Consumer research in the restaurant environment.
Part 2: Research design and analytical methods
Keywords
Customer satisfaction,
Restaurants, Hong Kong
Abstract
In Part 1, a model of dining
satisfaction and return patronage
was developed and described.
Based on extensive review of the
relevant consumer behaviour lit-
erature the model was developed
and underpinned by the disconfir-
mation and expectancy theory. As
noted in the article, disconfirma-
tion theory is widely accepted as
an account of the process by
which customers develop feelings
of satisfaction or dissatisfaction,
that is, when customers compare
new dining experiences with some
basis that they have developed
from prior experiences. On the
other hand, the assumption that a
customer will weigh various res-
taurant attributes is based on
expectancy theory. In the majority
of studies using disconfirmation
theory, expectations are formed
according to customers' pre-ex-
perience beliefs and standards
that they use to measure their
purchase experience. These the-
ories bring together the social,
psychological and cultural con-
cepts into four distinct groups of
variables: input variables both
internal and external, process
variables and output variables
(Lowenberg et al., 1979; Finkel-
stein, 1989). This paper is a
continuation and explains: how
the model of dining satisfaction
and return patronage was opera-
tionalised, that is, how the re-
search instrument was developed;
how the sample size and survey
procedures were developed and
conducted; and how the selection
of analytical procedures was con-
ceived.
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
# MCB University Press
[ISSN 0959-6119]
JaksÏa Kivela
Associate Professor, Department of Hotel and Tourism Management,
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, People's Republic of China
John Reece
Lecturer in Psychology, Department of Psychology and Intellectual Disability Studies,
RMIT University, Bundoora, Australia
Robert Inbakaran
Lecturer in Tourism, Department of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure,
RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
1. Operationalisation of the model
of dining satisfaction and return
patronage
Measures of dining experiences, attribute
importance, customer expectations and sa-
tisfaction have been diverse and dependent
upon the domain of research, in both the
number of attributes and level of abstraction.
In the hospitality and tourism context, nu-
merous service quality research instruments
have been used to measure customer satis-
faction. However, in the restaurant context
(excluding the fast-food category) there is a
lack of survey instrument development, with
the exception of guest comment cards.
Equally, service quality models such as
SERVQUAL and DINQUAL have not been
able to identify the salient attributes that are
particular to restaurant operations. It could
be argued that restaurateurs and restaurant
marketers continue to be hampered by both
the lack of appropriate customer feedback
and problems related to the content validity
of guest comment cards, i.e. they measure
post-dining perceptions only. In addition, due
to high levels of fragmentation and diversi-
fication in both the range of products, i.e.
menus and menu items and market seg-
ments, it is difficult to generalise restaurant
customer satisfaction results. This is because
restaurant industries have a distinct product
structure that is differentiated by price,
location, theme/ambience, service level, cui-
sine and style, which at the same time
demand a wide variety of market segments
for the same products. It must also be noted
that until this study, similar dining experi-
ence studies have not been undertaken in
Hong Kong. It was concluded that there was a
lack of appropriate research instruments
used for measuring dining satisfaction, so a
new research instrument was developed for
this study.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
http://www.emerald-library.com
Development of questionnaire (research
instrument)
For the purpose of this study, a questionnaire
listing 28 restaurant attributes (see Appen-
dix) was developed as a result of pilot testing,
and was subsequently used to operationalise
and test the model which was described in
Part 1 of the paper series. To develop the
questionnaire a series of three semi-struc-
tured face-to-face interviews (Delphi techni-
que) were conducted with:
1 Hong Kong Polytechnic University
(HKPU) hotel and catering management
faculty (n = 3 6 6);
2 Maitre'ds in Category 2 restaurants
(n = 3 6 6); and
3 a systematic sample of diners (every 5th
customer who walked into the restaurant,
n = 3 6 20),
in various theme/ambience[1] restaurants in
the Tsim Sha Tsui area of Hong Kong (see
Table I). The selection of restaurants for the
pilot survey was based on a convenience
sample because the researcher was familiar
with the operations. The purpose of the
interviews was to elicit opinions from re-
spondents about the following questions:
1 What restaurant attributes did they nor-
mally associate theme/ambience restau-
rants with?
