The role of servicescape and social

interaction toward customer service

experience in coffee stores.
The case of Vietnam
Quynh Xuan Tran, My Van Dang and Nadine Tournois

Abstract Quynh Xuan Tran is PhD

Purpose – This study aims to investigate the effects of servicescape on customer satisfaction and loyalty – student at IAE Nice,
centered on social interaction and service experience in the café setting. Graduate School of
Design/methodology/approach – Data for this study were collected from approximately 1,800 Management, University of
customers at 185 coffee stores located in the three largest cities in Vietnam through the self-administered Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice,
questionnaires. France and Lecturer at
Findings – The research findings pointed out the significant impacts of café servicescape on social University of Economics,
interaction quality, including customer-to-employee interaction (CEI) and customer-to-customer
The University of Danang,
interaction (CCI). Social interactions and servicescape were shown to remarkably influence customer
Da Nang, Vietnam.
experience quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty. Moreover, the study confirmed the interrelation
between service experience, satisfaction and loyalty in the café setting. My Van Dang is Associate
Professor at University of
Practical implications – This study provides marketers and service managers a deeper understanding
Economics, The University
of improving customer satisfaction and loyalty through the control of servicescape attributes and social
interactions in café contexts. of Danang, Da Nang,
Vietnam.
Originality/value – This research explores the significant impacts of café servicescape on social
Nadine Tournois is
interaction quality (CEI and CCI). Additionally, it provides insights within the role of social interactions to
customer’s affective and behavioral responses in service settings, especially the CCI quality. Professor at IAE Nice,
Graduate School of
Keywords Servicescape, Social interaction, Service experience, Café, Satisfaction, Loyalty
Management, University of
Paper type Research paper Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice,
France.

Introduction
Coffee is one of the most popular beverages worldwide with millions of people consuming it
every year (Spence and Carvalho, 2019). Vietnam is known as one of the world’s fastest-
growing retail coffee markets and the world’s second-largest producer and exporter of
coffee (Statista, 2020). The Vietnamese people consume coffee every day with friends or
colleagues in a favorite coffee shop (Jolliffe et al., 2010). According to the International
Coffee Organisation, Vietnam showed a steady per capita soluble coffee consumption Received 1 November 2019
Revised 3 December 2019
when compared to other countries over the past decade. Domestic consumption of coffee 1 April 2020
from 2012 to 2018 with CARG (compound annual growth rate) remained at 7.9%. The Accepted 6 April 2020

domestic coffee consumption market is a fierce competition of well-known foreign coffee This authors wish to express
brands such as Starbuck, Coffee Beans and Tea Leaves, Gloria Jeans and Dunkin Donuts appreciation to Da Nang
International Institute of
with local chains such as Trung Nguyen, Phuc Long, Highlands, Coffee House, Cong Café, Technology (DNIIT) for their
helps and supports during the
King Coffee and other local brands. The coffee industry represents one of the fastest- process of collecting data in
growing segments in the food-service industry with more than 10,000 coffee stores across Vietnam.

DOI 10.1108/IJCTHR-11-2019-0194 VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020, pp. 619-637, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 619
 the country (Jolliffe et al., 2010). The explosive growth and wide appearance of coffee
brands create an extensively competitive market where brands must look for ways to attract
and retain their customers as well as enhance profitability (Islam et al., 2019). Based on the
traditional approach, the marketing strategy often focuses on increasing customer
satisfaction and loyalty through the attempts of delivering high-quality services (Sinniah
et al., 2018). Nevertheless, service providers have realized that quality service is no longer
a strong competitive advantage (Gupta, 2016; Lee et al., 2010). The emerging propensity
concentrates on creating pleasant experiences for customers (Wu et al., 2018; Alnawas and
Hemsley-Brown, 2018; Ali et al., 2016a, 2016b). In the field of coffee service, customer’s
purpose is not simply purchasing a cup of coffee, but also purchasing pleasant
experiences in a given store such as listening to music, meeting with friends or enjoying the
café servicescape (Nadiri and Gunay, 2013). As noted by Oh et al. (2019), customers often
expect to enjoy a pleasant experience when visiting well-known coffee brands where the
coffee price is relatively expensive in comparison to other stores. Because they feel special
and valuable for drinking coffee at these places. When a society moves to the experience
economy, customers mostly look for an experience that can fulfill their desires and create a
memorable overall experience for each consumption (Ali et al., 2016a, 2016b).
Therefore, creating good experience quality attracted very much interest from scholars in
the hospitality industry generally (Alnawas and Hemsley-Brown, 2018; Ali et al., 2018; Wu
et al., 2018; Fernandes, 2016; Jin et al., 2015; Walter et al., 2010). In this industry,
experiences are considered as a very crucial factor because the nature of service offered
by the business is intangible (Maklan and Klaus, 2011; Lemke et al., 2011) and customers
typically evaluate service via their experiential perception instead of utilitarian and functional
aspects (Ismail, 2011). They no longer perceive value in a specific product that lacks in
experience-related aspects (Oh et al., 2019). Furthermore, the purpose of customers
nowadays is to achieve different experiences through attempts to consume various goods
and services (Chen and Chen, 2010; Wu et al., 2018). Consequently, creating memorable
experiences is expected to help service providers increase customer satisfaction and
loyalty (Verhoef et al., 2009).
In the service context, service experiences are remarkably shaped by various determinants
such as core services, physical surroundings and social interaction (Verhoef et al., 2009;
Walter et al., 2010; Lemke et al., 2011; Ali and Omar, 2014; Kim and Choi, 2016). While the
importance of core services has long been confirmed in the service marketing literature
(Han and Ryu, 2009; Moon et al., 2015; Kaura et al., 2015; Namin, 2017), further
investigations on social interaction and servicescape have been encouraged (Turley and
Milliman, 2000). Although numerous studies explore the effects of service environment and
social interaction on customer experience, service quality, satisfaction and loyalty (Ali et al.,
2016a, 2016b; Siu et al., 2012; Choi and Kim, 2015; Kim and Choi, 2013; Liu and Jang,
2009), yet scant research has been implemented to investigate how servicescape
dimensions influence social interaction.
Moreover, social interaction in the service environment might happen between customers
and employees or among customers (Lin and Mattila, 2010). Of these interactions, the first
one has been widely studied with its impacts on service quality, satisfaction or loyalty
(Alhelalat et al., 2017; Jang et al., 2015; Fowler and Bridges, 2012), whereas the second
one attracts very little interest from researchers (Lemke et al., 2011). This is not surprising as
customer-to-employee interaction (CEI) is a controllable factor, whereas customer-to-
customer interaction (CCI) is impossible to control completely during the service process
(Kim and Choi, 2016; Fakharyan et al., 2014). Consequently, there is a significant
consideration to further explore the role of CCI in the service environment. Besides, the
relationship between service quality, service satisfaction and brand loyalty has been
demonstrated in previous publications (Kaura et al., 2015; Lee et al., 2010; Namin, 2017),
yet the link between customer experience quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty has

PAGE 620 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
been scarcely examined (Kim and Choi, 2013). It may be partly because customer
experience quality has been relatively ignored, drawing less research attention compared
to service quality (Gupta, 2016; Bagdare and Jain, 2013). Furthermore, previous studies
often focus on restaurants and hotels (Khan et al., 2015; Kim and Choi, 2013; Walter and
Edvardsson, 2012) and theme parks (Wu et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2016a, 2016b; Dong and
Siu, 2013), a significant lack of works is identified in the café setting (Wu, 2017). Although
the café environment also includes the most outstanding characteristics of the service
industry such as the mutual interactions, activities and co-producer role of the customer
(Han and Ryu, 2009). Consequently, there is a considerable research gap that concentrates
on understanding the impacts of café physical environment on customer satisfaction and
loyalty centered on social interaction and service experience.
In summary, the present study is designed to achieve three objectives as follows:

1. The first objective is to investigate how the café service environment influences
customers’ perceived social interactions, including CEI and CCI.

