothesis Supported

_________________________________________________________________________________
Direct Effects
H1a: VSACA PPEQ 0.514** Yes
H1b: VSACA PLEASURE 0.591** Yes
H1c: VSACA AROUSAL 0.603** Yes

H2a: PPEQ SATISFY 0.276* Yes
H2b: PLEAS SATISFY 0.725** Yes
H2c: AROUSAL SATISFY 0.069 No
H3: SATISFY WTOPAY 0.348** Yes
Indirect (Mediation) Effects
H4a: VSACA PPEQ SATISFY 0.142** Yes
H4b: VSACA PLEAS SATISFY 0.429** Yes
H4c: VSACA AROUS SATISFY 0.041 No

________________________________________________________________________________
Note: *p < .05; **p < .001
Appendix A. Descriptions of Boutique Hotel Lobby and Classic Hotel Lobby
Boutique Classic
Definition Boutique hotels usually have fewer than 100 guest Classic hotels are described as traditional, not
rooms (Rutes et al., 2001). The descriptive elements of fashionable but elegant "based on historic standards of
a boutique hotel lobby include: fashionable, glamorous, accommodations and service traditions developed
stylish, chic, flair, and elegant (Rutes et al ., 2001). through experience and global refinement up to the
Boutique hotels are considered as high-stimulus present time" (Gee, 2010, p. 5). In comparison to
environment; it is is known to attract artists and boutique hotels, the interior decor of a typical small
celebrities (Rutes et al ., 2001). To differentiate this classic hotel is usually considered conservative and bold
style from the classic style, this hotel lobby is depicted (Gee, 2010). To differentiate this style from the
with more paintings on the wall, utilized dynamic and boutique style, a classic style hotel is depicted with
high-stimulus color combinations (e.g., red, orange, mostly neutral and calm color combinations and less
purple), trendy and chic layout and design (e.g., with the flair (e.g., without the fire pit), but elegant.
fire pit in the center of the seating area).
Description of the layout and design** Boutique hotel lobby is manipulated as a Classic hotel lobby is manipulated as a
trendy/fashionable hotel lobby for the size of 100 guest traditional/conservative hotel lobby for 100 guest
rooms. The size of the lobby is smaller (approximately 6 rooms. The size of the lobby is the same as boutique
to 8 sq.ft. of floor area per guest room in the lobby) style and mainly depicted the business and city-center
than large chain hotels (Penner et al ., 2013) and mainly lifestyle. The color combinations used to represent this
depicted the urban and city-center lifestyle. The color style are neutral, calm, and conservative (Eiseman,
combinations used to represent this style are dynamic 2008). The basic layout and design of the lobby includes
and exciting (Eiseman, 2008) since they are supposed to white sofa, dark gray tables, a wood front desk, and a
portray a high-stimulus environment. The basic layout blue carpet; it also has high-ceiling with glass windows
and design of the lobby is that the center of the lobby with lots of natural light. Natural plants and traditional
has a fire pit to induce a fashionable and chic artwork (photographs) are included and placed on the
impression; it is high-ceiling with glass windows with white wall around the lobby.
lots of natural light. Black and white modern paintings
are included and placed on the red wall around the
lobby. A TV screen is also mounted on the wall of the
lobby.
Color combination used High-stimulus/Dynamic color combinations Low-stimulus/Neutral or calm color combinations
Primary color accent Orange and purple White and Blue
Secondary color accent Red and green Tan and green
Painted walls Orange: *Untamed orange, ripe pumpkin White: *Whisper
White: *Wishful white Brown: *Molasses
Purple: *Hailstorm Green: *Climbing ivy
Gray: *Silver spoon
Wall Panels Orange tinged: *tan wood Dark brown wood
Tile Walls N/A Tan: *Sahara
Ceiling Gray: *Silver spoon White: *Whisper
Floating soffits Brown: *Northern territory N/A
Underside soffits N/A Green: *Climbing Ivy
Lamp shade Red: *Hot jazz White: *Whisper
Flooring Wood: Orange tinged or tan Wood:*Cedar chest
Wood: Tan or Orange tinged Carpet: *Ink Blotch (blue)
Carpet: Brown:*Bear in Mind Stone: dark and neutral gray
Stone: dark and neutral gray
Artificial turf (outisde entrance): *Spring juniper (green)
Furniture Orange tinged wood or tan with dark and light gray White, brown, and dark gray
Notes : *Color descriptions are based on Dunn Edwards Paints "Perfect Palette" color palette.
**In general, we followed the lobby design checklist provided by Penner et al., (2013, p. 346) to ensure that the basic layout, design,
and flow of the lobby is realistic and valid.
Appendix B. Preliminary questions to ensure subjects of the study are appropriate and valid.
Preliminary Question Participants’ Response
1. How many times did you stay at a hotel in the past 12 94.9% have stayed at a budget to full-
months? service hotel for at least, three times
within the past 12 months.
Preliminary Questions 2-9* 4=Neutral 5=Positive to
7=Extremely Positive
2. The overall image I have about this hotel via watching 23.3% 79.9%
this video clip is:
3. I like the way this hotel servicescape looks: 21.8% 70.0%
4. The experience through watching this video clip is 25.3% 60.0%
exactly what I want in a hotel:
5. This hotel lobby servicescape is attractive: 17.5% 75.9%

