Service Environment

International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
International Journal of Hospitality Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman
New or repeat customers: How does physical environment inuence their

restaurant experience?
Kisang Ryu a,1 , Heesup Han b,
a
b
Department of Food Service Management, College of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Sejong University, 98 Gunja-Dong, Gwanjin-Gu, Seoul, Korea
Department of Tourism Management, College of Business Administration, Dong-A University, Bumin-dong 2-ga, Seo-gu, Busan, South Korea
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Keywords:
Physical environment
Disconrmation
Customer satisfaction
Customer loyalty
First-time and repeat customers
Upscale restaurant
a b s t r a c t
This study proposed a conceptual model to examine how customers perceptions of the physical environment inuenced disconrmation, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty for rst-time and repeat
customers in upscale restaurants. Using a structural equation modeling analysis, this study showed that
facility aesthetics, lighting, layout, and service staff had signicant effects on disconrmation. Moreover,
disconrmation exerted a direct inuence on customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. Customer satisfaction also positively inuenced customer loyalty. Finally, the impacts of facility aesthetics, lighting,
table settings, and service staff on disconrmation signicantly differed between rst-time customers
and repeat customers. More specically, facility aesthetics, lighting, and service staff were signicant
predictors of both rst timers and repeaters perceived disconrmation, while layout and table settings
were signicant determinants of only repeat visitors perceived disconrmation. The implications for
academic researchers and marketing practitioners are discussed.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The importance of creating and maintaining a distinctive atmosphere has garnered growing attention among hospitality scholars
and managers as it is considered a key factor in attracting and
satisfying customers and in increasing nancial performance by
maximizing income and market share in the hospitality industry (Dube and Renaghan, 2000; Han and Ryu, 2009; Heide and
Gronhaug, 2009; Hertenstein et al., 2001; Jang and Namkung, 2009;
Kim and Moon, 2009; Liu and Jang, 2009; Magnini and Parker, 2009;
Ryu and Jang, 2007; Zemke and Pullman, 2008). A number of studies have found that customer reactions to the physical environment
(also known as atmospherics) can be more important, particularly
when hedonic consumption is highly involved (Bitner, 1992; Ryu
and Jang, 2007; Wakeeld and Blodgett, 1994). While consumption of many types of services (e.g., consumption of a ready-to-eat
food) is driven primarily by utilitarian, or functional, purposes, consumption of leisure services (e.g., ne-dining experiences) is largely
driven by hedonic, or emotional, motives (Lin, 2004; Ryu and Jang,
2007; Tang et al., 2001). Hedonic aspects of consumption behavior focus on the consumption experience (Arnold and Reynolds,
2003; Babin et al., 1994; Wakeeld and Baker, 1998), reecting the
need for entertainment and emotional value. In contrast, utilitar-
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 51 200 7427.

E-mail addresses: kryu@uno.edu (K. Ryu), heesup.han@gmail.com (H. Han).
1
Tel.: +82 2 3408 3313.
0278-4319/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2010.11.004
ian consumption is mainly task-related or functional in nature. This

study examines the determinants of customer satisfaction and loyalty within the realm of hedonic services, particularly in the upscale
restaurant context.
The physical environment is an important determinant of
consumer psychology (e.g., disconrmation and satisfaction) and
behavior (e.g., patronage and word-of-mouth) when a service is
consumed primarily for hedonic purposes and when customers
spend moderate to long periods of time immersed in a particular
atmosphere (Ryu and Jang, 2007; Wakeeld and Blodgett, 1994).
For instance, in the case of upscale restaurants, customers may
remain within an eaterys connes for 2 h or more, and they take in
their physical surroundings consciously and unconsciously before,
during, and after the meal. In addition to food and service, a pleasant
physical setting (e.g., innovative interior design and dcor, pleasing
music, subdued lighting, a unique color scheme, agreeable ambient
odors, a spacious layout, appealing table settings, and an attractive
service staff) should determine to a large extent the degree of overall customer satisfaction and loyalty resulting from the restaurant
visit (Han and Ryu, 2009; Kim and Moon, 2009; Sulek and Hensley,
2004; Turley and Milliman, 2000).
Researchers have acknowledged the importance of understanding the differences between rst-time visitors and repeat visitors
in the hospitality and tourism industry (Anwar and Sohail, 2004;
Morais and Lin, 2010; Opperman, 1997; Petrick, 2004). More specifically, various marketing researchers suggested that understanding
the differentiation between rst-time and repeat visitors can provide a good basis for market segmentation. The two segments differ
600
K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611
with regards to their motivations and activities towards the products or services. In addition, prior experience is perceived as a
vital determinant to consumers tripographic characteristics (e.g.,
number of previous visits, length of stay, party size, and accommodation type), as well as other variables such as planning behavior
and post-experience evaluations (Li et al., 2008; McKercher and
Chan, 2005). Regardless of their characteristics, repeat visitors
are commonly perceived as a preferable market segment that
should receive high priority in tourism and hospitality sectors, as
is evident in the abundance of loyalty programs and incentives
offered to encourage and reward repeat patronage (Mattila, 2006).
Therefore, various hospitality and tourism sectors need to rst
understand the differences between these two different segments
(e.g., rst-time versus repeat visitors) to develop persuasive marketing strategies to more effectively target these two segments,
more importantly for repeat visitors/customers. Nevertheless, the
following question still remained unanswered in the literature:
are there differences between rst-time visitors and repeat visitors in regards to their perceptions of physical environments in
the hospitality industry? In this regard, from a marketing perspective, it was advisable to examine the differences between rst-time
visitors and repeat visitors in terms of their perceptions of the physical environments on behalf of the restaurant management in this
study.
Despite the fact that there have been many studies made on the
inuence of the physical environment, a majority of this empirical research has focused on only one or a few particular physical
environmental elements (e.g., music). Hence, there still seem to be
areas calling for more study to understand the combined effect of
physical environments. While a substantial amount of research has
revealed that physical environments and disconrmation (dened
as a function of product or service performance, as perceived by
consumers following their actual experience, as well as their expectation of the product or service) can be important predictors of
customer satisfaction, particularly in a hedonic consumption situation, to the best of our knowledge no previous studies have jointly
tested the proposed relationships between physical environments,
disconrmation, and customer satisfaction in an integrated model.
In particular, surprisingly, no research has examined the relationships between the perceived quality of physical environments
and disconrmation. Since physical environments are particularly
inuential factors towards customer reactions in hedonic services,
there is a need to understand how customer satisfaction and
behavior change depending upon customers perception of physical environmental elements. Additionally, despite the importance
of understanding the differences between rst-time customers and
repeat customers in the hospitality and tourism industry, no study
to date has yet empirically compared the differences between
these segments (rst-time and repeat customers) in regards to
their perceptions of physical environments in the hospitality and
tourism industry, particularly in the restaurant industry. Thus, we
attempt to incorporate the moderator the frequency of past visits
to evaluate how customers the frequency of past visits (rsttime versus repeat visitation) strengthen or lessen the effect of
their perceived physical environment quality on satisfaction in this
study.
This present research aims to ll these research gaps. It proposes
and tests an integrative model which focuses on the relationship
between customer perceptions of physical environments on their
disconrmation, satisfaction and intended behaviors while identifying the differences between rst-time and repeat visitors in the
upscale restaurant industry. More specically, the objectives of current study were (1) to explore the effects of customers perceptions
of dining environments on perceived disconrmation in the upscale
restaurant context; (2) to examine the inuence of perceived disconrmation on customer satisfaction; (3) to test the impact of
customer satisfaction on customer loyalty; and (4) to investigate