2. The second objective is to examine the effects of café servicescape and social
interactions on customer service experience.
3. The last objective is to investigate the causal relationship between service experience,
customer satisfaction and loyalty in café stores.

Literature review
Theory of servicescape
The first concept regarding the physical environment was proposed by Kotler (1973) through
the term “atmospherics.” Atmospherics composite the intangible features of physical
surroundings such as vision (color, lighting), audition (kinds of music, sound level), touch
(cleanliness) and olfaction (scent, cues) (Kotler, 1973). Baker (1986) then described the
“physical environment” as a set of three aspects composing of sensory aspect, design factor
and social factor. Later, Bitner (1992) proposed the “servicescape” to describe the
dimensions of physical surroundings provided by service organizations. Bitner identified three
aspects of servicescape including “ambient conditions,” “spatial layout and functionality” and
“signs, symbols and artifacts.” Based on the stimulus–organism–responses paradigm
(Mehrabian and Russell, 1974), Bitner (1992) proposed a servicescape model that assumed
that servicescape attributes affect perceptions of customers and employees that then result in
their emotional, cognitive and physiological reactions to the store environment. Such internal
reactions, in turn, influence social interactions between and among customers and service
providers and lead to changes in behavioral responses, including approach and avoidance.
In additional to the above concepts, servicescape is also characterized through various
terms such as the marketing environment (Turley and Milliman, 2000), store atmosphere
(Roy and Tai, 2003), service atmosphere (Cronin, 2003) and social-servicescape (Tombs
and McColl-Kennedy, 2003). Such diverse terms express various perspectives of scholars
toward service physical surroundings. Nevertheless, the term “servicescape” (Bitner, 1992)
is used in this study because of the consistent purpose. Later, Wakefield and Blodgett
(1996) added the cleanliness factor into interfaces of servicescape because of its important
nature to traditional services as customers typically spend a moderate amount of time in
these facilities. Based on the servicescape framework (Bitner, 1992), the present study
conceptualizes servicescape as a multi-dimensional structure including “ambient
conditions,” “space and function,” “signs and symbols,” “facility aesthetics” and
“cleanliness”.
The ambient conditions comprise temperature, lighting, color, sound, odor and air quality
(Bitner, 1992; Kotler, 1973). While spatial layout refers to “the size and shape of equipment
and furnishings, and the spatial relationship among them” (Edvardsson et al., 2010),

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 621
 functionality is understood as the effective operation possibility of physical objectives within
service establishments (Han and Ryu, 2009). Signs and symbols are items used to instruct
for customers more efficiently such as directions of entering or exit, the guidance of
restrooms and specific signs (Rosenbaum and Massiah, 2011). Facility aesthetics are
referred to as “a function of architectural designs as well as interior designs and décor,
contributing to the attractiveness of the servicescape” (Wakefield and Blodgett, 1996),
whereas cleanliness refers to “the sense of neatness, tidiness, or orderliness in the
establishment” (Siu et al., 2012).

Social interaction
According to Bitner (1992), social interaction is “a verbal and non-verbal social process
occurring among customers and staff to share knowledge, experience, and thoughts.” In
service settings, Lin and Mattila (2010) characterized social interaction as a part of service
encounter that comprises “any interaction that customers may have with service staff, with
other consumers and with servicescape.” In this study, social interaction is understood as
interactive behaviors among humans, including CEI and CCI.
First, CEI is “personal interaction happening between customers and service staff during
the service delivery process” (Lin and Mattila, 2010). In service marketing, “interaction
quality” is used to assess the interaction between customers and service providers in
various studies (Fowler and Bridges, 2012; Joon Choi and Sik Kim, 2013; Choi and Kim,
2015; Alhelalat et al., 2017). Interaction quality is conceptualized as “the customers’
perception of how the service is delivered during service encounters” (Lemke et al., 2011).
Customers often evaluate interaction quality of service employees from initial contacts to
ending service such as asking the information, requesting help or getting a service (Moore
et al., 2005).
Second, CCI is understood as “the perceived judgment of the superiority of customers’
interaction with other customers” (Lemke et al., 2011). Research findings indicated that
although other customer’s behaviors cannot be predicted, these behaviors have been
highlighted as a critical aspect of service experience, service quality, satisfaction and
loyalty (Moura e Sá and Amorim, 2017; Kim and Choi, 2016; Fakharyan et al., 2014; Joon
Choi and Sik Kim, 2013; Yoo et al., 2012). According to Kim and Choi (2016), the CCI
comprises “friend/family interaction, neighboring customer interaction and audience
interaction.” However, this study has been focused on internal interaction among customers
(friend/family interaction) which reflects the customers’ perceived interaction with friends,
family or relatives (Nicholls, 2010) because in coffee stores, consumers typically gather into
small groups or private couples in which they have intimate relations and ignore interactions
with strangers.

Customer service experience

Customer experience is a popular term that has been much discussed in service marketing
(Carù and Cova, 2015). Service experience is conceptualized as “the customer’s interaction
with the service process, the organization, the physical facilities, the service firm’s
employees and other customers” (Johnston and Clark, 2008). Meyer and Schwager (2007)
understood “a customer experience as the internal and subjective response customers
have to any direct or indirect contact with a company.” Generally, the core nature of service
experience is a process of interaction with different subjects including social factors and
physical interfaces. And this leaves customers certain memories about the experiences
they spent (Walter et al., 2010).
To measure service experience, many researchers used service experience quality to
replace for service quality (Wu et al., 2018; Alnawas and Hemsley-Brown, 2018; Kim and
Choi, 2016; Fernandes, 2016; Jin et al., 2015). Service experience quality is documented as

PAGE 622 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
“a holistically perceived judgment about the excellence or superiority of the overall
customer experience” (Lemke et al., 2011). Using the concept of experience quality brings
a deeper awareness of a holistic experience consisting of cognitive, emotional and
behavioral responses (Cole and Scott, 2004; Chen and Chen, 2010), whereas the focus of
service quality has been on customer’s cognitive and attitudinal responses to the functional
and utilitarian aspects of a given service (Gupta, 2016). For high interaction-related services
(hotels and restaurants), several major dimensions of customer experience quality are
investigated such as physical, social, emotional aspects, peer-to-peer quality (Kim and
Choi, 2013; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019), interaction quality (Lemke et al., 2011; Joon
Choi and Sik Kim, 2013) and physical environment quality (Wu et al., 2018).

