See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/235303164

The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction: The moderation of

service contexts

Article  in  Journal of Services Marketing · June 2006

DOI: 10.1108/08876040610674562

CITATIONS READS
169 1,546

2 authors, including:

Ying Jiang
Ontario Tech University
11 PUBLICATIONS   306 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Smart Toys View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ying Jiang on 16 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The impact of affect on service quality and
satisfaction: the moderation of service contexts
Ying Jiang
Department of Marketing, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA, and
Cheng Lu Wang
Department of Marketing and International Business, University of New Haven, West Haven, Connecticut, USA

Abstract
Purpose – As an alternative explanation of incongruent findings in the literature, the purpose of the present study is to introduce the concept of
hedonic versus utilitarian service context as a moderating variable in the relationship between the affect (pleasure and arousal) and perceived service
quality and satisfaction.
Design/methodology/approach – A consumer survey was conducted to test moderation hypotheses, which was analyzed with hierarchical
regression equations.
Findings – The results show that pleasure had stronger influences on perceived service quality and satisfaction in the hedonic service context than in
the utilitarian service context. Arousal is found to influence perceived service quality and satisfaction in the hedonic service context but not in the
utilitarian service context.
Research limitations/implications – It is likely that in hedonic related services, consumers will often use some affective criteria to evaluate service
quality, in addition to the traditional service quality measures.
Practical implications – Companies providing hedonic services should modify the content of their services or add novelty stimulus into their services
from time to time in order to evoke the most desired consumer emotions and enhance satisfaction.
Originality/value – The proposed moderating effect of service contexts improved predictions and explanations of the theoretical relationship between
affect and perceived service quality/satisfaction. It specifies the conditions under which affect will or will not impact perceived service quality and
satisfaction.

Keywords Customer services quality, Customer satisfaction, Utilitarianism

Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers can be found at
the end of this article.
It is now generally agreed that affect is an important aspect of
consumption and it will influence quality evaluation and
satisfaction (e.g. Bagozzi et al., 1999; Erevelles, 1998; Mano
and Oliver, 1993; Westbrook, 1987; Westbrook and Oliver,
1991). In consumer research, Russell’s (1980) circumplex
model of affect has been widely used and regarded as having
advantages for conceptualizing service experiences over
discrete emotion models (Bitner, 1992; Donovan and
Rossiter, 1982; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999; Wirtz et al.,
2000). Russell (1979, 1980) proposes that pleasant-
unpleasant and arousing-sleepy are two primary dimensions
of affect. He suggests that all emotions apart from pleasure
and arousal emerge as different combinations of these two
dimensions. Evidence from consumer research shows that
pleasure and arousal dimensions are experienced by
consumers during or after the consumption of product/
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0887-6045.htm
Journal of Services Marketing
20/4 (2006) 211– 218
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0887-6045]
[DOI 10.1108/08876040610674562]
services (Bitner, 1992; Darden and Babin, 1994; Hui and
Bateson, 1991; Hendrix et al., 1979; Kempf, 1999; Mano,
1996; Mehrabian and Wixen, 1986; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999;
Wirtz et al., 2000).
However, the literature shows that existing studies yielded
quite different findings and incongruent conclusions
regarding the relationship between affect (pleasure and
arousal) and quality evaluation and/or satisfaction. For
instance, Oliver’s (1994) study in a health care service
context has shown that there is no significant correlation
between perceived service quality and positive/negative affect.
Oliver (1993a) suggests that quality is not affect-based, thus
distinguishing quality from satisfaction, which to some extent
is affect-based. However, Compeau et al. (1998) have
demonstrated that participants’ affective responses have a
positive effect on their product quality judgments.
Specifically, participants with more positive affective
responses judge the quality to be higher. Darden and Babin
(1994) have also found that consumer evaluation of a retail
store is not only influenced by its functional quality but is also
influenced by its “emotional-induced quality” (Russell and
Pratt, 1980, p. 312) that consumers attribute to the retail
setting.
More conflicting results have been reported regarding the
effect of arousal. Mano and Oliver’s (1993) study has
Authors equally contributed to the manuscript.

