Zins2002 (New)

This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]
On: 09 February 2014, At: 03:10

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK
Journal of Travel & Tourism

Marketing
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttm20
Consumption Emotions,
Experience Quality and
Satisfaction
a
Andreas H. Zins
a
Institute for Tourism and Leisure Studies,
Vienna University of Economics and Business
Administration , Vienna, Austria
Published online: 13 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: Andreas H. Zins (2002) Consumption Emotions, Experience Quality
and Satisfaction, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 12:2-3, 3-18, DOI: 10.1300/
J073v12n02_02
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J073v12n02_02
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Moskow State Univ Bibliote] at 03:11 09 February 2014
ARTICLES
Consumption Emotions, Experience Quality

and Satisfaction:
A Structural Analysis
for Complainers versus Non-Complainers
Andreas H. Zins
ABSTRACT. Previous research has demonstrated that attribute based

evaluations are significant determinants of satisfaction: direct and indirect
effects through cognitive evaluation induced emotions. This study argues
that in a multiple-encounter service environment like tourism the experi-
ence elicited emotions are antecedent to the final cognitive evaluation of
the entire consumption episode. Both affective and cognitive responses
exercise an almost independent impact on overall satisfaction conceptual-
ized according to Oliver’s (1997) multi-domain approach. Considerable
differences in the structure of cognitive effects on satisfaction are demon-
strated for complaining and non-complaining consumers. [Article copies
available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-
HAWORTH. E-mail address: <getinfo@haworthpressinc.com> Website: <http://
www.HaworthPress.com> © 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
KEYWORDS. Consumption emotions, satisfaction, confirmation/discon-

firmation, complaining
Andreas H. Zins is affiliated with the Institute for Tourism and Leisure Studies, Vi-
enna University of Economics and Business Administration, Vienna, Austria.
Address correspondence to: Andreas H. Zins, Institute for Tourism and Leisure
Studies, Augasse 2-6, A-1090 Vienna, Austria (E-mail: zins@wu-wien.ac.at).
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 12(2/3) 2002
http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/product.asp?sku=J073
 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 3
4 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
INTRODUCTION
Satisfaction research has adopted the perspective that both emotional

and cognitive responses are responsible for this kind of post-purchase
evaluation. To find consistent structural relationships across different
studies it would be necessary to compare identical or at least very simi-
lar concepts. However, this cannot be observed throughout a number of
published studies: neither on the side of the satisfaction concept
(Bagozzi et al., 1999; Hunt, 1977; Westbrook and Oliver, 1991) nor on
the antecedent side of cognitive and affective appraisals (Mano and Oli-
ver, 1993; Nyer, 1997; Oliver, 1993; Zajonc, 1980). Nyer (1997) argued
with Lazarus (1991) that emotions are consequences of cognitive ap-
praisals. Zajonc (1980; Zajonc and Markus, 1984) and Izard (1977) be-
lieve that while cognitions may be a sufficient cause for emotions,
cognitions may not be necessary for the formation of emotions. In this
study it is maintained that consumption emotions–evoked through expe-
riencing various episodes of customer-environment interactions–are an-
tecedent to cognitive evaluations of the service encounter. This reasoning
does not contradict Nyer’s position as final product or service appraisals
may trigger emotional reactions that differ in nature and direction from
immediate affective responses during consumption experiences. This
study investigates the structural relationships of consumption emotions
and disconfirmation evaluations with respect to satisfaction formation
using Oliver’s domain related satisfaction scale (Oliver, 1997) in the
field of tourism services. Complaining will be treated as a mechanism
for coping with excessive negative perceptions (Nyer, 1997; West-
brook, 1987). It is expected that both emotional and cognitive responses
as well as structural relationships with satisfaction will vary between
customers who already complained or wanted to complain and those
who felt no reason to complain.
CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND
Model Components
There is ample evidence that emotional reactions associated with the

consumption experience are fundamental for the determination of satis-
faction (Liljander and Strandvik, 1997; Oliver, 1993; Mano and Oliver,
Andreas H. Zins 5
1993; Westbrook, 1987; Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). The affective

perspective complements the previous research findings confirming
that satisfaction ascends when perceived performance is equal or