Hypotheses development
Servicescape and social interactions
Café servicescape refers to a constructed facility, including both indoor and outdoor
characteristics of the physical space where the service process happens (Wu, 2017;
Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019). According to Walter et al. (2010), servicescape is
significantly associated with social interactions because almost all interactions occur within
the service environment. Fowler and Bridges (2012) illustrated that positive responses to
ambiance may strengthen customers’ perceived encountering quality with service
providers. Further, factors relating to the design of servicescapes such as space, function
and aesthetics might contribute to socialization between customers and staff (Carù and
Cova, 2015). Consequently, it is expected that the presence of environmental stimuli in café
shops could considerably facilitate or constrain CEI quality.
Zemke and Shoemaker (2007) found evidence that using an appropriate scent in casino
settings is likely to strengthen interact behaviors among stranger customers. In the
hospitality industry, it was pointed out that the service atmosphere is considerably
associated with CCI quality (Fakharyan et al., 2014). Furthermore, the disorganized seating
arrangement in a concert hall may signal not only a bad service experience but also the
unreliability of CCI (Choi and Kim, 2015). Likewise, the positive evaluation of customers
toward café servicescape is presumed to positively impact CCI quality. Therefore, two
hypotheses are suggested as follows:
H1. The perceived servicescape of café stores positively affects customer-to-employee
interaction.
H2. The perceived servicescape of café stores positively affects customers’ internal
interaction.
Servicescape and service experience. The importance of servicescape to service
experience has been frequently investigated in the service industry generally. For
example, it was confirmed in theme parks (Wu et al., 2018), restaurants (Liu and Jang,
2009), resort brands (Ismail, 2011) and airports (Choi and Kim, 2015). In the coffee
context, the servicescape was also regarded as one of the foremost components of
customer experiential quality (Sinniah et al., 2018; Wu and Cheng, 2019; Sethjinda and
Laothumthut, 2019). The convenient location of a coffee outlet with comfortable seating,
cleanliness and well-prepared equipment contributes to constituting excellent
experience quality among customers (Wu, 2017). Therefore, the author suggests as
follows:
H3. The perceived servicescape of café stores positively affects customer experience quality.

Social interactions and service experience

Research findings showed that the positive state of employees such as politeness,
pleasantness and helpfulness in face-to-face encounters with customers may increase

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 623
 perceived interaction quality and experience quality (Verhoef et al., 2009; Joon Choi and Sik
Kim, 2013; Choi and Kim, 2015; Wu et al., 2018). Regarding the café setting, interaction
quality is perceived to be one of the most critical aspects of experiential quality (Wu, 2017;
Sinniah et al., 2018; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019). Customers could evaluate
interaction quality through employees’ attitudes, behavior and problem-solving in the café
environment (Wu, 2017).
Abundant number of studies denoted that discussing with friends or relatives during
shopping would improve customer experience by advancing their confidence in making a
purchasing decision and making them enjoy a more pleasant shopping experience
(Rosenbaum and Massiah, 2007; Wu and Cheng, 2019). Customers’ knowledge is likely to
impact other customer’s service experience via social interactions (Kim and Choi, 2016,
2013). Therefore, it is assumed that the positive perception of CCI also leads to increasing
their café experience quality. In accordance with the above analysis, two hypotheses are
proposed as follows:
H4. Customer-to-employee interaction positively affects customer experience quality.
H5. Customers’ internal interaction positively affects customer experience quality.

Social interaction, service experience and customer satisfaction

In the service industry, employees are the first people of service organizations to
communicate with customers and they attempt to maintain necessary interactions with
customers during the service transaction (Lemke et al., 2011; Lin and Mattila, 2010).
Consequently, the CEI quality substantially influences customer’s attitudes and satisfaction
in luxury-hotel restaurants (Wu and Liang, 2009), the bed and breakfast market (Chen et al.,
2013) and restaurants (Alhelalat et al., 2017). Numerous studies have explored that CCI is a
remarkably influential factor for generating customer satisfaction in the vacation in hotels
(Zgolli and Zaiem, 2017; Fakharyan et al., 2014), hospitals (Joon Choi and Sik Kim, 2013),
foreign travel service (Wu, 2008) and theme parks (Ali et al., 2016a, 2016b). In a relevant
service environment such as café stores, it is predicted that social interaction quality
customers perceive in café stores, including CEI and CCI, substantially influences customer
satisfaction.
Service experience quality has long been known as a critical antecedent of service
satisfaction in them parks (Kao et al., 2008; Wu et al., 2018), guesthouse services (Amoah
et al., 2016), wine tourism (Fernandes, 2016) and heritage tourism (Chen and Chen, 2010).
Studies in the cafe setting found that customer experience is supported as a direct
determinant of service satisfaction among coffee customers (Yuan and Wu, 2008; Nadiri
and Gunay, 2013; Wu, 2017; Huang, 2017; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019). Accordingly,
three hypotheses are suggested as follows:
H6. Customer-to-employee interaction positively affects customer satisfaction.
H7. Customer experience quality positively affects customer satisfaction.
H8. Customers’ internal interaction positively affects customer satisfaction.

Social interactions, service experience and customer loyalty

Interact behaviors with staff or with other customers are one of the experiences that
customers perceive in the service environment (Janet Turner et al., 2008; Fowler and
Bridges, 2012). These interactions are shown to be deeply associated with customer loyalty
(Gremler and Gwinner, 2000; Guenzi and Pelloni, 2004; Chen et al., 2013). The expressions
of employees such as personal care, friendliness or willingness to service are closely
associated with customer’s behavioral outcomes, including positive word-of-mouth and
repurchase (Cetin and Dincer, 2014). Research findings found that the higher closeness in

PAGE 624 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
interactions between customers is more likely to enhance behavioral loyalty in fitness
centers (Guenzi and Pelloni, 2004), hair salons (Moore et al., 2005), tourism (Wu, 2008) and
hotels (Fakharyan et al., 2014; Zgolli and Zaiem, 2017). Similarly, the positive perception of
social interaction (CEI and CCI) might be an important antecedent of customer loyalty to
coffee outlets.
Positive service experience is likely to produce an emotive link between service providers
and customers, and engender customer loyalty in shopping malls (Lee et al., 2010),
restaurants (Choi and Kim, 2015), hotels (Cetin and Dincer, 2014), mass service contexts
(Kim and Choi, 2016) and the wine tourism industry (Fernandes, 2016). Therefore, the
authors suggest the following three hypotheses:
H9. Customer-to-employee interaction positively affects customer loyalty.
H10. Customer experience quality positively affects customer loyalty.
H11. Customer’s internal interaction positively affects customer loyalty.
Finally, customer satisfaction has long been treated as a major antecedent of loyalty toward
service providers generally (Kim, Lee and Yoo, 2006; Ali et al., 2018; Wu and Cheng, 2019).
Not exception, studies in the coffee setting also argue that customer satisfaction is
influential in the development of customer loyalty to café shops (Wu, 2017; Nadiri and
Gunay, 2013; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019; Choi and Hyun, 2017; Kim and Lee, 2017).
The final hypothesis is proposed as follows:
H12. Customer satisfaction positively affects customer loyalty to café stores.
The present study proposes a conceptual framework in Figure 1.