211
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang
indicated that satisfaction is an increased function of pleasure
but not of arousal. On the other hand, Kempf’s (1999) study
has shown that consumers’ evaluations of games are
significantly influenced by their arousal level. Mehrabian
and Wixen (1986) have reported that consumers show a
stronger preference for a video game if they feel more pleasure
and/or higher arousal. Darden and Babin (1994) have shown
that perceived store image or quality is associated both with
pleasure and arousal. Similarly, research has also found a
positive relationship between consumer purchasing intention
and feelings of pleasure/arousal derived from retail
environment (Donovan and Rossiter, 1982; Sherman and
Smith, 1987). Lately, Wirtz et al. (2000) has found that
arousal enhances the impact of pleasure on satisfaction only
when the consumer desires to feel excited. Therefore, we
propose that affect will have different impacts on consumers’
quality evaluation and satisfaction, depending on the hedonic
or utilitarian nature of products/services. The objective of this
research is to resolve the incongruence in the literature by
introducing service context (hedonic versus utilitarian) as a
moderating variable.
Hedonic versus utilitarian services
Research in consumer behavior has differentiated hedonic
consumption from utilitarian consumption (Dhar and
Wertenbroch, 2000; Kempf, 1999). Generally, hedonic
consumption designates those facets of consumer behavior
that relate to the multi-sensory, fantasy and emotive aspects of
one’s experience with products, whereas utilitarian
consumption is focused on the functional consequence of
consumption. It has been proposed that affect may provide a
richer understanding of the experiential aspects of
consumption and such consumption emotion may even
serve as a primary motivator for purchase (Batra and Ahtola,
1991; Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982; Holbrook and
Hirschman, 1982; Kempf, 1999; Wang et al., 2000).
A further examination of the research contexts of previous
studies has revealed that those seemingly contradictory findings
may be due to different product/service contexts in which the
research was conducted. For instance, the impact of pleasure on
quality evaluation or arousal on satisfaction has been mostly
found in certain products/services, such as ice cream (Compeau
et al., 1998), consumer games (Kempf, 1999; Mehrabian and
Wixen, 1986), and retail environments (Darden and Babin,
1994; Donovan and Rossiter, 1982; Sherman and Smith,
1987). In these products/services, the hedonic aspect of
consumption is typically more important and affective
responses may overwhelm cognitive responses. On the other
hand, the impacts of pleasure on perceived quality and arousal
on satisfaction has been less observed in other products/
services, such as health care (Oliver, 1994), a grammar checker
(Kempf, 1999), and PC-based home banking (Wirtz and
Bateson, 1999). In these products/services, the utilitarian or
functional aspect of consumption is more important and
rational decision is dominant over emotional responses.
Therefore, we propose that affect will have different impacts
on consumers’ quality evaluation and satisfaction, depending on
the hedonic or utilitarian products/services.
The current study investigates the impact of affect on
perceived quality and satisfaction in both hedonic and
utilitarian service contexts. Hedonic services provide
consumers with hedonic values such as excitement and
212
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218
playfulness (e.g., theme parks, vacation resorts, and
nightclubs). Utilitarian services, on the other hand, provide
consumers with certain functional utilities or solve practical
problems, such as car repairing, tax return filing, banking,
and health care. According to Batra and Ahtola (1991),
consumers’ evaluation of the hedonic component of the
service is based on the assessment of how much pleasure they
get, whereas the evaluation of the utilitarian component is
based on the assessment about the instrumental utility the
service’s functional attributes provide. The distinction of
hedonic versus utilitarian services will help to predict and
explain the different impact of affect on perceived service
quality and satisfaction. It may even clarify the condition
under which each dimension of affect will exert its influence.
Research hypotheses
According to the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm,
consumers often form expectations of quality. Perceived
quality when compared with quality expectations results in
disconfirmation of quality. Quality disconfirmation together
with other disconfirmations will finally influence satisfaction
(Oliver, 1993b). Hence, satisfaction can result from both
quality-related and non quality-related dimensions (Garland
and Westbrook, 1989; Singh, 1991). Consumers’ affect
experienced in service consumption can be a non-quality
dimension of service and may have direct or indirect impacts
on perceived service quality and satisfaction. In this study, we
examine how affect (pleasure and arousal) influence perceived
service quality and satisfaction in hedonic versus utilitarian
service contexts.
Pleasure and perceived service quality
Perceived service quality is defined as consumers’ judgment
about an entity’s overall excellence or superiority
(Parasuraman et al., 1988). It is the evaluation of the service
performance consumers received according to whether it
meets certain standards. When consumers are doing such
evaluations, they may refer to their feelings as well as their
cognition in the service consumption process. The feeling of
pleasure may have a positive influence on the evaluation of
whether the service meets certain standards or whether it has
the ability to satisfy the needs.
Researchers suggest that the affect-quality varies across
situations (Russell and Pratt, 1980). In addition, consumers’
affective expectations during service consumption are also
situation specific (Wirtz et al., 2000). Pham (1998) has found
that decision makers are more likely to rely on “How-do-I-
feel-it?” heuristics when they have hedonic rather than
instrumental motives. As such, people do not always make
evaluations based on product/service attributes; rather they
often use heuristics to make evaluations, such as their feelings
or the most available or vivid memory. In hedonic service
contexts, consumers may be more likely to store their feelings
during the consumption experiences into their memory,
which might be easily recalled. Meanwhile, consumers use
hedonic services for enjoyment purposes and evaluate service
quality in terms of how much pleasure they have received.
Hence, pleasure will be more pronounced in the quality
evaluation of hedonic services than utilitarian services. On the