2 What were their most likely reasons for
dining out?
3 What restaurant attributes were impor-
tant to them when they dined out in
theme/ambience restaurants?
The qualitative data from the first-round
interviews were then collated for common-
ality and sorted under the following cate-
gories:
1 food factors;
2 service factors;
3 ambience factors;
4 convenience factors; and
5 a restaurant that offers . . . x (ambience/
service/product) factors.
[ 269 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
Table I
Restaurant categories
Category 1 Category 2
Fine dining or gourmet Theme or ambience
restaurants restaurants
Formal fine dining Formal authentic
(reconstructed atmosphere)
Informal panoramic Informal authentic
(reconstructed atmosphere)
Formal panoramic Informal entertainment ±
theme
Focus is on gastronomy; Presentation of
sophisticated service; reconstructed theme or
elegant ambience; authenticity, i.e. ambience
spectacular views or and food style
location May be a fine dining
Usually features authentic
cuisine and decor
Category 3 Category 4
Family or popular Convenience or fast-food
restaurants restaurants
Informal Informal
Restaurants that offer Focus is on offering meals
well-cooked and presented, to be consumed on site
moderately priced meals and/or off-site for
for singles, groups and customers who do not
families. Meals that can want to prepare meals for
be substituted for home- themselves, and who
made lunch/dinner meals. require a quick convenient
Menu items that suit the economic meal, with fast
taste of children and service
adults. Pleasant informal
dining atmosphere.
Comfortable seating, and
table service

Round two interviewees (the same respon-
dents as in round-one interviews, except that
the customer sample was substituted by
another systematic selection of customers)
were then given the round-one attribute
listings and were asked to elaborate, add
additional items or disagree with the listings
in the context of three questions (above).
Items from the round-two interviews were
then sorted out for commonality under the
five categories and the same procedure for
third-round interviews and data analysis was
followed as for the second-round interviews.
The qualitative analysis of the final round is
highlighted in Table II. Based on these
findings, together with the findings of pre-
vious research noted in Part 1, the question-
naire for the study was developed.
Qualitative responses from the third-round
interviews and feedback that were similar
were compressed and identified with a gen-
eric title. For example, dining out reasons
such as ``get together with friends'', ``office
get together'', ``take family out'', ``regular
weekly dine-out'' were compressed and iden-
tified as ``I am dining out because of a social
occasion''. Responses such as ``it's conveni-
ent'', ``too tired/busy to cook at home'', ``it's
more comfortable to eat out'', ``I don't know
how to cook'', ``no need to wash-up after
meal'', ``convenient location'', were com-
pressed as ``I am dining out because it is
convenient''. These were then used as the
basis for developing the questionnaire.
The questionnaire, items anchored to a
five-point Likert (1967) scale, was then
[ 270 ]
developed to operationalise the model and
the following steps were employed in con-
structing the questionnaire:
. development of scales from a set of items
describing subjective perceptions (impor-
tance), (expectations) and (expectations
met) of restaurant attributes that were
related to the dining occasion, customer
characteristics and customers' situational
constraints; and
. validation of the scale.
Validity
Validity encapsulates two dimensions:
1 the discriminant validity of measured
expectations; and
2 the dimensionality of customer satisfac-
tion (construct validity).
Discriminant validity is established, for ex-
ample, when the between-factor item corre-
lations are lower than the within-factor item
correlations. Miller (1977), who argued that
multiple comparison standards for expecta-
tions do exist first, raised the questions
associated with discriminant validity. In
accordance with this viewpoint, customer
satisfaction researchers have measured dif-
ferent expectations in their studies.