Research methodology
This study focuses on the interpersonal service which highlights the importance of
servicescape attributes and social interaction quality between and among customers and
employees. Therefore, the café setting was chosen because this service is widely used by
almost everyone and it includes the most outstanding characteristics of the service industry
such as the mutual interactions and co-producer role of the customer (Han and Ryu, 2009).
Data for this study were collected from the customers of coffee stores located in the three
largest cities in Vietnam (Hanoi capital, Danang city and Hochiminh city). In each
destination, 70 coffee stores were recruited to participate in the study based on an available

Figure 1 Research framework

Perceived customer-to- H6 Customer

Ambient conditions
employee interaction satisfaction

H7

Spatial layout H1 H4
H
H8

H12
Signs and symbols H3 Customer’s service
experience quality
H9

Facility aesthetics H2 H5
H10

Perceived customer-to- Customer loyalty

Cleanliness customer interaction H11

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 625
 list of stores. After, the research team randomly selected 70 shops to collect data. Because
one of the research objectives is to evaluate internal interaction quality among customers,
the survey for groups is critical. The minimum selection of two groups for each café store
(each group with three to five people) is recommended. Therefore, the research team
provided each coffee store a packet of materials including ten survey questionnaires for
customers. The self-administered questionnaires were distributed to randomly ten chosen-
customers at each coffee store and they were instructed to fill out the surveys and returned
them to the interviewers. Of the total target of 210 stores, 185 stores were permitted to
collect the distributed 1,850 questionnaires. Finally, 1,779 questionnaires were available to
use for the subsequent analysis.
In this study, all measurement items were summarized and adapted from prior studies.
Customers’ perceived servicescape was based on the servicescape framework (Bitner,
1992) comprising ambient conditions; space and function; signs and symbols; facility
aesthetics; and cleanliness. The measurement method of ambient conditions, space and
function was developed by Bitner (1992). Signs and symbols were measured following
Bitner (1992) and Siu et al. (2012). Facility aesthetics was based on Bitner (1992) and
Wakefield and Blodgett (1996) with four items. Consistent with the work of Siu et al. (2012),
cleanliness was measured by five items. The customer service experience was adapted
from Kim and Choi (2016) with three items. For customers’ perceived interaction with
employees, it was adapted from a relevant scale by Gremler and Gwinner (2000) with 11
items. Nevertheless, after screened via in-depth interviews with experts and marketing
professors, some items were recommended to remove out because they were not
consistent with the research context (Bagdare and Jain, 2013; Moon et al., 2015). The
remaining items were still assured of the reliability, convergent and discriminant validity for
further analysis (Gupta, 2016). The final eight-item scale was used in this study. Customers’
perceived internal interaction was measured by four items from Lemke et al. (2011).
Customer satisfaction was adapted from Yoo et al. (2012) with five items. Finally, customer
loyalty was measured following Zeithaml et al. (1996), including five items. All items were
measured according to the five-point Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly
agree.
To test the research instrument, the complete questionnaire was screened via in-depth
interviews with experts and marketing professors at Nice University of Sophia Antipolis,
France. Later, the pilot test was performed with a small sample of 20 customers. The
reliability and validity of the questionnaire were checked before using them in the mass
study. In this study, SPSS 22.0 was used to analyze descriptive statistics. While AMOS 24,
one of the most commonly used CB-SEM software applications and much more user-
friendly (Wei et al., 2017; Hair et al., 2014), was used to analyze the research model
(Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). According to the rule of thumb, CB-SEM is recommended
for this case because
䊏 the research objective is to test and confirm an extended model by Bitner (1992);
䊏 the research data is analyzed with a large sample size (N = 1779);
䊏 all research constructs are reflective measures; and
䊏 the global goodness-of-fit for research model is emphasized (Hair et al., 2014, 2017a).

Findings and results

Profile of the sample
The results of demographic statistics showed that there were 48.5% female and 51.5% male
in a total of 1,779 respondents. Most of the respondents were between 19 and 30 years old
with approximately 82%, and above 30 years old only accounted for 11.7%. A majority of

PAGE 626 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
participants (more than 41%) were students, 19% were employees and 15.2% were in
businesses. Customers already visited café shops a few times in the past. Additionally, they
often spent 30 min to 2 h for each visit to café stores.

Measurement model
In this study, because all indicators are considered to be caused by research constructs,
these constructs were thus reflective measurements (Hair et al., 2017a). According to the
two-step process suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) for a reflective model,
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was first used to evaluate the goodness-of-fit for the
measurement model. In the analysis procurement, the standardized loading estimated
should be assured of being 0.6 or higher (Hair et al., 2014). Next, the composite reliability
(CR) was used to assess constructs’ internal consistency reliability. Hair et al. (2014)
commented that the CR value above 0.7 is good for confirmation purposes. Table 1 shows
that the CR values were greater than 0.7, ranged from 0.751 to 0.922. For the convergent
validity, the results pointed that the average variance extracted (AVE) from all constructs is
greater than 0.50 ranged from 0.501 to 0.736, pointing that measurement constructs are
likely to interpret the majority of the variance (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Regarding
discriminant validity, the final results are presented in Table 2, showing that the discriminant
validity is satisfied as the square root of AVE value of each construct is larger than its
correlations with other constructs (Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2014). As such, the
measurement model is satisfied with the reliability, convergent and discriminant validity.
For the goodness-of-fit of the measurement model, it was assessed by several important
indices including comparative fit index (CFI), goodness of fit index (GFI), adjusted
goodness of fit index (AGFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and
p-value (Hair et al., 2014). The final result showed that the measurement model was a good
fit with level of indices as following: x 2 = 2,949.302, df = 767, p < 0.01, CFI = 0.955, AGFI =
0.910, GFI = 0.923 and RMSEA = 0.04. Furthermore, the analysis of relational weights
between the first-order construct and the second-order construct in Table 3 demonstrated
that customers’ perceived servicescape is significantly recognized as a second-order
factor with five first-order factors consisting of ambiance; spatial layout; facility aesthetics;
signs and symbols; and cleanliness.

Structural model
In the second step, the research framework was evaluated by SEM to identify interrelations
among constructs. The result of maximum likelihood estimation indicated a reasonably
good fit to the data: x 2 = 3,311.152, df = 795, p < 0.01, CFI = 0.948, GFI = 0.915, AGFI =
0.903, RMSEA = 0.042. Therefore, the research model is valid and the interrelation analysis
could be continued (Hair et al., 2014). According to Cohen (1988), the standardized path
coefficient ( b ) and p-value should be used to evaluate the relationship between constructs
and the statistical significance. The absolute values of coefficients are less than 0.1 for
“small effect,” around 0.3 for “medium effect” and above 0.5 for “large effect” with a
significance level lower than 5%. The final findings revealed that all 12 hypotheses were
supported in this study (Table 4). First, the estimates indicated that the perceived
servicescape strongly influenced CEI in the café setting ( b = 0.750, p < 0.001). Even the
path coefficient of this relationship achieved the largest value in all correlations. Thus, H1
was supported. Similarly, the customer’s perceived servicescape was shown to greatly
affect CCI ( b = 0.724, p < 0.001). As such, H2 was confirmed in this study.
Being consistent with our expectation in H3, the relation between perceived servicescape
and customer service experience was recognized ( b = 0.283, p < 0.001). The path
coefficient denoted the moderate effect of customers’ perceived servicescape on their café
experience. The finding also signified that the perception of customers about café

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 627
 Table 1 Results of confirmatory factor analysis
Construct Label Loadings CR AVE

