relationship quality of an establishment and perceived value of … · javier sa´nchez-garcia,...

Relationship Quality of an Establishment andPerceived Value of a Purchase

JAVIER SANCHEZ-GARCIA, MIGUEL A. MOLINER-TENA, LUIS CALLARISA-FIOL and

ROSA M. RODRIGUEZ-ARTOLA

Relationship quality is an emerging concept that attempts to measure the

lifetime value of a customer. A review of the literature reveals that the indi-

cators that determine the construct are satisfaction with the relationship,

the customer’s trust and the customer’s level of commitment. The paper

also considers how the perceived value of a purchase influences the

quality of the relationship with an establishment, i.e. how a single trans-

action influences the valuation of a whole relationship. Gummeson

[1987] considers that the quality of the relationship is the value accumu-

lated during/throughout the relationship. This posits the existence of a

causal link between perceived value and relationship quality. On the

basis of an Expectancy–Value Model [Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975], and

the model of Berkowitz [1993], we consider the relationships among the

variables of the model. The results show that affect plays a fundamental

role in long term valuation, while cognition is more influential in the

short term. Another important conclusion is that the affective valuations

made during the first moments have decisive consequences in the long term.

INTRODUCTION

Relationship marketing has given substantial impetus to research focused on the study

of consumer loyalty. As against the short term objective, commercial distribution

firms have realised the importance of maintaining long term relationships with

their customers. The repetition of purchases by buyers is the main aim pursued by

establishments, because this has a positive and direct impact on their profitability.

The relationships established between two parties may take different forms, such

as contracts, joint ventures, alliances or informal cooperation. These formulas are

very widespread at the level of relationships in industrial markets, but they are not

usual in consumer markets. In any event, independently of the formal aspects that

regulate a relationship, each of the participants in the exchange makes their own

Javier Sanchez-Garcia, Departamento de Administracion de Empresas y Marketing, Universitat Jaume I,Campus del Riu Sec, 12071 Castellon de la Plana, Spain. Email: [email protected]

The Service Industries Journal, Vol.27, No.2, March 2007, pp.151–174ISSN 0264-2069 print=1743-9507 onlineDOI: 10.1080=02642060601122710 # 2007 Taylor & Francis

valuation of it. This overall evaluation is decisive for the continuity of the relation-

ship, and commercial distribution firms know the key mechanisms that guide the

behaviour of their customers. The concept of relationship quality attempts to reflect

this overall evaluation.

Relationship quality has been defined as the ‘degree of appropriateness of a

relationship to fulfill the needs of the customer associated with the relationship’

[Hennig-Thurau and Klee, 1997: 751]. This is an emerging mega-construct in the lit-

erature on marketing, which through certain indicators attempts to value the health of

a relationship. The consumer’s satisfaction, trust and commitment are the indicators

that the literature has identified.

Together with this, perceived value is a construct that has attracted the attention of

a number of researchers. One aspect that has been assumed but little tested in the lit-

erature is that the valuation of a relationship is directly influenced by the successive

transactions taking place over time. The perceived value of a purchase (transaction) is

an antecedent of the quality of the relationship with an establishment (relationship).

This is in line with Gummeson [1987] when he considers that the quality of the

relationship could be interpreted in terms of accumulated value. For this reason

relationship quality aims to measure the lifetime value of a customer, which is an

aspect that the Marketing Science Institute (MSI) [2004] highlights among its

research priorities for the coming years.

The objective of this study is to identify the key indicators of the relationship

quality of an establishment and to study the links among them and with the perceived

value of a purchase. For this purpose we start from a conceptual framework based on

the Expectancy–Value Model [Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975], the effects of affect

[Ajzen, 2001] and Berkowitz’s model [1993]. We posit a causal model which is

tested on a sample of Spanish consumers with experience in the purchase of

ceramic products.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: THE EXPERIENTIAL VIEW

The fundamental object of the study of relationship marketing is how long term

relationships are created and maintained. In this sense the study of consumers’ beha-

viour and the mechanisms that lead them to be loyal to a supplier are a key element.

Taking as reference the Expectancy–Value Model [Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975], pur-

chasing behaviour is influenced by purchasing intention. Purchasing intention is a

direct consequence of the attitude to the product/service and of subjective rules.

The antecedents of the attitude to the product/service are the descriptive and inferred

beliefs about the consequences of the purchasing behaviour, whereas the normative

beliefs relating to the influence on the consumer of the opinions of his/her reference

group are the antecedents of the subjective norms.

With regard to the formation of attitudes, the model is clearly cognitive, because it

is based on the processing of information. On the basis of information from the environ-

ment and from the residuals of past experiences, consumers form their beliefs. These

beliefs may be descriptive, if they arise from one’s own observation of reality, or

may be inferred, if they are the consequence of inference from several beliefs.

152 THE SERVICE INDUSTRIES JOURNAL

Recently researchers have been incorporating affect as a key element in the for-

mation of attitudes [Ajzen, 2001]. Affect is reserved for general states of mind (hap-

piness, sadness) and for specific emotions (fear, anger, envy), states which contain

degrees of valency and thresholds [Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000; Giner-Sorolla, 1999;

Schwartz and Clore, 1996; Tesser and Martin, 1996]. Authors like Zajonc [1980]

assign a preference to affect over cognition. The most widely accepted view of this

proposal is that based on a multidimensional vision of attitude, which assumes that

evaluations are influenced both by cognition and by affect [Eagly and Chaiken,

1993; van der Pligt et al., 1998]. The studies carried out show that, for example,

when beliefs and feelings about an object are of negative valency, the feelings tend

to predominate [Lavine et al., 1998b]. Haddock and Zanna [2000] summarised the

results of many studies that support the joint effects of beliefs and feelings on evalu-

ations. In parallel fashion, attitudes towards some objects remain more in affect than

in cognition, while for other objects they rest more on cognition than on affect

[Kempf, 1999]. In marketing, this line of research has been given the name of the

‘experiential view’.

Regarding the relationship between cognitive and affective variables, Berkowitz

[1993] formulates a theory as to how the affective and cognitive elements interact to

influence behaviour. He identifies three types of processes that are likely to occur

when the consumer is exposed to a stimulus.

Firstly, the information relating to the stimulus is subjected to a relatively

basic and automatic associative process, which occurs before cognitive processes

like valuations, interpretations, schemas, attributions and strategies begin. These

primitive and instinctive processes occur relatively rapidly and can provoke

affective reactions of the lowest level, as well as action tendencies (approach

or avoidance) based on a rapid valuation of the affective meaning of the stimulus.

Secondly, the information relating to the stimulus is subjected to a cognitive

process which is more deliberative and of a higher level, the result of which may

serve to strengthen or weaken the action tendencies deriving from the lower level

affective reactions.

Finally, the higher level processing may give rise to higher level affective reac-

tions and to action tendencies, which are generated more slowly than the lower

level affective reactions because the information is subjected to a more deliberative

process before those reactions can occur.

The model suggests that when a choice among various alternatives presents

itself, two processes take place [Shiv and Fredorikhin, 1999]. The first starts

automatically and gives rise to affective reactions, which can vary in terms of

valency and intensity. The second process, more deliberative and controlled,

generates cognitions about the alternatives. These cognitions could be based on

external stimuli or on memory, and could be favourable or unfavourable to

each of the alternatives implicated in the choice. The model suggests that, if

processing resources are available, consumer behaviour will be guided by affec-

tive reactions. Following this reasoning, impulse purchases are guided by auto-

matic affective reactions, due to the consumer’s limitations for processing the

resources.

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY AND PERCEIVED VALUE 153

RELATIONSHIP QUALITY OF AN ESTABLISHMENT

Relationship quality of an establishment can be seen as a mega-construct made up of

other key components that reflect the overall nature of a relationship between an

establishment and consumers [Hennig-Thurau et al., 2002]. Gummeson [1987] con-

siders relationship quality to be the quality of interaction between a customer and a

supplier, and it can be interpreted in terms of accumulated value. Other authors

have defined relationship quality as the ‘degree of appropriateness of a relationship

to fulfill the needs of the customer associated with the relationship’ [Hennig-

Thurau and Klee, 1997: 751]. Therefore, relationship quality can be considered a

fundamental aspect of the formation of the attitude towards the establishment.