the moderating effect of the past experience (differentiating rsttime customers and repeat customers) on the link between physical
environments and disconrmation.
This study is important both theoretically and practically. Practically, this study can provide restaurateurs with various insights
into the important role of physical environmental elements on customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. It is expected that the
conceptual model, survey instrument, methodology, and ndings
of this study can be used to help restaurant managers establish
what they are doing right or wrong to retain customers, which could
lead to increased revenue and market share (Molinari et al., 2008).
This study can also offer meaningful information to restaurant managers who plan to undertake renovation projects. In addition, this
study theoretically contributes to the service marketing literature
beyond previous research. This study is the rst to propose a conceptual model that investigates the combined relationships among
physical environments, disconrmation, customer satisfaction, and
loyalty for both rst-time customers and repeat customers in the
service industry, particularly in the restaurant industry.
2. Literature review
2.1. Physical environment
Dining is more than eating out for a majority of customers.
Customers may not want to feel at home. They may seek a memorable experience away from home, and atmosphere can play a
critical role in creating that memorable experience. To capture how
customers perceived the physical environment in the dining area,
the DINESCAPE scale was used in this study (Ryu and Jang, 2007,
2008a). The DINESCAPE is dened as the man-made physical and
human surroundings in the dining area of upscale restaurants. The
DINESCAPE includes six dimensions: facility aesthetics, lighting,
ambience, layout, table settings, and service staff. These component
aspects will be detailed in the paragraphs that follow.
2.1.1. Facility aesthetics
Facility aesthetics means architectural design, interior design
and dcor that contribute to the attractiveness of the dining environment (Wakeeld and Blodgett, 1994). Facility aesthetics can
be critical in attracting and retaining restaurant customers (Cobe,
2007). Not only can it inuence consumer trafc to a restaurant, but
it can also affect the revenue of the restaurant. A lot of dining establishments recognize and utilize facility aesthetics to create specic
restaurant themes (Barbas, 2002). For instance, P.F. Changs China
Bistro made their mark through innovative interior design and
dcor. Additionally, it can play a role as an important marketing tool
by affecting customer responses such as attitudes, emotions, price
perceptions, value perceptions, satisfaction, and behavior (Berry
and Wall, 2007; Han and Ryu, 2009; Kim and Moon, 2009; Liu
and Jang, 2009; Pullman and Gross, 2004; Pullman and Robson,
2007; Ryu and Jang, 2007). For instance, once inside the dining area,
customers often spend hours observing (consciously and unconsciously) the interior of the dining area. These evaluations are likely
to affect their attitudes towards the restaurant. In addition to the
appeal of the dining areas architectural design, customers may be
inuenced by the color schemes of the dining area, such as those
adorning its walls and oor coverings. Other aspects of interior
design, including furniture, pictures/paintings, plants/owers, or
wall decorations may serve to enhance the perceived quality of
dining environments, eliciting emotions in a customer and inuencing behavior. Ryu and Jang (2008b) found that facility aesthetics
was a signicant antecedent of customers pleasure, arousal and
behavioral intention in an upscale restaurant context.
2.1.2. Ambience
Ambient elements are intangible background characteristics
(e.g., music, scent, temperature) that tend to affect the non-visual
senses and may have a subconscious effect on customers (Baker,
1987). Previous studies have found that atmospheric music can
(1) affect customer perceptions of business places (Mattila and
Wirtz, 2001; North and Hargreaves, 1998); (2) elicit emotions
(Ryu and Jang, 2007); (3) inuence customer satisfaction and
relaxation (Magnini and Parker, 2009; Oakes, 2003); (4) increase
shopping time and waiting time (Yalch and Spangenberg, 2000);
(5) decrease perceived shopping time and waiting time (Hui et al.,
1997; Yalch and Spangenberg, 2000); (6) inuence dining speed
(Milliman, 1986); (7) inuence purchase intentions (Baker et al.,
1992; North and Hargreaves, 1998); (8) amend consumer perceptions of brand personality (Magnini and Parker, 2009); (9)
inuence buyer/seller interaction (Magnini and Parker, 2009); (10)
enhance employee productivity (Magnini and Parker, 2009); and
(11) increase sales (Magnini and Parker, 2009; Mattila and Wirtz,
2001; North and Hargreaves, 1998). Moreover, the inuence of
pleasant scents as a powerful tool to increase sales has gained
much attention in retail businesses (Bone and Ellen, 1999; Chebat
and Michon, 2003; Mattila and Wirtz, 2001). Retailers now know
that aroma can have an impact on a consumers desire to make
a purchase. It is also suggested that ambient scent might also
inuence a consumers mood, emotion, or subjective feeling state
(Bone and Ellen, 1999; Chebat et al., 2009). Additionally, Zemke
and Shoemaker (2008) conducted an empirical study to investigate
how introducing an ambient scent affects interactions between
people within a meeting room. The study revealed that introducing an ambient scent into a meeting room signicantly increased
the number of social interactions between subjects. Ryu and Jang
(2007) revealed that ambience had signicant effects on the level
of customer pleasure. Kim and Moon (2009) further found that
ambient conditions have the highest association with perceived
service quality and the second highest correlation with pleasurefeeling.
2.1.3. Lighting
. Research indicates that there is a relationship between
lighting levels and individuals emotional responses and approachavoidance behaviors. Baron (1990) showed that subjects had a more
positive affect in conditions of low levels of lighting compared to
high levels of lighting. The level of comfort was increased at relatively low levels of light, while comfort decreased as levels of
light rose. In addition, higher levels of illumination are associated
with increased physiological arousal. Moreover, the type of lighting could affect an individuals perception of the quality of space,
changing his/her awareness of physical, emotional, and psychological aspects of the area and accordingly inuencing behavioral
intentions (Kurtich and Eakin, 1993). Areni and Kim (1994) identied the impact of in-store lighting on various aspects of shopping
behavior (e.g., consumer behavior, amount of time spent, and total
sales) in a retail store setting. The results revealed that brighter
lighting inuenced shoppers to examine and handle more products but did not have an impact on sales or time spent in the store.
Knez and Kers (2000) examined the inuence of indoor lighting,
gender, and age on mood and cognitive performance. It was found
that indoor lighting was an affective source that may convey emotional meanings differentiated by gender, age, or both. Lighting
can be one of the most powerful physical stimuli in restaurants,
particularly in upscale restaurants. While bright lighting at fastfood restaurants (e.g., McDonalds) may symbolize quick service
and relatively low prices, subdued and warm lighting in more genteel establishments may symbolically convey full service and high
prices.
601
2.1.4. Layout
Spatial layout refers to the way in which objects (e.g., machinery,
equipment, and furnishings) are arranged within the environment.
Just as the layout in discount stores facilitates the fulllment of
functional or utilitarian needs, an interesting and effective layout can also facilitate fulllment of pleasure or hedonic needs
(Wakeeld and Blodgett, 1994; Ryu and Jang, 2008b). Spatial layout that makes people feel constricted may have a direct effect on
customer quality perceptions, excitement levels, and, indirectly, on
their desire to return. This implies that service or retail facilities that
are specically designed to add some level of excitement or arousal
to the service experience, such as those in an upscale restaurant,
should provide ample space to facilitate exploration and stimulation within the physical environment (Wakeeld and Blodgett,
1994). The locations of tables in restaurants have a tremendous
impact on the overall experience of a customer. Table placement
has the ability to transmit a sense of privacy, portray the functionality desired, and operate as a boundary for the customer (Lin,
2004). Ryu and Jang (2008b) revealed that layout was a signicant determinant of the level of pleasure in an upscale restaurant
context.
2.1.5. Table settings
Table settings should be an important element of atmosphere in
upscale restaurant setting. Upscale restaurants should be designed
to deliver a prestigious image to attract upper-class customers. For
instance, high quality atware, china, glassware, and linen can be
effective tools to inuence customers perceptions of overall restaurant service quality. The way in which the table is decorated (e.g.,
an attractive candle and owers on the table) can also make customers feel that they are in a prestigious environment. Even though
this dimension has been largely ignored in the hospitality literature,
probably because it is unique and valid only to upscale restaurants,
table setting is assumed to affect diners cognitive (e.g., disconrmation) and affective (emotions) responses, which in turn inuence
customer behavior.
2.1.6. Service staff
Service staff refers to the service employees in the service setting (Ryu and Jang, 2008a). It includes employee appearance, the
number of employees, and the gender of employees. It is important to note that actual service staff interactions differ from the
physical presence of service staff. More specically, the interactions
between service staff and customers are not considered as the elements of the physical environments in this study since they are
not the attributes of the tangible quality. A professional employee
uniform may effectively convey an organizations image and core
values in a very up-close and personal way. Baker et al. (1992) found
that social cues (e.g., number/appearance of employees) positively
inuenced customer emotions such as arousal. Tombs and McCollKennedy (2003) further claimed that service staffs are related to the
desired social density, which affects customers affective and cognitive responses as well as their repurchase intentions. Similarly,
Ryu and Jang (2007) supported the strong inuence of employees
on customers pleasure and arousal states.
2.2. Disconrmation and customer satisfaction
A considerable amount of work towards understanding consumer satisfaction or dissatisfaction has taken place among
consumer researchers since understanding what makes consumers
satised or dissatised is a key to successful marketing management in service industries (Han and Ryu, 2009; Oliver, 1980). From
the satisfaction stream of research, the concept of disconrmation
evolved. In the literature, disconrmation refers to a psychological
or mental comparison of the expectation-performance gap (Oliver,
602
1997). This proposes that consumers have expectations about products or services prior to consumption. As the product or service
is consumed or delivered, consumers compare their perceptions
of consuming the product or service to their expectations. Three
general types of outcomes can be expected from disconrmation:
positive disconrmation, negative disconrmation, and zero disconrmation. Positive disconrmation takes place when perceived
performance exceeds expectations and is likely to lead to enhanced
satisfaction. In contrast, negative disconrmation happens when
performance falls short of expectations and is likely to result in less
favorable evaluations, consequently dissatisfaction. Zero disconrmation or simple conrmation occurs when performance just meet
expectations (Menon and Dube, 2000; Oliver and Bearden, 1985;
Oliver et al., 1997; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999).
On the other hand, based on the performance-based approach,
other scholars have argued that customer satisfaction needs to
integrate affective responses in addition to cognitive evaluations
during consumption (Mano and Oliver, 1993; Oliver, 1993; Rojas
and Camarero, 2008; Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). Traditionally,
satisfaction was considered to be a cognitive state (disconrmation theory) (Oliver, 1980; Oliver and DeSarbo, 1988). Recently,
however, there has been a growing recognition among researchers
that a purely cognitive approach may be inadequate in explaining satisfaction evaluations. The need to understand satisfaction
from a more emotional aspect has been emphasized in connection with cognitive inuence (Oliver et al., 1997; Phillips and
Baumgartner, 2002; Premkumar and Bhattacherjee, 2008; Rojas
and Camarero, 2008; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999). Specically, in the
case of upscale restaurants, understanding customer satisfaction
from a more emotional perspective can be more relevant given
that customer reactions to the physical environment is more emotional and hedonic consumption is highly involved. In this study,
customer satisfaction represents the consumers emotive state or
fulllment responses, the degree to which the level of fulllment
is pleasant or unpleasant (Oliver, 1997).
2.3. Impact of physical environments on disconrmation
We are aware of no studies that examine the relationship
between the perceptions of physical environment quality and perceived disconrmation. However, there are a number of reasons
why we assume the relationships between two variables.
Researchers established the simultaneous effect of key customer
satisfaction or dissatisfaction (CS/D) constructs (expectations, performance, and disconrmation) in various contexts (Bigne et al.,
2008; Bowen, 2001; Kanning and Bergmann, 2009; Lee and Beeler,
2007; Molinari et al., 2008; Oliver and DeSarbo, 1988; Patterson,
2007; Premkumar and Bhattacherjee, 2008; Rojas and Camarero,
2008; Szymanski and Henard, 2001; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999; Yi
and La, 1993; Yoon and Kim, 2000). The literature assumed that
expectations and performance have indirect effects on satisfaction
through a disconrmation process in a causal path framework. In
this process, an individuals expectations are used as a standard for
comparison in the judgment of consumers perceived performance
through actual experience (Szymanski and Henard, 2001). While
much of the prior disconrmation research has examined simultaneous effect of expectation and performance as key determinants of
disconrmation (Bigne et al., 2008; Kanning and Bergmann, 2009;
Lee and Beeler, 2007; Molinari et al., 2008; Oliver and DeSarbo,
1988; Patterson, 2007; Premkumar and Bhattacherjee, 2008; Rojas
and Camarero, 2008; Spreng and Mackoy, 1996; Szymanski and
Henard, 2001), the present study only used performance as an
important predictor of disconrmation. Although past empirical
research has shown a signicant effect of expectations on disconrmation (Patterson, 1993; Spreng et al., 1996; Tse and Wilton, 1988),
recent studies empirically demonstrated that performance was a
much more powerful predictor of satisfaction than expectation