6. This hotel lobby servicescape looks aesthetically 19.6% 73.5%
appealing to me:
7. I truly enjoyed the layout and the environment of the 24.0% 64.0%
hotel lobby servicescape via watching this video clip:
8. I am satisfied with the overall experience of the hotel 22.7% 67.0%
lobby servicescape by watching this video clip:
9. After watching this video clip, the overall likelihood for 23.5% 71.5%
me to stay in this hotel is:
*Note: Subjects were asked to rate from a scale of 1=extremely negative to 7=extremely positive from
questions 2-9.
Appendix C. Summary of Servicescape Literature Review (2010-2016)
Author(s) Sample & Design IV DV Moderator/ Findings
Mediator
Ariffin, Nameghi, Survey research. Hospitableness: the Guest satisfaction Servicescape There is a positive effect of hotel hospitality
& Zakaria (2013) 403 hotel guests. host-guest on guest satisfaction and a positive
interpersonal moderating effect of servicescape.
relationship.
Demoulin (2011) Field experiment in a Music congruency Emotional responses; Emotional Confirmed the proposed mediation effects.
French restaurant. cognitive responses; response Music congruency leads to low arousal and
104 respondents for return intention high pleasure. Pleasure induced by music
the non-congruent congruency increases customers’ evaluation
music treatment and of environment quality and service quality,
95 for the congruent which positively affects return intention.
music treatment
Durna, Dedeoglu, Survey research. Servicescape WOM Overall image Servicescape components had a positive
& Balikcioglu 410 sample size (Substantive Revisiting effect on overall image, and overall image had
(2015) staging and the same effect on WOM and revisiting.