Ambient conditions CAMB 0.751

CAMB1 a
CAMB2 0.68
CAMB3 0.69
CAMB4 0.74
CAMB5 a
CAMB6 a
Spatial layout CSPACE 0.803 0.506
CSPACE1 0.74
CSPACE2 0.79
CSPACE3 0.68
CSPACE4 a
CSPACE5 0.62
Facility aesthetics CFAC 0.849 0.587
CFAC1 0.63
CFAC2 0.73
CFAC3 0.86
CFAC4 0.83
Signs and symbols CSIGNS 0.922 0.702
CSIGNS1 0.78
CSIGNS2 0.84
CSIGNS3 0.88
CSIGNS4 0.85
CSIGNS5 0.83
Cleanliness CCLEAN 0.875 0.584
CCLEAN1 0.75
CCLEAN2 0.80
CCLEAN3 0.82
CCLEAN4 0.79
CCLEAN5 0.66
Customer’s perceived interaction with employee CINTER 0.900 0.529
CINTER1 0.71
CINTER2 0.74
CINTER3 0.74
CINTER4 0.73
CINTER5 0.77
CINTER6 0.70
CINTER7 0.73
CINTER8 0.70
Customer’s service experience perception CEXPER 0.893 0.736
CEXPER1 0.84
CEXPER2 0.88
CEXPER3 0.86
Internal interactions among customers CINTERNAL 0.878 0.643
CINTERNAL1 0.74
CINTERNAL2 0.78
CINTERNAL3 0.86
CINTERNAL4 0.83
Customer’s satisfaction CSAT 0.857 0.666
CSAT1 a
CSAT2 a
CSAT3 0.80
CSAT4 0.84
CSAT5 0.81
Customer’s loyalty CLOY 0.867 0.685
CLOY1 0.83
CLOY2 0.85
CLOY3 0.81
CLOY4 a
CLOY5 a
Note: a: Items were eliminated from the process of confirmatory factor analysis.

PAGE 628 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
 Table 2 Discriminant validity assessment
Construct Camb Cspace Cfac Csig Cclean Cinter Cexp Cinteral Csat Cloy

Camb 0.708
Cspace 0.621 0.711
Cfac 0.496 0.581 0.766
Csig 0.509 0.586 0.435 0.838
Cclean 0.540 0.636 0.599 0.585 0.764
Cinter 0.499 0.535 0.461 0.540 0.620 0.727
Cexp 0.510 0.546 0.569 0.433 0.502 0.621 0.858
Cinternal 0.494 0.539 0.517 0.450 0.578 0.607 0.697 0.802
Csat 0.524 0.570 0.574 0.488 0.629 0.651 0.682 0.660 0.816
Cloy 0.523 0.566 0.535 0.489 0.625 0.610 0.649 0.631 0.803 0.828
Notes: The values of square root of AVE are presented through the italics diagonal elements. The
other elements present the mutual correlation among constructs

Table 3 Relation weights between first-order constructs and second-order constructs

Second-order constructs First-order constructs Weight p-value


Customers’ perceived servicescape Ambient conditions 0.710

Spatial layout 0.795

Facility aesthetics 0.708

Signs and symbols 0.693

Cleanliness 0.813

Note: p < 0.001

Table 4 Standardized results of the structural model

Hypotheses Coefficients p-value Supported


1. CSER ! CINTER 0.750 Yes

2. CSER ! CINTERNAL 0.724 Yes

3. CSER ! CEXPER 0.283 Yes

4. CINTER ! CEXPER 0.181 Yes

5. CINTERNAL ! CEXPER 0.387 Yes

6. CINTER ! CSAT 0.321 Yes

7. CEXPER ! CSAT 0.302 Yes

8. CINTERNAL ! CSAT 0.274 Yes

9. CINTER ! CLOY 0.105 Yes

10. CEXPER ! CLOY 0.113 Yes

11. CINTERNAL ! CLOY 0.116 Yes

12. CSAT ! CLOY 0.579 Yes
Notes: CSER = customers’ perceived servicescape; CINTER = customers’ perceived interaction with
employee; CINTERNAL = internal interactions among customers; CEXPER = customers’ service
experience perception; CSAT = customers’ satisfaction; CLOY = customers’ loyalty;  p < 0.001

servicescape and social interaction quality contributed to explaining more than 50% of the
variance in customer experience (R2 = 0.57). Based on parameter estimates, both H4 and
H5 were supported ( b 4 = 0.181, b 5 = 0.387, p4 < 0.001, p5 < 0.001), signifying that the
social interaction quality customers perceive in café stores, including CCI and CEI,
moderately influenced customer’s café experience.
H6, H7 and H8, which predicted the positive effects of social interaction and experience
quality on customer satisfaction, were supported. According to parameter estimates,
indexes were recognized, respectively, as follows: b 6 = 0.321, b 7 = 0.302, b 8 = 0.274,
p6 < 0.001, p7 < 0.001 and p8 < 0.001. They showed that CCI, CEI and experience quality
moderately impacted the development of customer satisfaction. Three factors were likely to

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 629
 interpret approximately 60% of the variance in customer satisfaction (R2 = 0.60). Likewise,
the influences of CCI, CEI and customer experience quality on customer loyalty were also
recognized in H9, H10 and H11 ( b 9 = 0.105, b 10 = 0.113, b 11 = 0.116, p9 < 0.001, p10 <
0.001, p11 < 0.001). Nevertheless, these effects are regarded to be relatively slight when all
path coefficients of three relationships are close to 0.1. Ultimately, as predicted, the analysis
result supported H12 regarding the relationship between customer satisfaction and loyalty
to café shops ( b = 0.579, p < 0.001). The path value illustrated the large influence of
customer satisfaction on loyalty in the coffee context. Additionally, the results given in
Figure 2 denoted that customer satisfaction along with social interactions and service
experience contributed to interpreting approximately 67% of the variance in customer
loyalty to coffee stores (R2 = 0.67).

Testing the mediating role of social interactions and customer satisfaction

To further explore the indirect effects of social interactions and customer satisfaction in the
structural model, the mediating test was implemented with the Sobel test and the method of
bias-corrected bootstrapping (Preacher and Hayes, 2008). Table 5 indicates that CEI
significantly mediated the effects of servicescape on customer service experience (Cser !

Figure 2 Hypotheses testing of structural model

Ambience Customer-to-employee 0.321*** Satisfaction

interaction (R 2 = 60%)

0.710*** 0.302***

0.181*** 0.274***
Layout 0.750***

0.795***

0.283*** Service experience

0.693*** Servicescape 0.579***
Signs (R 2 = 57%)
Perception

0.708*** 0.105***
***
Aesthetics 0.724
0.387***
0.113***
0.813***

0.116*** Loyalty
Cleanliness Internal interaction (R 2 = 67%)

Notes: ***p < 0.001, χ2 = 3311.152; df = 795, CFI = 0.948; GFI = 0.915, AGFI = 0.903;
RMSEA = 0.042

Table 5 Results of mediating role testing

95% Bootstrap CIs
Paths of mediating role Indirect effects LL CIs UL CIs p-values Mediating roles

1. Cser ! Cinter ! Cexper 0.219 0.130 0.308 0.001 Partial mediator

2. Cser ! Cinternal ! Cexper 0.452 0.372 0.546 0.001 Partial mediator
3. Cinter ! Csat ! Cloy 0.201 0.157 0.246 0.001 Partial mediator
4. Cexper ! Csat ! Cloy 0.182 0.138 0.231 0.001 Partial mediator
5. Cinternal ! Csat ! Cloy 0.160 0.121 0.200 0.001 Partial mediator
Notes: Cser = servicescape, Cinter = customers’ perceived interaction with employees, Cexper =
customers’ service experiences, Cinternal = customers’ internal interaction, Csat = customers’
satisfaction, Cloy = customers’ loyalty

PAGE 630 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
Cinter ! Cexper; 0.219; 95% bootstrap CIs = 0.130 lower limit CIs, 0.308 upper limit CIs; p =
0.001). Further, the direct effect of servicescape on customer service experience was
significant (b = 0.283, p < 0.001). As such, CEI holds a partial mediating role in the relation
between servicescape and service experience. Similarly, the result of Table 5 indicates that
CCI partially mediated the relationship between servicescape and service experience.
Additionally, the report also showed that customer satisfaction played a partial mediating role in
the three relationships between CEI, CCI, service experience and customer loyalty.