contrary, consumers in utilitarian service contexts might be
more likely to store their thoughts of service attributes into
memory. Therefore, the utilitarian values will have a more
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang
critical role in evaluating the quality of utilitarian services. As
such, we hypothesize that:
H1. The service context will moderate the effect of pleasure
on perceived service quality, showing that the
relationship between pleasure and perceived service
quality will be stronger in hedonic contexts than in
utilitarian contexts.
Pleasure and satisfaction
Whereas early models of consumer satisfaction mainly
focused on cognitive processes, more recent research has
stressed that affect plays an important role in satisfaction
(Erevelles, 1998; Mano and Oliver, 1993; Nyer, 1997).
Satisfaction, according to Oliver (1997), is a consumer
judgment that a product or service provides a pleasurable
level of consumption-related fulfillment. As such, customer
satisfaction is closely associated with customers’ affective
responses to service. The influences of pleasantness-
unpleasantness (positive and negative affect) on satisfaction
have been well documented in the literature (Oliver, 1993a,
1994; Mano and Oliver, 1993; Westbrook, 1987; Wirtz and
Bateson, 1999). However, existing studies failed to examine
the relationship between pleasure and satisfaction across
hedonic and utilitarian service contexts. Given that emotional
gratification is a major consumption motive in hedonic service
contexts and consumers often form affective expectations
regarding particular affect they would experience, the actual
pleasure they receive in service consumptions will directly
influence their satisfaction. However, in utilitarian contexts,
given that task fulfillment is the major consideration,
consumers would not expect pleasure as a result of service
consumption. Consequently, pleasure will have less impact on
satisfaction. Thus, we hypothesize that:
H2. The service context will moderate the effect of pleasure
on satisfaction, showing that the relationship between
pleasure and satisfaction will be stronger in hedonic
contexts than in utilitarian contexts.
Arousal and perceived service quality
The effect of arousal on perceived service quality has been
inadequately studied, because service research has been
largely focused on utilitarian service contexts. Consumers
often seek different arousal levels while consuming different
services. Consumers use the utilitarian service mainly for its
functional values rather than its sensational stimulation.
Thus, arousal, the degree of activation, is not a component
that consumers would usually expect to experience when
consuming utilitarian services. Hence, consumers’ evaluations
of utilitarian service quality are less likely to rely on their
arousal levels.
On the other hand, during the consumption of hedonic
services, especially those risky activities and horror movies,
consumers often seek excitement (the combination of arousal
and pleasantness) and even fear or horror (the combination of
arousal and unpleasantness). Sensory experience has been
demonstrated to inject positive influence on product
evaluation when seeking emotional stimulation is an
important goal of consumption (Cohen and Areni, 1991). A
growing body of research evidence indicates that consumers
have a strong motivation to maintain an optimum level of
stimulation, which is a person’s preferred amount of
physiological activation or arousal (Steenkamp and
213
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218
Baumgartner, 1992). Logically, when consumers evaluate
the quality of hedonic services they have received, they will
also refer to their arousal level as a critical cue to determine
whether the service meet their affective expectations. Thus,
we hypothesize that:
H3. Service context will moderate the effect of arousal on
perceived service quality, showing that arousal will
influence perceived service quality in hedonic contexts
but not in utilitarian contexts.
Arousal and satisfaction
Consumers using utilitarian services will generally feel
satisfied if their tasks have been fulfilled up to their
expectations. Hence, the level of arousal will not be
significantly related to satisfaction, as demonstrated in
previous studies (Mano and Oliver, 1993; Wirtz and
Bateson, 1999). However, consumers using hedonic services
usually experience the affective gratification from sensory
attributes (Batra and Ahtola, 1991). Leisure pursuits that are
novel, complex, and risky can raise consumers’ arousal levels,
which produce pleasurable feelings (Hendrix et al., 1979) and
enhance satisfaction (Wirtz et al., 2000). For instance, the
arousal states elicited from risky consumption experiences
such as skydiving and white-water river rafting (Celsi et al.,
1993; Arnould and Price, 1993) magnifies the pleasure
experience and eventually leads to satisfaction. As such, we
expect that arousal states will be significantly related to
satisfaction in hedonic service contexts.
H4. The service context will moderate the effect of arousal
on satisfaction, showing that arousal will affect
satisfaction in hedonic contexts but not in utilitarian
contexts.
Research methods
Pretest
To effectively examine the difference of consumption
experience in hedonic and utilitarian services, we need to
identify the prototype hedonic and utilitarian services that can
be used in the study. Hence, a pretest was conducted. A total
of 26 undergraduate students from a university in Hong Kong
were recruited to participate in two focus groups on a
voluntary basis. Participants were briefed about the
differences between hedonic and utilitarian services. Then,
they were asked to think out as many hedonic and/or
utilitarian services as possible. They also discussed the nature
of these services and how frequently they patronage these
services. Finally, karaoke and banking were selected, given
that majority of the participants from the focus groups agreed
that these two services were typical hedonic and utilitarian
services that college students in Hong Kong most frequently
patronized. Karaoke is a very popular entertainment with an
affordable price for college students and the general public in
Hong Kong. In order to balance the two services in aspects
other than the hedonic/utilitarian nature, such as duration of
time and encounter with the service employees, banking
service in the current study required that participants had
come down to the branch office and encountered with the
service employees, which excluded ATM and online banking
services. There were several major banks’ branch offices on or
near campus and students could do their bank transactions
conveniently and frequently.
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction Journal of Services Marketing
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218