communicative
staging)
Elliot, Cherian, & Qualitative sample: Cultural metaphors Customer pleasure N/A Ethnic consumers derive pleasure in
Casakin (2013) 25 participants in ethnic servicescape from specific cues afforded by
Quantitative sample: servicescapes metaphors related to their own culture. The
110 University themes that emerged dealt with symbolic
students experience, imaginary experience, and
reviving experience, which form the concept
of ethno-pleasure.
Han (2013) Field survey; In-flight ambient Cognitive evaluation; Cognitive Air quality, temperature, layout, and
331 valid surveys conditions; Affective evaluation; evaluation; equipment/amenities significantly induce
Space/function Passenger Passenger positive cognitive and affective evaluations.
satisfaction; Intention satisfaction Satisfaction, thereby influences passengers’
to repurchase; Affective positive behavioral intentions. Cognitive
Intention to evaluation; evaluation, affective evaluation, and
recommend passenger satisfaction also mediate the
proposed conceptual framework.
Heung & Gu Field survey from 10 Restaurant Dining N/A Restaurant atmospherics have a significant
(2012) middle-upscale full- atmospherics and satisfactionBehavioral influence on patrons’ dining satisfaction and
service restaurants in employee factors intentions (i.e., their behavioral intentions, particularly their
Hong Kong. intentions to return; intentions to return and spread positive word-
A total of 118 spared positive word- of-mouth and their willingness to pay more.
surveys. of-mouth; willingness Dining satisfaction was also found to have a
to pay more) significant influence on behavioral intentions
(i.e., intentions to return and to recommend
the restaurant).
Hooper, Coughlan Intercepted fields Servicescape Behavioral intentions N/A It is more appropriate to model the
& Mullen (2013) survey research. (design); employee servicescape as a separate construct which
355 valid responses. service quality; precedes service quality. Design is a
overall ervice significant contributor to behavioral
quality intentions further confirming the necessity to
manage service environments in order to
generate repatronage behaviors.
Hyun & Kang Field survey research. Environmental and Emotional responses Motivational Environmental cues have a stronger impact
(2014) 379 valid data were non-environmental orientation; on arousal than do non-environmental cues.
used and collected cues hedonism Among the various environmental cues,
from luxury ambient conditions were the most powerful
restaurants in the element in patrons’ arousal. There is also a
U.S. positive effect of arousal on pleasure and of
pleasure on behavioral intentions.
Jani & Han (2015) Field survey research. Hotel ambience Emotions; Loyalty The Big Five Hotel ambience had significant positive
563 responses from Factors of effects on the positive consumption emotion
hotel guests. Personality and a significant negative effect on negative
consumption emotion. Further, consumption
emotion has both positive and negative
effects on hotel guest loyalty. Among
personality factors, extraversion, openness to
experience, and agreeableness were observed
to strengthen relationships, with higher
scores for the traits indicating stronger
ambience-emotions-loyalty relationships.
Kim & Mattila Qualitative: N/A EVISQUAL: User N/A Consumers evaluate video clips based on six
(2011) interviews were interface; aesthetics; distinct dimensions: User interface,
conducted to derive customization or aesthetics, customization/personalization,
33 questions for the personalization; assurance/trust, flexibility, virtual human
questionnaire. Assurance/trust; interaction.
Quantitative flexibility; virtual
method:200 travelers human interaction
participated at the
airport (for an
exploratory factor
analysis and reliability
tests). Field survey
research 184 student
participants
Kim & Purdue Using Verma et al.’s Cognitive, Affective, Hotel choice N/A When consumers choose a hotel, they
(2013) (1999) five-step Sensory attributes consider not only cognitive attributes (e.g.,
choice modeling price, service, food quality, and national
process & brand), but also affective (e.g., comfortable
Web-based survey feeling and entertaining) and sensory (e.g.,
research. room quality, overall atmosphere) attributes.
494 respondents. The results also demonstrate the incremental
value of adding affective and sensory
attributes to a choice model when compared
to a model using only traditional cognitive
attributes.
Lam, Chan, Fong, Field survey research. Dimensions of Customer cognitive N/A Overall servicescape dimensions of casinos
& Lo (2011) 513 surveys from servicescapes and affective show a significant impact on gamblers'
gaming customers in satisfaction; cognitive and affective satisfaction.
five casinos in Macau. behavioral intentions Customers are more satisfied when they
gamble in an attractive physical environment.
Satisfaction also affects their intention to
revisit the casinos. Navigation, ambience, and
cleanliness are significant predictors of
cognitive satisfaction. Seating comfort and
interior décor are significant predictors of
affective satisfaction.
Lee & Hwang Online survey via Psychological Attitude toward N/A Consumers who exhibit materialism and
(2011) Survey Monkey.com characteristics; luxury restaurants hedonism had favorable attitudes toward
239 responses were demographic luxury restaurants; they also strongly
used. characteristics associate luxury restaurants with overall good
service quality. Consumers who desire
uniqueness had more unfavorable attitudes
toward luxury restaurants than did middle
