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

net/publication/320591353

Influence of empathy on hotel guests’ emotional service experience

Article  in  Journal of Services Marketing · October 2017

DOI: 10.1108/JSM-06-2016-0220

CITATIONS READS

16 2,996

3 authors, including:

Umasuthan Hamsanandini
Jeju National University
4 PUBLICATIONS   20 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Umasuthan Hamsanandini on 05 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Services Marketing
Influence of empathy on hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park, Jong-Hyun Ryu,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park, Jong-Hyun Ryu, (2017) "Influence of empathy on hotel guests’ emotional service
experience", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 Issue: 6, pp.618-635, https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-06-2016-0220
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-06-2016-0220
Downloaded on: 05 December 2017, At: 05:17 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 127 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 154 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2017),"Visual service scape aesthetics and consumer response: a holistic model", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 Iss 6
pp. 556-573 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-01-2016-0021">https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-01-2016-0021</a>
(2017),"Linking service convenience to satisfaction: dimensions and key moderators", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 Iss
6 pp. 527-538 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2016-0353">https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2016-0353</a>

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:302048 []
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.

 Influence of empathy on hotel guests’
emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan and Oun-Joung Park
Department of Tourism Management, Jeju National University Jeju, South Korea, and
Jong-Hyun Ryu
School of Business Management, Hongik University, Sejong, South Korea

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study is to assess the comparative influence of two empathy dimensions (cognitive and emotional attributes) on
emotional service experience and behavioral intention among business and leisure hotel guests. Studies relevant to empathy dimensions are
relatively scarce in tourism and hospitality.
Design/methodology/approach – The current study reviewed the concepts of empathy, and empirically compared perceptions of empathy
attributes between the two groups. The survey was intended to examine how well the hotel employees emotionally handle hotel guests’ incidents or
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

inquiries related to any discomforts through personalized attention. The data were collected from 330 hotel guests who had actually complained
about service failures while staying at the hotel during the record-breaking summer of 2013 in terms of number of visitors to Jeju. An active
empathetic listening (AEL) tool has been taken to measure the hotel guest’s cognitive views and behavioral intentions, as well as emotional
empathy measures under the empathic concern and emotional contagion.
Findings – The results revealed that empathetic dimensions strongly influenced the service experiences of hotel guests. While the emotional service
experience of business guests was almost completely determined by the cognitive empathy, the emotional service experience of the leisure guests
was mainly governed by the emotional empathy.
Practical implications – These outcomes suggest that the empathetic services through a “purpose of visit”-oriented manner might enhance the
guest’s overall emotion positively.
Originality/value – According to the prior literatures and empirical findings in hospitality and tourism, empathy can be seen as subscale in
SERVQUAL instrument. This paper focus on insights of empathy dimensions, and it was revealed that the interaction of both the cognitive and
emotional dimensions of empathy conjointly determines the overall emotional service experience and intention of hotel guests.
Keywords Cognitive empathy, Emotional empathy, Emotional service experience, Hotel service
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction communication between employees and customers has been

The modern trend in the hotel industry emphasizes the
importance of employee–customer interaction (Chu and
Murrmann, 2006; Kuo et al., 2012). Attitude, intention and
perception of customers are affected by the approach of service
employees (Schneider and Bowen, 1985). In this sense, the
hoteliers should realize that customers’ thoughts and feelings in
service attributes affect emotions in either a positive or negative
way in the overall service experience (Barsky and Nash, 2002).
However, recent reports related to hotel service experiences
indicated that the rising level of dissatisfaction related to
unfriendly approaches and lack of concern for customers’
emotional service expectations have been shown to have had a
dramatic impact on guest loyalty (McDowell, 2013; Williams,
2013; Marketmetrix, 2012). To resolve this critical issue, the
importance of developing an emotional connection and
emphasized. Understanding guests’ emotions by highly
engaged employees can help improve guests’ experiences and
change future intentions in a positive direction (Fairweather,
2013; Williams, 2013), and have a determining factor on the
level of satisfaction and customer loyalty. Therefore, highly
engaged employees are expected to project a positive emotional
display of service while treating guests (Barsky and Nash,
2002).
Understanding these customers’ emotional empathic service
requirements is a key part of the empathy dimension. The
display of empathy, or caring individualized attention, in
service has been identified as one of the intangible aspects in
service quality. Numerous studies in hospitality service quality
and loyalty literature measured empathy as one of the subscales

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/0887-6045.htm
The authors thank Barr Jacob, Jeju National University, Republic of Korea
for improving the use of English, and Navaneethaiyer Umasuthan, Nihon
University, Japan for critical constructive comments that greatly improved
the manuscript. This work was supported by the Hongik University New
Faculty Research Support Fund.

Journal of Services Marketing

Received 11 June 2016
31/6 (2017) 618–635 Revised 16 October 2016
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 0887-6045] 17 January 2017
[DOI 10.1108/JSM-06-2016-0220] Accepted 14 April 2017