Data collection Results

In order to achieve comparable results in both hedonic and
utilitarian service contexts, a quota sampling method was All hypothesized moderating effects were tested using
used and an effort was made to collect equal amount of hierarchical regression equations. The significance of the
questionnaires in both service contexts. Self-administered interaction term and R2 change attributable to the inclusion of
questionnaires containing all the measures were given to 350 the interaction effect were assessed (Aiken and West, 1991;
undergraduate students attending classes in a Hong Kong Jaccard et al., 1990). Because the moderator, service context,
university and 303 questionnaires were usable (usable rate: was a categorical variable, it was coded as a dummy variable
86.6 percent). Among 303 usable questionnaires, 151 were before entering the regression model (Jaccard et al., 1990).
completed based on karaoke consumption experience and 152 Table I summarizes the results.
were completed based on banking experience. Males and
The impact of pleasure on perceived service quality and
females were evenly distributed in the two contexts.
The questionnaire began with a screening question asking satisfaction
participants whether they had patronized a karaoke or H1 and H2, which posit that the relationship between
banking (excluding online banking and ATM) service in the pleasure and perceived service quality (satisfaction) is
last month. Only those who had patronized either of these two stronger in the hedonic service context than in the
services in the last month were asked to continue with the utilitarian service context, were tested as follows. First,
questionnaire and answer all the questions based on that perceived service quality (satisfaction) was regressed on
particular service consumption experience. Each participant pleasure and service contexts, which produced R2 of 0.231
only selected one service context, i.e. either karaoke or (service quality) and 0.227 (satisfaction), respectively.
banking. Hence, consumption experience in both hedonic Second, the product of pleasure and service contexts was
and utilitarian service contexts was collected. The same data entered in the regression model, which produced R2 values of
collection method has been used in some similar studies (e.g. 0.25 (service quality) and 0.26 (satisfaction), respectively.
Mano and Oliver, 1993; Oliver, 1994). The increase in R2 was 0.019 for service quality and 0.031 for
satisfaction, which were statistically significant (p , 0:01) in
Measures both cases, supporting the hypothesized interaction effects.
Affect Further analysis of the interactions by examining the slopes of
Affect measures were adapted from Russell and Pratt’s (1980) pleasure on perceived service quality (satisfaction) in hedonic
scale, which has been demonstrated to have discriminant and and utilitarian service contexts revealed that the impact of
external validity (Holbrook, 1986; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999). pleasure on perceived service quality (satisfaction) was
The scale has also been shown to have a “pan-cultural” nature stronger in the hedonic context than in the utilitarian
(Russell, 1983, 1991; Russell et al. 1989; Russell and Sato, context (see Table II for results of separate regression
1995). Two subscales – pleasant and arousing – were used in analysis results). As such, both H1 and H2 were supported.
this study. A few items, such as “beautiful” and “pretty” were
dropped because the original scale was used to measure the The impact of arousal on perceived service quality and
affective response to environment. Also, one item satisfaction
(“delighted”) was dropped to avoid overlapping with a same H3 and H4, which state that arousal influences perceived
item in the “satisfaction” scale. Participants were asked to service quality (satisfaction) in the hedonic context but not in
respond to a series of adjectives to describe the feelings they the utilitarian context, were tested in the same way. The first
experienced during the service consumption on a seven-point equation including arousal and service context as predictor
scale, ranging from 1 ¼ “not at all” to 7 ¼ “very much”.
Cronbach’s alpha was 0.85 for arousal, and 0.73 for pleasure. Table I Result of testing the interaction effect of pleasure/arousal and
Perceived service quality service context
The purpose of this study is to examine whether affect will Step Regression equation b R2 DR2
influence consumers’ general evaluation of the service quality
of a particular consumption experience rather than to Dependent measure: service quality
examine its effect on some specific service quality Pleasure 0.318 * *
dimensions. Hence, the overall service quality measurement, 1 Service context 0.333 * * 0.231 0.231 * *
instead of specific service quality dimensions, was used here. 2 (Pleasure £ Service context) ( 2 0.755) * 0.250 0.019 *
The overall service quality was measured by a two-item scale Arousal 0.100
adopted from Teas (1993). Participants were asked to 1 Service context 0.401 * * 0.139 0.139 * *
evaluate the quality of the service (banking or karaoke) they 2 (Arousal £ Service context) ( 2 0.640) * * 0.170 0.031 * *
received within a month on a seven-point scale, with higher
scores indicating higher perceived service quality. Cronbach’s Dependent measure: satisfaction
alpha for the scale was 0.79. Pleasure 0.378 * *
1 Service context 0.258 * * 0.227 0.227 * *
Satisfaction
Since consumer satisfaction in this study is encounter-specific 2 (Pleasure £ Service context) ( 2 0.964) * * 0.258 0.031 * *
judgments, which is consumer’s satisfaction/dissatisfaction with Arousal 0.056
a discrete service encounter (Bitner and Hubbert, 1994; Oliver, 1 Service context 0.314 * * 0.088 0.088 * *
1997), three seven-point items were adopted from Bitner and 2 (Arousal £ Service context) ( 2 0.681) * * 0.122 0.034 * *
Hubbert (1994) to measure satisfaction based on a specific Notes: *p , 0:01; * *p , 0:001
transaction. Cronbach’s alpha for the satisfaction was 0.79.