and high income populations. They also
weakly associate luxury restaurants with
overall good service quality.
Lin (2010) Experimental Matching color and Pleasure; Arousal N/A The interactive effect of Gestalt versus non-
research. music to hotel bars Gestalt and AST on individual’s pleasure and
255 subjects and hotel guest arousal are both positive and statistically
rooms (i.e., Gestalt significant. As individual’s AST increases, both
versus Non-Gestalt the arousal score and pleasure score
situations); arousal- increased in Gestalt situations (dynamic bar
seeking tendency and tranquil guest room) and decreased in
(AST) non-Gestalt situations (tranquil bar and
dynamic guest room).
Lin & Liang (2011) Intercept field survey Social environment; Customer emotion; N/A Both social and physical environments have a
research in various Physical satisfaction; positive influence on customer emotion and
fashion apparel retail environment behavioral intentions satisfaction, which in turn affect behavioral
stores; intentions. The physical environment
296 pairs of exhibited more influence on customer
employees and
customers emotion and satisfaction than the social
participated. environment.
Lin & Worthley Experimental Individual Pleasure, Arousal, Servicescape Gestalt versus non-Gestalt servicescape
(2012) research: combined personality traits Satisfaction, (i.e., Gestalt situations moderated the relationship
colors and music to (i.e., Arousal- Approach/ avoidance vs. non- between arousal seeking tendency and
form differential seeking tendency behaviors Gestalt) emotions. Pleasure was found to enhance
servicescape and the Big Five satisfaction; satisfaction was found to
situations. Personality Traits) enhance approach-avoidance behaviors.
261 participants However, this study demonstrated the
weaker nature of arousal in the model.
Miles, Miles, & Survey research Firm servicescape Customer satisfaction Firm The results support the assertion that firm
Cannon (2012) Total sample: 1,287 characteristics competitive competitive strategy has an impact on the
463 (Electronics strategy strength of the relationship between
retailing) customer satisfaction and servicescape
490 (general characteristics. In addition, to payoff for
merchandising investment in physical surroundings differs
retailing) depending on the firm's competitive strategy.
334 (prepared foods)
Ponnam & Balaji Field survey research. Visitation motives; Evaluation of N/A The attribute importance varied across the
(2014) 316 patrons of casual restaurant restaurant visitation motives.
dining restaurants in attributes experience
India.
Ryu, Lee, & Kim Field survey research The quality of Customer perceived N/A The quality of the physical environment, food,
(2010) at an upscale Chinese physical value; customer and service were significant determinants of
restaurant. 300 environment; satisfaction; restaurant image. The quality of the physical
responses were Restaurant image; behavioral intentions environment and food were significant
analyzed. predictors of customer perceived value.
Siu, Wan, & Dong Two stage: The servicescape Customers’ beliefs Perceived- Servicescape elements positively influence
(2012) -Qualitative-in-depth about servicescape sacrifice; customers’ perceived quality of the service,
interviews quality, affect, value-for- their affect, satisfaction, and desire to stay.
-Quantitative survey satisfaction, and money Value-for-money considerations enhance the
research: Total of 368 desire to stay positive impact customer satisfaction has on
subjects customers’ desire to stay in convention
centers. Customers’ perceived level of
sacrifice has a direct effect on their desire to
stay.
Walsh, Shiu, Field survey Store-related Customer Arousal, Store-related cognitions differentially affect
Hassan, researchSample: 274 cognitions: (music satisfaction, loyalty Pleasure emotions, satisfaction, and loyalty.The two
Michaelidou, & Customers in four & aroma); store- emotions of arousal and pleasure
Beatty (2011) coffee shops of a choice criteria: differentially mediate the relationships
major chain (merchandise between store-related cognitions and
quality perceptions, customer outcomes (i.e., satisfaction and
service quality loyalty).
perceptions, &
price perceptions)
Wardono, Hibino, Experimental Defined by Perceived sociability, N/A The results showed that the restaurant with
& Koyama (2012) method; Qualitative emotion, and monochromatic colors, dim lighting and plain
162 senior college approach: Interior behavior related to decors yielded a statistically significant
students colors; lighting; social dining difference in the perceived sociability,
decors emotion and behavior related to dining with
almost any other interior conditions in
romantic dining, as opposed to casual dining.
Wong & Prentice Survey research Individual Impulse gambling; Moderator: Casino service environment explains
(2015) conducted in Macao perception of the Gambling behaviors Organizational significant variance in impulsive gambling
casinos. service (freq. of visit, length service which subsequently influences gambling
1923 subjects in 57 environment of stay, total environment behaviors. Impulsive gambling shows partial
casinos (ambient condition, spending) Mediator: and full mediation effects between service
space function, Impulse environment factors and gambling behaviors.
signs, symbols, and gambling Casino service environment on an
artifacts) organizational level also moderates the
linkage between individual perception of
service environment, impulsive gambling and
gambling behaviors.
Note: * Due to space limitations, more information is available from the author by request.