Churchill and Surprenant (1982), Tse and
Wilton (1988) and Oh and Jeong (1996)
measured subjects' expectations on expected
[predicted] product performance, whereas
Cadotte et al. (1987) measured both product
norms and brand norms as comparison
standards. Boulding et al. (1993) included
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
Table II
Interview feedback results (items not in any particular order)
What attributes do you normally
associate theme/ambience
restaurants with?
Decor
Theme of the restaurant
Type and style of food
Foods which are not eaten at home
Different eating experience
Presentation of food
Nice tableware
Being served and attended to
Should be a happy place to go to
Feels comfortable to eat there
Nice view when dining
Variety of foods that are offered
Being a famous eating place
Being satisfied after dining
Offer experiences about different
foods and culture
Should be a place of entertainment
Welcoming environment
Which restaurant attributes are
What are your most likely reasons for important to you when you dine
dining out in theme/ambience out in theme/ambience
restaurants? restaurants?
It's convenient Freshness of food
Get together with friends Convenient location
Office get together Convenient parking
Too tired/busy to cook at home Polite staff
Regular weekly dine-out Suitable for children also
For a meeting Quality of food
Birthday party Presentation of food
On a date Friendly staff
Business lunch/dinner Food which is nutritious
At the end of the month (just got paid) High standard of service
To meet people Helpful staff
The restaurant was recommended Food which tastes good
To experience new foods Convenient parking
It's more comfortable to eat out Good portion size
Entertaining a visitor from overseas Clean staff
For a treat If the place is recommended
I was invited To experience different foods
Somewhere to go Staff that can explain the menu
Take family out Clean food
It's part of my job Good wine list
I don't know how to cook Unusual foods
I like different foods Clean place
When there is a special promotion on
No need to wash-up after meal
Convenient location

measures of ideal expectations along the
normative measures and found discriminant
validity between the two types of expecta-
tions. Elaborating further, the construct
validity is important to consider because it
addresses the question of what the survey,
and its measurement scale, is actually mea-
suring. On the other hand, content validity
focused on whether or not the items in the
survey adequately represented the construct
under study. For example, the customer
satisfaction construct developed and imple-
mented in this study was composed of three
different sub-dimensions relating to a res-
taurant's products and services:
1 expectations;
2 expectations met, i.e. perceived perfor-
mance; and
3 importance.
As noted in Part 1, this construct was derived
from the disconfirmation paradigm and ex-
pectancy-value theories where Barsky (1992)
argued that the disconfirmation paradigm is
generally accepted as the construct that best
explains customer satisfaction. It was also
argued that the impact of attribute impor-
tance on consumer decision making is also
widely recognised. Salient elements from
each of these research areas were brought
together to develop the customer satisfaction
model described in Part 1. For example, the
independent variables from the Delphi study
as well as those from the previous customer
satisfaction research identified in the litera-
ture review, namely supported Carman's
(1990) and Barsky's (1992) quality and dis-
confirmation models respectively, are almost
identical as those representing the indepen-
dent variables in this study. This also
supports the inclusion of these specific terms
as well as their relationship with each other.
The model gives a customer satisfaction
score as a result of the interaction of these
terms. This customer satisfaction score
(EM 6 I) is content-valid therefore. This is
because it contains survey information from
all three sub-dimensions. The degree of
content validity of the measurement scale
may be assessed by evaluating how closely
the survey items represent the notion of
customer satisfaction. The survey measures
for ``expectations met'' (EM) and ``impor-
tance'' (I) are also consistent with the find-
ings from the literature reviewed. These
terms, indicated separately on the survey
questionnaire, validate the concept and
components of customer satisfaction. A
[ 271 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
critical measure in this study is the result of
the comparison between customers indicat-
ing their willingness to ``return'' and their
satisfaction levels. This is based on the idea
which suggests that customers return to
restaurants because they are satisfied with
the restaurant ± nomological validity.