greater than expected performance. Both perspectives, positive and
negative affect, disconfirmation as well as attribute satisfaction, were
confirmed to impact satisfaction when applied to automobiles and to a
university course (Oliver, 1993). That study concludes that attribute
satisfaction correlates more significantly with satisfaction in the case of
automobiles whereas affect influences satisfaction more strongly in the
case of the university course. In addition, the model considering affect
and disconfirmation is more predictive of satisfaction than a model con-
sidering affect and attribute satisfaction.
Apart from the necessary conceptual difference between attribute
satisfaction and attribute performance evaluation (Oliver, 1993) it is
questionable whether attribute satisfaction is an adequate cognitive ap-
praisal. It is also doubtful whether the adjectives (e.g., essential, excit-
ing, nice, pleasant) used for product evaluations by Mano and Oliver
(1993) are apt to reflect appraisals for which consumers need to engage
much of their cognitive capabilities. Much more cognitive effort has to
be applied if a consumer is asked to compare actual performance or per-
ception with previously held expectations. Hence, it is proposed to use a
disconfirmation approach for: (a) integrating a cognition-dominant per-
spective; and, (b) and simultaneously bridging the emotional research
efforts to the service quality paradigm.
Nyer (1997) used product performance measures as cognitive ap-
praisals together with emotional reactions for evaluating a computer ex-
periment. His theoretical position and empirical findings are in favor of
the cognitive appraisal–emotions sequence. However, it can be argued
that the exercise on the computer is accompanied by manifold emotions
while a final judgement on various characteristics of the PC-system
cannot be determined before finishing the whole task. As the measure-
ment explicitly referred to the feelings the respondents experienced
during the task it can be assumed that the emotional responses did not
reflect the feelings about the outcome of the experiment. Hence, follow-
ing the affective-processing mechanisms (i.e., affective traces or mark-
ers in episodic memory) reviewed by Cohen and Areni (1991) the
opposite sequence (emotional experience–cognitive product or service
appraisal) is supported in this study (cf., Figure 1).
Disconfirmation was shown to be independent from consumption
emotions (Oliver, 1993). This result may be biased due to various fac-
FIGURE 1. Conceptual model explaining satisfaction formation.

Consumption Subjective
Satisfaction
Emotions Disconfirmation
tors: e.g., only a single measurement item capturing the overall perfor-
mance evaluation was applied; or by the reference object of the
emotional responses (“intensity of emotional experience”–see Oliver
[1993], p. 423) of either process or result experiences. Service en-
counters and, in particular, the experience of vacation travel, involve
not only the products and services delivered by the service provider
but also the surrounding conditions, such as the customers them-
selves, other customers, ‘atmospherics’ as defined by Kotler (1973),
or ‘servicescapes’ as defined by Bitner (1992). If the differentiated
view of various service and encounter characteristics is followed–
common within the service quality literature–it can be expected that
emotional reactions and cognitive evaluations are not completely in-
dependent from each other. Moreover, those domains of service expe-
riences that are perceived and evaluated more holistically will have
stronger ties with affective reactions during the service encounter than
other domains.
Consumption emotions address the affective responses elicited dur-
ing product usage or the consumption experience. Previous work by
psychologists (e.g., Izard, 1977; Russell and Mehrabian, 1977) has been
the starting point to validate the circumplex structure of human emo-
tions in the field of marketing research. Depending on the set of applied
emotions a two- or three-factor structure emerged in several studies and
revealed significant convergence (see Bagozzi et al., 1999). Mano and
Oliver (1993), using a combination of Watson Clark, and Tellegen’s
(1988) PANAS scale and Mano’s (1991) circumplex scale, found cor-
roborating results in a two-factor (positive and negative affect) and a
three-factor solution (upbeat positive affect, negative affect, low arousal
and warmth). After further investigation (between-group convergence
and multidimensional scaling) they supported a two-dimensional struc-
ture of the product-elicited emotions. Mano and Oliver (1993), as well
Andreas H. Zins 7
as Richins (1997), urged the use of a more complex emotional measure.

Therefore, their measurement instrument was adopted for this study as
it provided a balanced and varied set of negative and positive adjectives.