and that it is therefore not necessary, in practice, to conduct a differentiated survey of expectation measure (Kanning and Bergmann,
2009; Lee and Beeler, 2007; Premkumar and Bhattacherjee, 2008).
Therefore, this study only included the performance measure (e.g.,
physical environment quality) as the primary determinant of perceived disconrmation.
Although no study to date has yet empirically examined the
relationships between the physical environment quality and perceived disconrmation, some scholars demonstrated the causal
relationship from perceived performance regarding perceived service quality to perceived disconrmation (Rojas and Camarero,
2008). The perception of service quality refers to the global judgment made by the consumer by evaluating the excellence of a
service (Oliver, 1997). Some scholars stated that the perceived service quality is determined by three dimensions: outcome quality,
interaction quality, and physical environment quality (Brady and
Cronin, 2001; Rojas and Camarero, 2008). Here, physical environment quality means the ambient conditions where the service is
delivered or the product is sold. In addition, some other scholars
suggested that the physical environment quality is one of three
primary dimensions of perceived service quality (i.e., food quality, service quality, physical environment quality) in the context
of restaurant industries (Jang and Namkung, 2009; Ryu and Han,
2010). Since the physical environments are considered as one of
major components of perceived service quality (Brady and Cronin,
2001; Jang and Namkung, 2009; Ryu and Han, 2010), it is logical to
expect the direct effect of the physical environment quality on the
level of disconrmation.
Not only may the physical environment elicit affective
responses (e.g., emotions, customer satisfaction) (Han and Ryu,
2009; Mehrabian and Russell, 1974; Ryu and Jang, 2007), it may also
induce cognitive or perceptual responses (e.g., quality, disconrmation, value) (Bitner, 1992; Kim and Moon, 2009; Reimer and Kuehn,
2005), inuencing peoples evaluations and judgments on the quality of a place, product, or service (e.g., the dining experience). Some
previous studies have further revealed that the physical environment may inuence a customers evaluation of service quality, as
well as their behavioral responses (Baker et al., 2002; Berry and
Wall, 2007; Jang and Namkung, 2009). For example, if customers
perceive the background music of a restaurant to be pleasing, this
environmental cue may positively affect cognitive responses such
as perceived disconrmation.
Several sources of information (e.g., advertising and commercial communication, word of mouth referrals, or prior experiences)
can create expectations of service quality for individuals, which are
then challenged by the real experience (dHauteville et al., 2007).
The results of a service experience such as a dining experience can
be worse or better than what the consumer expected when the
purchase or consumption is made (Oliver, 1980). One can therefore
reasonably assume that the intensity of disconrmation can vary
in relation to the intrinsic qualities of a product or service such as
the physical environment in the dining area. For example, in the
case of upscale restaurants, an unknown atmospherics can generate a pleasant surprise upon dining experience and thereby leads
to positive disconrmation and, consequently, customer satisfaction. Oppositely, an unpleasant experience with high expectations
towards upscale restaurants can create a feeling of disappointment which reinforces the negative disconrmation. Hence, it is
logical to postulate that customers perceptions of physical environments may inuence the perceived disconrmation. Based on
the aforementioned discussion, the following hypotheses were
proposed:
Hypothesis 1a. Facility aesthetics positively inuences perceived
disconrmation.
Hypothesis 1b.
rmation.
Lighting positively inuences perceived discon-
Hypothesis 1c. Ambience positively inuences perceived disconrmation.

Hypothesis 1d.
mation.
Layout positively inuences perceived disconr-
Hypothesis 1e.
conrmation.
Table settings positively inuence perceived dis-
Hypothesis 1f.
conrmation.
Service staff positively inuences perceived dis-
2.4. Impact of disconrmation on customer satisfaction and

customer loyalty
An array of previous research has empirically conrmed a direct
causal relationship between disconrmation and consumers satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Bigne et al., 2008; Bowen, 2001; Kanning
and Bergmann, 2009; Lee and Beeler, 2007; Loureiro, 2010;
Molinari et al., 2008; Patterson, 2007; Pizam and Milman, 1993;
Rosen et al., 2003; Spreng and Mackoy, 1996; Szymanski and
Henard, 2001; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999; Yen and Lu, 2008; Yoon
and Kim, 2000). Wirtz and Bateson (1999) proposed a conceptual
model that integrated the research on the environmental perspective of service experiences with the standard satisfaction model.
The study found that conrmation/disconrmation had a direct and
positive effect and positive effect on pleasure, and both, in turn,
had direct and positive effects on satisfaction. Pizam and Milman
(1993) tested Olivers (1980) expectancy disconrmation theory
and found that disconrmations were relatively good predictors of
overall satisfaction with a destination. Patterson (2007) examined
the determinants of customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction (CS/D)
in the context of business professional services. The results indicated that performance was found to affect CS/D directly but not as
powerfully as disconrmation. Bigne et al. (2008) conducted a study
to examine cognitive and affective antecedents and consequences
of consumer satisfaction in the context of two hedonic services:
a theme park experience and a visit to an interactive museum.
The results showed that disconrmation had a direct inuence on
consumer satisfaction in both samples. Additionally, the ndings
indicated that disconrmation had an indirectly positive effect on
loyalty through pleasure and satisfaction. Molinari et al. (2008) also
conducted an empirical study to examine how satisfaction, quality,
and value affect repurchase and positive word-of-mouth behavioral intentions in a services business-to-business setting. The
results of the study showed a strong positive effect from positive
disconrmation of expectations to satisfaction. The ndings also
indicated direct links from positive disconrmation to repurchase
intention and word-of-mouth intention. Yen and Lu (2008) conducted a study to draw on expectancy disconrmation theory (EDT)
to explore e-service quality and the factors inuencing an individuals loyalty intention towards online auctions. The results found
that that e-service quality dimensions (i.e., efciency, privacy protection, contact, fulllment, and responsiveness) had statistically
signicant inuences on buyers disconrmation. The ndings further indicated that that buyers disconrmation of online auctions
was positively associated with their satisfaction, and their satisfaction was positively associated with loyalty intentions. Loureiro
(2010) suggested that satisfaction was a more signicant determinant of loyalty than delight and disconrmation was an important
predictor of both satisfaction and delight. Although there is considerable support for the impact of disconrmation on satisfaction,
research on the effect of disconrmation on customer loyalty is relatively limited (Bigne et al., 2008; Molinari et al., 2008; Oliver et al.,
1997).
603
Consequently, this study postulates that positive disconrmation derived by customers who positively evaluate physical
environments will positively inuence their satisfaction and loyalty (Bigne et al., 2008; Wakeeld and Blodgett, 1999), resulting in
the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2. Perceived disconrmation positively inuences
customer satisfaction.
Hypothesis 3. Perceived disconrmation positively inuences
customer loyalty.
2.5. Impact of customer satisfaction on customer loyalty
A great deal of previous research has shown empirical evidence of a positive relationship between customer satisfaction
and loyalty (Alegre and Cladera, 2009; Chi and Qu, 2008; Cronin
et al., 2000; Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Fornell et al., 1996; Han
and Ryu, 2009; Oh, 1999). Fornell et al. (1996) indicated that
enhancing satisfaction levels contributed to building customer loyalty in regards to repurchase likelihood and price tolerance given
repurchase. Cronin and Taylor (1992) revealed that satisfaction
is a critical determinant of positive behavioral intentions in various service sectors (e.g., fast food, banking, and dry cleaning). In
addition, Han and Ryu (2009) conducted a study to provide empirical evidence of customer-loyalty enhancement through physical
environments, price perception, and customer satisfaction in the
restaurant industry. The ndings showed that the direct effect of
customer satisfaction on customer loyalty was statistically signicant. Satised customers are likely to remain loyal to the
provider by repatronizing the service/product, by spreading positive word-of-mouth (WOM), and by spending more. Therefore,
it was hypothesized that customer satisfaction was a signicant
predictor of customer loyalty in the upscale restaurant industry.
Hypothesis 4.
tomer loyalty.
Customer satisfaction positively inuences cus-
2.6. Physical environment and disconrmation between

rst-time and repeat customers
Lim and Razzaque (1997) argued that the impact of the situation
in which purchase or consumption occurs has been largely ignored
in understanding customer behaviors. However, situational inuence can be either the largest or second-largest determinant
of or contributor to consumers preferences for different types
of products or services (Belk, 1975). Bitner (1990) found that
physical environments and employee responses signicantly inuenced important consumer responses and underlined the need to
consider these and other situational variables in predicting and
explaining consumer behaviors. Similarly, Bitner (1992) proposed
that situational factors such as monetary mood and plans/purposes
for being in the physical environment can have a moderating effect
on customers responses. Meiselman (1996) also argued that the
most important and neglected area in need of understanding in
restaurant consumer behavior is the dining situation itself. Given
this rationale, we can carefully assume that past experience, which
can be one of the most powerful situation factors, can possibly affect
customers perceptions about the quality of physical environments
(Bitner, 1992).
Expectations are known to play a critical role in the formation
of disconrmation by serving as a comparison standard. However,
the nature of expectations might differ across customers depending
on many factors, such as past experience, word-of-mouth reports,
advertising, policies, and price. In particular, the past experience is
perceived as an important predictor to consumers post-experience
evaluations (Li et al., 2008; Ryu and Jang, 2006). That is, the expec-
604
tations and interpretations of physical environment quality might