214
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang
Table II Regression coefficients showing the significance of the effect
of pleasure on perceived service quality and satisfaction
Perceived service quality Satisfaction
Karaoke Banking Karaoke Banking
(hedonic) (utilitarian) (hedonic) (utilitarian)
Pleasure 0.471 * * 0.226 * * 0.568 * * 0.247 * *
Notes: *p , 0:01; * *p , 0:001
variables resulted in R2 values of 0.139 for perceived service
quality and 0.085 for satisfaction respectively. When the
product term of arousal and service context was entered in the
equation, R2 values increased to 0.170 (service quality) and
0.122 (satisfaction), respectively. The R2 changes were 0.031
(service quality) and 0.033 (satisfaction), and both were
statistically significant (p , 0:001), which supported the
interaction hypotheses. The simple slope analysis of arousal
on perceived service quality (satisfaction) by separate
regression analysis showed that the coefficient of arousal
was not significant in the utilitarian service context but
statistically significant in the hedonic service context (see
Table III for results of separate regressions). As such, both H3
and H4 were supported.
Discussion
Summary and contributions
Although recent research has acknowledged the role of affect in
perceived service quality and satisfaction, the literature fails to
specify the conditions under which different dimensions of
affect will or will not influence service quality evaluation and
satisfaction. As noted by Sheth et al. (1988), the relationships
among the theoretical concepts should be specified to clearly
delimit the hypotheses. Our proposed moderating effect of
service context improves the predictions and explanations of the
theoretical relationship between affect and perceived service
quality/satisfaction. Our findings provide an explanation for
inconsistent results reported in previous studies. We have
demonstrated that the impact of both pleasure and arousal on
perceived service quality and satisfaction depends upon the
hedonic or utilitarian service context. In particular, pleasure
was found to have stronger influences on perceived service
quality and satisfaction in the hedonic service context than in
the utilitarian service context. Arousal was found to influence
perceived service quality and satisfaction only in the hedonic
service context but not in the utilitarian service context.
Although quality evaluation has been regarded as more
objective and will be less likely influenced by affect (Oliver,
1994), our findings indicated that affect influences quality
evaluation in hedonic service contexts. Such an argument is
Table III Regression coefficients showing the significance of the effect
of arousal on perceived service quality and satisfaction
Perceived service quality Satisfaction
Karaoke Banking Karaoke Banking
(hedonic) (utilitarian) (hedonic) (utilitarian)
Arousal 0.292 * 20.058 0.264 * 20.112
Notes: *p , 0:001
215
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218
consistent with research findings in social judgment studies,
which show that, people often use heuristics to save mental
efforts for many judgments (Hastie and Dawes, 2001).
Availability of memories, biased samples stored in memory,
and biased sampling from memory will lead people to arrive at
subjective judgment that may not be rational or accurate
(Hastie and Dawes, 2001). Likewise, Mattila (1998) has
found that inefficient information processors might be subject
to biased evaluations caused by their mood states at the
information-encoding stages. Those findings help to explain
why affect has more impacts on quality evaluation in hedonic
service contexts than in utilitarian service contexts.
Our findings also contribute to the service quality literature,
which is mainly focused on utilitarian services. In utilitarian
service contexts, consumers’ evaluation of service quality is
largely rational judgments of the functional utilities that services
provide. Researchers have shown that traditional measures of
service quality, such as reliability, empathy, assurance, and
responsiveness may only measure the cognitive evaluations of
service quality, and may not be applicable to leisure services,
which are consumed for hedonic purposes and are evaluated in
terms of feelings (Taylor et al., 1993; Wakefield and Blodgett,
1999). It is likely that in hedonic service contexts, consumers
often unconsciously use other criteria to evaluate service quality.
For example, a consumer watching comedian performance may
evaluate the quality based on how much laughing is elicited by
the comedian; a consumer participating parachute jumping may
evaluate the quality based on how much excitement is
experienced; and a consumer participating a Halloween party
may even judge the quality based on how much fear and horror
he felt. Therefore, differentiating hedonic service contexts from
utilitarian ones will help to improve service quality measures by
including affect dimensions.
Managerial implications
Most leisure, entertainment, and luxury services are consumed
mainly for feelings of gratification (Hirschman and Holbrook,
1982). The service consumption experience per se can be
regarded as the major output of service organizations (Bitner,
1990). Maintaining and/or enhancing customer satisfaction are
critical for successful marketing and this research reveals that
consumers’ subjective evaluation of service quality and
satisfaction are based on how pleasure and active they are
during the service consumption experience. Managerial
implications from previous research have emphasized the
need to create pleasant service environments (e.g. Wirtz et al.,
2000). However, this study centers on how to make consumers
emotionally aroused in hedonic services. Hence, companies
providing these services should make consumers feel activated
and excited, as well as pleasure and happy.
Service firms can manage consumers’ consumption
emotions by controlling over the service process that
produces the consumption experience (Wirtz and Bateson,
1999). Many popular leisure activities often induce higher
arousal levels, such as in parachute jumping, white-water
rafting, and casino gambling. Indeed, even the desire to
attend such events can be influenced by the need for arousal.
Companies providing hedonic services should modify the
content of their services and/or add novelty stimulus into their
services from time to time so as to evoke the most desired
consumer emotions (Nyer, 1997) and keep consumers