The conceptualization of the satisfaction construct seems to be an is-
sue only for a very limited number of researchers. It is rather excep-
tional to find a discussion about the content (e.g., Giese and Cote 1999)
or to find more than a single-item measure to capture overall satisfac-
tion with the exchange process. Bagozzi et al. (1999, p. 201) state that
satisfaction is neither a basic emotion nor a central emotional category
in leading theories of emotions. However, the most frequently used
measure is simply represented by a uni- or bi-polar scale for satisfac-
tion. Nevertheless, there is great support to view satisfaction as an
evaluative post-choice or post-experience judgement that has affinity to
attitudes and yet is assumed to represent a hedonic continuum (West-
brook and Oliver, 1991). Using Oliver’s 12-item scale of satisfaction
(Oliver, 1997), it is assumed to encounter both a variety of emotional re-
actions that are presumably more important outcomes of purchase
(Bagozzi et al., 1999) and the cognitive perspective of the consumption
evaluation as well.
Special attention is intended to be drawn on differences between
complaining and non-complaining customers. Dröge and Halstead
(1991) focused just on this issue illustrating effects of subjective dis-
confirmation and retrieved expectations on satisfaction and post-pur-
chase affective response in the context of carpet owners. While the
supposed higher cognitive engagement by complainers was corrobo-
rated with respect to the expectation influence on satisfaction and affect
(Oliver and DeSarbo, 1988), the path from disconfirmation to satisfaction
turned out five times stronger for complainers. However, these authors
investigated affective response in a post-purchase post-consumption situa-
tion. In this study the focus is on the affective states during the consump-
tion period. In addition, it is argued that for some facets of a holiday
experience expectations had been formed prior to the departure while for
numerous service situations and episodes no concrete expectations exist.
Therefore, a generally higher level of cognitive elaboration is not as-
sumed for complaining customers. In contrast, it is postulated that either
unpleasant incidents and/or large gaps between expectations and deliv-
ered service quality levels will negatively influence the traveler’s emo-
tional state which irradiates to the final evaluation of the consumption
experience (→ satisfaction).
Hypotheses
Summarizing the conceptual discussion above the following hypoth-

eses describe the model to be tested in this study:
H1: Experiential consumption emotions can be arranged by two fac-

tors: negative and positive affectivity;
H2: Satisfaction will be positively (negatively) correlated with posi-

tive (negative) consumption experience emotions;
H3: Service experience evaluations influence the formation of satis-

faction in a positive manner;
H4: The effect of service experience evaluations will be moderated

by consumption emotions; and,
H5: The influence of consumption experience emotions on satisfac-

tion is expected to be stronger for consumers who actually com-
plained or considered to complain.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design
Data were collected from 597 leisure travelers by face-to-face inter-

views during July and September 1999 in selected holiday regions of
Austria. The sample was stratified by quotas for gender (55 percent
male), nationality (68 percent Germany, 32 percent Austria), comfort
level of the accommodation (only 3- and 4-star or equivalent hotels),
length of stay (minimum one week), and elapsed time after arrival (50
percent between at least one half and two thirds of their stay had expired,
50 percent later during their stay). Contacted vacationers were promised
to receive a modest present via mail as an incentive for participating in
the study and releasing their postal address. The oral interview covered
socio-demographic characteristics, travel behavior aspects in general and
of the particular trip, a list of disconfirmation elements of the entire va-
cation, holiday motivations, complaint behavior or intentions, con-
sumption experience emotions, satisfaction statements, and repeat visit
and recommendation intentions.
Andreas H. Zins 9
Measurement of Satisfaction
Oliver’s 12-item Likert-type scale (Oliver, 1997) was adapted and

translated for the use in the particular tourism services context. This sat-
isfaction scale covers the following domains: overall performance;
evaluation and quality; need fulfillment; failed expectations; satisfac-
tion (anchor); success attribution; regret; positive affect; failure attribu-
tion; negative affect; purchase evaluation; success attribution; and,
cognitive dissonance (Table 1). The latter two were dropped as the
wording and content referred to the acquisition and possession of prod-
ucts that would not apply to service experiences. Each statement was
measured on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (entirely reject) to 7 (fully
accept).
Measurement of Consumption Emotions
The consumption experience-elicited emotions were developed tak-

ing Mano and Oliver’s (1993) inventory of 43 adjectives. These items
represented an amalgam of the PANAS scale (Watson, Clark, and
Tellegen, 1988) and Mano’s (1991) circumplex scale. Due to time and
space restrictions the inventory was reduced to nine positive and nine
negative emotions (Table 2). All variables had factor loadings above
TABLE 1. Satisfaction scale (adapted from Oliver’s domain specific instrument,

1997).
Domain Reformulated statement

overall performance,
This is the best vacation I could have spent this year.
evaluation and quality
need fulfillment This vacation trip is exactly what I needed.
failed expectations This vacation hasn't worked out as well as I thought it would. (rev.)
satisfaction (anchor) I am satisfied with my decision to spend this vacation here.
success attribution My choice to spend this holiday was a wise one.
regret If I could do it over again, I'd spend a different vacation. (rev.)
positive affect I have truly enjoyed this vacation.
failure attribution I feel bad (guilty) about my decision to spend this vacation. (rev.)
negative affect I am not happy that I spend this holiday. (rev.)
success attribution I am sure it was the right thing to stay here for my holidays.
Note: (rev.) = reversed scale orientation.