Discussion and contribution

This study provides significant findings for creating customer satisfaction and loyalty
through servicescape, social interactions and service experience in café settings. As
expected, the findings showed that customer’s positive responses to café servicescape are
critical in shaping CEI. This result remarkably supports early conclusions relating to
manipulating CEI quality through the pleasant presence of physical stimuli (Wu, 2017; Carù
and Cova, 2015; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019; Choi and Kim, 2015). Interestingly,
results indicated that positive responses with environmental stimuli deeply affect CCI quality
in coffee stores. This result is consistent with prior works (Fakharyan et al., 2014; Choi and
Kim, 2015). As a result, the findings illustrate that the café servicescape could strongly
stimulate or restrict human interactions between and among customers and employees.
The result also revealed that customer’s evaluation toward café servicescape directly
influences customer service experience. This validates previous propositions in identifying
servicescape as a determinant of service experience quality (Sinniah et al., 2018; Wu and
Cheng, 2019; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019; Walter and Edvardsson, 2012). Further, this
study pointed out that both CCI and CEI play a determinant role in shaping café experience
quality. It strongly supports prior perspectives that service organizations are likely to
enhance service experience quality through the control of CEI and CCI (Lemke et al., 2011;
Wu et al., 2018; Wu, 2017; Sinniah et al., 2018). Therefore, physical attributes and social
interactions should be treated as an integral part of customer experience in the coffee
environment.
Additionally, the findings suggested that CEI, CCI and customer experience substantially
impact customer satisfaction to café shops. This parallels the findings of past studies (Ali
et al., 2016a, 2016b; Zgolli and Zaiem, 2017; Nadiri and Gunay, 2013; Wu, 2017; Huang,
2017; Amoah et al., 2016), whose findings revealed that customer satisfaction could be
improved efficiently by focusing on fostering social interactions and improving experience
quality in the service setting.
Likewise, the analysis result recognized the significant impact of social interactions and
service experience on loyalty toward café providers. The positive perception of personal
connections (CEI and CCI) results in advancing beneficial behaviors such as re-use or
spreading the message (Chen et al., 2013; Gremler and Gwinner, 2000; Cetin and Dincer,
2014). The positive service experience could produce an emotional bond between
customers and organizations, leading to positive behavioral responses (Choi and Kim,
2015; Fernandes, 2016). Finally, research findings illustrated that customer loyalty is
strongly shaped by customer satisfaction in café stores. This parallels the findings of past
studies (Wu, 2017; Nadiri and Gunay, 2013; Sethjinda and Laothumthut, 2019).

Theoretical contributions
The study findings provide some critical contributions as follows. The foremost contribution
to theory advancement is developing and extending the servicescape model of Bitner
(1992) by investigating the impact of servicescape attributes on social interaction quality
between and among customers and employees in the café setting. The findings show that
the positive evaluation of customers toward café servicescape strongly contributes to

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 631
 increasing CEI and CCI quality. This provides an in-depth insight into the critical role of
servicescape in creating and engendering social interaction experiences in the café setting.
Second, this study offers a better understanding of the importance of social interaction in
the service environment, especially CCI. The results suggest that the evaluation of
customers toward internal interactions is an important indicator of service experience
quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty to the café services. Additionally, CCI along with
CEI expresses a significant mediating role for the effects of café servicescape on service
experience quality.
Third, this research advances the knowledge of customer service experience in the service
environment. The findings contribute to identifying the determinants of service experience,
including servicescape and social interactions. Servicescape in the café environment is
significantly evaluated upon five major dimensions containing ambient conditions; spatial
layout; facility aesthetics; sign and symbol; and cleanliness. Social interactions customers
perceived should be holistically evaluated through CEI and CCI.
The last contribution is the exploration of relationships between service experience,
customer satisfaction and loyalty in the service atmosphere. The findings suggest that the
positive perception of customers toward experiential activities in coffee stores is directly
influential in the development of customer satisfaction and loyalty. Furthermore, customer
satisfaction is recognized as a mediating variable for the impacts of social interactions and
service experience on customer loyalty.

Managerial applications
This study attempts to provide a deeper understanding for marketers and service providers
about the critical role of servicescape, social interaction and service experience within the
café setting. It shows that consumers nowadays not only focus on traditional aspects of
service but also spend much interest in the entire experience that a firm creates for them
(Wu et al., 2018; Alnawas and Hemsley-Brown, 2018; Oh et al., 2019). Because customers
visit coffee stores, they desire to achieve pleasant experiences with their friends and
relatives (Nadiri and Gunay, 2013; Ali et al., 2016a, 2016b). Such experiences could be
established through interactions with café servicescape, service employees and other
customers. Moreover, with more and more appearance of café models, managers are
facing increasing challenges from other competitors. Creating wonderful and distinct
experiences is regarded as a unique competitive advantage in this fierce battle.
The findings also highlighted the role of social interactions customers have with staff and
other customers in the service context. Managers should concentrate on training and
educating employees because their expression and behavior are one of the major elements
that reflect service quality and deeply affect customer evaluation. The managers, therefore,
should assure that employees always appear elegantly and behave professionally.
Additionally, it is important to highlight the harmony and unity in terms of overall design style
from employee’s uniform to the decor, aesthetics of physical facility aiming to maximize the
effects of servicescape on customer perception.

Limitations and future studies

Even though the present study provided several contributions in service marketing
literature, there still exist some limitations. This study only concentrates on investigating the
café setting without covering other services. Each service has different characteristics; only
investigating the café setting could lead to difficulties to generalize the findings to the
service industry generally. It is suggested that future research can contribute to the
generalizability of findings by exploring diverse service contexts and by comparing results
across the types of services. Additionally, the use of interviews and survey methods in

PAGE 632 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
Vietnam café stores also results in a specific market pattern, again limiting the
representativeness, generalizability and applicability of results. The designing
characteristics of café setting, service experience behaviors and job experiences vary in
different cultural contexts. As such, it could be an interesting research topic to carry out a
cross-cultural study, extending the research scope of café shops in other geographical
locations. This would thus make research findings more generalizable to the café context.

References
Alhelalat, J.A., Habiballah, M. M A. and Twaissi, N.M. (2017), “The impact of personal and functional
aspects of restaurant employee service behavior on customer satisfaction”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 66, pp. 46-53.
Ali, F. and Omar, R. (2014), “Determinants of customer experience and resulting satisfaction and revisit
intentions: PLS-SEM approach towards Malaysian resort hotels”, Asia-Pacific Journal of Innovation in
Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 1-19.
Ali, F., Amin, M. and Cobanoglu, C. (2016a), “An integrated model of service experience, emotions,
satisfaction, and price acceptance: an empirical analysis in the Chinese hospitality industry”, Journal of
Hospitality Marketing & Management, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 449-475.