From the standpoint of the experiential view, relationship quality is not only cog-

nitive, but also affective. The consumer not only makes a rational analysis of the

relationship; his or her emotions and feelings also play a fundamental role in relation-

ship quality. Moreover, relationship quality is of a subjective nature, not only because

of the different interpretation that each of the parties may make, but also because of its

dynamic character. According to Ravald and Gronroos [1996], relationship quality

varies over time, so that during the first stages of a relationship the value of each trans-

action is of great importance, whereas in more mature stages of the relationship the

quality of the relationship is what counts. Thus, the customers’ expectations evolve

from a predominance of transactional factors towards a greater emphasis on relational

variables.

From the point of view of the Berkowitz [1993] model, relationship quality is a set

of higher level affective reactions and of action tendencies that are generated rela-

tively slowly compared to lower level affective reactions, since the information is

subjected to a more deliberative process before those reactions can occur.

One fundamental aspect is to identify the variables or affective reactions that con-

sumers take into account when determining the relationship quality of an establish-

ment. The literature has analysed various proposals: cooperative norms [Baker

et al., 1999], opportunism [Dorsch et al., 1998], customer orientation [Dorsch

et al., 1998; Palmer and Bejou, 1994], seller’s experience [Palmer and Bejou,

1994], conflict, propensity to invest and expectations of continuity [Kumar et al.,

1995]. Nevertheless, the most recent studies agree that the customer’s satisfaction

with the performance of the establishment, trust in this establishment, and the per-

ceived commitment to the establishment are the key variables underlying relationship

quality [Baker et al., 1999; Crosby et al., 1990; Dorsch et al., 1998, Garbarino and

Johnson, 1999; Palmer and Bejou, 1994; Smith, 1998].

Customer Satisfaction

According to the disconfirmation paradigm, satisfaction is a comparison between

performance and expectations [Hunt, 1977; Oliver, 1981]. But according to Oliver

[1999] this is a definition based on what the consumer does, and not on its psychologi-

cal meaning. He therefore proposes that ‘satisfaction is defined as pleasurable fulfill-

ment’ [Oliver, 1999: 34]. That is, the consumer senses that consumption fulfils

some need, desire, goal or so forth and that this fulfilment is pleasurable. Thus,


satisfaction is the consumer’s sense that consumption provides outcomes against a

standard of pleasure versus displeasure. This view of satisfaction reflects its affective

nature. From this point of view, it is a high level affective reaction that is generated

slowly as the relationship develops.

In the case of satisfaction with an establishment, the consumer values the degree

of pleasurable fulfilment of his needs and wishes, including the full range of goods or

services offered by the establishment and its evolution over time. Satisfaction depends

on the experience of using the products or services. Satisfaction has been treated as a

one-dimensional construct, which varies along a continuum from dissatisfaction to

satisfaction.

Customer’s Commitment

Morgan and Hunt [1994] consider that the commitment–trust tandem is the indivisi-

ble axis that leads to the efficiency, productivity and effectiveness of relationships.

The basis for maintaining relationships is the keeping of promises [Gronroos,

1990], so that if a promise is not fulfilled the consumer will not repeat the purchase

of a product or the consumption of a service, so the relationship will come to an end

[Moliner and Callarisa, 1997].

Some authors consider that commitment is the highest level of relational bond

[Dwyer et al., 1987]. Commitment between the parties arises when one of them con-

siders that its relationship with the other is so important that it is worthwhile making

the maximum effort to maintain it indefinitely [Dwyer et al., 1987; Gundlach et al.,

1995; Moorman et al., 1992; Morgan and Hunt, 1994]. The essence of commitment

between the parties is the adoption of a long term orientation of the relationship, a

desire to make short term sacrifices in order to obtain long term benefits [Dwyer

et al., 1987]. From the point of view of the Berkowitz model, commitment can

also be considered a high level action tendency, since it implies a certain behaviour

intention towards the establishment, a consequence of a long deliberative process in

which cognitive and affective elements have intervened.

The literature has established two dimensions of commitment that fit the

Berkowitz model: affective commitment and calculated or cognitive commitment

[Geyskens et al., 1996; Wetzels et al., 1998]. The former captures the emotional

elements of commitment, the latter refers to a more rational analysis.

Affective commitment is based on emotional motives, like the feeling of belong-

ing and respect for the other party [Geyskens and Steenkamp, 1995]. Numerous

studies have shown that individuals remain in a relationship because of the emergence

of positive feelings that associate feelings of belonging with a high degree of res-

pect for the other party [Allen and Meyer, 1990; Geyskens and Steenkamp, 1995;

Geyskens et al., 1996; Konovsky and Cropanzano, 1991; Kumar et al., 1995;

Morgan and Hunt, 1994].

Cognitive commitment is an exercise in economic calculation, and two types can

be distinguished: negative and positive. Cognitive commitment is negative when the

relationship is maintained due to the costs and penalties associated with abandoning it

[Young and Denize, 1997]. As soon as alternatives appear, relationships based on

negative commitment will dissolve [Rusbult, 1980, 1983]. The commitment is


positive if the motive for remaining in the relationship is the possibility of obtaining

economic gains or benefits. This commitment is said to be based on cognitive value

[Rusbult, 1980; Ravald and Gronroos, 1996].

With respect to causal relationships, the literature holds that satisfaction with the

establishment is an antecedent of the consumer’s commitment to it. Satisfaction is a

comparison between the results of the different transactions carried out and prior

expectations. Satisfaction is therefore a belief inferred as a consequence of one or

more earlier purchases. If as a consequence of these experiences the level of satisfac-

tion is low, the level of commitment to the establishment will also be low. When the

consumer experiences an increase in his satisfaction with the establishment, his com-

mitment also increases, in either the affective or cognitive component. Hence:

H1: The consumer’s satisfaction with an establishment directly and positively

influences the consumer’s commitment to that establishment.

Customer’s Trust

Together with commitment, the other key element for the establishment to be able to

maintain long term relationships is the consumer’s trust [Morgan and Hunt, 1994]. It

is necessary for the consumer to feel trust in the establishment, since according to

Morgan and Hunt [1994] it is the basic element that will permit the promises and

the relationships to be established and maintained [Berry, 1995; Bitner, 1995].

Trust implies that the good intentions of the establishment are not questioned by

the consumer, that the promises made do not generate uncertainties in the purchaser,

and that the communication between the parties is honest, open and frequent [Czepiel,

1990]. Trust has been defined as an individual’s general expectation as to whether

another’s word can be trusted [Rotter, 1967].

Trust can be studied as a personality trait of each individual person (some people

have a greater propensity to trust than others), and as that in which trust is placed. The

latter perspective is the one that interests us here, because it implies the valuation of

the resources, capacities, norms of conduct, values, priorities and behaviour inten-

tions of an establishment.

On the basis of this conceptualisation, trust can also be catalogued as a high level

affective reaction, according to the Berkowitz [1993] model. It involves a complex,

slow, long term subjective valuation of a provider.

At a general level it is accepted that trust is composed of two major dimensions:

honesty (belief that the establishment will keep its word and that it has the capacity to

do so), and benevolence (belief that the establishment is interested in the consumer’s

well-being) [Doney and Cannon, 1997; Ganesan, 1994; Ganesan and Hess, 1997;

Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Kumar et al., 1995; Moorman et al., 1993; Morgan

and Hunt, 1994; Singh and Sirdeshmukh, 2000]. In this sense trust is an eminently

affective construct because it is based on two dimensions with a strong emotional

component.

The literature reviewed permits the hypothesis that trust is an antecedent of com-

mitment. The clearest justification is that of Kramer [1999], who considers that trust


reduces the transaction costs of searching for information on prices and alternatives

available in the market, of inspection and measurement of the objects exchanged,

of communication between the parties, and of legal advice. The higher the level of

trust, the lower the transaction costs and the greater the commitment to the supplier.