618
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
in the SERVQUAL tool developed from the basic design,
which includes tangible – physical facilities; intangibles such as
reliability – ability to perform; responsiveness – quick and
accurate response; assurance – trust and confidence; and
empathy – understanding customers’ needs (Parasuraman
et al., 1988).
The empathy dimension includes both cognitive and
emotional reactions, which help the hotel employees to
understand customers’ service expectations (both in thought
and feeling) to help them accordingly (Basil et al., 2008). From
hotel guests’ perspectives, empathic experiences in hotel units
differ widely based on the individuals’ requirements. Basically,
business travelers are considered as one of the key market
resources because they are frequent travelers who use hotel
resources globally within their number of business tours
annually (Juwaheer and Ross, 2003). Due to their purpose of
non-personal travel and indifference to personal interactions,
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
their decision-making processes are determined by the
cognitive perception of services (Wilkins et al., 2007). In
contrast, leisure travelers are highly sensitive in terms of their
travel accommodation, cost allocation and safety awareness.
This concern might stem from the idea that leisure trips often
involve families, and these travelers have a higher sensitivity to
what may occur around them when their families are involved.
Therefore, leisure travelers expect individualized care, shared
good feelings and helpful attention in each aspect of service
compared to business travelers (Swan and Combs, 1976).
However, the studies relevant to customer’s empathetic
service expectation or experience are limited, when compared
to the level of emotional labor service quality, loyalty and
performance in tourism and hospitality (Bitner et al., 1990;
Hartline and Jones, 1996; Thibaut and Kelley, 1959; Bhave
et al., 1999; Parasuraman et al., 1988). Although several
conceptual reviews addressed the importance of empathy
dimensions, and empirical results are also partially highlighted
the empathy scale in service quality instrument (SERVQUAL
measures) also influence on customer satisfaction, only a few
empirical studies have examined the empathy dimensions
exclusively (Juwaheer and Ross, 2003).
The current study aims to explore the influence of the
empathetic dimensions on the emotional service experiences of
hotel guests and how this influence varies among different types
of guests based on their visiting purpose (business/leisure). The
objectives of the study are:
 to investigate the relationships among the cognitive
empathy, emotional empathy, and emotional service
experiences; and
 to compare the influences of the two different types of
empathy and emotional service experiences in-depth, in
between business- and leisure-traveler groups.
2. Theoretical background
2.1 Empathy
Empathy plays a key role in understanding the mental states of
others in human behavior (Hogan, 1969). There were several
definitions found in different conceptual studies. Hollin’s
(2002) study defined displaying empathy as “’the power to see
one’s own act, from another person’s point of view” (Hollin,
2002). Similarly, numerous other studies re-stated that
619
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
empathy is the act of constructing for oneself another person’s
mental state (Watson et al., 1984; Smith, 2006). These
researchers divided the empathy into two distinct dimensions,
namely, cognitive empathy (Köhler, 2015; Baron-Cohen and
Wheelwright, 2004; McBane, 1995; Homburg et al., 2009;
Pilling and Eroglu, 1994) and emotional empathy (Eisenberg
and Miller, 1987; Mehrabian and Epstein, 1972; Lamm et al.,
2007; Eisenberg and Strayer, 1987; Hoffman and Richards,
1984).
It has been reported that these empathy dimensions and
behaviors originate from the human brain and neural network
systems (Shamay-Tsoory et al., 2009). The process of both
cognitive and affective components was psychologically
constructed and regulated by central characteristic of several
interconnected neurological elements to support the ability to
empathize to the effect of producing emotional understanding.
Preston and de Waal (2002) mentioned that the perception of a
behavior in another, automatically activates one’s own
representations for the behavior, and output automatically
proceeds to motor areas of the brain where responses are
prepared and executed in empathy systems (Preston and de
Waal, 2002). Thus, it is apparent that the human brain and
neural network control the overall empathy complex system.
Meanwhile, the social and marketing psychological literature
have conceptualized that the customers’ cognition and
emotional experiences of a particular product or service
determine their decision making processes and behavioral
intentions such as revisit and word of mouth (WOM), widely
(Decrop, 1999).
2.1.1 Cognitive empathy
Cognitive empathy is an ability to understand someone else’s
mind, thoughts and internal views by sensing and recognizing
their real state by thinking from their perspective to respond
accordingly. The above cognitive thinking and processing
mental states are defined as perspective taking (Barrett-
Lennard, 1981; Bernstein and Davis, 1982; Dymond, 1949).
Perspective taking empowers an individual to understand the
role or point of view of another person, to anticipate the
reactions of the other and to address the other’s perceived
needs or opinions (Devoldre et al., 2010). Thereby, service
researchers mention that perspective taking is the tendency of
an individual to adopt the viewpoint of others (Coke et al.,
1978; Wolff et al., 2002; Dymond, 1949; Miller et al., 1988).
Moreover, communication and marketing-related reviews
consider cognitive thinking as an active empathetic listening
(AEL) perspective (Drollinger et al., 2006). The AEL was
defined as a form of listening practiced by sales employees in
which traditional active listening is combined with empathy to
achieve a higher form of listening. These authors defined this
conceptualized AEL as a three-stage process, namely, sensing
(listening to customers and paying more attention), processing
(synthesizing information and remembering the conversation)
and responding (asking questions for clarification and using
verbal and nonverbal attention) (Drollinger et al., 2006). This
cognitive empathy is the one that makes a person say, “I
understand what you feel” (Decety and Jackson, 2004).
Therefore, this study adopted the AEL scale to measure
cognitive empathy and behaviors.
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
2.1.2 Emotional empathy
In contrast, emotional empathy is defined as an observer’s
emotional response to another person’s emotional state. The
capacity to recognize emotions also supports a separate
dimension of understanding emotions in empathy and is also
defined as “one’s ability to experience another’s real state of
feeling in a given situation and react with the same emotional
responses to that situation” (Basil et al., 2008). In general,
empathy determines an effective response more appropriate to
someone else’s situation (Eisenberg and Miller, 1987).
However, it may vary based on the individual’s response and
situation. Recent psychological researchers have emphasized
the specific function of the neuron system with respect to
concepts of empathy (Schulte-Rüther et al., 2007). Emotional
empathy was stated as a process which transforms the cognitive
collection of data into an image-demonstrating process with a
passive view of emotional faces (Dapretto et al., 2005). Hence,
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
the mechanism automatically evokes emotional empathy when
seeing the reactions of others’ actions. The emotional empathy
concept includes two facets or reactive states, including
empathic concern and emotional contagion (Coke et al., 1978).
Empathic concern refers to a person responding to another
person’s emotions in a given situation without experiencing
these emotions (Eisenberg, 2002; Wieseke et al., 2012). Also,
this concern for another is to express the helping tendency and
response through courtesy, respect, interest, apology and care
in a natural way. On the other hand, emotional contagion is to
feel the same emotions between interacting individuals, which
may result, for instance, in an automatic reactive state which
includes sharing feelings and social interactions with another
person (Homburg and Stock, 2005).
Thus, researchers have increasingly agreed that empathy is a
well-known multidimensional construct comprising cognitive
and emotional factors, and set their own definitions according
to their aim of research. Hence, this study considers that
empathy is an inner feeling, which helps to understand another
person’s feelings and emotional reactions to assist with
beneficiary intentions. Therefore, the empathy constructs
combine the two facets of cognitive empathy (perspective
taking) and emotional empathy (empathic concern and
emotional contagion).
2.2 Emotional service experience
It has been noted that the customer’s psychological state of
cognitive and emotional empathetic experiences are a result of
their emotional effects (Watson and Tellegen, 1985). Emotion
is a psychological change and can be expressed in two valences,
positive or negative. Positive emotions are known as pleasant
feelings and negative emotions are called unpleasant feelings
(Wierzbicka, 1992). Many researchers evaluated the emotional
service experience using the two different frames, which help in
understanding consumers’ overall experiences and their impact
on the behavioral intention.
Yi (1990) proposed that “the buyer’s cognitive and
emotional responses to the service experiences associated with
a particular service leads to behavioral intention” (Yi, 1990).
The emotional state moderates the two different positive and
negative activations (Watson and Tellegen, 1985). Wundt
(1912/1924) defined the original pleasure-activation model of
emotional affects (Wundt, 1912/1924), which has been further
620
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
developed by Russell’s research (Russell et al., 1989;
Reisenzein, 1994). Russell’s (1998) development scale states
that pleasant and unpleasant expression of the customer rises
from positive and negative emotional affects (Feldman Barrett
and Russell, 1998). This state is clearly recognized by the
feelings or facial reactions to another person externally (e.g.
happy, sad). The activation and deactivate experiences mean a
sense of mobilization or energy on very high or low ends,
respectively. In this state, the customer’s ability to perceive is
more complex with both cognitive and mood related processes;
thus, it is critical to recognize the appropriate channel of
communication and response by another person (e.g.
excitement, relaxation, hyper activated, calm, quiet).
Mehrabian’s and Russell (1974) emotional states fall into
three basic domains: pleasure, arousal and dominance
(Mehrabian and Russell, 1974). Dominance, however, has
been shown to have a non-significant effect on behavior
(Donovan et al., 1994). Mehrabian’s scale offers a bipolar
framework for emotional responses. Prior literature has widely
suggested bipolar and unipolar scales to measure the emotional
affects. The bipolar conceptualization allows for the emotions
of pleasant and unpleasant states, as well as for the indifference
of neither pleasant nor unpleasant states. In Babin’s (1998)
view, despite its convenience, the bipolar view was inadequate
for capturing consumer emotions and further showed that
feeling a negative emotion does not prevent the occurrence of a
positive emotion (Babin and Griffin, 1998). Research on
personal reports of individual affective experiences has
indicated two largely independent, unipolar dimensions
corresponding to positive and negative affects (Abelson and
Sermat, 1962). Along this line, Yalch and Spangenberg (2000)
have dealt with emotional responses within a discrete positive
and negative emotion scheme instead of a pleasure and arousal
scheme (Yalch and Spangenberg, 2000).
In contrast, Westbrook and Oliver (1991) suggested that the
unipolar view for investigating consumption experiences
appears more suitable (Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). The
unipolar view is considered to be more appropriate in
understating emotions of consumption because it is able to
indicate that the customer feels happiness and unhappiness at
the same time (Jang and Namkung, 2009).
Several studies evaluated the emotional affects and
experiences using mulitple complex measures. Therefore, the
current study measures the emotional affects (postive affects:
happy, pleased, content, excited, alert, hyper activated;
negative affects: miserable, troubled, unhappy, tedious, serene,
quiet) and behavioral intention using two dimensional
development scales on the basis of unipolar measures adopted
from the study by Feldman and Russell (Feldman Barrett and
Russell, 1998).
2.3 Behavioral intention
The customer’s behavioral intention is a complex process and is
widely influenced by in the levels of customer’s satisfaction and
dissatisfaction. Customer satisfaction means a positive status of
emotion that develops a long-term relationship between service
firms and customers. The quality of the relationship highly
depends on feelings and emotional interactions between
customers and employees (Davidow, 2000).
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
A number of researchers have investigated the role of
customer future consumption contexts in consumer behavior
studies. An individual customer’s future behavioral intention
measures fall in three sub-elements, namely, revisits or
retention, recommendation to friends or others and WOM
(Spreng et al., 1995). The willingness to return or revisit, which
is associated with an emotional attachment to the product or
service, is a behavior tendency to view the relationship as a
partnership (loyalty) (Bowen and Shoemaker, 2003). The
motive to recommend the product or service and willingness to
provide a positive recommendation to others are the aspects of
behavioral attitudes (Jones and Sasser, 1995).
Further, the customer’s behavioral approach includes all
types of consumer actions that are possible to deliver in either
positive or negative manner (Singh, 1988). An “expression of
satisfaction or dissatisfaction” is addressing the hotel service
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
experience either to appreciate or to condemn by direct
communication with third party or spreading positive or
negative WOM (Day, 1980).
The satisfied customers tend to be engaged in a positive
behavior which is a complementation of the business and
services. In the opposite situation, the consumer does
complaint behavior that involves directly reporting the incident
they experienced to the business or transferring information
something negatively regarding the incident to other some
third-party organizational entity (Jacoby and Jaccard, 1981).
Among the customers who complain, many make the
complaint directly to the management with an intention of
receiving better services in future (Park et al., 2008). This
shows that the above customers are highly influenced and
potentially would become loyal customers in the future (Mittal
et al., 2016). Next, the worst case is that customers do not
directly complain to the organization, but instead they commit
to never return again and tell others about their negative
experience. It creates future challenges for the service business.
Thus, studies in consumer complaint behavior are critically
important in explaining and predicting consumer repurchase
intentions and customer loyalty (Day, 1984).