interested and/or bring surprise to consumers, because
consumers will be excited when experiencing novelties. If
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang
consumers feel bored in a hedonic service context, their
perceived service quality and satisfaction will be lower than
when they can experience high levels of arousal and pleasure.
It is generally agreed that companies have a good opportunity
to convert satisfied customers into loyal customers. However,
hedonic service providers should not only maintaining the
same service level, they should also particularly monitor loyal
customers’ activation/arousal level to make them feel that they
can always discover more every time they patronize the
service.
Many hedonic services involving extended stay in the
service and hence environmental factors can also influence the
level of consumers’ arousal or excitement. Therefore, the
physical environment, such as layout design, equipment,
facilities, seat, and ambience, is regarded as one of the critical
factors to monitor emotional arousal (Wakefield and Blodgett,
1994, 1999; Wakefield and Baker, 1998; Zeithaml and Bitner,
2000). Adding new technology/equipment, novelty features,
surprising stimuli, and sensory cues, such as color and
lighting, background music and scents will highlight the
arousal level and pleasant feelings in a service context (Wirtz
et al. 2000). Companies should also make consumers feel
comfortable while introducing novelties, because
uncomfortable feelings will decrease the level of pleasure.
Guidance and explanation of these novelties should be given
in detail and in an easy-to-understand manner, or consumers
will get confused and thus feel less happy.
In addition, companies should also manage consumers’
expected arousal level (Wirtz et al., 2000). If the expectation is
too high, the discrepancy between the actual arousal level and
the expectation will result in lower perceived quality and lower
satisfaction. Hence, external communications, such as
advertising, should be managed at the optimal level to
attract customers, but not over promising the excitement that
consumers are going to have.
Finally, in utilitarian service contexts, pleasure was also
found to influence the subjective evaluation of service quality
and satisfaction. Accordingly, managers of these services
should first delicately design the service to meet consumers’
functional needs. Meanwhile, the physical environment
should also be well designed to make consumers feel
comfortable and pleasant, but avoid undesirable noise. For
example, some laundries are now proving music, movies, and
coffee for their customers.
References
Aiken, L. and West, S.G. (1991), Multiple Regression: Testing
and Interpreting Interactions, Sage Publications, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Arnould, E.J. and Price, L.L. (1993), “River magic:
extraordinary experience and the extended service
encounter”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, June,
pp. 24-45.
Batra, R. and Ahtola, O.T. (1991), “Measuring the hedonic
and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes”, Marketing
Letters, Vol. 2, April, pp. 159-70.
Bitner, M.J. (1990), “Evaluating service encounters:
the effects of physical surroundings and employee
responses”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, April, pp. 69-82.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), “Servicescapes: the impact of physical
surroundings on customers and employees”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 56, April, pp. 57-71.
216
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218
Bitner, M.J. and Hubbert, A.R. (1994), “Encounter
satisfaction versus overall satisfaction versus quality: the
customer’s voice”, Service Quality: New Direction in the
Theory and Practice, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
CA, pp. 72-94.
Celsi, R.L., Randall, D.R. and Leigh, T.W. (1993), “An
exploration of high risk leisure consumption through
skydiving”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, June,
pp. 1-23.
Cohen, J.B. and Areni, C.S. (1991), “Affect and consumer
behavior”, in Robertson, A. and Kassarjian, H. (Eds),
Handbook of Consumer Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, pp. 188-240.
Compeau, L.D., Grewal, D. and Monroe, K.B. (1998), “Role
of prior affect and sensory cues on consumers’ affective and
cognitive responses and overall perceptions of quality”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 42, July, pp. 295-308.
Darden, W.R. and Babin, B.J. (1994), “Exploring the concept
of affective quality: expanding the concept of retail
personality”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 29,
February, pp. 101-9.
Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2000), “Consumer choice
between hedonic and utilitarian goods”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 37, February, pp. 60-71.
Donovan, R.J. and Rossiter, J.R. (1982), “Store atmospheric:
an environmental psychology approach”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 58, Spring, pp. 34-57.
Erevelles, S. (1998), “The role of affect in marketing”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 42, July, pp. 199-215.
Garland, B.C. and Westbrook, R.A. (1989), “An exploration
of client satisfaction in a nonprofit context”, Journal of
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 17, Fall, pp. 297-303.
Hastie, R. and Dawes, R.M. (2001), Rational Choice in an
Uncertain World: The Psychology of Judgment and Decision
Making, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hendrix, P., Kinnear, T. and Taylor, J. (1979), “The
allocation of time by consumers”, in Wilkie, V.W. (Ed.),
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 14, Association for
Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 38-44.
Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1982), “Hedonic
consumption: emerging concepts, methods and
propositions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46, Summer,
pp. 92-101.
Holbrook, M.B. (1986), “Emotion in the consumption
experience: toward a new model of the human
consumer”, in Peterson, R.A., Hoyer, W.D. and Wilson,
W.R. (Eds), Role of Affects in Consumer Behavior, Lexington
Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 17-52.
Holbrook, M.B. and Hirschman, E.C. (1982), “The
experience aspects of consumption: consumer fantasies,
feelings, and fun”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9,
September, pp. 132-40.