Furthermore, given that trust is the necessary basis for promises to be believable, and

since commitment is based on the keeping of promises by the establishment, the

causal relationship can be posited as follows:

H2: The consumer’s trust in the establishment directly and positively influences

the consumer’s commitment to that establishment.

The literature posits that satisfaction with the relationship is an antecedent of trust

[Anderson and Srinivasan, 2003; Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder, 2002; Delgado-

Ballester and Munuera-Aleman, 2001; Garbarino and Johnson, 1999; Singh and

Sirdeshmukh, 2000]. The greater the satisfaction with the establishment, whether due

to the product purchased or to the performance of the establishment itself, the more

trust generated in the consumer, thus establishing a direct relationship between the

two variables. Satisfaction is a residual of past experiences, the direct product of a

behaviour, whereas trust implies a feeling that takes into account these experiences

with the establishment. The relationship between the two variables can perhaps

best be seen in the negative aspect. If the consumer’s level of satisfaction falls, trust

will suffer.

H3: The consumer’s satisfaction with the establishment directly and positively

influences the consumer’s trust in that establishment.

PERCEIVED VALUE AND RELATIONSHIP QUALITY

Perceived value is the essential result of marketing activities and is a first order

element in relationship marketing [Dumond, 2000; MSI, 2004; Oh, 2003; Peterson,

1995; Ravald and Gronroos, 1996]. Marketing researchers have recently been

trying to grapple with this concept and to study it in greater depth. Two major

approaches to the conceptualisation of perceived value can be identified.

On the one hand, perceived value is understood as a construct configured by two

parts, one of benefits received by the customer (economic, social and relationship)

and another of sacrifices made (price, time, effort, risk and convenience) [Bigne

et al., 2001; Cronin et al., 1997, 2000; Dodds et al., 1991; Grewal et al., 1998; Oh,

2003; Rapp and Collins, 1991, 1996].

Recently an approach based on the conception of perceived value as a multidi-

mensional construct has been gaining ground [De Ruyter et al., 1997, 1998; Rust

et al., 2000; Sinha and DeSarbo, 1998; Sweeney and Soutar, 2001; Woodruff,

1997]. This approach allows us to overcome some of the problems of the traditional

approach to perceived value, particularly its excessive concentration on economic

utility [Zeithaml, 1988]. Another important asset of the second approach is that it

echoes the experiential view.


Transferring the experiential view to the study of the perceived value construct,

two conclusions can be drawn. Firstly, the view of perceived value as a cognitive vari-

able is partial, since it is necessary to incorporate the affective component. Secondly,

maintaining the concept of perceived value as a comparison between ‘getting’ and

‘giving’, the affective variables should also enter the equation: ‘Emotional benefits

may also affect choices between instrumental alternatives that are functionally equiv-

alent in other aspects’ [Havlena and Holbrook, 1986: 394]. Since perceived value is a

dynamic variable that is also experienced after consumption, it is necessary to include

subjective or emotional reactions that are generated in the consumer [Bolton and

Drew, 1991; Havlena and Holbrook, 1986; Sweeney and Soutar, 2001]. These affec-

tive elements refer to specific emotions (fear, anger, envy) generated in the moment of

the transaction [Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000; Giner-Sorolla, 1999; Schwartz and Clore,

1996; Tesser and Martin, 1996]. According to Berkowitz’s [1993] model, they are a

consequence of a relatively basic and automatic associative process, which occurs

before the start of cognitive processes (valuations, interpretations, attributions and

strategies), and of high level affective processes (satisfaction, trust and commitment).

Regarding the dimensions of the construct, there exists a fairly general consensus

in the identification of functional factors (quality, price) and affective factors (feelings

and social impact) [Anderson and Narus, 1990; Gassenheimer et al., 1998; Lapierre,

2000; Palmer and Ponsonby, 2002; Sanchez et al., 2005; Sheth et al., 1991a, 1991b;

Sweeney and Soutar, 2001]. On the basis of Sheth et al. [1991a, 1991b], and the

PERVAL scale by Sweeney and Soutar [2001] we have developed the GLOVAL

scale [Sanchez et al., 2005] which measures the perceived value of a purchase, includ-

ing not only the establishment but also the product purchased there, widening the

scope of the PERVAL scale. The dimensions identified are specifically the functional

value of the installations, functional value professionalism of the contact personnel,

functional value quality of the product/service, functional value price, emotional

value and social value [Sanchez et al., 2005].

Regarding the link between the perceived value of a purchase and the variables

that confirm the relationship quality of an establishment, it has to be said that there

are not many empirical studies. Gummeson [1987] considers that the relationship

quality could be interpreted in terms of accumulated value. In the same sense,

Ravald and Gronroos [1996] consider that during the first stages of a relationship

the value of each transaction is of great importance, while in more mature stages

of the relationship it is the quality of the relationship that counts. It is accepted, there-

fore, that the perceived value of a purchase is an antecedent of the relationship quality

of an establishment.

At the conceptual level, perceived value is a different construct from satisfaction.

While perceived value occurs at different stages of the purchasing process, including

the pre-purchase stage [Woodruff, 1997], it is universally accepted that satisfaction is

a post-purchase and post-consumption evaluation [Hunt, 1977; Oliver, 1981]. Percep-

tions of value can therefore be generated without having bought or used a product,

whereas satisfaction depends on the experience of using the product or service.

The perceived value is a comparison between what a purchase has contributed of

‘getting’ and what it has involved of ‘giving’, whereas satisfaction is a comparison


between the result and previous expectations. Satisfaction is a comparison between

the expectation of value (before the purchase) and the perceived value (after the pur-

chase) [Parasuraman, 1997; Ravald and Gronroos, 1996]. Moreover, satisfaction has

been treated as a one-dimensional construct, which varies along a continuum from

dissatisfaction to satisfaction. Perceived value, on the other hand, is a multidimen-

sional construct [Sweeney and Soutar, 2001]. Perceived value and satisfaction are

therefore different variables. The literature analysed considers that perceived value

is an antecedent of satisfaction [Anderson et al., 1994; Durvasula et al., 2004;

McDougall and Leveske, 2000; Oh, 1999; Patterson and Spreng, 1997; Ravald and

Gronroos, 1996; Singh and Sirdeshmukh, 2000; Spreng et al., 1993; Szymanski

and Henard, 2001; Woodall, 2003]. In this study we also analyse the link between

the perceived value of a purchase and satisfaction with the relationship sustained

over time with an establishment, i.e. the perceived value of a transaction and the sat-

isfaction with a relationship. Immediately post-purchase it is the transaction that influ-

ences the relationship, while in a situation of decision to purchase, it is the satisfaction

with the relationship that influences the expectation of value. This allows us to put

forward hypothesis H4.

H4: The perceived value of a purchase positively influences the consumer’s

satisfaction with the establishment.

With respect to the link between the perceived value of a purchase and trust in and

commitment to the establishment, Morgan and Hunt [1994] consider that the benefits

of the relationship are precursors of trust. The perceived value of a purchase can be

considered part of the benefits of the relationship. For this reason it can be posited that

the perceived value of a purchase is an antecedent of trust in the establishment [Singh

and Sirdeshmukh, 2000]. Some posit a causality in the opposite direction, i.e. trust is

an antecedent of perceived value, though this is a pre-purchase scenario, in which

trust is an antecedent of the expectation of value [Sirdeshmukh et al., 2002]. Trust

has been conceptualised by some authors as a complex psychological state influenced

by motivational and affective components [Bromiley and Cummings, 1996; Kramer

et al., 1996; McAlister, 1995]. This is a higher order affective process according to the

classification of Berkowitz [1993], with slower processing, as against the value

implied in a more cognitive evaluative process. For all these reasons we put

forward the hypothesis:

H5: The perceived value of a purchase directly and positively influences the

consumer’s trust in the establishment.