2.4 Relationship among empathy, emotional service
experience and behavioral intention in hotel service
In tourism and hospitality research, the relationships among
empathetic services, emotional affects and behavioral intention
has been empirically examined in the frame of service quality
influences’ overall satisfaction which is linked to loyalty
(Parasuraman et al., 1988). In the hotel business, the display of
genuine feelings (deep acting, surface acting) of concern for the
customer is viewed as an essential ingredient in service quality
and loyalty (Chu and Murrmann, 2006). In a real hotel setting,
it has been shown that guests perceive larger service gaps in
emotional services (Juwaheer and Ross, 2003). It is evident that
the customer’s service requirement is highly associated with the
empathic service approach (Juwaheer and Ross, 2003).
Understanding the individual’s emotional service
expectation suggests service providers and designers a
significance of creating a pleasantly affective service (Lin,
2004). This analysis clearly noted that satisfying empathetic
service expectation is critical in hotel business.
621
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
2.4.1 Relationship between cognitive empathy and emotional
empathy
There is a debate on whether cognition or emotion comes first
in consumers’ service evaluation (satisfaction/dissatisfaction).
However, previous psychological-based research literature has
shown that individuals who score higher on cognitive
empathetic understanding (perspective taking of the
Interpersonal Reactivity Index) exhibit a high level of emotional
response (empathic concern scale) (Kaplan and Iacoboni,
2006). Some studies described cognitive empathy as related to
impaired higher decision-making power (Bechara et al., 1998).
In addition, the concept of Gestalt psychology described that,
when customers evaluate services, there is an individual
perception known as a cognitive schema (Köhler, 2015). Also
individual’s cognitive perceptions stimulate his or her
emotional responses (e.g. pleasure, arousal and dominance
(Mehrabian and Russell, 1974). Hence, Lazarus (1999) has
also noted that cognition precedes emotion when individuals
are measuring service satisfaction (Lazarus, 1999). Based on
this argument, the current research study hypothesizes the
following:
H1. Cognitive empathy influences emotional empathy.
2.5 Relationship among empathy, emotional experience
and intention
Several ideas support the relationship between human
cognition, perspective taking and perceived emotional
experience. An individual’s perspective taking of understanding
another person’s feelings influence their emotions. One
application of the cognitive approach to emotion has come
from investigating people’s understanding of the causes of their
own emotional feelings. In addition, perspective taking requires
an awareness of personal and situational circumstances and
empathy. Perspective taking has been shown to be positively
related to patience, sensitivity in pleasant thoughts and
negatively related to an aggressive mindset and dissatisfied
attitudes (Parker and Axtell, 2001). Thus, understanding an
individual’s perspective, thinking and evaluation directs their
self-emotional experience and decision-making.
Empirical evidence showed that individuals’ perceived
emotions are separated into positive and negative dimensions.
Positive emotions exert a positive influence such as repeat
visiting intentions and recommendations, whereas negative
emotions exert a negative influence such as compliant behavior
on post purchase behaviors (Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). In
addition, service recovery reveals that satisfaction with
complaint handling as the customer’s overall emotional feeling
about the service firm is driven by positive intentions and
determines the success of the service industry (Davidow,
2000). Therefore, the emotionally satisfied customers have a
strong emotional attachment to the company, and they expect
relationships instead of compliments. Also without a strong
emotional bond, service satisfaction is meaningless and
incomplete. Hence, the current study considered that there is a
relationship between the empathy dimensions, emotional
affects and behavioral intention based on the above discussed
conceptual and empirical analyses. Thus, the study’s
hypotheses are as follows:
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
H2. cognitive empathy influences emotional hotel service
experience.
H3. Emotional empathy influences emotional hotel service
experience.
H4. Customers’ emotional experiences influence their
behavioral intention.
2.6 Emotional hotel stay experience between business
and leisure guests
Since the 1980s, plenty of studies have researched the
importance regarding selection of hotels, service attributes,
overall satisfaction and loyalty of business and leisure travelers.
A summary of the global business guests’ survey findings
empathize that the factors such as reputation; reliable service
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
from the reception; cleanliness; comfortable room facilities and
design; location; brand and rating; physical property; and value
for money seemed to be important (Dubé and Renaghan, 2000;
Mccleary et al., 1993; Lewis, 1984b; Bowen and Shoemaker,
2003; Cadotte and Turgeon, 1988; Dubé and Renaghan, 1999;
Hartline and Jones, 1996). As frequent travelers, business
guests widely use star-rated hotels, where they stay and
experience the facilities for a limited time, due to their purpose
of visit including meetings and/or conferences, etc. Thus, they
expect a home-like comfort stay in hotels. Hence, a cognitive
view of service expectation is comparatively high in the
perspective of business guests (Callan and Kyndt, 2001;
Dolnicar, 2002; Gundersen et al., 1996). Thus, it is an
essentianl factor to upgrade the required standard of hotel
services to accommodate their demands.
In contrast, leisure guests seem to be more concerned and
sensible with cost allocation, safe and secure hotel
environment, and friendly and courteous employee service
attributes (Chu and Choi, 2000; Lewis, 1984a; Kashyap and
Bojanic, 2000). Due to their holiday mood, leisure activitities
and traveling with their families, leisure guests expect to receive
more informal services from hotel employees which includes a
more friendly approach, personal attention and emotionally
interaction (Heung et al., 2001). When leisure guests are overall
satisfied with their trip, this often leads to peaceful leisure
recollections which are influenced by their positive emotions
and comfortable hotel service experiences (Neal et al., 1999;
Lewis, 1984a; Barsky and Labagh, 1992; Barsky and Nash,
2002; Hartline and Jones, 1996). Babakus and Boller (1992)
stated that, compared to business travelers, leisure travelers’s
behaivor intention is highly involved with reference groups,
Figure 1 The proposed research model and hypotheses
622
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
such as the travel reviews and WOM communication (Babakus
and Boller, 1992). Also, the emotional touch of personal
interactions with employees is a critical component of the
service quality evaluation (Knutson, 1988).
In terms of the purpose of the visit, guests’ empathetic service
requirements determining their service experience level are
distinguished by groups. Therefore, the current study aims to
compare the hotel guest’s perceived empathy dimension and
emotional experience level between business and leisure guests.
Based on the previous empirical study results on business
guests’ cognitive service expectation and leisure guests’
personalized emotional service expectation, the following two
hypotheses are established.
H5. Influence of cognitive empathy on the emotional service
experience is high in business guests than leisure hotel
guests.
H6. Influence of emotional empathy on the emotional service
experience is high in leisure hotel guests than business
hotel guests.
2.7 Hypotheses
The current study established its research model with two
distinct empathy elements, cognitive empathy and emotional
empathy, as well as emotional hotel stay experience and
behavioral intention (Figure 1). This framework is based on
previous similar empirical study models and results (Rupp
et al., 2008; Wieseke et al., 2012; Lin, 2004; Mason et al., 2006;
Oh, 1999; Johnson et al., 2001; Sohn and Lee, 2012). As
mentioned above, the relationship among empathy dimension,
emotional experience and behavioral intention; comparison
between business and leisure hotel guests; influence of
cognitive empathy and emotional empathy; influence of guests’
overall emotional service experience; and behavioral intention
are to be verified and examined to validate and testify the above
proposed model system (Figure 1).
To achieve the objectives of the study, six core research
hypotheses were established (H1 to H6) (Figure 1).
3. Methodology
3.1 Measures
The variable measures for the present study were adopted from
prior literature, with only minor modifications on the basis of
the preliminary pilot study results. Modifications were required
to make the scales fit to the context of the study. All ratings for
the items in different scales were performed in seven-point
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
Likert-type scales (Bettencourt, 1997). The study adopted the
cognitive empathy views from the AEL scale. Initially, the AEL
constructs known as “perspective taking”, with three subscales
including, sensing (six items), processing (five items) and
responding (three items), accounting for a total of 14 items,
were used in measuring the cognitive empathy dimensions
(Drollinger et al., 2006; Gearhart and Bodie, 2011; Park and
Raile, 2010; Bodie, 2011). Second, emotional empathy was
measured through a total of eight items which could be divided
into two subscales, namely, empathic concern (three items) and
emotional contagion (five items) (McBane, 1995; Wieseke
et al., 2012; Yik et al., 2011). Overall, 22 items were used to
determine the two empathy dimensions. Finally, a 12-item
scale was adapted from James A Russell’s study to measure the
emotional experience and intention (Russell and Carroll, 1999;
Feldman Barrett and Russell, 1998; Yik et al., 2011). Based on
a bipolarity (positive and negative) dimensional approach
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
(Feldman Barrett and Russell, 1998), three items were used in
each of the four sub-scales of the emotional effects and
intention; pleasant/unpleasant and activated/deactivated,
respectively (Table I). The current study suggests that the
composition of the design is suitable for accomplishing its
objective(s).
3.2 Sampling and data collection
Data were collected from hotel guests, who experienced any
inconvenience or discomforting situation during their stay
experience at Korean hotels. A pilot study was conducted, in
which a total of 50 questionnaires were distributed among
international hotel guests, those who had experienced any
inconveniences. A 66 per cent response rate was recorded.
Thereafter, an up-scale survey study was conducted from
July to August in 2013. The survey sites were located at the Jeju
International Airport and other famous and mass tourist
destinations around the island, including Sunrise Peak
(Seongsan Ilchulbong), Seogiwpo, Jungmun and the
International Convention Centre. Furthermore, data collection
was also extended to a few tourist-oriented events/locations
such as beaches (festivals and sports tournaments), Jeju City
Tour and summer festivals which occurred in different parts of
the island (Jeju-Weekly, 2013). A total of 400 questionnaires
were distributed as an on-site self-administered survey. The
questionnaires which were incomplete and marked as not
encountering any critical incidents were excluded from
Table I Construct measures
Dimensions Measurement Reference
Cognitive empathy Perspective-taking Drollinger et al. (2006),
dimension (AEL scale): Sensing, Gearhart and Bodie
processing and (2011), Park and Raile
responding (2010), Bodie (2011)
Emotional empathy Empathic concern McBane (1995), Wieseke
dimension Emotional contagion et al. (2012), Yik et al.
(2011)
Emotional affects Pleasant or Russell and Carroll (1999),
and intention unpleasant Feldman Barrett and
Activated or Russell (1998), Yik et al.
deactivated (2011)
623
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
consideration. A total of 330 filtered questionnaires were used
as valid samples in the final analysis, resulting in an 82.5 per
cent overall response rate.
3.3 Data analysis
Once the data were collected from the questionnaire, the SPSS
16.0 package was used for sorting the data. First, frequency
analysis was used to assess the characteristics of the sample.
The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was then used to
confirm the factor loadings, whether the measured variables
interpret the hypothesized latent variables. The study checked
Cronbach’s alpha to confirm the items’ internal reliability.
Convergent and discriminant validity tests were conducted by
checking the average variance extracted (AVE) (Zait and
Bertea, 2011) to determine stability and correlation. A
composite construct reliability (CCR) test (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981) was conducted to confirm the internal
consistency of the variables. To statistically test the
hypothesized relationships, the Structural Equation Modeling
(SEM) has been employed (Byrne, 2009; Blunch, 2012). The
SEM was conducted using a recommended software called
AMOS 18 (Arbuckle, 2009). In terms of sample size, the SEM
technique has been significantly employed between 151 to 400
sample data for over various tourism studies during last decade
(Nunkoo et al., 2013). Also, the minimum sample size
requirement for SEM recommends using a sample size of at
least five to ten cases per parameter. Hence, the 330 sample size
used in the current study is valid for 34 indicators to examine
the proposed research model. For the comparison between
leisure and business guest groups, multiple regression analysis
was conducted to show the most significantly influencing
empathy variables on emotional service experience in each
group.
4. Results
4.1 Respondents’ profile
Based on their purpose of visit, respondents (n = 330) were
sub-divided into two groups, namely, business guests (n = 119)
and leisure guests (n = 211). The demographic information of
the respondents, such as gender and age group, was collected
and profiled (Table II). The majority of the respondents were
female, in both business (52 per cent) and leisure hotel guests
(58 per cent). With respect to the respondent’s age groups,
both business (50 per cent) and leisure (49 per cent) guests
were most prevalent in the 30-39, and next in the 40-49 age
groups, respectively. This finding indicated that most of the
hotel (guests) respondents were aged between 30-49 years. In
terms of occupation, the largest group in both business (56 per
cent) and leisure hotel guest respondents (50 per cent) were in
the professional category (such as doctors, lawyers, professors,
researchers and teachers). The general image of the sample can
be described as adult, highly educated and professional. These
sample characteristics show that the respondents represent
ideal hotel guests.
According to the objectives of the study, to examine how well
the hotel employees emotionally handle hotel guests’ incidents
through personalized attention, the research survey
questionnaire was collected from respondents along with some
primary information such as the type of hotel(s) in which the
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience Journal of Services Marketing
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635