TABLE 2. Product-elicited emotions.

Emotional variable No. Emotional variable No.

in good mood 1 upset 10
nervous 2 alert 11
happy 3 angry 12
sluggish 4 satisfied 13
active 5 unhappy 14
scared 6 enthusiastic 15
attentive 7 afraid 16
ashamed 8 pleased 17
astonished 9 in bad mood 18
Note: adapted from Mano and Oliver (1993).
0.5 in the Mano and Oliver (1993) study. As emotions could arise sev-
eral times in course of a vacation travel period, the scale was anchored
with 1 (never) to 5 (frequently).
Measurement of Confirmation/Disconfirmation of Travel Attributes
The cognitive appraisal was operationalised by 23 items describing

the vacation travel experience. Four domains can be distinguished a pri-
ori: (1) destination atmosphere (items, e.g., climate, safety, landscape,
cleanness, friendliness); (2) infrastructure (e.g., public transportation,
cultural offers, shopping facilities); (3) tourism related infrastructure
(e.g., excursions, sports, entertainment, facilities for families); and,
(4) tourism services (e.g., accommodation, food and beverages, person-
nel). The scale was constructed following the disconfirmation para-
digm: A ‘23’ marked the pole where expectations had not been fulfilled
at all; the ‘0’marker signified met expectations, and the pole ‘23’ ex-
pectations had been more than fulfilled. The scale points were trans-
formed afterwards into the 1-7 interval.
RESULTS
First, it was checked whether complaining and non-complaining
travelers differ in terms of their elicited consumption emotions. Gen-
erally, six out of the list of 18 emotional descriptors differed signifi-
cantly (Table 3). The mean differences show the expected direction, yet
not all affective components seem to reflect incidents and events that in-
Andreas H. Zins 11
duce consumers to complain. Non-complaining travelers feel more ac-

tive and alert as well as more enthusiastic and pleased but they are not
more often satisfied and attentive than complainers. In terms of negative

emotional states even more descriptors appear to be very similar contrast-
ing these two consumer groups. Only very strong expressions for nega-
tive affect (i.e., ‘upset’ and ‘angry’) exhibit a clear differentiation.
When testing the reliability of typically represented emotional di-
mensions the already reduced set of emotions (Mano and Oliver, 1993)
had to be narrowed down again (Table 3). Only two adjectives are left to
represent a positive arousal factor with a correlation of 0.59. The pleas-
antness factor could be constructed by four emotions resulting in a di-
mension with a reliability value of 0.70 (Cronbach, 1972). Finally,
seven out of nine emotions qualified to represent a negative affect di-
mension with a reliability score of 0.77.
Hence, after elimination of five emotions with unclear loadings the
remaining 13 adjectives could fit either a two- (44 percent of extracted
variance) or a three-dimensional (51 percent of extracted variance) so-
lution. Integrating the items ‘in good mood’ and ‘active’ in the positive
affect dimension of pleasantness would be possible. However, compar-
ing the emotional configuration in a multidimensional space the loss in
fit advocates a three-dimensional solution (stress in two dimensions =
0.17; stress in three dimensions = 0.13). In addition, the confirmatory
factor analysis with structural equations supported three emotional ar-
eas representing a pleasantness dimension which is highly correlated
with a separate high positive affect dimension, and a third negative af-
fect dimension which is not correlated with the other two.
The cognitive evaluation of the vacation experience was captured by
23 items covering four domains. In a common factor analysis (using
OBLIMIN rotation) a restricted 4-factor solution extracted 57 percent
of the variance (Table 4). The separate analysis of factor reliability ex-
hibited satisfactory scores for atmosphere, for suprastructure, and for
tourism services. The last dimension, representing infrastructure, did
not show the same level of homogeneity (four items, alpha = 0.63). The
tourism atmosphere dimension, which represents more abstract or
background features of a destination, exhibited the largest differences
between complainers and non-complainers. The infrastructure domain
is more explicit in terms of fields of services; however, the tourism in-
dustry is often not directly responsible for the quality levels. Some eval-
uation differences appeared for public transport services and the opening
hours of the shops. Among the five criteria covering the tourism
suprastructure only one (scope of excursions) was evaluated differently
TABLE 3. Emotional differences between complaining and non-complaining