vary across rst-time visitors and repeat visitors (Parasuraman
et al., 1985; Zeithaml et al., 1993). Accordingly, rst-time visitors
perceptions of physical environment quality might be different
from those of repeat visitors under the assumption that the past
experiences of repeat visitors inuence their judgment of physical
environment quality. Similarly, the disconrmation measure might
be also inuenced by the past experience among two groups.
Past experience is highly associated with the cues that customers use to evaluate the quality of products or services. First-time
visitors with less familiarity with products or services should have
fewer core cues to assess quality than repeat visitors since they
lack prior experiences in a restaurant setting. First-time visitors
are more likely to have more complex and differentiated images of
products and services than repeat visitors (Fakeye and Crompton,
1991; Petrick, 2004) because of incomplete evaluative information
about the restaurant. However, repeat visitors are likely to evaluate
the gap between expectations and performance more exactingly.
Accordingly, this study assumed that situation-specic measures,
particularly the frequency of past visits (rst-time visitors versus
repeat visitors) could enhance or lessen the effect of customers perceptions about the quality of physical environments on perceived
disconrmation.
The perceived quality of the physical environment might vary
depending upon different prior experience (e.g., new visitors
versus repeat visitors). Customers in various frequency stages
may inuence their preferences and, consequently, evaluations of
the physical environment quality in foodservice differently. For
instance, in comparison to repeat visitors, rst-timers tend to be
more explorative and adventurous in nature. Thus, rst-time visitors might prefer to get a table where he or she is able to facilitate
exploration and stimulation within the luxurious physical environment considering it is his/her rst experience in the environment.
In contrast, repeat customers might be more preferred with the
table with more privacy. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that
under the upscale restaurant context frequency of past visits (rsttime versus repeat visitation) can be a key factor to differentiate
customers perceptions of physical environments and, in turn, perceived disconrmation. In sum, given the different expectations
towards the atmospherics of the restaurant between rst-time
visitors and repeat visitors, it also seemed advisable to consider
moderating role of the frequency of past visits (rst-time versus
repeat visitation) in this study to better explain the impact of physical environments on customer satisfaction and loyalty behavior.
Consequently, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypotheses 5a5f. Past experience (of rst-time customers
versus repeat customers) has a signicant moderating role in the
relationship between each dimension of physical environment and
perceived disconrmation.
Based on aforementioned discussion, the following conceptual
framework regarding the relationships among latent variables was
proposed, as shown in Fig. 1.
3. Methodology
3.1. Measurement
The operationalizations of the questionnaire were developed
based on the extant literature to examine the relationships between
the perceived quality of physical environments, disconrmation,
customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty in the upscale restaurant setting. The questionnaire was rst developed in English and
then translated into Korean by the researcher from the respective
country and a bilingual professor to ensure that all expressions and
words were included and properly stated in both versions. The com-
Facility
Aesthetics
H1a
Ambience
H1b
Lighting
H1c
Table
Settings
H1d
H2
Disconfir
mation
H4
H3
H1e
Layout
H1f
Service
Staff
Customer
Satisfaction
Customer
Loyalty
H5a-5f
First-timers
vs. Repeaters
Fig. 1. Proposed model.
plete Korean version of the questionnaire was then back-translated

into English by another bilingual professor who was familiar with
the subject content. Differences in expression were dealt with by
consultation with an English professor in Korea. Then, a pilot test
of the research instrument was conducted as a preliminary test of
the nal version. Thirty actual customers at an upscale restaurant
participated to assess the adequacy of the content. Based on the
results of a content adequacy assessment, modications of items
were made.
First, respondents were asked to rate each DINESCAPE item
using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly
agree) to assess customers physical environmental perceptions
in the dining area. The DINESCAPE scale also included an option
for not applicable, which was useful in analyzing non-response.
The questionnaire included a pool of 21 measurement items for
six dimensions (facility aesthetics, lighting, ambience, layout, table
settings, and service staff) derived from the DINESCAPE scale (Ryu
and Jang, 2007; Ryu and Jang, 2008a,b). More specically, this
list of 21 items consisted of ve items for aesthetic design (e.g.,
Paintings/pictures are visually attractive), four items for ambience (e.g., Background music relaxes me), three items for lighting
(e.g., Lighting creates a warm atmosphere), three items for layout
(e.g., Seating arrangement gives me enough space), three items
for table settings (e.g., Tableware (e.g., glass, china, silverware) is
of high quality), and three items for service staff (e.g., Employees
are neat and well dressed).
Second, perceived disconrmation is a psychological interpretation of a expectation-performance discrepancy, and can be
perceived as worse than expected (negative disconrmation), or
better than expected (positive disconrmation), or as expected
(zero disconrmation) (Oliver, 1980; Spreng and Page, 2003). Perceived disconrmation was measured with two items using a
7-point semantic differential scale suggested by previous studies
(Bigne et al., 2008; Oliver, 1980; Wirtz and Bateson, 1999). Subjects
were asked to respond to two statements, ranging from worse
than expected to better than expected (e.g., Overall dining
experience is worse thanbetter than expected). Third, customer
satisfaction was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly
disagree, 7 = strongly agree) with three items (e.g., Overall, I am
satised with this restaurant) (Oliver, 1997). Fourth, customer
loyalty was measured using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) with ve items (e.g., I would like to come
back to this restaurant in the future) (Han and Ryu, 2009). Fifth, to
identify if the participants were rst time or repeat visitors to the

restaurant, one question was asked (Is this your rst time to visit
this restaurant?) using a dichotomous scale. Finally, demographic
variables (e.g., gender, age, education, income) were measured.
3.2. Data collection
605
ric invariances. In particular, a non-restricted model without any

parameter constraints was compared to the full metric invariance
model where all underlying factors were constrained to be equivalent in order to test the measurement invariance. Once the full
metric invariance was supported, which indicates the patterns of
factor loadings across the two groups were invariant, the structural
invariance was tested by comparing a baseline model (full metric
invariance of the structural model) to the constrained model (full
path invariance model) to identify the equivalence of the structural
paths. Finally, invariance tests for hypothesized paths were conducted to test path differences between the rst-time and repeat
visitor groups.
To limit extraneous variability, we examined the perceptions of

the physical environments only in the context of classic Korean
restaurant. The data were collected from customers at Korean
upscale restaurants in which average guest check per person were
more than $25 and which provided professional service, a luxurious Korean atmosphere, and exceptional Korean cuisine. Using
a convenience sampling approach, 310 responses were collected
via a self-administered questionnaire at three upscale restaurants
in Seoul, Korea. The host explained the purpose of the survey and
asked if customers were willing to participate in the survey when
they sat down at their tables. Those who agreed were given a survey
questionnaire as they were nishing their main entre. To control
or minimize common-method bias, we guaranteed anonymity and
condentiality to the respondents in order to reduce evaluation
apprehension (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Under the permission of the
management, the questionnaire was distributed to 450 customers
in three upscale restaurants. 310 responses were gathered with a
68.9 percent response rate. After deleting surveys with incomplete
responses, 300 questionnaires remained for data analysis. Among
these 300 usable responses, two extreme multivariate outliers were
excluded (Mahalanobis D (21) > 46.797, p < .001). Finally, 298 cases
were deemed appropriate for further analyses.
In the present study, about 54.0% of the participants were male

(n = 161), and 46.0% were female (n = 137). Their mean age was
37.82 years old. The survey participants were relatively highly
educated. In particular, the largest category was college graduate
(51.3%) followed by the 2-year/some college (15.1%) and graduate degree (7.7%) groups. In terms of household income, 24.1% of
the participants reported an income less than $20,000; the majority reported an income between $20,000 and $50,000 (50.7%); and
25.2% reported an income above $50,000. Among the participants,
36.9% reported that it was their rst time to visit the restaurant
(n = 110), and 63.1% reported that they had visited the restaurant
two or more times (n = 188).
3.3. Data analysis
4.2. Measurement model
The present study employed Anderson and Gerbings (1988)

two-step approach to evaluate the convergent validity for modeled constructs and to test hypotheses. After testing the sufciency
of the measurement model using the Conrmatory Factor Analysis
(CFA), a structural analysis was conducted to assess the proposed
model through Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), using AMOS
5. In addition, the moderating effect of past experience (rst-time
versus repeat visitor groups) was evaluating by using tests for met-
The measurement model provided a good t to the data

(2 = 1050.463, d.f. = 428, p < .001; RMSEA = 0.070; CFI = 0.904;
NFI = 0.849). However, a standardized factor loading value for the
last item of ambience (i.e., air aroma) was lower than the suggested cutoff of .40 (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). Thus, this item
was excluded for further analyses. The CFA excluding this variable
was re-estimated (2 = 893.011, d.f. = 398, p < .001; RMSEA = 0.065;
CFI = 0.921; NFI = 0.867). The chi-square test showed that the model
4. Results
4.1. Prole of the respondents
Table 1
Results of the conrmatory factor analysis and correlation matrices.
Measure
FA
FA
AM
1.000
.663
(.440)
.725
(.526)
.596
(.355)
.495
(.245)
.568
(.323)
.497
(.247)
.538
(.289)
.533
(.284)
5.230
.813
.818
LI
TS
LA
SS
DI
CS
CL
Mean
SD
Coefcient alpha
Goodness-of-t statistics:
AM
LI
TS
LA
SS
DI
CS
CL
1.000
.658
(.433)
.496
(.246)
.473
(.224)
.534
(.285)
.386
(.149)
.416
(.173)
.417
(.174)
5.361
.893
.778
1.000
.488
(.238)
.483
(.233)
.554
(.307)
.406
(.165)
.455
(.207)
.427
(.182)
5.315
.917
.820
1.000
.517
(.267)
.585
(.342)
.512
(.262)
.484
(.234)
.491
(.241)
5.122
.937
.831
1.000
.518
(.268)
.443
(.196)
.480
(.230)
.440
(.194)
5.132
.905
.750
1.000
.478
(.228)
.570
(.325)
.581
(.338)
5.264
.927
.833
1.000
.732
(.536)
.718
(.516)
4.688
1.110
.854
1.000
.744
(.554)
5.083
.961
.891
1.000
AVE
Composite
reliability
.513
.603
.817
.812
.641
.840
.632
.837
.519
.764
.637
.840
.684
.866
.735
.893
.728
.930
4.979
1.064
.930
2 = 893.011, d.f. = 398, p < .001; RMSEA = 0.065; CFI = 0.921; NFI = 0.867
Note. FA = facility aesthetics; AM: ambience; LI: lighting; TS: table settings; LA: layout; SS: service staff; DI: disconrmation; CS: customer satisfaction; CL: customer loyalty.
Squared correlations are in the parentheses.
606