In the same sense, commitment is a higher order relational link. If a purchase has

offered a high level of value, this will improve the purchasers’ level of commitment.

H6: The perceived value of a purchase directly and positively influences the

consumer’s commitment to the establishment.

The causal model posited is reflected in Figure 1.


QUANTITATIVE STUDY

Several scales were designed to measure the variables included in the model. Table 1

specifies the references. We designed a quantitative study in which the population of

reference were consumers over 18 years of age in Spain. Three cities were chosen, in

different regions of Spain, and of different sizes: Madrid (3,000,000 inhabitants),

Valencia (750,000) and La Coruna (250,000).

The industry chosen for the study was ceramic products, which is an important

sector of the economy of the Valencia region. Four hundred and two valid personal

interviews were carried out. The sample was distributed equally among the three

cities, at 134 interviews each. The sampling procedure was random, with quotas

for each city, and stratified by age.

The field work was carried out in December 2002. In the data analysis, structural

equation models are used, and in particular confirmatory factor analysis (LISREL).

DATA ANALYSIS

First we analyse the dimensions, reliability and validity of the measurement scales

used and then we test the causal model, where the relationships among the dimensions

obtained in the earlier analyses are established. In the first case confirmatory factor

analyses will be carried out for each of the scales (value, satisfaction, trust and com-

mitment), and in the second we perform a path analysis.

FIGURE 1

CAUSAL MODEL


Analysis of Dimensions, Reliability and Validity of the Scale of Perceived Value of a

Purchase (GLOVAL)

From the confirmatory factor analysis of the items used to measure the value of a pur-

chase we obtain six dimensions: functional value of the establishment (installations),

functional value of contact personnel (professionalism), functional value of the

product purchased (quality), functional value price, emotional value and social

value (Table 2).

Convergent validity exists insofar as all the factor loadings are greater than

0.5, and is further ratified by the fact that each of the items contributes to the

formation of only a single dimension and no other. The scale is also reliable

because the values of the statistics that determine composite reliability are

above 0.80, the composite reliability of the total scale of perceived value of the

purchase being 0.98.

With regard to divergent validity, no confidence interval of the correlations

between the factors obtained includes unity (Table 3). The highest correlation is

the one between the functional value of the product (quality) and the functional

value price (0.90); and the lowest correlation is that between the functional value

of the product (quality) and the social value (0.35).

TABLE 1

DESIGN OF THE SCALES OF MEASUREMENT OF THE CONSTRUCTS

Variable IndicatorsNumberof items References

Post-purchaseperceived value

24 items Gloval (Sanchez et al.,2006) Perval (Sweeneyand Soutar, 2001)

Functional value of establishmentinstallation

4 items

Functional value of establishmentpersonnel

4 items

Functional value of product 4 itemsFunctional value of price 3 itemsEmotional value 5 itemsSocial value 4 items

Consumer satisfaction 6 items Bloemer and Odekerken-Schroder (2002)Satisfaction with establishment 3 items

Satisfaction with the product 3 items

Consumer’s trustin establishment

7 items Morgan and Hunt (1994);Kumar et al. (1995);Doney and Cannon(1997); Ganesan andHess (1997)

Honesty 4 itemsBenevolence 3 items

Consumer’s commitmentto establishment

5 items Meyer and Allen (1991);Anderson and Weitz(1992); Morgan andHunt (1994); Geyskenset al. (1996)

Affective commitment 3 itemsCognitive commitment 2 items


Analysis of Dimensions, Reliability and Validity of the scale of Satisfaction

with the Establishment

In Table 4 we observe that satisfaction has a two-dimensional character, differentiat-

ing between satisfaction with the establishment where the tiles were acquired, and

TABLE 2

PERCEIVED VALUE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT

Functional value of the establishment (installations) Factor loadings

The distribution of the interior favoured confidentialityand privacy

0.85

The establishment was neat and well organised 0.76The installations were spacious, modern and clean 0.65The establishment was well located (easily found,

central and/or with good transport links)0.60

Functional value of contact personnel(professionalism)

They were up-to-date about new items and trends 0.85They knew their job well 0.78Their advice was valuable 0.75They knew the products they had in the store well 0.73Functional value of the product purchased (quality)The product purchased was well made or manufactured 0.92The quality of the product purchased has endured 0.73Relative to other brands the product purchased had an

acceptable level of quality0.64

The product purchased has performed as expected 0.52Functional value priceIt was a good purchase for the price paid 0.79The product purchased was reasonably priced 0.56The price was the main criterion for the decision 0.50Emotional valueI feel comfortable with the product purchased 0.79The personnel were always willing to satisfy my wishes

as a customer, whatever product I wanted to buy0.71

The personnel gave me a positive feeling 0.70I felt relaxed in the establishment 0.55The personnel didn’t hassle me to decide quickly 0.54Social valueChoosing this brand improved the way I am perceived

by others0.94

The people who choose this brand obtain social approval 0.94The brand that I chose is chosen by many people that I

know0.76

Buying in that store has improved the way I amperceived by others

0.71

Fit of the model: Chi-square ¼ 227.24, df ¼ 201, P ¼ 0.09877; RMSEA ¼ 0.019; GFI ¼ 0.95;AGFI ¼ 0.93.Composite reliability of the functional value establishment: 0.88.Composite reliability of the functional value of the personnel (professionalism): 0.91.Composite reliability of the functional value of the product: 0.83.Composite reliability of the functional value price: 0.80.Composite reliability of the emotional value: 0.89.Composite reliability of the social value: 0.92.Composite reliability of the perceived value of the purchase: 0.98.


satisfaction with the tiles themselves. Each of these two dimensions is formed by

three identical items, but the first three refer to the establishment and the other

three to the tiles.

Convergent validity is demonstrated by factor loadings higher than 0.5, and

because each item contributes to forming only the dimension that corresponds to it.

The heaviest factor loading in the case of satisfaction with the establishment is that

TABLE 4

CONSUMER SATISFACTION

Satisfactionwith the

establishment

Satisfactionwith theproduct

My expectations of the establishment have been met at all times 0.86 –I have always felt satisfied with the establishment 0.85 –The level of satisfaction attained was high compared to that of

other similar establishments0.74 –

I am satisfied with the tiles acquired – 0.90My expectations of the tiles purchased have been fulfilled – 0.84Compared to other tiles that I have seen the degree of

satisfaction is high– 0.76

Fit of the model: Chi-square ¼ 5.40, df ¼ 8, P-value ¼ 0.71355, RMSEA ¼ 0.001, GFI ¼ 0.99,AGFI ¼ 0.99.Discriminant validity. Correlation between the factors and in parentheses the confidence interval of thecorrelation: 0.69 (0.61–0.77).Composite reliability of satisfaction with the establishment: 0.86.Composite reliability of satisfaction with the tiles: 0.87.Composite reliability of satisfaction: 0.93.

TABLE 3

DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY OF THE VALUE OF THE PURCHASEa

Functionalvalue of the

establishment

Functionalvalue of

the contactpersonnel

Functionalvalue of the

productFunctionalvalue price

Emotionalvalue

Socialvalue

Functional valueof theestablishment

0.63(0.55–0.71)

0.65(0.57–0.73)

0.47(0.41–0.53)

0.70(0.62–0.78)

0.40(0.34–0.46)

Functional valueof the contactpersonnel

0.70(0.62–0.78)

0.54(0.48–0.60)

0.83(0.75–0.91)

0.45(0.37–0.53)

Functional valueof the product

0.90(0.82–0.97)

0.72(0.64–0.80)

0.35(0.29–0.41)

Functional valueprice

0.69(0.63–0.75)

0.37(0.29–0.45)

Emotional value 0.51(0.43–0.59)

Social value

a Each box contains the correlation between the factors and in parentheses the confidence interval of thecorrelation.


of ‘My expectations of the establishment have been met at all times’ (0.86). For sat-

isfaction with the tiles the highest factor loading is ‘I am satisfied with the tiles

acquired’ (0.90).