Hui, M. and Bateson, J.E.G. (1991), “Perceived control and
the effects of crowding and consumer choice on the service
experience”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18,
September, pp. 174-84.
Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R. and Wan, C.L. (1990), Interaction
Effects in Multiple Regression, Sage Publications, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Kempf, D. (1999), “Attitude formation from product trial:
distinct roles of cognition and affect for hedonic and
functional products”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 16,
January, pp. 35-50.
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang
Mano, H. (1996), “Assessing emotional reactions to TV ads:
a replication and extension with a brief adjective checklist”,
in Corfman, K. and Lynch, J. (Eds), Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 23, Association for Consumer Research,
Provo, UT, pp. 63-9.
Mano, H. and Oliver, R.L. (1993), “Assessing the
dimensionality and structure of the consumption
experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction”, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, December, pp. 451-66.
Mattila, A. (1998), “An examination of consumers’ use of
heuristic cues in making satisfaction judgments”, Psychology
and Marketing, Vol. 15, August, pp. 477-501.
Mehrabian, A. and Wixen, W.J. (1986), “Preferences for
individual video games as a function of their emotional
effects on players”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 3-15.
Nyer, P.U. (1997), “A study of the relationships between
cognitive appraisals and consumption emotions”, Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25, Fall, pp. 296-304.
Oliver, R.L. (1993a), “Cognitive, affective, and attribute
bases of the satisfaction response”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 20, December, pp. 418-30.
Oliver, R.L. (1993b), “A conceptual model of service quality
and service satisfaction: compatible goals, different
concepts”, Advances in Services Marketing and
Management, Vol. 20, pp. 65-85.
Oliver, R.L. (1994), “Conceptual issues in the structural
analysis of consumption emotions, satisfaction, and quality:
evidence in a service setting”, Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 21, pp. 16-22.
Oliver, R.L. (1997), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on
the Consumer, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988),
“SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for measuring
consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 64, Spring, pp. 12-40.
Pham, M.T. (1998), “Representativeness, relevance, and the
use of feelings in decision making”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 25, September, pp. 144-59.
Russell, J.A. (1979), “Affective space is bipolar”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 37, September,
pp. 345-56.
Russell, J.A. (1980), “A circumplex model of affect”, Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 39, December,
pp. 1161-78.
Russell, J.A. (1983), “Pancultural aspects of the human
conceptual organization of emotions”, Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 1281-8.
Russell, J.A. (1991), “Culture and the categorization of
emotions”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 110, November,
pp. 426-50.
Russell, J.A. and Pratt, G. (1980), “A description of the
affective quality attributed to environments”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 38, February,
pp. 311-22.
Russell, J.A., Lewicka, M. and Niit, T. (1989), “A cross-
cultural study of a circumplex model of affect”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 57, November,
pp. 848-56.
Russell, J.A. and Sato, K. (1995), “Comparing emotion
words between languages”, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Vol. 26, July, pp. 384-91.
217
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218
Sheth, J., Gardner, D.M. and Garrett, D.E. (1988), Marketing
Theory: Evolution and Evaluation, Wiley, New York, NY.
Sherman, E. and Smith, R.B. (1987), “Mood states of
shoppers and store image: promising interactions and
possible behavioral effects”, in Wilkie, V.W. (Ed.), Advances
in Consumer Research, Vol. 14, Association for Consumer
Research, Provo, UT, pp. 251-4.
Singh, J. (1991), “Understanding the structure of consumers’
satisfaction evaluations of service delivery”, Journal of
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 19, Summer, pp. 223-44.
Steenkamp, J.E.M. and Baumgartner, H. (1992), “The role
of optimum stimulation level in exploratory consumer
behavior”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 19,
December, pp. 434-48.
Taylor, S.A., Shrland, A., Cronin, J.J. Jr and Bullard, W.
(1993), “Recreational service quality in the international
setting”, International Journal of Service Industry
Management, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 68-86.
Teas, R.K. (1993), “Expectations, performance evaluation,
and consumers’ perceptions of quality”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 57, October, pp. 18-34.
Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1994), “The importance
of servicescapes in leisure service settings”, Journal of
Services Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 66-76.
Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1999), “Consumer
response to intangible and tangible service factors”,
Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 16, January, pp. 51-68.
Wakefield, K.L. and Baker, J. (1998), “Excitement at the
mall: determinants and effects on shopping response”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 74, Fall, pp. 515-39.
Wang, C.L., Chen, Z.X., Chan, A.K.K. and Zheng, Z.C.
(2000), “The influence of hedonic value on consumer
behaviours: an empirical investigation in China”, Journal of
Global Marketing, Vol. 14 Nos 1/2, pp. 169-86.
Westbrook, R.A. (1987), “Product/consumption-based
affective responses and postpurchase process”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 24, August, pp. 258-70.
Westbrook, R.A. and Oliver, R.L. (1991), “The
dimensionality of consumption emotion patterns and
consumer satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 18, June, pp. 84-91.
Wirtz, J. and Bateson, J.E.G. (1999), “Consumer satisfaction
with services: integrating the environment perspective in
services marketing into the traditional disconfirmation
paradigm”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 44, January,