Table 3
Standardized indirect effects.
Table 2
Results of the structural equation modeling.
Hypotheses
Coefcients
t-Values
Results
Effects of
H1a: FA DI
H1b: AM DI
H1c: LI DI
H1d: TS DI
H1e: LA DI
H1f: SS DI
H2: DI CS
H3: DI CL
H4: CS CL
.652**
.134
.294*
.100
.165*
.262**
.862**
.509**
.367**
3.051
1.465
2.069
.950
1.985
2.793
16.441
5.080
3.720
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Not supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Supported
Customer
satisfaction (CS)
Customer loyalty
(CL)
Facility aesthetic (FA)

Ambience (AM)
Lighting (LI)
Table settings (TS)
Layout (LA)
Service staff (SS)
Disconrmation (DI)
.563**
.116
.254*
.086
.143*
.226*
.538**
.111
.243*
.082
.136*
.216*
.316**
R2 (DI) = .554
R2 (CS) = .744
R2 (CL) = .715
Goodness-of-t statistics:
2 = 924.887, d.f. = 410, p < .001, 2 /d.f. = 2.256, RMSEA = 0.065; CFI = .918;
NFI = .863
Note. FA: facility aesthetic; AM: ambience; LI: lighting; TS: table settings; LA: layout; SS: service staff; DI: disconrmation; CS: customer satisfaction; CL: customer
loyalty.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
t was signicantly improved compared to the previous CFA model

(2 = 157.452, d.f. = 30). Table 1 shows the results of the CFA
including descriptive statistics, correlations among constructs, reliability, and Average Variance Extracted (AVE).
All composite reliabilities were above the recommended value
of .70, ranging from .764 to .930 (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994).
The results indicated a strong reliability of measures. All AVE values exceeded the recommended value of .50 (Fornell and Larcker,
1981). The squared correlation value between a pair of constructs
was lower than the AVE of each construct. These ndings indicated
that both convergent and discriminant validity are evident (Fornell
and Larcker, 1981).
4.3. Structural model
The Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was utilized to test
relationships among study constructs. Fig. 2 and Table 2 present the
results of the SEM, including goodness-of-t statistics and coefcients. The model adequately ts the data (2 = 924.887, d.f. = 410,
p < .001, 2 /d.f. = 2.256, RMSEA = 0.065; CFI = .918; NFI = .863). The
relationship between the components of DINESCAPE and perceived
disconrmation was tested. The regression paths from facility
aesthetic ( = .652, t = 3.051, p < .01), lighting ( = .294, t = 2.069,
p < .05), layout ( = .165, t = 1.985, p < .05), and social factor ( = .262,
t = 2.793, p < .01) to disconrmation were positive and signicant,
supporting Hypotheses 1a, 1c, 1e and 1f. However, the paths from
ambience ( = .134, t = 1.465, p > .05) and table settings ( = .100,
t = .950, p > .05) to perceived disconrmation were not signicant.
Thus, Hypotheses 1b and 1d were not supported. The regression paths from perceived disconrmation to customer satisfaction
( = .862, t = 16.441, p < .01) and customer loyalty ( = .509, t = 5.080,
p < .01) were signicant. Thus, Hypotheses 2 and 3 were supported.
Lastly, as expected, the linkage between customer satisfaction and
loyalty was positive and signicant ( = .367, t = 3.720, p < .01), supporting Hypothesis 4. This model achieved a satisfactory level
of goodness of t in predicting the total variance of perceived
disconrmation (R2 = .554), customer satisfaction (R2 = .744), and
customer loyalty (R2 = .715).
Indirect effects of the components of DINESCAPE and perceived disconrmation were examined (see Table 3). The ndings
indicated that facility aesthetic (FA-DI-CS = .563, p < .01), lighting
(LI-DI-CS = .254, p < .05), layout (LA-DI-CS = .143, p < .05), and social
factors (LI-DI-CS = .226, p < .05) signicantly affected customer sat-
*
**
p < .05.
p < .01.
isfaction through perceived disconrmation. That is, perceived

disconrmation acted as a mediator in the relationship between
these components of DINESCAPE and customer satisfaction in the
proposed model. In addition, results showed that facility aesthetic
(FA-DI-CS-CL = .538, p < .01), lighting (LI-DI-CS-CL = .243, p < .05), layout (LA-DI-CS-CL = .136, p < .05), and social factors (LI-DI-CS-CL = .216,
p < .05) signicantly affected customer loyalty through perceived
disconrmation and satisfaction. Thus, it can be concluded that
both disconrmation and satisfaction had a signicant mediating role between these variables and customer loyalty. Further,
satisfaction was found to mediate the effect of perceived disconrmation on loyalty (DI-CS-CL = .316, p < .01).
4.4. Invariance models
The respondents were divided into rst-time (n = 110) and
repeat-visitor groups (n = 188) before testing group differences for
Hypothesis 5. Measurement invariance was rst tested. A nonrestricted model was run using CFA without constraining any factor
loading across groups, and a full-metric invariance model was run
using CFA while constraining all factor loadings to be equal across
groups. The results indicated that full-metric invariance was supported in that the chi-square difference between two models was
not signicant (2 (22) = 28.224, p > .01) (see Table 4). This nding fullled the requirement for the invariance test of the structural
model.
As a next step, a baseline model was run by including proposed
paths among the study variables. The model presented a satisfactory t to the data (2 = 1494.580, d.f. = 842, p < .001, 2 /d.f. = 1.775,
RMSEA = 0.051; CFI = .901; NFI = .801). This baseline model was
compared with a series of nested models using a chi-square difference test. In particular, the equality of a particular parameter
between two groups was tested by constraining a specic path of
interest to be equal across groups in sequence (nested models). The
ndings are presented in Table 5.
The results showed that the paths from facility aesthetic
(2 (1) = 9.040, p < .01), lighting (2 (1) = 7.051, p < .01), table settings (2 (1) = 4.552, p < .05), and social factors (2 (1) = 5.260,
p < .05) to perceived disconrmation signicantly differed across
the rst-time and repeat-visitor groups. However, the links
between ambience and perceived disconrmation (2 (1) = 2.022,
p > .05) and between layout and perceived disconrmation
(2 (1) = 1.004, p > .05) were not signicant between groups. Thus,
Hypotheses 5b and 5e were not supported. Results further reveal
that the effects of facility aesthetic (FVG: = .349, p < .01 versus
RVG: = .841, p < .01), lighting (FVG: = .262, p < .05 versus RVG:
= .423, p < .01), table settings (FVG: = .075, p > .05 versus RVG:
= .369, p < .05), and social factors (FVG: = .217, p < .05 versus
RVG: = .289, p < .01) on perceived disconrmation were greater in
the repeat-visitor group. It should be noted that the link between
table settings and perceived disconrmation for the rst-time customers group (FVG: = .075, p > .05) was not signicant, but this
607
Facility
Aesthetic
Ambience
Lighting
H1a: .652** (3.051)
H1b: .134 (1.465)
Customer
Satisfaction
H1c: .294** (2.069)
H1d: .100 (0.950)
H2: .862** (16.441)
Disconfir
mation
H4: .367** (3.720)
Table
Settings
H3: .509** (5.080)
H1e: .165* (1.985)
Customer
Loyalty
Layout
*p < .05, **p < .01
H1f: .262** (2.793)
Goodness-of-fit statistics:
2 = 924.887, df = 410, p<.001, 2/df = 2.256,
Service
Staff
RMSEA = .065; CFI = .918; NFI = .863

Fig. 2. Causal relationships among latent variables.
link was signicant for the repeat customers group (RVG: = .369,
p < .05). Similarly, the link between layout and perceived disconrmation for the rst-time visitors group (FVG: = .157, p > .05) was
not signicant, while this link was signicant for the repeat visitors group (RVG: = .202, p < .05). Overall, these ndings supported
Hypotheses 5a, 5c, 5d, and 5f.
Table 4
Results of the measurement invariance.
2
Models
Non-restricted model
1423.456
Full-metric invariance of CFA model
1451.680
Chi-square difference test:
2
(22) = 28.224, p > .01 (insignicant) full-metric invariance (supported)
d.f.
RMSEA
CFI
NFI
796
818
.052
.051
.902
.901
.806
.802
Table 5
Results of the invariance tests for the paths.
Paths
H5a: FA DI (S)
H5b: AM DI (NS)
H5c: LI DI (S)
H5d: TS DI (S)
H5e: LA DI (NS)
H5f: SS DI (S)
Fit of the model with the path
Chi-square difference
test
Baseline model
(freely estimated)
Nested model
(constrained to be equal)
FVG: = .349** (t = 3.010)

RVG: = .841** (t = 5.980)
2 (842) = 1494.580
FVG: = .135 (t = .724)
RVG: = .191 (t = 1.587)
2 (842) = 1494.580
FVG: = .262* (t = 2.198)
RVG: = .423** (t = 3.213)
2 (842) = 1494.580
FVG: = .075 (t = .717)
RVG: = .369* (t = 2.457)
2 (842) = 1494.580
FVG: = .157 (t = 1.478)
RVG: = .202* (t = 2.101)
2 (842) = 1494.580
FVG: = .217* (t = 2.270)
RVG: = .289** (t = 3.301)
2 (842) = 1494.580
2 (843) = 1503.620
2 (1) = 9.040, p < .01