The divergent validity of the scale is also verified, as the confidence interval of the

correlation between satisfaction with the establishment and with the tiles does not

include unity (0.61–0.77). The composite reliability of the scale is high, all the stat-

istics determining it being higher than 0.86.

Analysis of Dimensions, Reliability and Validity of the scale of Trust in the

Establishment

Trust in the establishment is formed by two dimensions: honesty and benevolence

(Table 5). Honesty refers to the establishment’s technical and human capacity to

fulfil its obligations (0.85), the positive experiences provided (0.85), reputation

(0.85) and the degree of fulfilment of promises (0.76). Benevolence includes the

establishment’s concern for its customers’ well-being (0.94) and problems (0.87),

and the support and assistance that it gives them (0.87).

Convergent validity is ratified, as the factor loadings are higher than 0.5, and

because no item contributes to the formation of a dimension other than its own. Diver-

gent validity is demonstrated because the value of the correlation between the factors

is 0.80 and the confidence interval does not include unity (0.70–0.90). The statistics

that determine composite reliability are higher than 0.90, thus ratifying it.

Analysis of Dimensions, Reliability and Validity of the scale of Commitment

to the Establishment

The consumer’s commitment to the establishment has one affective dimension and

one cognitive one (Table 6). The affective dimension makes reference to courtesy

(0.88), to feeling at ease (0.78) and to loyalty to the establishment (0.73). And the

TABLE 5

CONSUMER’S TRUST

Honesty Benevolence

It has shown at all times that it has the capacity to fulfil itsobligations (skills and technical and human means)

0.85 –

It has always provided me with positive experiences 0.85 –It has always had a good reputation 0.85 –It has always kept its promises 0.76 –It has been concerned for my well-being at all times – 0.94It has constantly been concerned about my problems – 0.87I have always been able to count on its support and assistance – 0.87

Fit of the model: Chi-square ¼ 17.97, df ¼ 13, P-value ¼ 0.15853, RMSEA ¼ 0.031, GFI ¼ 0.99,AGFI ¼ 0.97Discriminant validity. Correlation between the factors and in parentheses the confidence interval of the cor-relation: 0.80 (0.70–0.90)Composite reliability of trust–honesty: 0.90Composite reliability of trust–benevolence: 0.92Total composite reliability of trust: 0.95


cognitive dimension refers to the effort involved in changing establishment (0.91) and

to the non-existence of other alternatives (0.72).

To the extent that the factor loadings are higher than 0.5, the scale that measures

the commitment to the establishment possesses convergent validity, which is corro-

borated by the fact that each of the items contributes to the formation of a single

dimension. The confidence interval of the correlation between the two dimensions

obtained is between 0.40 and 0.60, thus ratifying divergent validity as it does not

include unity. The reliability of the scale is also accepted because the value of the stat-

istics of composite reliability are greater than 0.80.

The four confirmatory factor analyses carried out to measure the dimensions,

reliability and validity of the scales analysed are adequate, the probabilities associated

with the chi-squared statistics being greater than 0.05, the statistics GFI and AGFI

close to unity and the RMSEAs close to zero. Furthermore, all the parameters of

these models are significant, the associated t-values exceeding 1.96.

Causal Link between Perceived Value of a Purchase and the Relationship Quality of

an Establishment

Finally we test the overall model in which the causal relationships among value, sat-

isfaction, trust and commitment are established. For the development of this model

we performed a path analysis, taking the weighted mean values of the above vari-

ables. The weighting depends on the factor loadings obtained in the earlier confirma-

tory factor analysis. With the model thus obtained we will test the hypotheses put

forward (Figure 2).

The path analysis carried out to establish the causal relationships among the vari-

ables being studied is adequate, because the probability of the chi-squared statistic is

0.05644 (higher than 0.05), and the statistics GFI and AGFI are close to unity (0.97

and 0.96, respectively) and RMSEA is close to zero (0.030). Also all the parameters

TABLE 6

CONSUMER’S COMMITMENT

Commitmentaffective

Commitmentcognitive

They have always been courteous and friendly 0.88 –I have always felt at ease in the establishment 0.78 –I feel very loyal 0.73 –It would take me too much time, effort and/or money to buy in another

establishment– 0.91

There are no alternatives – 0.72

Fit of the model: Chi-square ¼ 2.28, df ¼ 2, P-value ¼ 0.31992, RMSEA ¼ 0.019, GFI ¼ 0.99,AGFI ¼ 0.98.Discriminant validity. Correlation between the factors and in parentheses the confidence interval of the cor-relation: 0.50 (0.40–0.60).Composite reliability of affective commitment: 0.84.Composite reliability of cognitive commitment: 0.80.Total composite reliability of commitment: 0.90.


of the model are significant because the associated t-values are always higher than

1.96.

The perceived value of a purchase produces effects on the consumer’s satisfaction

both with the establishment and with the product. Satisfaction with the establishment

is determined by the emotional value (0.42), the functional value of the product (0.32)

and the functional value of the personnel (0.12), and satisfaction with the product is

influenced fundamentally by the functional value of the product (0.53), though also by

the emotional value (0.18) and the functional value of the personnel (0.12). These

results allow us to affirm that the fourth working hypothesis, that the perceived

value of a purchase is an antecedent of the consumer’s satisfaction with the establish-

ment, is fulfilled.

In relation to the influence of the perceived value of the establishment on the con-

sumer’s trust in the establishment, we determine that perceived value influences the

two dimensions of trust: honesty and benevolence. In the first case, honesty is deter-

mined by emotional value (0.32) and by social value (0.12). That is, in this case the

functional aspects of perceived value have no explanatory power. Benevolence is

determined by social value (0.28), the functional value of the personnel (0.20),

emotional value (0.12) and by the functional value of the establishment (0.09).

These results determine the fulfilment of hypothesis 5, establishing that the perceived

value of a purchase is an antecedent of the consumer’s trust in the establishment.

We next analyse the effects of the perceived value of a purchase on the consu-

mer’s commitment to the establishment, in both affective and cognitive dimensions.

FIGURE 2

CAUSAL RELATIONSHIPS


TABLE 7

DEGREE OF FULFILMENT OF THE HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis Relationships obtained ParameterFulfilment of

hypothesis

H4 Value ! Satisfaction with theestablishment

Emotional value ! Satisfactionwith the establishment

0.42 3

Functional value product! Satisfaction with theestablishment

0.32

Functional value personnel! Satisfaction with theestablishment

0.12

H4 Value ! Satisfaction with theproduct

Functional value product! Satisfaction with the product

0.53

Emotional value ! Satisfactionwith the product

0.18

Functional value personnel! Satisfaction with the product

0.12

H5 Value ! Trust–honesty Emotional value ! Trust–honesty 0.32 3

Social value ! Trust–honesty 0.12H5 Value ! Trust–benevolence Social value ! Trust–benevolence 0.28

Functional value personnel! Trust–benevolence

0.20

Emotional value ! Trust–benevolence

0.12

Functional value establishment! Trust–benevolence

0.09

H6 Value ! Affective commitment Social value ! Affectivecommitment

0.20 3

Emotional value ! Affectivecommitment

0.18

Functional value establishment! Affective commitment

0.12

H6 Value ! Cognitive commitment Social value ! Cognitivecommitment

0.43

Functional value price ! Cognitivecommitment

0.18

Functional value establishment! Cognitive commitment

0.12

H3 Satisfaction ! Trust–honesty Satisfaction with the establishment! Trust–honesty

0.43 3

Satisfaction with the product! Trust–honesty

0.11

H3 Satisfaction ! Trust–benevolence

Satisfaction with the establishment! Trust–benevolence

0.29

H1 Satisfaction ! Affectivecommitment

Satisfaction with theestablishment! Affectivecommitment

0.24 3

H1 Satisfaction ! Cognitivecommitment

–

H2 Trust ! Affective commitment Trust–honesty! Affectivecommitment

0.13 3

Trust–benevolence!Affectivecommitment

0.13

H2 Trust ! Cognitive commitment –


Affective commitment is determined by social value (0.20), emotional value (0.18)

and the functional value of the establishment (0.12). And the antecedents of cognitive

commitment are social value (0.43), the functional value of price (0.18) and the func-

tional value of the establishment (0.12). These results determine that the sixth hypoth-

esis is fulfilled.