travelers.
Emotional variable No. Non- Complainers t-test Cronbach

Complainers p value alpha
High positive affect 0.59
active 5 3.9 3.7
alert 11 3.8 3.6 0.05
Pleasantness 0.70
attentive 7 3.8 3.7
satisfied 13 4.4 4.3
enthusiastic 15 3.5 3.3 0.05
pleased 17 3.8 3.6 0.1
Negative affect 0.77
nervous 2 1.6 1.6
scared 6 1.2 1.2
upset 10 1.5 1.7 0.1
angry 12 1.6 2.0 0.001
unhappy 14 1.2 1.2
afraid 16 1.6 1.6
in bad mood 18 1.5 1.5
Discarded emotions
in good mood 1 4.5 4.5
happy 3 4.2 4.1 0.1
sluggish 4 2.3 2.2
ashamed 8 1.2 1.1
astonished 9 2.5 2.4
Note: scale from 1 (never) to 5 (frequently); alpha was not calculated for the discarded emotion variables.
by complainers and non-complainers. The core tourism products exhib-

ited relatively more and distinct contrasts between the two groups of
travelers, particularly with respect to comfort and equipment of the ac-
commodation and the personal service there.
Oliver’s satisfaction scale (1997) was subjected to a factor and reli-
ability analysis. The ten statements loaded as expected on one dimen-
sion and revealed a high reliability score (Table 5). With the exception
of statement 8 (failure attribution), the remaining nine measurement
items were significantly different between complainers and non-com-
plainers. The entire satisfaction scale scores spanning a continuum from
low to high satisfaction differ correspondingly between these two
groups (Table 5).
Andreas H. Zins 13
TABLE 4. Different evaluations of tourism offer between complaining and

non-complaining travelers.
Cognitive evaluation No. Non- Complainers t-test Cronbach

Complainers p value alpha
Atmosphere 0.88
friendliness of population 2 5.0 4.9 0.05
helpfulness of population 12 4.4 4.2
helpfulness of personnel 16 4.9 4.8 0.01
climate, weather 19 3.9 3.6 0.05
landscape 3 5.1 5.0
village architecture 4 4.7 4.4 0.01
quietness in the village 5 4.5 3.9 0.01
cleanliness of the village 24 4.8 4.7
personal safety 20 4.6 4.5
walking and hiking trails 27 4.9 4.8 0.05
Infrastructure 0.77
shopping facilities 13 4.2 4.0
art and culture 10 4.3 4.3
public transport 22 4.2 3.9 0.01
shopping hours 14 4.3 4.1 0.1
Suprastructure 0.81
facilities for families with children 28 4.6 4.5
scope of excursions 11 4.8 4.5 0.05
bad weather facilities 25 4.3 4.1
sporting facilities 17 4.7 4.6
entertainment facilities 26 4.4 4.2
Tourism services 0.83
Friendliness of personnel 2 5.0 4.9
catering/restaurants 9 5.0 4.8
comfort and equipment 6 4.7 4.2 0.01

of accommodation
service in accommodation 7 5.0 4.7 0.01
Note: scale from 1 (expectations not fulfilled) to 7 (expectations more than fulfilled).
Finally, structural equation modeling was applied to the dataset, using

AMOS 4.0 software (Arbuckle and Wothke, 1999) and distinguished two
groups: 75 percent of the respondents were those vacationers who did not
mention any complaint; the remaining sample consists of 10 percent ac-
tual complainers and 15 percent who intended to complain. As no sig-
TABLE 5. Satisfaction differences between complaining and non-complaining

travelers.
No. Satisfaction statement Non- Complainers t-test

Complainers p value
1 This is the best vacation I could have spent this year. 5.2 4.8 0.01
2 This vacation trip is exactly what I needed. 5.7 5.4 0.001
This vacation hasn't worked out as well as I thought it 1.7 2.3 0.001
3
would. (rev.)
I am satisfied with my decision to spend this 6.4 6.0 0.001
4
vacation here.
5 My choice to spend his holiday was a wise one. 6.2 5.8 0.01
If I could do it over again, I'd spend a different 1.8 2.2 0.01