(signicant)
2 (843) = 1496.602
2 (1) = 2.022, p > .05

(insignicant)
2 (843) = 1501.631
2 (1) = 7.051, p < .01

(signicant)
2 (843) = 1499.132
2 (1) = 4.552, p < .05

(signicant)
2 (843) = 1495.584
2 (1) = 1.004, p>.05

(insignicant)
2 (843) = 1499.840
2 (1) = 5.260, p < .05

(signicant)
Note. Fit statistics of the baseline model: 2 = 1494.580, d.f. = 842, p < .001, 2 /d.f. = 1.775, RMSEA = 0.051; CFI = .901; NFI = .801. FA: facility aesthetic; AM: ambience; LI: lighting;
TS: table settings; LA: layout; SS: service staff; DI: disconrmation; CS: customer satisfaction; CL: customer loyalty; S: supported; NS: not supported; FVG: rst-time visitors
group; RVG: repeat visitors group.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
608
5. Conclusion
5.1. Summary and discussion
This study extended the existing literature by proposing a conceptual model to explore the impact of customer perceptions of
physical environments on perceived disconrmation, customer
satisfaction and customer loyalty in an upscale restaurant context.
Moreover, this study investigated whether there was a difference
between rst-time and repeat customers with regard to the impact
of the perceived physical environment on perceived disconrmation for the rst time. The ndings of the present study revealed that
the proposed model could accurately predict customers perceived
disconrmation, satisfaction, and loyalty, implying its applicability
in the hospitality industries is strong. This paper makes an important contribution to the literature by examining the combination
of the effects of physical environments, perceived disconrmation, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty for rst-time and
repeat customers. Consequently, the present study raises some
interesting conclusions with signicant implications from both theoretical and practical standpoints.
5.2. Theoretical and managerial implications
The current study has implications related to the understanding
of the disconrmation framework. First, the relationship between
customers physical environmental perceptions in the dining area
and disconrmation is a particularly salient topic for the consumption experience in a ne-dining restaurant context since customers
are mainly driven by hedonic purposes such as the need for pleasure, fun and excitement. The results of this study indicated that
key dimensions of the physical environment directly affecting perceived disconrmation were facility aesthetics, lighting, layout, and
service staff. Among the six physical environmental dimensions
studied, facility aesthetics most signicantly inuenced perceived
disconrmation. This nding stresses the important role of facility
aesthetics in creating a unique and innovative ne dining atmosphere; aesthetics should be stressed since they are most likely
to differentiate an upscale restaurant from its competition. The
study results suggest restaurateurs who plan to redesign their
facilities should assess customer perceptions of facility aesthetics (e.g., ceiling/wall dcor, carpeting/ooring, paintings/pictures,
plants/owers, furniture, and color) before making any signicant
investment, bearing in mind these perceptions can vary depending on individual differences (e.g., rst-time visitors versus repeat
visitors) and different time periods (e.g., 1 month after renovation
versus 1 year after renovation).
The ndings of this study reinforced the importance of understanding the impact of perceived disconrmation on customer
satisfaction and customer loyalty. Results showed that perceived
disconrmation positively and directly inuenced customers satisfaction and loyalty. In other words, perceived disconrmation
seems to enhance customer satisfaction and engender customer
loyalty. For instance, customers in the upscale restaurant can be
pleasantly surprised by the elegance of facility aesthetics (e.g.,
paintings/pictures, plants/owers, furniture, color, and ceiling/wall
dcor). This surpassing of expectations is likely to enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty. Therefore, it is recommended that
restaurateurs take into account customers evaluations on an ongoing basis. For example, whenever the management identies some
physical environmental features (e.g., unpleasant genre of background music) that do not meet customers expectations, it needs
to x or adjust these atmospheric components rapidly to avoid
customer disappointment.
Results further reveal that positive disconrmation was a strong
determinant of customer loyalty. Results indicated that the positive
disconrmation derived from the physical environments determined the extent to which customers intended to come back and to
recommend the restaurant to friends or others. Hence, restaurant
management should understand how important physical environments are in inducing positive disconrmation in restaurants.
Additionally, it was not surprising that the ndings of this study
reinforced the positive impact of customer satisfaction on customer
loyalty, suggesting a fundamental way to improve customer loyalty
is to enhance customer satisfaction levels. This positive causal relationship is consistent with previous studies across various settings
(Bigne et al., 2008; Han and Ryu, 2009).
The ndings of the present study indicated that both perceived
disconrmation and satisfaction had signicant mediating roles in
the proposed framework that explains the formation of customer
loyalty. These results indicated that disconrmation and customer
satisfaction are important to the loyalty formation process, and
the effects of physical environment in this process become even
stronger when restaurant customers perceive high levels of positive
disconrmation and have satisfactory dining experiences. Accordingly, to take full advantage of an eaterys physical environment, it is
critical for restaurant operators to enhance perceived disconrmation and satisfaction levels. These variables should also be utilized
as valuable concepts by restaurant researchers who aim to develop
a conceptual framework that explains loyalty formation.
The hypothesized moderating effect of frequency of past visits
(rst-time versus repeat customers) on the relationships between
physical environment and perceived disconrmation was partly
supported. The results showed that the frequency of past visits
moderated the relationship between four DINESCAPE dimensions
(i.e., facility aesthetics, lighting, table settings, and service staff)
and perceived disconrmation. More specically, in comparison
to rst-timers, repeat visitors perception towards the quality
of physical environment was a much greater predictor of perceived disconrmation. This nding implied that repeat customers
were more likely to base their perceptions about the perceived
disconrmation on how the atmosphere (i.e., facility aesthetics, lighting, table settings, and service staff) made them feel.
This makes intuitive sense, as repeat patrons tend to have more
salient perceptions of how the physical surroundings will make
them feel based on their past experiences, while rst-time visitors must draw their expectations of the physical environment
and overall dining experience from whatever information that
they may have received (e.g., word-of-mouth reports, advertising,
and price). This could also be attributed to the high expectations customers have towards an upscale restaurant. First-time
customers might expect a relatively higher quality of physical surroundings than repeat customers. When the atmosphere did not
match rst-timers high expectations, they were likely to evaluate it somewhat unfavorably. Or, a simple conrmation condition
could occur if the quality of physical environment was just as
expected. Of all the DINESCAPE antecedents, facility aesthetics had
the strongest impact on perceived disconrmation, suggesting that
restaurateurs wishing to position themselves with the use of atmosphere (physical environment) should pay substantial attention to
their facility aesthetics (e.g., ceiling/wall dcor, paintings/pictures,
plants/owers, furniture, ooring/carpeting, color, cleanliness) to
retain repeat customers. For example, restaurateurs can change or
arrange table owers to elicit positive emotional responses from
repeat customers, such as positive surprise or delight at exceeded
expectations, which in turn would exert a strong inuence on
perceived disconrmation, customer satisfaction, and customer
loyalty.
It was further revealed that facility aesthetics, lighting, and service staff were signicant determinants of both rst timers and
repeaters perceived disconrmation. However, it was worth noting that layout and table settings were signicant predictors of only
repeat visitors perceived disconrmation. This implies that layout

and table settings play a more important role for repeat visitors than
for rst-time visitors. It is also very important to notice that these
two dimensions can be controlled to a large extent by restaurant
management in building and maintaining personal bond with customers. That is, marketing strategies for repeat customers should
highlight the restaurants personal relevance by delivering emotional or relational benets by making them feel special. In terms
of layout, the restaurant management must be aware of where
repeat customers want to be seated and how they want to move
through the dining room. Then, the managers should train or educate employees to meet repeat customers special needs or priority
with regard to the layout. For example, a restaurant host or hostess should provide greater care by seating repeat visitors to comply
with their preferences within the seating locations (e.g., seat with
enough comfort and tangible privacy from other customers) without spending extra human and monetary resources. In addition,
the management need to pay close attention to foster customers
perception of table setting since is an important determinant in
the upscale restaurants to deliver a prestigious image to retain
upper-class customers. Thus, restaurateurs need to make sure customers are provided with high quality atware (e.g., chopsticks,
knives, spoons, forks), china (e.g., plate/china, dishes, cups), glassware (e.g., glass), linen (white table cloths, napkin presentation),
menu with variety of wines as well as attractive food presentation and innovative menu design. The way in which the table is
decorated should make repeat customers feel prestigious or even
pleasantly surprised.
From a marketing management perspective, the present study
suggests that managing disconrmation in conjunction with the
physical environments is very important for both rst-time and
repeat visitors. Restaurant marketers need to understand how
customer perceptions of physical environments can be properly
managed. Every physical environmental element at each dining
experience should be managed appropriately, and promises should
be fullled to result in a happy experience for customers. A key factor in an upscale restaurants success is to generate the greatest
favorable response with regards to the physical environment from
customers so they will return to the restaurant again and again.
5.3. Limitations and future research
Limitations of the research stem from the use of a convenience
sample. Since the data were also collected in three upscale restaurants in South Korea, the current result should not be generalized
to other restaurant segments and other places. Given the great
diversity of hospitality and tourism industries, more research is
necessary to determine if similar results would be derived from
different samples across various hospitality and tourism industries. This study did not attempt to specify hypothesis regarding
the characteristics of the moderation (rst-time versus repeat visitation) in conjunction with the physical environments because of
the lack of theoretical support in the previous literature. Future
research can extend the current study by further developing the
specied hypotheses. There are also many other opportunities for
future research. In future research, it would be advisable to incorporate the possible role of demographic differences (e.g., gender
and age) since customers reactions to physical environments may
vary depending on their demographic characteristics. Moreover,
incorporating other antecedents or consequences of disconrmation would be a fruitful avenue for future research. For instance,
examining how customers positive or negative disconrmation
of expectations inuence their affective states, such as emotions
or mood states, in the hedonic consumption services would be an
interesting study. Additionally, the differences between rst-time
and repeat visitors could have many other explanations (e.g., expe-
609
rience newness, reasons for returning). Investigating these issues

would provide other opportunities for future research. Finally,
additional research is needed to assess other moderating variables
that may affect the associations between these constructs. The purpose of dining (e.g., business, leisure, special occasion) could have
an effect on repeat business, and the other measures. For instance,
customers who visited for the leisure purpose might prefer pleasing and relaxing music with enough volume while customers who
visited the restaurant for the business purpose might not prefer
listening to music, which can be considered as noise during their
conversation. Moreover, the restaurant itself in conjunction with
other variables such as the food quality and service quality in the
restaurant and external cues (e.g., critics) could have effects on disconrmation and customer satisfaction. In addition, it would be
interesting to examine if the Korean cultural expectations of nedining restaurants might differ from other cultures. Therefore, in
further research, it will be appropriate to test these moderating
effects in order to improve the interpretation of certain results in
this study.
Appendix A.
Measurement items used in the study
Factors
Questions
Facility aesthetics
Paintings/pictures are visually attractive.