Visual Servicescape Aesthetics and Consumer Experience

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Visual Servicescape Aesthetics and Consumer Experience

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Services Marketing

Effects of visual servicescape aesthetics comprehension and appreciation on consumer experience

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Effects of Visual Servicescape Aesthetics Comprehension and Appreciation on

A hotel lobby is chosen as the servicescape to measure individuals’ VSACA because it

Turley and Milliman (2000) provided a comprehensive literature review of studies in

Conceptual Development and Theoretical Framework

that psychological processing of an event—simultaneous cognitive and affective processing of

Visual servicescape aesthetic comprehension and appreciation (VSACA)

Emotion and Cognition

H1a: Individuals’ VSACA has a significant direct effect on PPEQ.

VSACA and Emotions

Overall satisfaction can be defined as a post-consumption evaluative judgment

individual’s positive VSACA of a hotel lobby. It is a customers’ fulfillment response (Oliver,

----INSERT Tables 2 and 3 HERE----

Willingness to pay more is measured on a 7-point Likert scale (1=Strongly disagree to

Structural model and model testing

---INSERT TABLES 4 and 5 HERE---

Aesthetics comprehension entails the overall level of appreciation or significance in a

Limitations and Future Research

Bruyn, S.T. (n.d.). http://www.2.bc.edu/~bruyn/Theoretical.html. (Retrieved on July 2, 2015).

Cafferata, P. and Tybout, A. (1989), Cognitive and affective responses to advertising,

Countryman, and Jang, S. (2006), “The effects of atmospheric elements on customer

Erevelles, S. and Leavitt, C. (1992), “A comparison of current models of consumer

Forty, A. (1986), Objects of Desire. Pantheon Books, New York, NY.

Gilbert, G.R. and Veloutsou (2006), “A cross-industry comparison of customer satisfaction”,

Halstead, D. (1989), “Expectations and disconfirmation beliefs as predictors of customer

Hamilton, V.L. (2004), “Identification as a challenge to dual-process theories of persuasion”, in

select a low-cost airline”, Tourism Management, Vol. 37, pp. 125-135.

Heck, R. (2007), “Examining the relationship between teacher quality as an organizational

Ittleson, W.H. (1973), “Environment perception and contemporary perceptual theory”, in

Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 485-494.

Leisen, B. and Vance, C. (2001), “Cross-national assessment of service quality in the

McGuire, L. (1999), Australian services marketing and management, MacMillan, Melbourne.

Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, McGraw-Hill,

development, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY.

Russell, J. and Pratt, G. (1980), “A description of the affective quality attributed to

Valdez, P. and Mehrabian, A. (1994), “Effects of color on emotions”, Journal of Experimental

Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68, pp. 2012-2108.

Yuksel, A. and Remmington, M. (1998), “Customer satisfaction measurement”, Cornell Hotel

Figure 1a. Hypothesized Research Model: Direct effects

*Note: Results of independent samples t-tests indicated Boutique and

of other things I already own.

Table 3. Inter-Correlations Among Model Variables

Hypothesized Relationship Estimate Hypothesis Supported

H1a: VSACA PPEQ 0.514** Yes

H1b: VSACA PLEASURE 0.591** Yes

H1c: VSACA AROUSAL 0.603** Yes

H2a: PPEQ SATISFY 0.276* Yes

H2b: PLEAS SATISFY 0.725** Yes

H2c: AROUSAL SATISFY 0.069 No

H3: SATISFY WTOPAY 0.348** Yes

Indirect (Mediation) Effects

H4a: VSACA PPEQ SATISFY 0.142** Yes

H4b: VSACA PLEAS SATISFY 0.429** Yes

H4c: VSACA AROUS SATISFY 0.041 No

5. This hotel lobby servicescape is attractive: 17.5% 75.9%

(2015) staging and the same effect on WOM and revisiting.

334 (prepared foods)

You might also like