6
vacation. (rev.)
7 I have truly enjoyed this vacation. 6.3 5.9 0.001
I feel bad (guilty) about my decision to spend this 1.3 1.4 n.s.
8
vacation. (rev.)
9 I am not happy that I spend this holiday. (rev.) 1.3 1.6 0.001
I am sure it was the right thing to stay here for 6.3 5.8 0.001
10
my holidays.
Entire Satisfaction Scale 0.10 0.30 0.001
Note: scale ranging from 1 (entirely reject) to 7 (fully accept).
nificant mean differences appeared in the evaluative dimensions of the

model the latter two sub-groups were merged. A 2-group model with
constrained structural parameters was estimated and evaluated against a
null and an unconstrained model (Figure 2). The fit indices were as fol-
lows: chi2 = 978.6; df = 587; p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.068; AGFI = 0.868;
TLI = 0.930; and, CFI = 0.938. The degree of determination is much
higher for the group of complainers (r2 = 0.34) than for the non-com-
plainers (r2 = 0.24).
The structure of the experiential consumption emotions can be satis-
factorily arranged in a two-factor solution (or, even better, in a three
factor solution), which substantiates the previous findings on the domi-
nant positive-negative affect circumplex of emotions. The third dimen-
sion is positively tuned and seems to reflect the intensity or activation
level commonly identified as an arousal dimension, which confirms
H1. Both emotional domains exercise independently an almost equally
strong influence on the satisfaction construct, which confirms H2.
There are no significantly different correlation estimates between the
two investigated groups in this respect; thus, H5 is not confirmed.
Andreas H. Zins 15
FIGURE 2. Structural model for consumption emotions, travel experience eval-

2
uations and satisfaction with estimates and R values for complainers (C) and
non-complainers (NC).
C: complainers
C: + .28 NC: non-complainers
NC + .37 n.s.: not significant
c: + .29 Atmosphere
NC: = .30 .09/.09
Pleasantness
.43/.57 C: − .71
NC: n.s.
C: + .62
NC: + .72
C: + .65 Infra structure C: n.s.
NC: + .76 C: + .87 .39/.52 NC: − .08
NC: + .47
C: + .32 Satisfaction
High positive NC: + .41 .34/.24
Affect C: n.s
NC: + .80 Supra structure C: + .67
.76/.67 NC: n.s.
C: n.s.
NC: − .40
C: + .88 C: + .67
NC: + .47 NC: n.s.
Negative Affect
Tourism Services
.77/.85
C: + .65 estimates with
insignificant group
NC: + .76
differences
C: − .26 estimates with

NC: − .32 C: + .88 significant group
NC: + .47 differences
In contrast, the cognitive evaluations of the consumption experience

are highly interrelated and differ significantly between complainers and
non-complainers. These relationships can be interpreted as irradiation
effects from the more general to the more specific vacation spheres.
This reflects the fact that tourism services can be neither rendered nor
experienced without a significant context. While the impact on satisfac-
tion is rather strong for complainers it is weak and differently structured
for non-complainers. However, the positive evaluation of some general
destination attributes summarized as ‘atmosphere’ seem to suppress the
satisfaction formation, especially for the group of complainers; thus,
H3 is partially confirmed.
The moderating effect of consumption emotions through the cogni-
tive elements of the evaluation process can be shown, which confirms
H4. Yet, it is achieved unilaterally by positive affects and enacted ex-
clusively through the atmosphere factor while negative consumption
emotions show only direct signs of influence towards the satisfaction

construct.
IMPLICATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH
Complaining customers perceive and evaluate their consumption ex-