Therefore, at a general level, the perceived value of a purchase is an antecedent of

the relationship quality, i.e. increases in perceived value at transaction level will bring

with them increases in the relationship quality.

Once the effects of the perceived value of a purchase have been analysed, we

study the internal links in the relationship quality mega-construct. With respect to

the influence of satisfaction on the consumer’s trust, the honesty dimension is deter-

mined by satisfaction with the establishment (0.43) and by satisfaction with the

product (0.11), while the benevolence dimension is only affected by satisfaction

with the product (0.29). These results permit us to establish that hypothesis 3 is ful-

filled, as satisfaction is an antecedent of trust.

As to the influence of satisfaction on commitment, only satisfaction with the

establishment influences the affective dimension of commitment (0.24). On the

other hand, satisfaction with the product exercises no significant influence on commit-

ment. From these results we can deduce that hypothesis 1 is fulfilled, satisfaction

being an antecedent of commitment to the establishment, though only in its affective

dimension.

The last group of relationships refers to the effects of trust on commitment. In this

case we observe that affective commitment is determined, with equal intensity, by the

two dimensions of trust: honesty (0.13) and benevolence (0.13). However, cognitive

commitment is not determined by any of the dimensions of commitment. With the

TABLE 8

TOTAL AND INDIRECT EFFECTSa

Effects

Antecedents

Satisfactionwith the

establishment

Satisfactionwith theproduct

Trust–honesty

Trust–benevolence

Affectivecommitment

Cognitivecommitment

Functional value ofestablishment

0.09 0.13 (0.01) 0.12

Functional value ofpersonnel

0.12 0.12 0.06 (0.06) 0.24 (0.03) 0.07 (0.07)

Functional value ofproduct

0.32 0.53 0.20 (0.20) 0.09 (0.09) 0.12 (0.12)

Functional value price 0.18Emotional value 0.42 0.18 0.52 (0.20) 0.24 (0.12) 0.38 (0.20)Social value 0.12 0.28 0.25 (0.05) 0.43Satisfaction with the

establishment0.43 0.29 0.34 (0.10)

Satisfaction with theproduct

0.11 0.01 (0.01)

Trust–honesty 0.13Trust–benevolence 0.13

aEach cell shows the total effect (direct and indirect) of the causal relationships, and in parentheses the indir-ect effects.


relationships thus obtained we can establish that hypothesis 2 is fulfilled: trust is an

antecedent of commitment, though only in its affective dimension.

Together with the direct effects analysed above, it is also appropriate to consider

the indirect ones, which determine the total influence of one variable on another

(Table 8). For example, emotional value influences trust–honesty both directly

(0.32) and indirectly through satisfaction with the establishment (0.42 �

0.43 ¼ 0.18) and satisfaction with the product (0.18 � 0.11 ¼ 0.02). This generates

a total effect of emotional value on trust-honesty of 0.52 (0.32þ 0.18þ 0.02).

From the analysis of the intensity of the total effects we can determine that

emotional value is the variable that exercises the strongest influence on the rest of

the variables, followed by the functional value of the product, the social value, satis-

faction with the establishment, the functional value of the personnel, the functional

value of the establishment, the functional value price, trust (both honesty and bene-

volence) and finally satisfaction with the product.

CONCLUSIONS

Theoretical and Business Implications

The study permits us to draw a first conclusion with regard to the importance of low

level affective processes, captured in emotional value, which influences practically all

the variables of the model. Although Berkowitz [1993] describes them as ‘crude and

primitive’, these relatively basic and automatic associative processes have key conse-

quences in satisfaction, trust and the consumer’s commitment to the establishment.

The first moments are important because they generate an impression in the purchaser

that remains for a long time. A key antecedent of relationship quality is therefore in

the most basic feelings (emotional value) derived from the individual transactions

between the establishment and the consumer.

At a more general level we confirm the predominant role played by affect in the

formation of attitudes, in interaction with cognitive elements. As posited by Berko-

witz [1993] and Peter and Olson [1999], the results show how affective and cognitive

systems interact with each other. This interaction is important in the development of

inferred beliefs, but can also moderate the effects of some beliefs or affects on other

beliefs or affects.

Another important aspect to highlight is the effects of social value. The Expect-

ancy–Value Model considers that subjective norms, together with the attitude to

the object, are determinants of the behaviour intention. In this sense, commitment

is perhaps the variable with the strongest conative component in the model. While

trust is an affective predisposition, favourable or otherwise, commitment is an

action tendency, since it involves dedicating an effort to maintain the relationship

in the long term and having demonstrated the will to do so [Dwyer et al., 1987;

Gundlach et al., 1995; Moorman et al., 1992; Morgan and Hunt, 1994]. Social

value is an approximation to subjective norms, and is observed to be the factor

with greatest total and direct effect on cognitive commitment, and the second greatest

direct effect (the third in total effect) on affective commitment. According to the


postulates of this theory, therefore, social value can have a determining influence on

the intention to repurchase in the establishment which will moderate the effect of the

attitude towards that establishment.

The cognitive variables (functional value of the product and of the personnel)

exercise their greatest influence on satisfaction, which is the high level affective

process that takes place immediately after the purchase in the establishment. Their

effects seem somewhat diluted compared to variables like trust and commitment,

where variables of an affective and social type emerge. It seems, therefore, that cog-

nitive beliefs have more important effects in the short term, which become diluted

with the passage of time, whereas affect and social norms have less effect in short

term evaluations, but their importance increases in the long term. It is fundamental,

therefore, from the point of view of relational marketing and of managing relation-

ships in the long term, to target the affective and social aspects of the consumer.

Nevertheless, from the results of this study we cannot infer that some variables are

more important than others in repeat purchase behaviour.

At management level, the study also allows some recommendations to be pro-

posed. The establishment must provide value fundamentally through the different

transactions that it undertakes with the consumer, and more specifically by caring

for the quality of the product and the professionalism of its personnel. These are

key aspects for achieving consumer satisfaction. It is also necessary for the establish-

ment to attempt to control emotional aspects relating to the consumer’s comfort with

the product, generation of positive feelings, predisposition to help, that the consumer

feels at ease and calm in making decisions. To achieve this it is necessary to pay atten-

tion to the assortment of products and services offered by the establishment, so that

they seek the comfort of the consumer. Likewise the customer contact personnel

and the design of the sales floor play a fundamental role, because they help to generate

positive feelings of relaxation and calm in the consumer, and show the predisposition

to help. In this sense the merchandising and selection, training and motivation of the

personnel in sales techniques are key elements in achieving the trust and the commit-

ment of the consumer, and therefore long term commercial relationships.

One aspect that is difficult to manage is the consumer’s social beliefs. The estab-

lishment must try to be acknowledged and accepted by the consumer’s social milieu.

In this sense the results seem to show two paths. The first is to provide value to all the

customers who come to the establishment, by means of the instruments already men-

tioned. This implies a homogenisation of the value offered to purchasers, which does

not mean a standardisation, since it is necessary to have the empathy necessary to

satisfy each customer. The second path is a communication that targets the social

aspects, the need to belong and to integrate. The strategy of the brand and the

choice of its positioning is an aspect that should also be cared for by the

establishment.

Limitations and Future Lines of Research

The limitations of the study lie in the type of product and establishment analysed.

Ceramics are a product of medium involvement and low product differentiation, in

that there are no brands widely recognised by consumers. Studying the cases of


establishments that sell products with higher or lower involvement, and products with

a higher degree of product differentiation, would perhaps offer conclusions of interest

with regard to the generalisation of the results of this study.

Another obvious limitation is the scope of the sample. It is concentrated in a par-

ticular country, so it should be replicated with samples from other countries.