Table II Demographic profile of respondents (n = 330)

B (n = 119) L (n = 211) B (n = 119) L (n = 211)
Description n (%) n (%) Description n (%) n (%)
Sample group Occupation
Male 57 48 88 42 Civil servants/Govt. officers 8 6 18 9
Female 62 52 123 58 Professionals 67 56 106 50
Total 119 100 211 100 Self-employee 11 9 24 11
Age group Business executive officers 14 12 33 16
20-29 18 15 30 14 Corporate sector employee 9 8 24 11
30-39 59 50 104 49 Student 7 6 – –
40-49 40 34 71 34 Others 3 3 6 3
50-59 2 1 6 3 Total 119 100 211 100
Total 119 100 211 100
Notes: B, Business hotel guests; L, Leisure hotel guests
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

respondents experienced the critical incident/discomfort and
the respective service unit which caused the issue/problem
(Table III). The data indicated that 47 and 55 per cent of
respondents in business and leisure guests have, respectively,
chosen the star-graded hotels for their accommodation. Leisure
guest respondents’ accommodation was mainly represented by
1-4 star-graded hotels (42 per cent) and pensions (19 per cent).
Whereas, the main choices of business guest respondents were
1-4-star-graded hotels (37 per cent), guest house (19.3 per
cent) and pensions (18.5 per cent). The profile also indicated
that a large pool of business hotel guest respondents
experienced inconveniences or felt discomfort regarding three
important service units related to room facilities (33 per cent),
front desk (19 per cent) and room service (15 per cent).
Meanwhile, leisure guest respondents had complaints mainly
regarding room facilities (29.9 per cent), front desk (19.4 per
cent), followed by room service (12.8 per cent) and
housekeeping (10.9 per cent). The front desk issues may be
indicative of the poor person-interactive service barriers
between the guests and the hotel reception. Based on the
summary of the travel profile (Table III), it could be inferred
that business hotel guests expect standard services from the
accommodations and encountered critical inconveniences in
room facilities and lack of front desk interactive services
compared to other service units. More or less similarly, leisure
hotel guests’ experienced critical incidents related to room
facilities, room or housekeeping services and lack of
personalized attention at front desk in their accommodations.
4.2 Reliability and validity analyses
The adequacy of the measurement model was evaluated by a
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Table IV shows the results
of the measurement model. Most of the model fit indices from
CFA demonstrated a good fit with x 2 (df) = 1.450 (482), x 2 =
699.13, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = 0.89, root mean square
error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.04, adjusted goodness-
of-fit index (AGFI) = 0.87, normed fit index (NFI) = 0.95,
Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = 0.98 and comparative fit index
(CFI) = 0.98. Although the chi-square statistic shows
significance at p < 0.001 level, the relatively large sample size of
our study (n = 330) offsets the seriousness of the effect of the
statistic to the validity of the measurement model (Anderson
and Gerbing, 1982). Collectively, the results of the CFA satisfy
the recommended level of goodness of fit, which implies that

Table III Accommodation categories of respondents (n = 330) and the service units that had failures
B (n = 119) L (n = 211) B (n = 119) L (n = 211)
Accommodation types n (%) n (%) Service area n (%) n (%)
Star hotels 56 47 117 55 Front desk 23 19 41 19.4
1,2,3,4-stars 44 37 88 42 Reservation 13 11 20 9.5
5-star 12 10 29 14 Telephone information 3 2.5 13 6.2
Concierge desk 2 1.7 2 0.9
Others 63 53 94 45 Meeting/catering/banquet 1 0.8 – –
Guest house 23 19.3 27 13 Package tour information center – 3 1.4
Pension 22 18.5 40 19 Door attendants (Bell desk) 2 1.7 3 1.4
Condominium 6 5 12 6 Room service (including mini-bar) 18 15 27 12.8
Youth hostel 12 10 10 5 Housekeeping 12 10 23 10.9
Others – – 5 1 Laundry service 6 5 11 5.2
Total 119 100 211 100 Restaurant – – 3 1.4
Swimming pool – – 2 0.9
Room facilities* 39 33 63 29.9
Total 119 100 211 100
Notes: B, Business hotel guests; L, Leisure hotel guests; *internet, TV, rest room, bed, shower, water tab, etc

624
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience Journal of Services Marketing
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635

Table IV CFA results

Standardized Cronbach’s
Items Measurement Measured questions Mean loadings SMC alpha CCR AVE
CE-1 Sensing-1 Q6_1 Sensed how I felt 3.89 0.86 0.74 0.93 0.99 0.93
CE-2 Sensing-2 Q6_2 Listened for more than just spoken words 3.77 0.84 0.71
CE-3 Sensing-3 Q6_3 Sensed the importance of what I said 3.76 0.88 0.78
CE-4 Sensing-4 Q6_4 Was aware of my unique problems 3.58 0.87 0.75
CE-5 Sensing-5 Q6_5 Sensed why I felt the way I did 3.54 0.82 0.68
CE-6 Sensing-6 Q6_6 Listened for the tone of the conversation 3.74 0.74 0.55
CE-7 Processing-1 Q6_7 Seemed to understand the main points what I 3.85 0.82 0.66 0.93 0.98 0.93
complained
CE-8 Processing-2 Q6_8 Seemed to detect the problem I had 3.75 0.83 0.69
CE-9 Processing-3 Q6_9 Perceived likely significant of my complained 3.6 0.88 0.78
CE-10 Processing-4 Q6_10 Kept track of points (e.g. by taking notes about 3.47 0.86 0.73
important points) I made
CE-11 Processing-5 Q6_11 Assured me that he/she would remember what I 3.42 0.85 0.71
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

complained
CE-12 Responding-1 Q6_12 Responded to my inquiries with his/her body 3.85 0.77 0.59 0.89 0.98 0.94
language (e.g. head nods)
CE-13 Responding-2 Q6_13 Assured me that he/she understood me, by restating 3.63 0.87 0.76
or paraphrasing important points
CE-14 Responding-3 Q6_14 Showed his/her interest by asking questions to gain 3.49 0.91 0.83
more information and to clarify my problematic situation
EE-1 Empcon-1 Q6_15 Seemed to be a soft hearted (understanding) person 3.73 0.87 0.75 0.91 0.98 0.95
EE-2 Empcon -2 Q6_16 Quickly realized that I was unhappy even if he/she 3.59 0.87 0.76
did not know my problem well
EE-3 Empcon-3 Q6_17 Had a tender, concerned feeling for my unpleasant 3.55 0.89 0.78
situation
EE-4 Emocont-1 Q6_18 Seemed to be emotionally disturbed by my situation 3.55 0.84 0.71 0.94 0.99 0.94
EE-5 Emocont-2 Q6_19 Became nervous, when I felt nervous, because of the 3.49 0.87 0.75
incident
EE-6 Emocont-3 Q6_20 Could not remain cool because of my discomfort 3.38 0.89 0.78
EE-7 Emocont-4 Q6_21 Felt unhappy due to my miserable incidents 3.36 0.84 0.71
EE-8 Emocont-5 Q6_22 Seemed to be affected by my unpleasant emotion 3.38 0.87 0.75
Em Ex-1 Pleasant-1 Q8_1 Happy 3.6 0.95 0.9 0.96 0.99 0.96
Em Ex-2 Pleasant-2 Q8_2 Pleased 3.55 0.92 0.84
Em Ex-3 Pleasant-3 Q8_3 Content 3.47 0.92 0.84
Em Ex-4 Activated-1 Q8_4 Excited 3.02 0.93 0.87 0.92 0.98 0.95
Em Ex-5 Activated-2 Q8_5 Alert (feels activated) 2.96 0.88 0.77
Em Ex-6 Activated-3 Q8_6 Hyper activated (feeling stirred up) 2.87 0.8 0.64
Em Ex-7 Unpleasant-1 Q8_7 Miserable 3.76 0.83 0.69 0.93 0.98 0.94
Em Ex-8 Unpleasant-2 Q8_8 Troubled 3.89 0.93 0.87
Em Ex-9 Unpleasant-3 Q8_9 Unhappy 3.91 0.94 0.87
BI-1 Revisits Q7_1 I would like to come back to this hotel in the future 3.6 0.97 0.94 0.98 0.99 0.98
BI-2 Recommend to others Q7_2 I would like to recommend this hotel to my friends or 3.57 0.98 0.95
others
BI-3 Word of mouth Q7_3 I would say positive things about this hotel to others 3.59 0.98 0.95
Notes: SMC = squared multiple correlation, CE = cognitive empathy, EE = emotional empathy, Em Ex = emotional service experience,
I = behavioral intention. All standardized loadings are significant at the 0.01 level or better. SRW = Standard regression weights/loadings, AVE = average
P P
variance extracted, CCR = composite constructs reliability. Normed X2 = X2/df. R items were reverse scored. CCR = ( standardized loadings) 2/(
P P P P
standardized loadings) 2 1 ( indicator measurement error), AVE = ( squared standardized loadings)/( squared standardized loadings) 1 ( indicator
measurement error)

the measurement model generally fits the sample data well. In insignificant and low values of emotional experience scale (e.g.
this study, an effort to purify the measurement scale was deactivated = 0.39) factor loadings were omitted from the
performed in the stage of employing the CFA for the purpose of measurement variables where the deactivated emotions were
delineating more valid constructs. Scale items displaying not well supported to the hotel guest’s relevant incidents or the

625
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience Journal of Services Marketing
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635

situation. The Cronbach’s alphas of the eight constructs ranged
from 0.89 to 0.98 (Table IV) which shows that the measures
(>0.7) are internally consistent (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). In
addition, CCR of each construct ranges from 0.82 to 0.95
exceeding (>0.7) suggested a minimum of 0.70 (Bagozzi,
1980). Therefore, these results show that all scales of the
measurement model demonstrate adequate internal
consistency for further analysis of the construct model.
The standardized loadings and the squared multiple
correlations (SMCs) for the measurement items and the
constructs were examined as evidence of convergent validity
(Bollen, 1998). Furthermore, the convergent validity can be
achieved when the SMCs between the items and the
construct is greater than the cut-off value of 0.40. As all of the
SMCs of each item surpassed the recommended level,
evidence of convergent validity for the tested items is
provided (Table IV). To assess the discriminant validity, the
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
computed mean variables for each measure. In comparison
with the values suggested by Hu and Bentler (1999), the overall
fit of the model to the data resulted in acceptable statistics as
shown in Table VI (Hu and Bentler, 1999).
The results pertaining to the model are as follows: model fit
indices with x 2(df) = 2.33 (36), x 2 = 83.75, GFI = 0.96,
RMSEA = 0.06, RMR = 0.04, AGFI = 0.92, NFI = 0.98,
TLI = 0.98 and CFI = 0.99, significant at a p < 0.001 level.
All structural path estimates were significant at the 0.01
level; except emotional empathy influence on emotional
service experience, which was significant at the 0.05 level;
where the signs of all structural paths were consistent with the
hypothesized relationships among the latent constructs. The
model accounted for a substantial proportion of the variance
(R2) in three endogenous variables: 89 per cent of emotional
empathy, 93 per cent in emotional experience, 90 per cent in

behavioral intention (Figure 2).