perience significantly more negatively than non-complainers (p <
0.001). However, the impact of consumption emotions perceived dur-
ing the travel experience does not differ significantly. This gives reason
to support Oliver’s satisfaction scale (1997) as a mixture of emotional
and cognitive aspects to be present when asking for a final evaluation
about the consumption experience.
However, the model fits the data much better in the case of complain-
ers. This general result coincides with the Dröge and Halstead (1991)
findings where the explanatory power for satisfaction, as well as for re-
purchase intention, was even more different between the two investigated
consumer groups. In their study, it was argued that the superior explana-
tory power of expectations was responsible for the better results for com-
plainers. This relationship cannot be ascertained within this study
because expectations were not captured in the questionnaire. The relative
contribution of the consumption emotions is raised for the non-complain-
ers compared to the complainers with tourism infrastructure and
suprastructure playing a subordinate role in the appraisal process.
Focusing only on the negative appraisals of the travel experience the
relationship between evaluation and satisfaction seems to be contradic-
tory. However, the post-experience evaluation ‘satisfaction’ builds on a
variety of perceptions and judgements which partially appear to be an-
tagonistic. In the Dröge and Halstead (1991) study for carpet owners,
retrieved expectations had only a direct influence on satisfaction and af-
fect for the complainers and none for the non-complainers, while show-
ing no effect of the subjective disconfirmation. Disconfirmation may be
a consequence of altered (retrieved) expectations. However, this con-
jecture is more speculative and should be investigated separately. Nev-
ertheless, it can be concluded cautiously that complainers’ satisfaction
formation is more dependent on cognitive appraisals than that of
non-complainers. It may be that their current emotional states are more
important than the reference to previously formed expectations, as in
Oliver’s expectation decay argument (1981).
More detailed research is necessary to get additional insights into the
conditions under which the customer’s coping mechanisms could yield
Andreas H. Zins 17
positive post-consumption evaluations paired with undisturbed loyalty

intentions and behavior despite negative service-experience emotions.
Further investigation would be necessary to systematically extract het-

erogeneity from these types of surveys (e.g., previous product experi-
ence, critical incidents).
This study tried to relate and enhance the research efforts devoted to
consumption emotions and satisfaction formation. One major weakness
lies in the ad hoc constructed scales for measuring disconfirmation of the
travel experience. The somewhat fuzzy effects among the sub-dimensions
have been interpreted as irradiation and context phenomena. However,
these arguments are tentative and demand additional in-depth research.
Other improvements and extensions would be feasible when linking
complaining issues with other personality constructs (e.g., involve-
ment, volitional control). More detailed emphasis could be laid on the
question of complaining behavior and the real outcome of complaints. It
could be that complaining customers are more satisfied than customers
who only intended to complain but did not receive a reasonable oppor-
tunity to talk about the reasons to an appropriate responsible person. It
is evident that a great deal of further research remains to be done.
REFERENCES
Arbuckle, J.L., and Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 User’s guide. Chicago: Smallwaters
Corporation.
Bagozzi, R.P., Gopinath, M., and Nyer, P.U. (1999). The role of emotions in market-
ing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(2), 184-206.
Bitner, M.J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers
and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56, 57-71.
Cohen, J.B., and Areni, C.S. (1991). Affect and consumer behaviour. in T. Robertson
and H. Kassarjian, (eds.), Handbook of consumer behaviour, pp. 188-240.
Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Cronbach, L.J. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements. Theory of
generalizability for scores and profiles. Wiley: New York.
Dröge, C., and Halstead, D. (1991). Postpurchase hierarchies of effects: The anteced-
ents and consequences of satisfaction for complainers versus non-complainers. In-
ternational Journal of Research in Marketing, 8, 315-328.
Giese, J.L., and Cote, J.A. (1999). Defining consumer satisfaction. Academy of Mar-
keting Science Review [Online], 00 (1).
Hunt, H.K. (1977). CS/D-overview and future research directions. In H. K. Hunt (ed.),
Conceptualization and measurement of consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction.
pp. 455-488. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Izard, C.E. (1977). Human emotions, New York: Plenum Press.
Kotler, P. (1973). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of Retailing, 48 (Winter),

48-64.
Lazarus, R.S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Oxford University Press, New York.
Liljander, V., and Strandvik, T. (1997). Emotions in service satisfaction. International