pp. 55-66.
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
experiences”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 76, Fall, pp. 347-65.
Zeithaml, V.A. and Bitner, M.J. (2000), Services Marketing:
Integrating Customer Focus Across the Firm, 2nd ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Further reading
Mowen, J.C. and Minor, M. (1998), Consumer Behavior,
5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Corresponding author
Cheng Lu Wang can be contacted at: cwang@newhaven.edu
 The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang
Executive summary and implications for
managers
This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives
a rapid appreciation of the content of the article. Those with a
particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article
in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of
the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefit of the
material present.
The impact of affect on service quality and satisfaction:
the moderation of service contexts
There is a popular children’s song which goes: “If you’re
happy and you know it, clap your hands. If you’re happy and
you know it, then your face will surely show it” – with each
line followed by vigorous hand claps.
Service providers need to know customers are happy with
service quality but if they are repairing your car or guiding you
through your tax return, they cannot really expect you burst
into song and clap you hands with joy.
The same goes for services where customers are more likely
to be demonstrative about their feelings – such as theme
parks, night clubs and ice-cream stalls or maybe even shops
full of wonderful and exciting things to buy. Understanding
evaluations of quality and satisfaction with the service offered
is rather more complex thank looking out for a smiling face,
and can be contradictory.
Different literature reveals different findings and disparate
conclusions with regard to how “affect” (pleasure and
arousal) is related to quality evaluation and/or satisfaction.
One researcher suggests that quality is not affect-based, thus
distinguishing quality from satisfction, which to some extent is
affect-based. Another concludes that people’s affective
responses have a positive effect on their product quality
judgments.
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang attempt to resolve this
incongruity in the literature by introducing service context
(hedonic versus utilitarian) as a moderating variable. They
consider that previous seemingly contradictory findings may
be due to different product/service contexts in which the
research was conducted. For instance, the impact of pleasure
on quality evaluation or arousal on satisfaction has been
mostly found in certain products/services (such as computer
games and retail environments). In these products/services,
the hedonic aspect of consumption is typically more
important and affective responses may overwhelm cognitive
responses.
However, in products/services such as health care or home-
based banking, the utilitarian or functional aspect of
consumption is more important and rational decision is
dominant over emotional responses. Consequently affect will
have different impacts on consumers’ quality evaluation and
satisfaction, depending on the hedonic or utilitarian product/
services.
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
218
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 20 · Number 4 · 2006 · 211 –218
Someone watching a comedian may evaluate the quality on
how much people laugh. People who parachute jump for fun
may evaluate the quality based on how much excitement is
experienced, and a Halloween partygoer might even judge the
quality based on how much fear and horror he or she felt.
Therefore, differentiating hedonic service contexts from
utilitarian ones will help to improve service quality measures
by including affect dimentions.
Maintaining and/or enhancing customer satisfaction are
critical for successful marketing. Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu
Wang’s study involved focus groups of undergraduates from a
Hong Kong university being asked to evaluate experiences of
karaoke and of service at a bank’s branch office.
People do not always make evaluations based on product/
service attributes; rather they often use heuristics to make
evaluations, such as their feelings or the most available or
vivid memory. In hedonic service contexts, consumers may be
more likely to store their feelings during the consumption
experiences into their memory, which might easily be recalled.
Meanwhile, consumers use hedonic services for enjoyment
purposes and evaluate service quality in terms of how much
pleasure they have received. Hence, pleasure will be more
pronounced in the quality evaluation of hedonic services than
utilitarian services. On the contrary, consumers in utilitarian
service contexts might be more likely to store their thoughts of
service attributes into memory. Therefore, the utilitarian
values will have a more critical role in evaluating the quality of
utilitarian services.
Leisure, entertainment and luxury services providers are
advised to make consumers feel activated and excited, as well
as pleased, and to modify or add to their services from time to
time to ensure consumers’ level of excitement is maintained.
Ying Jiang and Cheng Lu Wang say: “If consumers feel bored
in a hedonic service context, their perceived service quality
and satisfaction will be lower than when they can experience
high levels of arousal and pleasure. It is generally agreed that
companies have a good opportunity to convert satisfied
customers into loyal customers. However, hedonic service
providers should not only maintain the same service level,
they should also particularly monitor loyal customers’
activation/arousal level to make them feel that they can
always discover more every time they patronize the service.”
In utilitarian service contexts, pleasure was also found to
influence the subjective evaluation of service quality and
satisfaction. Accordingly, managers of these services should
first delicately design the service to meet consumers’
functional needs. Meanwhile, the physical environment
should also be well designed to make consumers feel
comfortable.
(A précis of the article “The impact of affect on service quality and
satisfaction: the moderation of service contexts”. Supplied by
Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

View publication stats