AVE the square root of the AVE in each construct is
compared to the correlation coefficients. As all the variances
are greater than (SQRT AVE > 0.5), the square of the
correlation coefficients ranged from 0.96 to 0.99 (Table IV).
A higher score indicates a more favorable response. These
results show that the variables in the study measurement
model appear to have acceptable levels of discriminant
validity (Watson and Tellegen, 1985).
In addition, the correlation matrix measures confirmed that
adopted constructs could be at least moderately correlated
(Table V). All the items were significantly correlated at 0.001
levels, indicating that the specific measurement variables are
sufficient in their representation of the construct validity (Hair
et al., 1998) for further analysis of the construct model.
4.3 Testing of proposed model
The study examined the associate relationships among
empathy dimensions, emotional service experience and
intention. The results of the structural model tested are
illustrated in Figure 2. Using the path analysis, the predicted
relationships among exogenous and endogenous constructs
were tested. The maximum likelihood estimation was used to
estimate the structural parameters of the model, along with
Hypothesis testing generally led to support for all of the
hypotheses proposed. The relationship between cognitive
empathy and emotional empathy (H1: 0.94 p < 0.001), the
relationship between cognitive empathy and emotional service
experience (H2: 0.64, p < 0.001), the relationship between
emotional empathy and emotional experience (H3: 0.34, p
(0.012) < 0.05), and the relationship between overall
emotional experience and behavioral intention (H4: 0.95 p <
0.001), all appeared to be significant while hotel employees
handling their incidents or inconvenience.
The hypothesized relationship with the proposed model
revealed that the cognitive empathy influences the hotel
guest’s emotional empathy; meanwhile, it also influences the
emotional service experience. Furthermore, H3 confirmed a
significant relationship between emotional empathy and a
hotel guest’s emotional experience. It is also noteworthy that,
according to H4, emotional experiences highly influence
behavioral intention. All these outcomes show that the
proposed model and hypothesis support in understanding the
relationships between the two empathy dimensions,
emotional experiences and intention to develop sensible
judgment (Figure 2).

Table V Correlation matrix

Correlation Sensing Processing Responding Empcon Emocont Pleasant Activated Unpleasant BI
Sensing 1
Processing 0.82 ** 1
Responding 0.73** 0.79** 1
Empcon 0.76** 0.77** 0.77 ** 1
Emocont 0.73** 0.75** 0.72 ** 0.79 ** 1
Pleasant 0.79** 0.77** 0.72** 0.73 ** 0.73** 1
Activated 0.71** 0.73** 0.68** 0.69 ** 0.69 ** 0.88** 1
Unpleasant (0.65)** (0.58)** (0.53)** (0.51)** (0.49)** (0.66)** (0.52)** 1
BI 0.82** 0.82** 0.76 ** 0.79 ** 0.80** 0.83** 0.72** (0.66)** 1
Mean 3.71 3.62 3.66 3.62 3.43 3.35 2.95 3.85 3.59
Std Deviation 1.22 1.28 1.18 1.23 1.28 1.35 1.17 1.49 1.6
SQRT AVE 0.96 0.96 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.99
n = 330
Notes: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). The data indicated within brackets “()” correspond to the negative relationship. Empcon =
empathic concern, Emocont = emotional contagion, BI = behavior intention

626
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
Figure 2 Testing on the proposed model
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
Table VI Test results of proposed hypotheses
Hypothesis tests Relationships Items
H1 EE / CE
H2 EM EX / CE
H3 EM EX / EE
H4 BI / EM EX
Note: SMC = squared multiple correlation, CE = cognitive empathy, EE = emotional empathy, SRW = standardized regression weights, SE = standard error,
CR = critical ratio,***Significant at p < 0.001 level,*significant at p < 0.05 level
In summary, the present study demonstrated that the empathic
service approach, interactive abilities and issues handling skills
of hotel employees positively influence the guests’ intention in
the total sample examined. This positive behavioral intention
leads to revisits, recommendations to others and WOM
intention.
4.4 Business versus leisure hotel guests
The business and leisure guests were compared to determine
whether the impact of empathy dimension on emotional stay
experience is varied by guests’ purpose of visits, particularly
when any inconveniences were encountered during the hotel
stay. Multiple regression analysis was conducted to clearly
show the most significant empathy attribute influencing
emotional service experience in each group.
The results in Table VII represent the predicted variables
which are highly influential in business and leisure guests’
groups. Table VII shows the results of business guests’ empathy
predictive variables which are related to their emotional service
experience. The findings exhibit that sensing, responding and
emotional contagion were significantly related to emotional
hotel service experience. Based on the magnitude of beta
values, the sensing ( b = 0.48 for pleasant, b = 0.31 for
activated, b = 0.69 for unpleasant) and responding ( b = 0.27
for pleasant, b = 0.35 for activated) variables seemed to be
more important contributors to the business guests’ pleasant,
activated and unpleasant emotional experiences than emotional
627
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
SRW SE P Status
0.94 0.05 *** Accepted
0.64 0.16 *** Accepted
0.34 0.14 0.012* Accepted
0.95 0.05 *** Accepted
empathy variables. The result indicated that business guests’
emotion depends on hotel employees’ cognitive empathetic
attitude to listen (sensing) and pay earnest attention
(responding) to guests’ level of discomfort. Therefore, H5 was
supported (Table VII).
In contrast, Table VIII shows that emotional contagion ( b =
0.78 for pleasant, b = 0.22 for activated, b = 0.64 for
unpleasant) relatively highly influences the leisure guests’
emotional service experience. The data further suggest that
leisure guests’ emotional comfort mainly depends on hotel
employees’ emotional contagion revealed by the personal
attention and interactive postures, all of which characterize the
processing capability of employees in the context of discomfort.
Thus, H6 was supported (Table VIII).
Additionally, we used SEM technique using AMOS 18 that
allowed the estimation of individual sub-models with a single
generalized model; the study used this advantage to compare
the models of business (n = 119) and leisure (n = 211) guests.
As an outcome, two individual sub-models were generated with
satiable statistic indices which are shown in Table AI.
The model for business hotel guests disclosed the fact that
cognitive empathy strongly influences the emotional service
experience (H2; 0.9) and behavioral intention at the 0.001 level
(Figure A1). Similar findings have also been obtained in
previous studies (Wilkins et al., 2007). In contrast, the impact
of emotional empathy on the emotional experiences of business
hotel guest’s service perception was insignificant (H3; 0.07).
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience Journal of Services Marketing
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635

Table VII Results of multiple regression analysis (H5 and H6): summary for business guests
Independent variables Dependent variable b t-value p-value VIF F-value R2 Adjusted R2
Pleasant 61.21 0.73 0.72
Sensing 0.48 5.44 *** 3.30
Responding 0.27 3.00 * 3.38
Em Cont 0.17 2.27 0.025n.s. 2.33
Activated 68.30 0.64 0.63
Responding 0.35 3.39 *** 3.38
Sensing 0.31 3.04 * 3.30
Emo cont 0.22 2.52 0.013n.s. 2.33

Unpleasant 107.62 0.48 0.48

Sensing 0.69 10.37 *** 1.00

Note: *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; n.s, not significant; CE = cognitive empathy, EE = emotional empathy, Em Con = empathy concern, Em Cont = emotional
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

contagion, ESE = emotional service experience

Table VIII Results of multiple regression analysis (H5 and H6): Summary for leisure guests
Independent variables Dependent variable b t-value p-value VIF F-value R2 Adjusted R2
Pleasant 149.77 0.61 0.60
Em cont 0.78 17.89 *** 1.00
Activated 102.44 0.60 0.59
Processing 0.44 5.71 *** 3.05
Em cont 0.22 2.91 * 2.86
Em con 0.18 2.31 0.022n.s. 3.09
Unpleasant 141.53 0.40 0.40
Em cont 0.64 11.90 *** 1.00
Notes: *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; n.s., not significant; CE = cognitive empathy, EE = emotional empathy, ESE = emotional service experience, Em Con =
empathy concern, Em Cont = emotional contagion

Interestingly, the pathway from cognitive empathy to emotional
empathy was also had a strong significant impact (H1; 0.95).
Therefore, the study conceived that empathic service
expectations and experiences of the business hotel guests are
strongly connected with cognitive thinking and evaluation
processes when encountering any inconvenience(s) regarding
the hotel accommodation facilities and services.
The pertinent data for the measurements described above
are as follows: model fit indices with x 2(df) = 1.75 (87), x 2 =
152.4, GFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.05, AGFI = 0.89, NFI = 0.97,
TLI = 0.98 and CFI = 0.99, significant at a p < 0.001 level.
On the contrary, emotional empathy had a significant effect
on the emotional service experience and intention of leisure
hotel guests at the 0.001 significance level (H3; 0.65,
Figure A2), as found in few past conceptual studies (Swan and
Combs, 1976). In addition, there was a moderate influence on
emotional service experience by cognitive empathy (H2; 0.33)
at the 0.05 level. Thus, the study resolves the fact that
emotional service experiences and response of leisure guests is
highly determined by emotional empathic aspects through
cognitive perception (H1; 0.94).
The study also examined the relationships between cognitive
empathy and emotional empathy and found that cognitive
empathy influences emotional empathy (H1) at the significance
level of 0.001, in both models for business and leisure guests.
Other than that, in the association between emotional service
experiences and behavioral intention (H4), it was noted that
emotional service experiences significantly determine the
behavioral intention of both business and leisure travel guests at
the 0.001 level of significance (Figures A1, A2). While the
emotional experiences of business guests were completely
determined by cognitive empathy, the emotional service
experiences of the leisure guest were mainly governed by the
emotional empathy. These empirical data also suggested that
the cognitive and emotional empathy attributes differentially
influenced the emotional experience and perception of business
and leisure guests (Figures A1 and A2) and therefore
confirmed the validity of assumptions H5 and H6.
To further confirm the robustness of relationships obtained
above, the parameters corresponding to each hypothesis were
subjected to further validity analyses, and the results are
tabulated in Table AI. It was evident from the x 2 difference
values that each relationship demonstrated a strong association
at the 0.05 significance level (Kim, 2007). In summary, the
study has confirmed its hypotheses empirically and concludes
that two empathy dimensions differentially impact the
emotional service experiences of guests and the degree of
impact depending on the purpose of the visit (business or
leisure). Furthermore, the proposed model fits well with its
hypothesis and could be used to determine the relationship
among empathy dimensions and emotional experience and/or
behavioral intention.