Journal of Service Industry Management, 8(2), 148-169.
Mano, H. (1991). The structure and intensity of emotional experiences: method and
context convergence. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26 (3), 389-411.
Mano, H., and Oliver, R. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the con-
sumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer
Research, 20, 451-466.
Nyer, P.U. (1997). A study of the relationships between cognitive appraisals and con-
sumption emotions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(4), 296-304.
Oliver, R.L. (1981). Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction processes in retail set-
ting. Journal of Retailing, 57, 25-44.
Oliver, R.L. (1993). A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction:
compatible goals, different concepts. In T. A. Swartz, D. E. Bowen and S. W.
Brown (eds.), Advances in services marketing and management, Vol. 2. pp. 65-85.
Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Oliver, R.L. (1997). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the consumer. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, R.L., and DeSarbo, W.S. (1988). Response determinants in satisfaction judge-
ments. Journal of Consumer Research, 495-507.
Richins, M. (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of
Consumer Research, 24, 127-146.
Russell, J.A., and Mehrabian, A. (1977). Evidence for a three-factor theory of emo-
tions. Journal of Research in Personality, 11, 273-294.
Watson, D., Clark, L.A., and Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief
measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 54 (June), 1063-1070.
Westbrook, R.A. (1987). Product/consumption based affective responses and post pur-
chase processes. Journal of Marketing Research, 24 (August), 258-270.
Westbrook, R.A., and Oliver, R.L. (1991). The dimensionality of consumption emotion
patterns and conumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(June), 84-91.
Zajonc, R.B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American
Psychologist, 35, 151-175.
Zajonc, R.B., and Markus H. (1984). Affect and cognition: the hard interface. In: C.E.
Izard, J. Kagan, and R.B. Zajonc (eds.), Emotions, cognition, and behaviour,
pp. 73-103, University Press, Cambridge.
SUBMITTED: 12/17/01
REVISION SUBMITTED: 02/10/02
ACCEPTED: 02/14/02
REFEREED ANONYMOUSLY

Zins2002 (New)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Zins2002 (New)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]

On: 09 February 2014, At: 03:10

Journal of Travel & Tourism

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J073v12n02_02

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Consumption Emotions, Experience Quality

ABSTRACT. Previous research has demonstrated that attribute based

KEYWORDS. Consumption emotions, satisfaction, confirmation/discon-

Satisfaction research has adopted the perspective that both emotional

There is ample evidence that emotional reactions associated with the

1993; Westbrook, 1987; Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). The affective

that satisfaction ascends when perceived performance is equal or

FIGURE 1. Conceptual model explaining satisfaction formation.

as Richins (1997), urged the use of a more complex emotional measure.

it provided a balanced and varied set of negative and positive adjectives.

Summarizing the conceptual discussion above the following hypoth-

H1: Experiential consumption emotions can be arranged by two fac-

H2: Satisfaction will be positively (negatively) correlated with posi-

H3: Service experience evaluations influence the formation of satis-

H4: The effect of service experience evaluations will be moderated

H5: The influence of consumption experience emotions on satisfac-

Data were collected from 597 leisure travelers by face-to-face inter-

Oliver’s 12-item Likert-type scale (Oliver, 1997) was adapted and

Measurement of Consumption Emotions

The consumption experience-elicited emotions were developed tak-

TABLE 1. Satisfaction scale (adapted from Oliver’s domain specific instrument,

Domain Reformulated statement

Note: (rev.) = reversed scale orientation.

TABLE 2. Product-elicited emotions.

Emotional variable No. Emotional variable No.

Note: adapted from Mano and Oliver (1993).

Measurement of Confirmation/Disconfirmation of Travel Attributes

The cognitive appraisal was operationalised by 23 items describing

duce consumers to complain. Non-complaining travelers feel more ac-

more often satisfied and attentive than complainers. In terms of negative

TABLE 3. Emotional differences between complaining and non-complaining

Emotional variable No. Non- Complainers t-test Cronbach

active 5 3.9 3.7

alert 11 3.8 3.6 0.05

attentive 7 3.8 3.7

satisfied 13 4.4 4.3

enthusiastic 15 3.5 3.3 0.05

pleased 17 3.8 3.6 0.1

Negative affect 0.77

nervous 2 1.6 1.6

scared 6 1.2 1.2

upset 10 1.5 1.7 0.1

angry 12 1.6 2.0 0.001

unhappy 14 1.2 1.2

afraid 16 1.6 1.6

in bad mood 18 1.5 1.5

happy 3 4.2 4.1 0.1

sluggish 4 2.3 2.2

ashamed 8 1.2 1.1

astonished 9 2.5 2.4

by complainers and non-complainers. The core tourism products exhib-

TABLE 4. Different evaluations of tourism offer between complaining and

Cognitive evaluation No. Non- Complainers t-test Cronbach

friendliness of population 2 5.0 4.9 0.05

helpfulness of population 12 4.4 4.2

helpfulness of personnel 16 4.9 4.8 0.01

climate, weather 19 3.9 3.6 0.05

landscape 3 5.1 5.0