Future lines of research could analyse the complete model proposed by the Theory

of Planned Behaviour [Ajzen, 1991]. It seems to be of special importance to incorpor-

ate the attitude and the intention to purchase, as well as to complete the social norms.

A complete model of repeat purchase behaviour and of consumer loyalty could thus

be obtained, based on a solid theoretical framework widely tested in psychology.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, I. (1991) The theory of planned behaviour, Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, 50, pp.179–211.

Ajzen, I. (2001) Nature and operation of attitudes, Annual Review of Psychology, 52, pp.27–58.Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (2000) Attitudes and the attitude–behavior relation: reasoned and automatic

processes. In W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone (eds.), European Review of Social Psychology, Chichester:John Wiley & Sons, pp.1–33.

Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. (1990) The measurement an antecedents of affective, continuance andnormative commitment on the organization, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, pp.1–18.

Anderson, J.C. and Narus, J.A. (1990) A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm workingpartnerships, Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), pp.42–58.

Anderson, J.C. and Weitz, B. (1992) The use of pledges to build and sustain commitment in distributionchannels, Journal of Marketing Research, 29, pp.18–54.

Anderson, R.E. and Srinivasan, S.S. (2003) E-satisfaction and e-loyalty: a contingency framework,Psychology and Marketing, 20(2), pp.123–38.

Anderson, E.W., Fornell, E. and Lehmann, D. (1994) Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability:findings from Sweden, Journal of Marketing, 58 (July), pp.53–66.

Baker, T.L., Simpson, P.M. and Siguaw, J.A. (1999) The impact of suppliers’ perceptions of resellermarket orientation on key relationship constructs, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,27(1), pp.50–57.

Berkowitz, L. (1993) Towards a general theory of anger and emotional aggression: implications of the cog-nitive-neoassociationistic perspective for the analysis of anger and other emotions. In R.S. Wyer andT.K. Srull (eds.), Advances in Social Cognition, vol.6, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.1–46.

Berry, L.L. (1995) Relationship marketing of services – growing interest, emerging perspectives, Journalof the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(4), pp.236–45.

Bigne, J.E., Moliner, M.A. and Callarisa, L.J. (2001) El valor y la fidelizacion de clientes: una propuesta demodelo dinamico de comportamiento, Revista Europea de Direccion y Economıa de la Empresa, 9(3),pp.65–78.

Bitner, M.J. (1995) Building service relationships: it’s all about promises, Journal of the Academy ofMarketing Science, 23(4), pp.246–51.

Bloemer, J. and Odekerken-Schroder, G. (2002) Store satisfaction and store loyalty explained by customer-and store-related factors, Journal of Customer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior,15, pp.68–80.

Bolton, R.N. and Drew, J.H. (1991) A multistage model of customer’s assessments of service quality andvalue, Journal of Consumer Research, 17, pp.375–84.

Bromiley, P. and Cummings, L.L. (1996) Transaction costs in organizations with trust. In R. Bies, R.Lewicti and B. Sheppard (eds.), Research on Negotiation in Organizations, Greenwich, CT: JAI,pp.219–47.

Cronin, J. Jr, Brady, M., Brand, R.R., Hightower, R.Jr and Shemwell, D.J. (1997) A cross-sectional test ofthe effect and conceptualization of service value, Journal of Services Marketing, 11(6), pp.375–91.

Cronin, J. Jr, Brady, M. and Hult, T. (2000) Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfactionon consumer behavioral intentions in service environments, Journal of Retailing, 76(2), pp.193–218.


Crosby, L.A., Evans, K.R. and Cowles, D. (1990) Relationship quality in services selling: an interpersonalinfluence perspective, Journal of Marketing, 54 (July), pp.68–81.

Czepiel, J.A. (1990) Service encounters and service relationships: implications for research, Journal ofBusiness Research, 20(1), pp.13–21.

De Ruyter, J.K., Wetzels, M., Lemmink, J. and Mattson, J. (1997) The dynamics of the servicedelivery process: a value-based approach, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14,pp.231–43.

De Ruyter, J.K, Wetzels, M. and Bloemer, J. (1998) On the relationship between perceived service quality,service loyalty and switching costs, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(5),pp.436–53.

Delgado-Ballester, E. and Munuera-Aleman, J.L. (2001) Brand trust in the context of consumer loyalty,European Journal of Marketing, 35(11/12), pp.1238–58.

Dodds, W.B., Monroe, K.B. and Grewal, D. (1991) Effects of price, brand and store information on buyers’product evaluations, Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (August), pp.307–19.

Doney, P.M. and Cannon, J.P. (1997) An examination of the nature of trust in buyer–seller relationships,Journal of Marketing, 61, pp.35–51.

Dorsch, M.J., Swanson, S.R. and Kelley, S.W. (1998) The role of relationship quality in the stratification ofvendors as perceived by customers, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), pp.128–42.

Dumond, E.J. (2000) Value management: an underlying framework, International Journal of Operations &Production Management, 20(9), pp.1062–77.

Durvasula, S., Lysonski, S., Mehta, S.C. and Tang, B.P. (2004) Forging relationships with services: theantecedents that have and impact on behavioral outcomes in the life insurance industry, Journal ofFinancial Services Marketing, 8(4), pp.314–26.

Dwyer, F.R., Schurr, P.H. and Oh, S. (1987) Developing buyer–seller relationships, Journal of Marketing,51 (April), pp.11–27.

Eagly, A.H. and Chaiken, S. (1993) The Psychology of Attitudes, Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and

Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Ganesan, S. (1994) Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer–seller orientation in buyer–seller

relationships, Journal of Marketing, 58 (April), pp.1–19.Ganesan, S. and Hess, R. (1997) Dimensions and levels of trust: implications for commitment to a relation-

ship, Marketing Letters, 8(4), pp.439–48.Garbarino, E. and Johnson, M.K. (1999) The different roles of satisfaction, trust and commitment in

customer relationships, Journal of Marketing, 63 (April), pp.70–87.Gassenheimer, J.B., Houston, F.S. and Davis, J. (1998) The role of economic value, social value and

perceptions of fairness in interorganizational relationship retention decisions, Journal of Academy ofMarketing Science, 26(4), pp.322–37.

Geyskens, I. and Steenkamp, J.B. (1995) An investigation into the joint effects of trust and interdependenceon relationship commitment, 24th Annual EMAC Conference Proceedings, Paris, pp.351–71.

Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.B., Scheer, L. and Kumar, N. (1996) The effects of trust andinterdependence on relationship commitment, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 51,pp.303–18.

Giner-Sorolla, R. (1999) Affect in attitude: immediate and deliberative perspectives. In S. Chaiken andY. Trope (eds.), Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, New York: Guilford, pp.441–61.

Grewal, D., Monroe, K. and Krishnan, R. (1998) The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers’perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions, Journal of Marketing,62(2), pp.46–59.

Gronroos, C. (1990) Service Management and Marketing. Managing the Moments of Truth in ServiceCompetition, Lanham, MD: Lexington Books and MacMillan, Inc.

Gummesson, E. (1987) The new marketing – developing long-term interactive relationships, Long RangePlanning, 20(4), pp.10–20.

Gundlach, G.T., Achrol, R.S. and Mentzer, J.T. (1995) The structure of commitment in exchange, Journalof Marketing, 59 (January), pp.78–92.

Haddock, G. and Zanna, M.P. (1999) Affect, cognition, and social attitudes, European Review of SocialPsychology, 10, pp.5–100.

Havlena, W.J. and Holbrook, M.B. (1986) The varieties of consumption experience: comparing twotypologies of emotion in consumer behavior, Journal of Consumer Research, 13, pp.394–404.

Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P. and Gremler, D.D. (2002) An integration of relational benefits andrelationship quality, Journal of Service Research, 4(3), pp.230–47.


Hennig-Thurau, T. and Klee, A.U. (1997) The impact of customer satisfaction and relationship quality oncustomer retention: a critical reassessment and model development, Psychology and Marketing, 14(8),pp.737–65.