Ali, F., Kim, W.G. and Ryu, K. (2016b), “The effect of physical environment on passenger delight and
satisfaction: moderating effect of national identity”, Tourism Management, Vol. 57, pp. 213-224.
Ali, F., Kim, W.G., Li, J. and Jeon, H.-M. (2018), “Make it delightful: customers’ experience, satisfaction
and loyalty in Malaysian theme parks”, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, Vol. 7, pp. 1-11.
Alnawas, I. and Hemsley-Brown, J. (2018), “The differential effect of cognitive and emotional elements of
experience quality on the customer-service provider’s relationship”, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 125-147.

Amoah, F., Radder, L., van Eyk, M. and Elizabeth, P. (2016), “Experience quality dimensions and
customer perceptions: a case study of guesthouses in Ghana”, African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism
and Leisure, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 1-21.

Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Bagdare, S. and Jain, R. (2013), “Measuring retail customer experience”, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, Vol. 41 No. 10, pp. 790-804.

Baker, J. (1986), “The role of the environment in marketing services: the consumer perspective”, The
Services Challenge: Integrating for Competitive Advantage, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 79-84.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), “Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 57-71.
Carù, A. and Cova, B. (2015), “Co-creating the collective service experience”, Journal of Service
Management, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 276-294.
Cetin, G. and Dincer, F.I. (2014), “Influence of customer experience on loyalty and word-of-mouth in
hospitality operations”, Anatolia, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 181-194.
Chen, C.-F. and Chen, F.-S. (2010), “Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral
intentions for heritage tourists”, Tourism Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 29-35.

Chen, C.M., Chen, S.H. and Lee, H.T. (2013), “Interrelationships between physical environment quality,
personal interaction quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in relation to customer loyalty: the case
of Kinmen’s bed and breakfast industry”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 262-287.
Choi, Y.G. and Hyun, S.S. (2017), “Relationships between Brand experiences, personality traits, prestige,
relationship quality, and loyalty”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29
No. 4, pp. 1185-1202.

Choi, B. and Kim, H.S. (2015), “The impact of servicescape on customer experience quality through
employee-to-customer interaction quality and peer-to-peer interaction quality in hedonic service
settings”, Asia Marketing Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 73-96.

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 633
 Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Inc. Hillsdale, NJ, p. 13.
Cole, S.T. and Scott, D. (2004), “Examining the mediating role of experience quality in a model of tourist
experiences”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 79-90.

Cronin, J.J. Jr, (2003), “Looking back to see forward in services marketing: some ideas to consider”,
Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 332-337.

Dong, P. and Siu, N.Y.-M. (2013), “Servicescape elements, customer predispositions and service
experience: the case of theme park visitors”, Tourism Management, Vol. 36, pp. 541-551.
Edvardsson, B., Enquist, B. and Johnston, R. (2010), “Design dimensions of experience rooms for
service test drives: case studies in several service contexts”, Managing Service Quality: An International
Journal, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 312-327.
Fakharyan, M., Omidvar, S., Khodadadian, M.R., Jalilvand, M.R. and Nasrolahi Vosta, L. (2014),
“Examining the effect of customer- to-customer interactions on satisfaction, loyalty, and word-of-mouth
behaviors in the hospitality industry: the mediating role of personal interaction quality and service
atmospherics”, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 610-626.
Fernandes, C.M. (2016), “Dimensions and outcomes of experience quality in tourism: the case of port
wine cellars”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 31, pp. 371-379.
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.
Fowler, K. and Bridges, E. (2012), “Service environment, provider mood, and provider-customer
interaction”, Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 165-183.

Gremler, D.D. and Gwinner, K.P. (2000), “Customer-employee rapport in service relationships”, Journal
of Service Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 82-104.

Guenzi, P. and Pelloni, O. (2004), “The impact of interpersonal relationships on customer satisfaction and
loyalty to the service provider”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 15 No. 4,
pp. 365-384.
Gupta, A. (2016), “Redefining service quality scale with customer experience quality scale: a critical
review”, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 48-64.
Hair, J.F., Gabriel, M. and Patel, V. (2014), “AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-
SEM): guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool”, Brazilian Journal of Marketing, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 44-55.
Hair, J.F., Jr, Matthews, L.M., Matthews, R.L. and Sarstedt, M. (2017a), “PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated
guidelines on which method to use”, International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, Vol. 1 No. 2,
pp. 107-123.
Han, H. and Ryu, K. (2009), “The roles of the physical environment, price perception, and customer
satisfaction in determining customer loyalty in the restaurant industry”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 487-510.
Huang, L.V. (2017), “Malaysian café culture: the relationship between customer experience and
customer satisfaction towards contemporary cafés”, People: International Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 1582-1602.
Islam, T., Ahmed, I., Ali, G. and Ahmer, Z. (2019), “Emerging trend of coffee cafe in Pakistan: factors
affecting revisit intention”, British Food Journal, Vol. 121 No. 9, pp. 2132-2147.
Ismail, A.R. (2011), “Experience marketing: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Relationship
Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 167-201.

Janet Turner, P., Leonard, L.B. and Shun Yin, L. (2008), “The effect of the servicescape on service
workers”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 220-238.

Jang, Y., Ro, H. and Kim, T.-H. (2015), “Social servicescape: the impact of social factors on restaurant
image and behavioral intentions”, International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, Vol. 16
No. 3, pp. 290-309.
Jin, N.P., Lee, S. and Lee, H. (2015), “The effect of experience quality on perceived value, satisfaction,
image and behavioral intention of water park patrons: new versus repeat visitors”, International Journal of
Tourism Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 82-95.

PAGE 634 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
Johnston, R. and Clark, G. (2008), Service Operations Management: improving Service Delivery, Pearson
Education London.
Jolliffe, L., Kwan, K. and Yen, G.K. (2010), “Coffee in Vietnam: international tourist experiences. Coffee
culture, destinations and tourism”, Channel View Publications, Vol. 24, pp. 89-98.
Joon Choi, B. and Sik Kim, H. (2013), “The impact of outcome quality, interaction quality, and peer-to-
peer quality on customer satisfaction with a hospital service”, An International Journal Managing Service
Quality, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 188-204.

Kao, Y.-F., Huang, L.-S. and Wu, C.-H. (2008), “Effects of theatrical elements on experiential quality and
loyalty intentions for theme parks”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 163-174.
Kaura, V., Prasad, C.S.D. and Sharma, S. (2015), “Service quality, service convenience, price and
fairness, customer loyalty, and the mediating role of customer satisfaction”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 404-422.
Khan, I., Garg, R.J. and Rahman, Z. (2015), “Customer service experience in hotel operations: an
empirical analysis”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 189, pp. 266-274.
Kim, H. and Choi, B. (2013), “The influence of customer experience quality on customers’ behavioral
intentions”, Services Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 322-338.
Kim, H.S. and Choi, B. (2016), “The effects of three customer-to-customer interaction quality types on
customer experience quality and citizenship behavior in mass service settings”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 384-397.

Kim, S.-H. and Lee, S.A. (2017), “Promoting customers’ involvement with service brands: evidence from
coffee shop customers”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 733-744.
Kim, W.G., Lee, Y.-K. and Yoo, Y.-J. (2006), “Predictors of relationship quality and relationship outcomes
in luxury restaurants”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 143-169.