Wall decorations are visually appealing.
Painting/pictures are visually attractive.
Colors used create a warm atmosphere.
Furniture (e.g., dining table, chair) is of high quality.
Lighting creates a warm atmosphere.
Lighting makes me feel welcome.
Lighting creates a comfortable atmosphere
Background music relaxes me.
Pleasing music.
Temperature is comfortable.
Air aroma is enticing.
Seating arrangement gives me enough space.
Layout gives me enough tangible privacy.
Layout makes it easy for me to move around.
Tableware (e.g., glass, china, silverware) is of high
quality.
The linens (e.g., table cloths, napkin) are attractive.
The table setting is visually attractive.
Employees are neat and well dressed.
Attractive employees make me feel good.
An adequate number of employees makes me feel
cared for.
Overall dining experience is worse thanbetter than
expected.
Quality of physical environments is worse
thanbetter than expected.
Overall, I am satised with this restaurant.
The overall feeling I got from this restaurant put me
in a good mood.
I really enjoyed myself at this restaurant.
I would like to come back to this restaurant in the
future.
I would recommend this restaurant to my friends or
others.
I would more frequently visit this restaurant.
Lighting
Ambience
Layout
Table settings
Service staff
Disconrmation
Customer satisfaction
Customer loyalty
References
Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: a
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 103 (3),
411423.
Alegre, J., Cladera, M., 2009. Analysing the effect of satisfaction and previous visits on
tourist intentions to return. European Journal of Marketing 43 (5/6), 670685.
Anwar, S.A., Sohail, M.S., 2004. Festival tourism in the United Arab Emirates: rsttime versus repeat visitor perceptions. Journal of Vacation Marketing 10 (2),
161170.
Areni, C.S., Kim, D., 1994. The inuence of in-store lighting on consumers examination of merchandise in a wine store. International Journal of Research in
Marketing 11, 117125.
610
Arnold, M.J., Reynolds, K.E., 2003. Hedonic shopping motivations. Journal of Retailing
79, 7795.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R., Grifn, M., 1994. Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and
utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research 20, 644656.
Baker, J., 1987. The role of the environment in marketing services. In: Czepeial,
J.A., Congram, C.A., Shananhan, J. (Eds.), The Services Challenges: Integrating for
Competitive Advantage. American Marketing Association, Chicago, pp. 7984.
Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., Voss, G., 2002. The inuence of multiple store
environment cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions.
Journal of Marketing 66 (2), 120141.
Baker, J., Levy, M., Grewal, D., 1992. An experimental approach to making retail store
environmental decisions. Journal of Retailing 68 (4), 445460.
Barbas, S., 2002. Just like home: Home cooking and the domestication of the American restaurant. Gastronomica 2, 4352.
Baron, R.A., 1990. Lighting as a source of positive affect. Progressive Architecture 71,
123124.
Belk, R.W., 1975. Situational variables in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer
Research 2 (3), 157164.
Berry, L.L., Wall, E.A., 2007. The combined effects of the physical environment and
employee behavior on customer perception of restaurant service quality. Cornell
Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 48 (1), 5969.
Bigne, J.E., Mattila, A.S., Andreu, L., 2008. The impact of experiential consumption
cognitions and emotions on behavioral intentions. Journal of Services Marketing
22 (4), 303315.
Bitner, M.J., 1990. Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings
and employee responses. Journal of Marketing 54 (2), 6982.
Bitner, M.J., 1992. Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers
and employees. Journal of Marketing 56, 5771.
Bone, P.F., Ellen, P.S., 1999. Scents in the marketplace: explaining a fraction of olfaction. Journal of Retailing 75 (2), 243262.
Bowen, D., 2001. Antecedents of consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction on long
haul inclusive tours: a reality check on theoretical considerations. Tourism Management 22 (1), 4961.
Brady, M.K., Cronin, J.J., 2001. Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived
service quality: a hierarchical approach. Journal of Marketing 65 (3), 3449.
Chebat, J., Michon, R., 2003. Impact of ambient odors on mall shoppers emotions,
cognition, and spending. Journal of Business Research 56 (7), 529539.
Chebat, J.C, Morrin, M., Chebat, D.R., 2009. Does age attenuate the impact of pleasant ambient scent on consumer response? Environment and Behavior 41 (2),
258267.
Chi, C.G.Q., Qu, H., 2008. Examining the structural relationships of destination image,
tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: an integrated approach. Tourism
Management 29 (4), 624636.
Cobe, P., 2007. How to revive a tired decor: creative ideas and practical tips to help
perk up your interior. Restaurant Business April, 2632.
Cronin Jr., J.J., Taylor, S.A., 1992. Measuring service quality: A reexaminantion and
extension. Journal of Marketing 56 (3), 5568.
Cronin, J.R.J.J., Brady, M.K., Hult, G.T.M., 2000. Assessing the effects of quality, value,
and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing 76 (2), 193218.
dHauteville, F, Fornerino, M., Perrouty, J.P., 2007. Disconrmation of taste as a measure of region of origin equity. International Journal of Wine Business Research
19 (1), 3348.
Dube, L., Renaghan, L.M., 2000. Creating visible customer value. The Cornell Hotel
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 41 (1), 6272.
Fakeye, P., Crompton, J., 1991. Image differences between prospective, rst-time,
and repeat visitors to the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Journal of Travel Research
30 (2), 1016.
Fornell, C, Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18,
3950.
Fornell, C., Johnson, M.D., Anderson, E.W., Cha, J., Bryant, B.E., 1996. The American
customer satisfaction index: Nature, purpose, and ndings. Journal of Marketing
60 (4), 718.
Han, H., Ryu, K., 2009. The roles of the physical environment, price perception, and
customer satisfaction in determining customer loyalty in the family restaurant
industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 33 (4), 487510.
Heide, M, Gronhaug, K., 2009. Key factors in guests perception of hotel atmosphere.
Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 50 (1), 2943.
Hertenstein, J.H., Platt, M.B., Brown, D.R., 2001. Valuing design: enhancing corporate performance through design effectiveness. Design Management Journal 21,
1019.
Hui, M.K., Dube, L., Chebat, J., 1997. The impact of music on consumers reaction to
waiting for services. Journal of Retailing 73 (1), 87104.
Jang, S., Namkung, Y., 2009. Perceived quality, emotions, and behavioral intentions:
application of an extended MehrabianRussell model to restaurants. Journal of
Business Research 62, 451460.
Kanning, U.P, Bergmann, N., 2009. Predictors of customer satisfaction: testing the
classical paradigms. Managing Service Quality 19 (4), 377390.
Kim, W.G., Moon, Y.J., 2009. Customers cognitive, emotional, and actionable
response to the servicescape: a test of the moderating effect of the restaurant
type. International Journal of Hospitality Management 28, 144156.
Knez, I., Kers, C., 2000. Effects of indoor lighting, gender, and age on mood and
cognitive performance. Environment and Behavior 32 (6), 817831.
Kurtich, J., Eakin, G., 1993. Interior Architecture. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York,
NY.
Lee, J., Beeler, C., 2007. The relationships among quality, satisfaction, and future
intention for rst-time and repeat visitors in a festival setting. Event Management 10 (4), 197208.
Li, X, Cheng, C., Kim, H., Petrick, J.F., 2008. A systematic comparison of rst-time
and repeat visitors via a two-phase online survey. Tourism Management 29 (2),
278293.
Lim, K.S., Razzaque, M.A., 1997. Brand loyalty and situational effects: An interactionist perspective. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 9 (4), 95115.
Lin, I.Y., 2004. Evaluating a servicescape: the effect of cognition and emotion. International Journal of Hospitality Management 23 (2), 163178.
Liu, Y., Jang, S., 2009. The effects of dining atmospherics: an extended
MehrabianRussell model. International Journal of Hospitality Management 28
(4), 494503.
Loureiro, S.M.C., 2010. Satisfying and delighting the rural tourists. Journal of Travel
and Tourism Marketing 27 (4), 396408.
Magnini, V.P., Parker, E.E., 2009. The psychological effects of music: implications for
hotel rms. Journal of Vacation Marketing 15 (1), 5362.
Mattila, A.S., 2006. How affective commitment boosts guest loyalty (and promotes
frequent guest programs). Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 47 (2), 174181.
McKercher, B., Chan, A., 2005. How special is special interest tourism? Journal of
Travel Research 44 (1), 2131.
Meiselman, H.L., 1996. The contextual basis for food acceptance, food choice, and
food intake: The food, the situation and the individual. In: Meiselman, H.L., MacFie, H.H. (Eds.), Food choice, acceptance, and consumption. Blackie Academic &
Professional, New York, pp. 239263.
Menon, K., Dube, L., 2000. Ensuring greater satisfaction by engineering salesperson
response to customer emotions. Journal of Retailing 76 (3), 285307.
Molinari, L.K., Abratt, R., Dion, P., 2008. Satisfaction, quality and value and effects on
repurchase and positive word-of-mouth behavioral intentions in a B2B services
context. Journal Services Marketing 22 (5), 363373.
Mano, H., Oliver, R.L., 1993. Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer
Research 20 (3), 451466.
Mattila, A.S, Wirtz, J., 2001. Congruency of scent and music as a driver of in-store
evaluations and behavior. Journal of Retailing 77 (2), 273289.
Mehrabian, A., Russell, J.A., 1974. An Approach to Environmental Psychology. MIT
Press, Cambridge, MA.
Milliman, R.E., 1986. The inuence of background music on the behavior of restaurant patrons. Journal of Consumer Research 13 (2), 286289.
Morais, D.B., Lin, C.H., 2010. Why do rst-time and repeat visitors patronize a destination? Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 27, 193210.
North, A.C., Hargreaves, D.J., 1998. The effect of music on atmosphere and purchase intentions in a cafeteria. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28 (24),
22542273.
Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New
York, NY.
Oakes, S., 2003. Musical tempo and waiting perceptions. Psychology and Marketing
20 (8), 685705.
Oh, H., 1999. Service quality, customer satisfaction, and customer value: a holistic
perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management 18, 6782.
Oliver, R.L., 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing 17, 460469.
Oliver, R.L., 1993. Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction
response. Journal of Consumer Research 20 (December), 418430.
Oliver, R.L., 1997. Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer. McGrawHill, New York.
Oliver, R.L., Bearden, W.O., 1985. Disconrmation processes and consumer evaluations in product usage. Journal of Business Research 13 (3), 235246.
Oliver, R.L., DeSarbo, W.S., 1988. Response determinants in satisfaction judgments.
Journal of Consumer Research 14 (4), 495507.
Oliver, R.L., Rust, R.T., Varki, S., 1997. Customer delight: foundations, ndings, and
managerial insight. Journal of Retailing 73 (3), 311336.
Opperman, M, 1997. First-time and repeat visitors to New Zealand. Tourism Management 18 (3), 177181.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, A.V., Berry, L.L., 1985. A conceptual model of service quality and its implication for future research. Journal of Marketing 49 (4), 4150.
Patterson, P.G., 1993. Expectations and product performance as determinants of
satisfaction for a high-involvement purchase. Psychology and Marketing 10 (5),
449465.
Patterson, P.G., 2007. Modeling the determinants of customer satisfaction for
business-to-business professional services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 25 (1), 417.
Petrick, J.F., 2004. First timers and repeaters perceived value. Journal of Travel
Research 43 (1), 2938.
Phillips, D.M., Baumgartner, H., 2002. The role of consumption emotions in the
satisfaction response. Journal of Consumer Psychology 12, 243252.
Pizam, A., Milman, A., 1993. Predicting satisfaction among rst time visitors to a destination by using the expectancy disconrmation theory. International Journal
of hospitality Management 12 (2), 197209.
Podsakoff, P.M.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (5), 879903.
Premkumar, G., Bhattacherjee, A., 2008. Explaining information technology usage:
a test of competing models. Omega 36, 6475.
Pullman, M., Gross, M.A., 2004. Ability of experience design elements to elicit emotions and loyalty behaviors. Decision Sciences 35 (3), 551578.