Hunt, S.D. (1977) The three dichotomies model of marketing: an elaboration of issues. In C.C. Slater (ed.),Macromarketing: Distribute Processes From A Societal Perspective, Boulder, CO: Business ResearchDivision, University of Colorado, pp.52–6.

Kempf, D.S. (1999) Attitude formation from product trial: distinct roles of cognition and affect for hedonicand functional products, Psychology and Marketing, 16, pp.35–50.

Konovsky, M.A. and Cropanzano, R. (1991) Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor ofemployee attitudes and job performance, Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, pp.689–707.

Kramer, R.M. (1999) Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions,Annual Review of Psychology, 50, pp.569–98.

Kramer, R.M., Brewer, M.B. and Hanna, B. (1996) Collective trust and collective action in organizations:the decision to trust as a social decision. In R.M. Kramer and T.R. Tyler (eds.), Trust in Organizations,Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp.357–89.

Kumar, N., Scheer, L.K. and Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. (1995) The effects of perceived interdependence ondealer attitudes, Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), pp.348–56.

Lapierre, J. (2000) Customer-perceived value in an industrial context, Journal of Business and IndustrialMarketing, 15(2/3), pp.122–40

Lavine, H., Thomsen, C.J., Zanna, M.P. and Borgida, E. (1998) On the primacy of affect in thedetermination of attitudes and behaviour: the moderating role of affective–cognitive ambivalence,Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, pp.398–421.

Marketing Science Institute (MSI) (2004) http://www.msi.org/msi/rp0204.cfm#,Overview.McAllister, D. (1995) Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in

organizations, Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), pp.24–59.McDougall, G.H.G. and Levesque, T. (2000) Customer satisfaction with services: putting perceived value

into the equation, Journal of Services Marketing, 14(5), pp.392–410.Meyer, J. and Allen, N. (1997) Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research and Application,

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Moliner, M.A. and Callarisa, L.J. (1997) El marketing relacional o la superacion del paradigma

transaccional, Revista Europea de Direccion y Economıa de la Empresa, 6(2), pp.67–80.Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Deshpande, R. (1992) Relationships between providers and users of market

research, Journal of Marketing Research, 29 (August), pp.314–28.Moorman, C., Deshpande, R. and Zaltman, G. (1993) Factors affecting trust in market research

relationships, Journal of Marketing, 57 (January), pp.81–101.Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994) The commitment–trust theory of relationship marketing, Journal of

Marketing, 58 (July), pp.20–38.Oh, H. (1999) Service quality, customer satisfaction and customer value: an holistic perspective,

International Journal of Hospitality Management, 18, pp.67–82.Oh, H. (2003) Price fairness and its asymmetric effects on overall price, quality and value judgements: the

case of an upscale hotel, Tourism Management, 24(4), pp.387–399.Oliver, R.L. (1981) Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction processes in retail setting, Journal of

Retailing, 57, pp.25–48.Oliver, R.L. (1997) Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Customer, New York: McGraw-Hill.Oliver, R. (1999) Whence consumer loyalty?, Journal of Marketing, 63 (special issue), pp.33–45.Palmer, A. and Bejou, D. (1994) Buyer–seller relationships: a conceptual model and empirical

investigation, Journal of Marketing Management, 10(6), pp.495–512.Palmer, A. and Ponsonby, S. (2002) The social construction of new marketing paradigms: the influence of

personal perspective, Journal of Marketing Management, 18, pp.173–92.Parasuraman, A. (1997) Reflections on gaining competitive advantage through customer value, Journal of

the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), pp.154–61.Patterson, P.G. and Spreng, R.A. (1997) Modeling the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction

and repurchase intentions in a business-to-business service context: an empirical examination,International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8(5), pp.415–22.

Peter, J.P. and Olson, J.C. (1999) Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy, 5th edition, New York:Irwin McGraw-Hill.

Peterson, R.A. (1995) Relationship marketing and the consumer, Journal of the Academy of MarketingScience, 23(4), pp.278–81

Rapp, S. and Collins, T. (1991) El Nuevo Rumbo del Marketing, Madrid: Ed. McGraw-Hill.


Rapp, S. and Collins, T. (1996) El Nuevo Maxi-Marketing, Madrid: Ed. McGraw-Hill.Ravald, A. and Gronroos, C. (1996) The value concept and relationship marketing, European Journal of

Marketing, 30(2), pp.19–30.Rotter, J.B. (1967) A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust, Journal of Personality, 35(4),

pp.651–65.Rust, T., Zeithaml, V. and Lemmon, K. (2000) Driving Customer Equity, New York: The Free Press.Rusbult, C.E. (1980) Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: a test of the investment model,

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, pp.172–86.Rusbult, C.E. (1983) A longitudinal test of the investment model: the development (and deterioration) of

satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements, Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 45(1), pp.101–17.

Sanchez, J., Callarisa, L., Rodrıguez, R.M. and Moliner, M.A. (2006) Perceived value of the purchase of atourism product, Tourism Management, 27, pp.394–409.

Schwarz, N. and Clore, G.L. (1996) Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In E.T. Higgins and A.W.Kruglanski (eds.), Social Psychology Handbook of Basic Principles, New York: Guilford, pp.433–65.

Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I. and Gross, L.G. (1991a) Consumption Values and Market Choice, Cincinnati,OH: South Western Publishing.

Sheth, J.N., Newman, B.I. and Gross, L.G. (1991b) Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumptionvalues, Journal of Business Research, 22 (March), pp.159–70.

Shiv, B. and Fedorikhin, A. (1999) Heart and mind in conflict: the interplay of affect and cognition inconsumer decision making, Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), pp.278–92.

Singh, J. and Sirdeshmukh, D. (2000) Agency and trust mechanisms in consumer satisfaction and loyaltyjudgements, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), pp.150–67.

Sinha, I. and DeSarbo, W.S. (1998) An integrated approach toward the spatial modeling of perceived cus-tomer value, Journal of Marketing Research, XXXV (May), pp.236–49.

Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J. and Sabol, B. (2002) Consumer trust, value and loyalty in relational exchanges,Journal of Marketing, 66(1), pp.15–37.

Smith, J.B. (1998) Buyer–seller relationships: similarity, relationship management, and quality,Psychology and Marketing, 15(1), pp.3–21.

Spreng, R.A., Dixon, A.L. and Olshavsky, R.W. (1993) The impact of perceived value on consumer satis-faction, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behaviour, 6, pp.50–55.

Sweeney, J.C. and Soutar, G. (2001) Consumer perceived value: the development of multiple item scale,Journal of Retailing, 77(2), pp.203–20.

Szymanski, D.M. and Henard, D.H. (2001) Customer satisfaction: a meta-analysis of the empiricalevidence, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(1), pp.16–35.

Tesser, A. and Martin, L. (1996) The psychology of evaluation. In E.T. Higgins and A.W. Kruglanski (eds.),Social Psychology Handbook of Basic Principles, New York: Guilford, pp.400–432.

Van der Pligt, J., Zeelenberg, M., Van Dijk, W.W., de Vries, N.K. and Richard, R. (1998) Affect, attitudesand decisions: let’s be more specific. In W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone(eds.), European Review of SocialPsychology, Chichester, UK: Wiley, vol.8, pp.33–66.

Wetzels, M., de Ruyter, K. and Van Birgelen, M. (1998) Marketing service relationships: the role ofcommitment, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 13(4/5), pp.406–23.

Woodall, T. (2003) Conceptualising ‘value for the customer’: an attributional, structural and dispositionalanalysis, Academy of Marketing Science Review, 12, pp.1–42.

Woodruff, R. (1997) Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage, Journal of the Academy ofMarketing Science, 25, pp.139–53.

Young, L. and Denize, S. (1997) Towards measuring commitment in business service relationships.Working Paper, School of Marketing, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.

Zajonc, R.B. (1980) Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences, American Psychology, 35,pp.117–23.

Zeithaml, V. (1988) Consumer perceptions of price, quality and value: a means–end model and synthesis ofevidence, Journal of Marketing, 52 (July), pp.2–22.


relationship quality of an establishment and perceived value of … · javier sa´nchez-garcia,...

Documents