Kotler, P. (1973), “Atmospherics as a marketing tool”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 48-64.
Lee, M.-S., Hsiao, H.-D. and Yang, M.-F. (2010), “The study of the relationships among experiential
marketing, service quality, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty”, International Journal of
Organizational Innovation (Online), Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 353-379.
Lemke, F., Clark, M. and Wilson, H. (2011), “Customer experience quality: an exploration in business and
consumer contexts using repertory grid technique”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 846-869.
Lin, I.Y. and Mattila, A.S. (2010), “Restaurant servicescape, service encounter, and perceived
congruency on customers’ emotions and satisfaction”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management,
Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 819-841.
Liu, Y. and Jang, S. (2009), “The effects of dining atmospherics: an extended Mehrabian–Russell model”,
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 494-503.
Maklan, S. and Klaus, P. (2011), “Customer experience”, International Journal of Market Research,
Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 771-792.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology, The MIT Press
Cambridge.
Meyer, C. and Schwager, A. (2007), “Understanding customer experience”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 116-126.
Moon, H., Park, J. and Kim, S. (2015), “The importance of innovative product design on customer
behavior: development and validation of a scale”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 32
No. 2, pp. 224-232.

Moore, R., Moore, M.L. and Capella, M. (2005), “The impact of customer-to-customer interactions in a
high personal contact service setting”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 482-491.
Moura e Sá, P. and Amorim, M. (2017), “A typology of customer-to-customer interaction and its
implications for excellence in service provision”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,
Vol. 28 Nos 9/10, pp. 1183-1193.
Nadiri, H. and Gunay, G.N. (2013), “An empirical study to diagnose the outcomes of customers’
experiences in trendy coffee shops”, Journal of Business Economics and Management, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 22-53.

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 635
 Namin, A. (2017), “Revisiting customers’ perception of service quality in fast food restaurants”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 34, pp. 70-81.
Nicholls, R. (2010), “New directions for customer-to-customer interaction research”, Journal of Services
Marketing, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 87-97.
Oh, D., Yoo, M.M. and Lee, Y. (2019), “A holistic view of the service experience at coffee franchises: a
cross-cultural study”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 82, pp. 68-81.

Preacher, K.J. and Hayes, A.F. (2008), “Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and
comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models”, Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40 No. 3,
pp. 879-891.

Rosenbaum, M.S. and Massiah, C.A. (2007), “When customers receive support from other customers:
exploring the influence of inter-customer social support on customer voluntary performance”, Journal of
Service Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 257-270.

Rosenbaum, M.S. and Massiah, C. (2011), “An expanded servicescape perspective”, Journal of Service
Management, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 471-490.
Roy, A. and Tai, S.T. (2003), “Store environment and shopping behavior: the role of imagery elaboration
and shopping orientation”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 71-99.
Sethjinda, T. and Laothumthut, W. (2019), “What drives experiential loyalty? A case study of coffee chain
stores in Bangkok”, Journal of Global Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 59-82.
Sinniah, S., Perumal, G., Seniasamy, R., Mohamed, R.K.M.H., Das, P.A.M. and Dhananjaya, O.S. (2018),
“Experiential quality among coffee lovers: an empirical study in the Malaysian coffee outlets industry”, e-
Bangi, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 104-116.
Siu, N.Y.-M., Wan, P.Y.K. and Dong, P. (2012), “The impact of the servicescape on the desire to stay in
convention and exhibition centers: the case of Macao”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,
Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 236-246.
Spence, C. and Carvalho, F.M. (2019), “The coffee drinking experience: product extrinsic (atmospheric)
influences on taste and choice”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 1, p. 103802.
Statista (2020), “Total coffee consumption in Vietnam from 1990 to 2018”, Available at: www.statista.com/
statistics/315003/vietnam-total-coffee-consumption/

Tombs, A. and McColl-Kennedy, J.R. (2003), “Social-servicescape conceptual model”, Marketing

Theory, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 447-475.
Turley, L.W. and Milliman, R.E. (2000), “Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a review of the
experimental evidence”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 193-211.
Verhoef, P.C., Lemon, K.N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M. and Schlesinger, L.A. (2009),
“Customer experience creation: determinants, dynamics and management strategies”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 31-41.
Wakefield, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1996), “The effect of the servicescape on customers’ behavioral
intentions in leisure service settings”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 45-61.
Walter, U. and Edvardsson, B. (2012), “The physical environment as a driver of customers’ service
experiences at restaurants”, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 2,
pp. 104-119.
Walter, U., Edvardsson, B. and Öström, Å. (2010), “Drivers of customers’ service experiences: a
study in the restaurant industry”, Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 3,
pp. 236-258.
Wei, W., Lu, Y.T., Miao, L., Cai, L.A. and Wang, C-y. (2017), “Customer-customer interactions (CCIs) at
conferences: an identity approach”, Tourism Management, Vol. 59, pp. 154-170.
Wu, C.H.-J. (2008), “The influence of customer-to-customer interactions and role typology on customer
reaction”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 28 No. 10, pp. 1501-1513.

Wu, H.-C. (2017), “What drives experiential loyalty? A case study of starbucks coffee chain in Taiwan”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 3, pp. 468-496.
Wu, H.-C. and Cheng, C.-C. (2019), “An empirical analysis of green experiential loyalty: a case study”,
Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 69-105.

PAGE 636 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020
Wu, C.H.-J. and Liang, R.-D. (2009), “Effect of experiential value on customer satisfaction with service
encounters in luxury-hotel restaurants”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 28 No. 4,
pp. 586-593.
Wu, H.-C., Li, M.-Y. and Li, T. (2018), “A study of experiential quality, experiential value, experiential
satisfaction, theme park image, and revisit intention”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 42
No. 1, pp. 26-73.
Yoo, J.J., Arnold, T.J. and Frankwick, G.L. (2012), “Effects of positive customer-to-customer service
interaction”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 9, pp. 1313-1320.

Yuan, Y.-H.E. and Wu, C.K. (2008), “Relationships among experiential marketing, experiential value, and
customer satisfaction”, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 387-410.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1996), “The behavioral consequences of service
quality”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 2, pp. 31-46.
Zemke, D.M.V. and Shoemaker, S. (2007), “Scent across a crowded room: exploring the effect of ambient
scent on social interactions”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 927-940.
Zgolli, S. and Zaiem, I. (2017), “Customer-to-customer interaction in tourism experience: moderating role
of nationality”, Arab Economic and Business Journal, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 44-56.

Further reading
Gerrard, P. and Cunningham, B. (2001), “Bank service quality: a comparison between a publicly quoted
bank and a government bank in Singapore”, Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Vol. 6 No. 1,
pp. 50-66.
Hair, J.F., Jr, Babin, B.J. and Krey, N. (2017b), “Covariance-based structural equation modeling in the
journal of advertising: review and recommendations”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 163-177.

Idris, A.K.M., Noor, N.M., Adilah, S.A., Tarmazi, N.H. and Ghazali, N. (2017), “Factors that influence
frontline employee behavior towards guest satisfaction in hotel”, Journal of Academia UiTM Negeri
Sembilan, Vol. 5, pp. 147-157.

International Coffee Organization (2019), “Statistics. Retrieved from report of country coffee profile:
Vietnam”.
Qin, H., Prybutok, V.R. and Zhao, Q. (2010), “Perceived service quality in fast-food restaurants: empirical
evidence from China”, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27 No. 4,
pp. 424-437.

Corresponding author
Quynh Xuan Tran can be contacted at: quynhtx@due.edu.vn

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

VOL. 14 NO. 4 2020 j INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH j PAGE 637