Pullman, M.E., Robson, S.K.A., 2007. Visual methods: using photographs to capture
customers experience with design. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly 48 (2), 121144.
Reimer, A., Kuehn, R., 2005. The impact of servicescape on quality perception. European Journal of Marketing 39 (7/8), 785808.
Rojas, C., Camarero, C., 2008. Visitors experience, mood and satisfaction in a heritage
context: evidence from an interpretation center. Tourism Management 29 (3),
525537.
Rosen, L.D., Karwan, K.R., Scribner, L.L., 2003. Service quality measurement and the
disconrmation model: taking care in interpretation. Total Quality Management
and Business Excellence 14 (1), 314.
Ryu, K., Han, H., 2010. Inuence of the quality of food, service, and physical environment on customer satisfaction in quick-casual restaurants: moderating role
of perceived price. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 34 (3), 310
329.
Ryu, K, Jang, S., 2006. Intention to experience local cuisine in a travel destination: the
modied theory of reasoned action. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research
30 (4), 507516.
Ryu, K., Jang, S., 2007. The effect of environmental perceptions on behavioral intentions through emotions: the case of upscale restaurants. Journal of Hospitality
and Tourism Research 31 (1), 5672.
Ryu, K., Jang, S., 2008a. DINESCAPE: a scale for customers perception of dining
environments. Journal of Foodservice Business Research 11 (1), 222.
Ryu, K., Jang, S., 2008b. The inuence of the physical environment on customer emotions and behavioral intentions: the application of modied MehrabianRussell
model. The Service Industries Journal 28 (8), 11511165.
Spreng, R., Mackenzie, S., Olshavsky, R., 1996. A reexamination of the determinants
of consumer Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing 60 (3), 1532.
Spreng, R.A., Mackoy, R.D., 1996. An empirical examination of a model of perceived
service quality and satisfaction. Journal of Retailing 72 (2), 201214.
Spreng, R.A., Page, T.J., 2003. A test of alternative measures of disconrmation. Decision Sciences 34 (1), 3162.
Sulek, J.M., Hensley, R.L., 2004. The relative importance of food, atmosphere, and fairness of wait: the case of a full-service restaurant. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly 45 (3), 235247.
Szymanski, D.M., Henard, D.H., 2001. Customer satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the
empirical evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 29 (1), 16
35.
611
Tang, E.P.Y., Chan, R.Y.K., Tai, S.H.C., 2001. Emotional inuence of environmental
cues on Chinese consumers in a leisure service setting. Journal of International
Consumer Marketing 14 (1), 6788.
Tombs, A., McColl-Kennedy, J.R., 2003. Social-servicescape conceptual model. Marketing Theory 3 (4), 447475.
Tse, D.K., Wilton, P.C., 1988. Models of consumer satisfaction formation. An extension. Journal of Marketing Research 25 (2), 204212.
Turley, L.W., Milliman, R.E., 2000. Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a
review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research 49 (2),
193211.
Wakeeld, K.L., Baker, J., 1998. Excitement at the mall: determinants and effects of
shopping response. Journal of Retailing 74 (4), 515539.
Wakeeld, K.L., Blodgett, J.G., 1994. The importance of servicescapes in leisure service settings. Journal of Services Marketing 8 (3), 6676.
Wakeeld, K.L., Blodgett, J.G., 1999. Customer response to intangible and tangible
service factors. Psychology and Marketing 16 (1), 5168.
Westbrook, R.A., Oliver, R.L., 1991. The dimensionality of consumption emotion
patterns and consumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research 18 (June),
8491.
Wirtz, J., Bateson, J.E.G., 1999. Consumer satisfaction with services: integrating the
environment perspective in services marketing into the traditional disconrmation paradigm. Journal of Business Research 44 (1), 5566.
Yalch, R.F., Spangenberg, E., 2000. The effects of music in a retail setting on real and
perceived shopping times. Journal of Business Research 49 (2), 139147.
Yen, C.H., Lu, H.P., 2008. Effects of e-service quality on loyalty intention: an empirical
study in online auction. Managing Service Quality 18 (2), 127146.
Yi, Y., La, S., 1993. The moderating role of condence in expectations and asymmetric
inuence of disconrmation on customer satisfaction. The Services Industries
Journal 23 (5), 2047.
Yoon, S.J., Kim, J.H., 2000. An empirical validation of a loyalty model based on expectation disconrmation. Journal of Consumer Marketing 17 (2), 120136.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A., 1993. The nature and determinants of
customer expectations of service. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
21 (1), 112.
Zemke, D., Pullman, M., 2008. Assessing the value of good design in hotels. Building
Research & Information 36 (6), 543556.
Zemke, D.V., Shoemaker, S., 2008. A sociable atmosphere: ambient scents effect on
social interaction. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 49 (3), 317329.

Service Environment

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Service Environment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management

New or repeat customers: How does physical environment inuence their

Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 51 200 7427.

ian consumption is mainly task-related or functional in nature. This

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

customer satisfaction on customer loyalty; and (4) to investigate

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

much more powerful predictor of satisfaction than expectation

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

Lighting positively inuences perceived discon-

Hypothesis 1c. Ambience positively inuences perceived disconrmation.

Layout positively inuences perceived disconr-

Table settings positively inuence perceived dis-

Service staff positively inuences perceived dis-

2.4. Impact of disconrmation on customer satisfaction and

Customer satisfaction positively inuences cus-

2.6. Physical environment and disconrmation between

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

tations and interpretations of physical environment quality might

plete Korean version of the questionnaire was then back-translated

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

identify if the participants were rst time or repeat visitors to the

ric invariances. In particular, a non-restricted model without any

To limit extraneous variability, we examined the perceptions of

In the present study, about 54.0% of the participants were male

3.3. Data analysis

4.2. Measurement model

The present study employed Anderson and Gerbings (1988)

The measurement model provided a good t to the data

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

Facility aesthetic (FA)

t was signicantly improved compared to the previous CFA model

isfaction through perceived disconrmation. That is, perceived

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

H1a: .652** (3.051)

H1b: .134 (1.465)

H1c: .294** (2.069)

H1d: .100 (0.950)

H2: .862** (16.441)

H4: .367** (3.720)

RMSEA = .065; CFI = .918; NFI = .863

Fit of the model with the path

FVG: = .349** (t = 3.010)

2 (1) = 9.040, p < .01

2 (1) = 2.022, p > .05

2 (1) = 7.051, p < .01

2 (1) = 4.552, p < .05

2 (1) = 1.004, p>.05

2 (1) = 5.260, p < .05

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

repeat visitors perceived disconrmation. This implies that layout

rience newness, reasons for returning). Investigating these issues

Paintings/pictures are visually attractive.

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

K. Ryu, H. Han / International Journal of Hospitality Management 30 (2011) 599611

You might also like