628
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
The interpretation of direct and indirect effects among
business and leisure guests is presented in Table AII. Based on
the matrix obtained for total effects, it is apparent that cognitive
empathy determines the emotional empathy (0.95) and
emotional experience (0.90) of business hotel guests as the sole
factor, and thereby, determines the intention (0.94) too.
However, it was noteworthy that emotional empathy governs
the emotional experience of leisure hotel guests which
subsequently impacts the behavioral intention (0.95). When
the study attempted to compare the indirect effects with the
direct effects, a significantly interesting relationship was found.
Cognitive empathy essentially determines the overall emotional
service experience of leisure hotel guests (0.61) compared to
that of business hotel guests; in which emotional empathy acts
as a potential intercessor. Collectively, results obtained from
both multiple regression analysis and SEM support our
hypotheses.
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
5. Discussion and conclusions
Overall, it was revealed that the interaction of both the
cognitive and emotional dimensions of empathy conjointly
determines the overall emotional service experience and
behavioral intention of hotel guests. The findings indicated that
the cognitive empathy dimension exhibits a great impact on
emotional empathy, which was also supported by previous
social psychological research (Shamay-Tsoory et al., 2009;
Smith, 2006; Oberman and Ramachandran, 2007). It also
confirms that the evaluation of the emotional service
experiences of a hotel guest is operated via two differential
empathetic psychological processes as per prior conceptual
perspectives and empirical arguments. Therefore, the hotel
employees’ emotional service attitude is associated with the
positive perceptions of hotel guests which could subsequently
drive the future behavioral intention of guests such as
willingness to return (Solomon et al., 1985) and guest loyalty.
Kim et al.’s (2001) and Suki’s (2012) similar findings also
support the results of the current study (Kim et al., 2001; Suki,
2012).
Importantly, the cognitive dimensional empathic service
approach helps to understand the cognitive perspective-taking
and behaviors of business hotel guests’ perceptions. The findings
of previous studies focusing on business travelers’ expectations,
disappointments, satisfaction and/or dissatisfaction are in
accordance with our results (Gundersen et al., 1996; Scanlan and
McPhail, 2000; Dolnicar, 2002). Despite the general concern on
fundamental hotel components, there is a strong emphasis on
intangible elements in terms of business guests’ perspective
(Dolnicar, 2002). Thus, the hotel employees may incorporate
AEL practices (Drollinger et al., 2006) which help:
 to sense the business hotel guest’s intention regarding the
incident and pay closer attention;
 in the processing phase, and the hotel employee would
remember the main points about the guest’s relative
incident; and
 to respond to the guest based on the circumstance in a
favorable manner.
As a result, an employee capable of active empathic listening is
most readily associated with skills that enable one to be an
effective conversational partner, one that can both initiate and
629
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
maintain a service environment and manage through problem
handling skills. Thereby, AEL employees build pleasant and
positive images in business hotel guests’ intentions. These
findings were further supported by the service marketing and
communication studies (Taute et al., 2010; Greason and
Cashwell, 2009; Lilius et al., 2008; Drollinger et al., 2006;
Wieseke et al., 2012).
Comparatively, the empathic concern could be reflected
through the hotel employee’s quick and genuine reaction
featured by enhancing tendency, courtesy and compassion to
leisure hotel guests. As a result, an emotional contagion in
response to leisure guests is shown when they encounter any
critical emotional situation or feel discomfort and confront the
employees for any probable solution(s). The result of this study
not only contributes to fill the research gap in empathic service
but also provides possible implication guidance to practice an
effective emotional hotel employee service technique. The
studies demonstrated that the interaction of the cognitive and
emotional dimensions of empathy determines the hotel guest’s
overall emotional experience and intentions. The potential
implications are outlined in each hierarchical step as follows:
In hotel service practices designed to determine positive hotel
stay experiences, more attention is required to analyze the
purpose of the guest’s visit. One of the important components
of customer motivation is being practiced as a part of Guest
Comment Cards (Su, 2004). The current study found that
business guests experienced negative perceptions regarding
accommodation facilities in terms of tangible aspects followed
by cognitive empathic aspects. The negative remarks of leisure
travelers were mainly about the emotional empathic service
approaches. Therefore, hoteliers should have strategies to
provide services with an appropriate empathic-touch based on
the guest’s personal profile, as the expectations are driven by
their purpose of visit including business or leisure. The human
resource management of the hotel must recruit competent
people who fit a particular emotional service role based on
personality types. Management could assist the hotel
employees with emotional display service settings. The AEL
communication tool using perspective-taking technique places
the employee in the business guests’ view comparatively, thus
significantly affecting the nature of the interaction with front
line staff (Peccei and Rosenthal, 1997). Therefore, cross-
cultural communication, interaction practices and role-playing
with multi-language skills are essential to enhance the domestic
hotel emotional service practice, positive intentions and loyalty
of guests.
Even though emotional display and empathic concern
practices vary among the domestic star-rated hotels,
friendliness is a key of positive emotional empathic technique
that provides an opportunity to build positive employee–
customer interactions with comfortable feelings particularly for
leisure hotel guests. Hosting awareness programs like “Feel-
Like-a-Guest” and “Walking in the shoes of the customer”
might support the development of emotionally competent,
guest-friendly employees (Juwaheer and Ross, 2003).
Advanced training programs may develop skilled employees, so
that emotionally touched service can be delivered. As domestic
and international leisure travelers’ demands are increasing
factors in tourism in Jeju province/South Korea, these
implications should be incorporated into hotel operational
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
practices. Core-findings of the current study may be useful to
hotel management while outlining the working role, emotional
behavior and inter-communication attributes of employees
with leisure hotel guests, which could subsequently augment a
pleasant emotional employee–customer relationship.
This paper is limited in that the results can be affected by
respondents’ capacity to recall uncomfortable situations. Also,
a large number of group package tourists are excluded from
leisure guest populations due to the mediation by tour guides
who may have limited the interaction between leisure hotel
guests and employees. Although Jeju is the most popular
tourism destination in South Korea, the study samples are still
geographically biased to generalize the study results. For better
reliable application of the study results to the entire hospitality
industry of Korea, data collection is required to be extended
nation-wide. Also, the sample size for each of business and
leisure guest groups was somewhat small considering the
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
number of parameters used in this study. For future study,
using a larger sample size can improve reliability and
generalization of the results. A future study may be extended
with the focus on comparing in depth the levels of
accommodation facilities (star-rated hotels) as well as other
lodging service providers such as pensions, guest houses and
hostels. Further, a comparison of the influence of cognitive
empathy and emotional empathy on emotional hotel stay
experience between international and domestic hotel guest
groups can be another interesting future study topic.
References
Abelson, R.P. and Sermat, V. (1962), “Multidimensional
scaling of facial expressions”, Journal of Experimental
Psychology, Vol. 63 No. 6, pp. 546-554.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1982), “Some methods for
respecifying measurement models to obtain unidimensional
construct measurement”, Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 453-460.
Arbuckle, J. (2009), Amos 18 User’s Guide, SPSS, Chicago, IL.
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.
Babin, B.J. and Griffin, M. (1998), “The nature of satisfaction:
an updated examination and analysis”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 127-136.
Bagozzi, R.P. (1980), Causal Models in Marketing, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Baron-Cohen, S. and Wheelwright, S. (2004), “The empathy
quotient: an investigation of adults with Asperger syndrome
or high functioning autism, and normal sex differences”,
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 163-175.
Barrett-Lennard, G.T. (1981), “The empathy cycle:
refinement of a nuclear concept”, Journal of Counseling
Psychology, Vol. 28 No. 2, p. 91.
Barsky, J.D. and Labagh, R. (1992), “A strategy for customer
satisfaction”, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 32-40.
Barsky, J. and Nash, L. (2002), “Evoking emotion: affective
keys to hotel loyalty”, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 39-46.
630
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
Basil, D.Z., Ridgway, N.M. and Basil, M.D. (2008), “Guilt
and giving: a process model of empathy and efficacy”,
Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-23.
Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D. and Anderson, S.W.
(1998), “Dissociation of working memory from decision
making within the human prefrontal cortex”, The Journal of
Neuroscience, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 428-437.
Bernstein, W.M. and Davis, M.H. (1982), “Perspective-taking,
self-consciousness, and accuracy in person perception”, Basic
and Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 1-19.
Bettencourt, L.A. (1997), “Customer voluntary performance:
customers as partners in service delivery”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 383-406.
Bhave, S.V., Ghoda, L. and Hoffman, P.L. (1999), “Brain-
derived neurotrophic factor mediates the anti-apoptotic
effect of NMDA in cerebellar granule neurons: signal
transduction cascades and site of ethanol action”, The
Journal of Neuroscience, Vol. 19 No. 9, pp. 3277-3286.
Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H. and Tetreault, M.S. (1990), “The
service encounter: diagnosing favorable and unfavorable
incidents”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 1,
pp. 71-84.
Blunch, N. (2012), Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling
Using IBM SPSS Statistics and AMOS, Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Bodie, G.D. (2011), “The active-empathic listening scale
(AELS): conceptualization and evidence of validity within
the interpersonal domain”, Communication Quarterly, Vol. 59
No. 3, pp. 277-295.
Bollen, K.A. (1998), Structural Equation Models, Wiley Online
Library, Hoboken, NJ.
Bowen, J.T. and Shoemaker, S. (2003), “Loyalty: a strategic
commitment”, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 44 Nos 5/6, pp. 31-46.
Byrne, B.M. (2009), Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS:
Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL.
Cadotte, E.R. and Turgeon, N. (1988), “Key factors in guest
satisfaction”, Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 4,
p. 44.
Callan, R.J. and Kyndt, G. (2001), “Business travellers’
perception of service quality: a prefatory study of two
European city centre hotels”, International Journal of Tourism
Research, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 313-323.
Chu, R.K.S. and Choi, T. (2000), “An importance-
performance analysis of hotel selection factors in the
Hong Kong hotel industry: a comparison of business and
leisure travellers”, Tourism Management, Vol. 21 No. 4,
pp. 363-377.
Chu, K.H.L. and Murrmann, S.K. (2006), “Development and
validation of the hospitality emotional labor scale”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1181-1191.
Coke, J.S., Batson, C.D. and Mcdavis, K. (1978), “Empathic
mediation of helping: a two-stage model”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 7, p. 752.
Dapretto, M., Davies, M.S., Pfeifer, J.H., Scott, A.A., Sigman,
M., Bookheimer, S.Y. and Iacoboni, M. (2005),
“Understanding emotions in others: mirror neuron
dysfunction in children with autism spectrum disorders”,
Nature Neuroscience, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 28-30.
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
Davidow, M. (2000), “The bottom line impact of
organizational responses to customer complaints”, Journal
of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 473-490.
Day, R.L. (1980), “Research perspectives on consumer
complaining behavior”, in Lamb, C.W. and Dunne, P.M.
(Eds), Theoretical Developments in Marketing, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, pp. 211-215.
Day, R.L. (1984), “Modeling choices among alternative
responses to dissatisfaction”, Advances in Consumer Research,
Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 496-499.
Decety, J. and Jackson, P.L. (2004), “The functional
architecture of human empathy”, Behavioral and Cognitive
Neuroscience Reviews, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 71-100.
Decrop, A. (1999), “Tourists’ decision-making and behavior
processes”, in Pizam, A. and Mansfeld, Y. (Eds), Consumer
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
Behavior in Travel and Tourism, The Haworth Hospitality
Press, New York, NY, pp. 103-133.
Devoldre, I., Davis, M.H., Verhofstadt, L.L. and Buysse, A.
(2010), “Empathy and social support provision in couples:
social support and the need to study the underlying
processes”, The Journal of Psychology, Vol. 144 No. 3,
pp. 259-284.
Dolnicar, S. (2002), “Business travellers’ hotel expectations
and disappointments: a different perspective to hotel
attribute importance investigation”, Asia Pacific Journal of
Tourism Research, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 29-35.
Donovan, R.J., Rossiter, J.R., Marcoolyn, G. and Nesdale, A.
(1994), “Store atmosphere and purchasing behavior”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 283-294.
Drollinger, T., Comer, L.B. and Warrington, P.T. (2006),
“Development and validation of the active empathetic
listening scale”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 2,
pp. 161-180.
Dubé, L. and Renaghan, L.M. (1999), “How hotel attributes
deliver the promised benefits: guests’ perspectives on the
lodging industry’s functional best practices (part II)”, The
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 40
No. 5, pp. 89-85.
Dubé, L. and Renaghan, L.M. (2000), “Creating visible
customer value how customers view best-practice
champions”, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 62-72.
Dymond, R.F. (1949), “A scale for the measurement of
empathic ability”, Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 13
No. 2, p. 127.
Eisenberg, N. (2002), “Distinctions among various modes of
empathy-related reactions: a matter of importance in
humans”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 33-34.
Eisenberg, N. and Miller, P.A. (1987), “The relation of
empathy to prosocial and related behaviors”, Psychological
Bulletin, Vol. 101 No. 1, p. 91.
Eisenberg, N. and Strayer, J. (1987), “Critical issues in the
study of empathy”, in Eisenberg, N. and Strayer, J. (Eds),
Empathy and Its Development, Cambridge University Press,
New York, NY, pp. 3-13.
Fairweather, A. (2013), “How to win more customers with the
human touch”, Global Hospitality Newsletter.
631
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
Feldman Barrett, L. and Russell, J.A. (1998), “Independence
and bipolarity in the structure of current affect”, Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 4, p. 967.
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.
Gearhart, C.C. and Bodie, G.D. (2011), “Active-empathic
listening as a general social skill: evidence from bivariate and
canonical correlations”, Communication Reports, Vol. 24
No. 2, pp. 86-98.
Greason, P.B. and Cashwell, C.S. (2009), “Mindfulness and
counseling self-efficacy: the mediating role of attention and
empathy”, Counselor Education and Supervision, Vol. 49
No. 1, pp. 2-19.
Gundersen, M.G., Heide, M. and Olsson, U.H. (1996),
“Hotel guest satisfaction among business travelers: what are
the important factors?”, the Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 72-81.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and William, C.
(1998), Black, Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice-Hall
International, WC.
Hartline, M.D. and Jones, K.C. (1996), “Employee
performance cues in a hotel service environment: influence
on perceived service quality, value, and word-of-mouth
intentions”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 35 No. 3,
pp. 207-215.
Heung, V.C., Qu, H. and Chu, R. (2001), “The
relationship between vacation factors and socio-
demographic and travelling characteristics: the case of
Japanese leisure travellers”, Tourism Management,
Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 259-269.
Hoffman, D.D. and Richards, W.A. (1984), “Parts of
recognition”, Cognition, Vol. 18 Nos 1/3, pp. 65-96.
Hogan, R. (1969), “Development of an empathy scale”,
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 33 No. 3,
p. 307.
Hollin, C. (2002), “Criminological psychology”, in Maguire,
M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook
of Criminology, Oxford University Press, Oxford,
pp. 144-174.
Homburg, C. and Stock, R.M. (2005), “Exploring the
conditions under which salesperson work satisfaction can
lead to customer satisfaction”, Psychology and Marketing,
Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 393-420.
Homburg, C., Wieseke, J. and Bornemann, T. (2009),
“Implementing the marketing concept at the employee-
customer interface: the role of customer need knowledge”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 4, pp. 64-81.
Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit
indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria
versus new alternatives”, Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55.
Jacoby, J. and Jaccard, J.J. (1981), “The sources, meaning, and
validity of consumer complaint behavior: a psychological
analysis”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 57 No. 3.
Jang, S.S. and Namkung, Y. (2009), “Perceived quality,
emotions, and behavioral intentions: application of an
extended Mehrabian–Russell model to restaurants”, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 451-460.
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
Jeju-Weekly (2013), Highest Ever High Season: A Record-
Breaking Summer for Jeju Tourism.
Johnson, M.D., Gustafsson, A., Andreassen, T.W., Lervik, L.
and Cha, J. (2001), “The evolution and future of national
customer satisfaction index models”, Journal of Economic
Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 217-245.
Jones, T.O. and Sasser, W.E. (1995), “Why satisfied customers
defect”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73 No. 6, p. 88.
Juwaheer, T.D. and Ross, D.L. (2003), “A study of hotel guest
perceptions in Mauritius”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 15 No. 2,
pp. 105-115.
Kaplan, J.T. and Iacoboni, M. (2006), “Getting a grip on other
minds: mirror neurons, intention understanding, and cognitive
empathy”, Social Neuroscience, Vol. 1 Nos 3/4, pp. 175-183.
Kashyap, R. and Bojanic, D.C. (2000), “A structural analysis
of value, quality, and price perceptions of business and
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
leisure travelers”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 39 No. 1,
pp. 45-51.
Kim, G.S. (2007), NEW AMOS 16.0 Structural Equation
Modeling Analysis 681.
Kim, W.G., Han, J.S. and Lee, E. (2001), “Effects of
relationship marketing on repeat purchase and word of
mouth”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 272-288.
Knutson, B.J. (1988), “Frequent travelers: making them happy
and bringing them back”, The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 82-87.
Köhler, W. (2015), The Task of Gestalt Psychology, Princeton
University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Kuo, C.M., Chen, L.C. and Lu, C.Y. (2012), “Factorial
validation of hospitality service attitude”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 3,
pp. 944-951.
Lamm, C., Nusbaum, H.C., Meltzoff, A.N. and Decety, J.
(2007), “What are you feeling? Using functional magnetic
resonance imaging to assess the modulation of sensory and
affective responses during empathy for pain”, PLoS One,
Vol. 2 No. 12, pp. e1292.
Lazarus, R.S. (1999), “Hope: an emotion and a vital coping
resource against despair”, Social Research, Vol. 66 No. 2,
pp. 653-678.
Lewis, R.C. (1984a), “The basis off hotel selection”, Cornell
Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 54-69.
Lewis, R.C. (1984b), “Isolating differences in hotel attributes”,
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 25
No. 3, pp. 64-77.
Lilius, J.M., Worline, M.C., Maitlis, S., Kanov, J., Dutton, J.E.
and Frost, P. (2008), “The contours and consequences of
compassion at work”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 193-218.
Lin, I.Y. (2004), “Evaluating a servicescape: the effect of
cognition and emotion”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 163-178.
Mcbane, D.A. (1995), “Empathy and the salesperson: a
multidimensional perspective”, Psychology & Marketing,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 349-370.
Mccleary, K.W., Weaver, P.A. and Hutchinson, J.C. (1993),
“Hotel selection factors as they relate to business travel
632
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
situations”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 32 No. 2,
pp. 42-48.
Mcdowell, S. (2013), How to Apologize to Customers, Global
Hospitality Newsletter.
Marketmetrix (2012), The Most Expensive Problems, Market
Metrix, Larkspur, CA.
Mason, D.D., Tideswell, C. and Roberts, E. (2006), “Guest
perceptions of hotel loyalty”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 191-206.
Mehrabian, A. and Epstein, N. (1972), “A measure of
emotional empathy1”, Journal of Personality, Vol. 40 No. 4,
pp. 525-543.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to
Environmental Psychology, The MIT Press, Cambridge.
Miller, K.I., Stiff, J.B. and Ellis, B.H. (1988), “Communication
and empathy as precursors to burnout among human service
workers”, Communications Monographs, Vol. 55 No. 3,
pp. 250-265.
Mittal, B., Baron, S. and Baron, S. (2016), “Retrospective:
why do customers switch? The dynamics of satisfaction
versus loyalty”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 6.
Neal, J.D., Sirgy, M.J. and Uysal, M. (1999), “The role of
satisfaction with leisure travel/tourism services and
experience in satisfaction with leisure life and overall life”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 153-163.
Nunkoo, R., Ramkissoon, H. and Gursoy, D. (2013), “Use of
structural equation modeling in tourism research past,
present, and future”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 52
No. 6, pp. 759-771.
Oberman, L.M. and Ramachandran, V.S. (2007), “The
simulating social mind: the role of the mirror neuron system
and simulation in the social and communicative deficits of
autism spectrum disorders”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 133
No. 2, p. 310.
Oh, H. (1999), “Service quality, customer satisfaction, and
customer value: a holistic perspective”, International Journal
of Hospitality Management, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 67-82.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988),
“Servqual”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 12-40.
Parker, S.K. and Axtell, C.M. (2001), “Seeing another
viewpoint: antecedents and outcomes of employee
perspective taking”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44
No. 6, pp. 1085-1100.
Park, H.S. and Raile, A.N. (2010), “Perspective taking and
communication satisfaction in coworker dyads”, Journal of
Business and Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 569-581.
Park, O.J., Lehto, X. and Park, J.K. (2008), “Service failures
and complaints in the family travel market: a justice
dimension approach”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 22
No. 7, pp. 520-532.
Peccei, R. and Rosenthal, P. (1997), “The antecedents of
employee commitment to customer service: evidence from a
UK”, International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 66-86.
Pilling, B.K. and Eroglu, S. (1994), “An empirical
examination of the impact of salesperson empathy and
professionalism and merchandise salability on retail
buyers’ evaluations”, The Journal of Personal Selling and
Sales Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 45-58.
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu
Preston, S.D. and De Waal, F.B. (2002), “Empathy: its
ultimate and proximate bases”, Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 1-20.
Reisenzein, R. (1994), “Pleasure-arousal theory and the
intensity of emotions”, Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 3, p. 525.
Rupp, D.E., Mccance, A.S., Spencer, S. and Sonntag, K.
(2008), “Customer (in) justice and emotional labor: the role
of perspective taking, anger, and emotional regulation†”,
Journal of Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 903-924.
Russell, J.A. and Carroll, J.M. (1999), “On the bipolarity of positive
and negative affect”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 125 No. 1, p. 3.
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 No. 5, p. 848.
Scanlan, L. and Mcphail, J. (2000), “Forming service
relationships with hotel business travelers: the critical
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)
attributes to improve retention”, Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 491-513.
Schneider, B. and Bowen, D.E. (1985), “Employee and
customer perceptions of service in banks: replication and
extension”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 3,
p. 423.
Schulte-Rüther, M., Markowitsch, H.J., Fink, G.R. and Piefke,
M. (2007), “Mirror neuron and theory of mind mechanisms
involved in face-to-face interactions: a functional magnetic
resonance imaging approach to empathy”, Journal of
Cognitive Neuroscience, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 1354-1372.
Shamay-Tsoory, S.G., Aharon-Peretz, J. and Perry, D. (2009),
“Two systems for empathy: a double dissociation between
emotional and cognitive empathy in inferior frontal gyrus versus
ventromedial prefrontal lesions”, Brain, Vol. 132 No. 3,
pp. 617-627.
Singh, J. (1988), “Consumer complaint intentions and
behavior: definitional and taxonomical issues”, The Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 93-107.
Smith, A. (2006), “Cognitive empathy and emotional empathy
in human behavior and evolution”, Psychological Record,
Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 3-21.
Sohn, H.K. and Lee, T.J. (2012), “Relationship between
HEXACO personality factors and emotional labour of
service providers in the tourism industry”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 116-125.
Solomon, M.R., Surprenant, C., Czepiel, J.A. and Gutman, E.
G. (1985), “A role theory perspective on dyadic interactions:
the service encounter”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49
No. 1, pp. 99-111.
Spreng, R.A., Harrell, G.D. and Mackoy, R.D. (1995),
“Service recovery: impact on satisfaction and intentions”,
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 15-23.
Su, A.Y.L. (2004), “Customer satisfaction measurement
practice in Taiwan hotels”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 397-408.
633
Journal of Services Marketing
Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635
Suki, N.M. (2012), “Examining hotel service quality elements
effects on overall tourists satisfaction”, European Journal of
Social Sciences, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 646-653.
Swan, J.E. and Combs, L.J. (1976), “Product performance and
consumer satisfaction: a new concept”, The Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 25-33.
Taute, H.A., Huhmann, B.A. and Thakur, R. (2010),
“Emotional information management: concept development
and measurement in public service announcements”,
Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 417-444.
Thibaut, J.W. and Kelley, H.H. (1959), The Social Psychology of
Groups, Wiley, New York, NY.
Watson, D. and Tellegen, A. (1985), “Toward a consensual
structure of mood”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 98 No. 2,
pp. 219-235.
Watson, P., Grisham, S.O., Trotter, M.V. and Biderman, M.
D. (1984), “Narcissism and empathy: validity evidence for
the narcissistic personality inventory”, Journal of Personality
Assessment, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 301-305.
Westbrook, R.A. and Oliver, R.L. (1991), “The dimensionality
of consumption emotion patterns and consumer satisfaction”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 84-91.
Wierzbicka, A. (1992), “Defining emotion concepts”, Cognitive
Science, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 539-581.
Wieseke, J., Geigenmüller, A. and Kraus, F. (2012), “On the
role of empathy in customer-employee interactions”, Journal
of Service Research, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 316-331.
Wilkins, H., Merrilees, B. and Herington, C. (2007),
“Towards an understanding of total service quality in
hotels”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,
Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 840-853.
Williams, B.K. (2013), The Smile Reserve: Is It Suited to the
Hospitality Industry? Global Hospitality Newsletter.
Wolff, S.B., Pescosolido, A.T. and Druskat, V.U. (2002),
“Emotional intelligence as the basis of leadership emergence
in self-managing teams”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 13
No. 5, pp. 505-522.
Wundt, W.M. (1912/1924), An Introduction to Psychology, in
Pintner, R.T. (Trans.), Original work published 1912, Allen
& Unwin, London.
Yalch, R.F. and Spangenberg, E.R. (2000), “The effects of
music in a retail setting on real and perceived shopping
times”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2,
pp. 139-147.
Yi, Y. (1990), “A critical review of consumer satisfaction”,
Review of Marketing, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 68-123.
Yik, M., Russell, J.A. and Steiger, J.H. (2011), “A 12-point
circumplex structure of core affect”, Emotion, Vol. 11 No. 4,
pp. 705-731.
Zait, A. and Bertea, P.E. (2011), “Methods for testing
discriminant validity”, Management & Marketing Journal,
Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 217-224.
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience Journal of Services Marketing
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635

Appendix

Figure A1 Model testing for business hotel guests (n =119)

Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

Figure A2 Model testing for leisure hotel guests (n = 211)

Table AI Comparison on the hypotheses between business and leisure guests and testing of chi-square value changes
B (n = 119) L (n = 211) Testing of chi-square value changes
H Relationships SRW S.E P SRW S.E P x2 df P x 2/df x 2(D x 2)† Ddf
H1 EEMP / CEMP 0.95 0.08 *** 0.94 0.06 ***
H2 EMOEX / CEMP 0.9 0.28 *** 0.33 0.2 0.048* 174.81 75 *** 2.33 22.41* 12
H3 EMOEX / EEMP 0.07 0.25 0.772n.s 0.65 0.19 *** 174.97 75 *** 2.33 22.57* 12
H4 BI / EMOEXP 0.94 0.08 *** 0.95 0.06 *** 152.4 (model)* 87 *** 1.75 – –
Notes: *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; n.s., not significant; basic model

634
 Hotel guests’ emotional service experience Journal of Services Marketing
Hamsanandini Umasuthan, Oun-Joung Park and Jong-Hyun Ryu Volume 31 · Number 6 · 2017 · 618–635

Table AII Total, direct and indirect effects

Direct effects Indirect effects Total effects
H Paths B (n = 119) L (n = 211) B (n = 119) L (n = 211) B (n = 119) L (n = 211)
H1 EE / CE 0.95*** 0.94*** – – 0.95*** 0.94***
H2 EMOEX / CE 0.90*** 0.33* 0.07n.s 0.61*** 0.97*** 0.33*
H3 EMOEX / EE 0.07n.s 0.65*** – – 0.07n.s 0.65***
H4 BI / EMOEX 0.94*** 0.95*** – 0.61*** 0.94*** 0.95***
Notes: H, hypothesis; B, Business hotel guests; L, Leisure hotel guests; CE, cognitive empathy; EE, emotional empathy; EMEX, emotional experience; BI,
behavioral intention; SRW, standardized regression weights; S.E, standard error; n.s., not significant; ***significant at p < 0.001 level,*significant at p <
0.05 level; †: Kim (2007)

About the authors tourism marketing, particularly the tourist behaviour,

tourism marketing communication strategies and service
Umasuthan Hamsanandini is a Doctoral Student in the management.
Department of Tourism Management at Jeju National
Downloaded by Memorial University of Newfoundland At 05:17 05 December 2017 (PT)

University, majoring in Tourism Management. Her research
interests include tourist behaviour, hotel service management
and tourism marketing.
Oun-Joung Park is an Associate Professor in the
Department of Tourism Management at Jeju National
University. Her areas of interests include hospitality and
Jong-Hyun Ryu is an Assistant Professor in the Department
of Global Business Administration at Hongik University. His
research areas are energy-related operation management,
quality control, probabilistic optimization, simulation
optimization and multipurpose optimization. Jong-Hyun Ryu
is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: jongh.
ryu@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

635

View publication stats