Therefore, those customers that the model
identified as ``satisfied'' were also willing to
``return'' (this will be highlighted by chi-
square analysis and the logistic regression
analysis in Part 3). It is argued, therefore,
that the measure of customer satisfaction
used in this study correlates in the theoreti-
cally predicted way with a measure of a
different ± nomologic, but related construct,
for example the ``return'', a position sup-
ported by Tull and Hawkins' (1990) study. The
content validity of the items (Kerlinger, 1986)
was checked by a convenience panel of diners
(n = 57), restaurant managers (n = 19), and
hotel and catering educators (n = 16). The
panel was asked to review the items and to
consider specifically:
. with which of the five attribute sets (food,
service, convenience, ambience, and a
restaurant that offers . . . factors) each
item was associated;
. the clarity of the items; and
. the likelihood of the items being sensitive
to the respondents.
As a result of panel analysis the question-
naire was modified for clarity; the size and
type of font and the sequence of questions
was adjusted, and the wording of some of the
items was modified. Also, the number of
items for expectations, importance and ex-
pectations met was reduced from the original
42 to 28 items shown in Table III.
The questionnaire was written in English
and was then translated into Cantonese using
a double translation method. The research
instrument was translated by the Depart-
ment of Chinese and Bilingual Studies at the
Hong Kong Polytechnic University. The
English version was translated by a profes-
sional translator into Cantonese, and the
Cantonese version was then translated back
into English by another professional trans-
lator. The researcher and both translators
agreed on the final Cantonese version, which
was adjusted for the Cantonese cultural
context while at the same time keeping the
conceptual meaning and the validity of the
constructs intact. Both versions of the ques-
tionnaire were then pilot tested. As a result
of pilot testing the layout of the instrument
was modified from the four single (A4 size
paper) page format to one single page (A3 size
paper) back-to-back. The language describing
some of the items was also modified and the
sequence of some of the demographic ques-
tions was adjusted. The rest of the question-
naire was not changed. The final version of
the questionnaire is presented in the Appen-
dix.
2. Hypotheses
Findings from previous research, the model
of dining satisfaction and return patronage,
together with the objectives of the study
(presented in Part 1) provided the foundation
for the development of the following research
hypotheses for testing:
Ha1 The difference between pre-dining per-
ceptions (PrDp) and post-dining per-
ceptions (PoDp) mean scores is
statistically significant.
Ha2 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the dining out frequency and
return patronage intentions.
Ha3 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the dining out occasions and
return patronage intentions.
Ha4 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the customers who have dined in
the restaurant before and return
patronage.

Table III
Number of items for expectations, importance and expectations met
Food Service
Presentation of food Friendly, polite, helpful staff
Menu item variety Attentive staff
Nutritious food Staff greeting customers
Tastiness of food Efficient service
Freshness of food Staff are willing to serve
Temperature of food Staff have food/beverage
knowledge
Sympathetic handling of
complaints
A restaurant that
Atmosphere Convenience (offers) . . .?
Level of comfort in the Handling of telephone Offers a new dining
restaurant reservations experience
Level of noise in the Parking convenience Offers food of a consistent
restaurant standard
View from the restaurant Feels comfortable to eat
Cleanliness of the there
restaurant Offers service of a
Dining privacy consistent standard
Restaurant's temperature
Restaurant's appearance
Staff appearance

[ 272 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
Ha5 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the dining frequency and the
dining-out occasion.
Ha6 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the customers' age and return
patronage intentions.
Ha7 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the customers' gender and return
patronage intentions.
Ha8 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the customers' occupation and
return patronage intentions.
Ha9 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the customers' income and re-
turn patronage intentions.
Ha10 There is a significant relationship be-
tween the customers' situational con-
straints such as time and money and
return patronage intentions.
Ha11 Satisfaction with the dining experience
leads to return patronage.
Ha12 Customers' satisfaction with the quality
of food results in a greater probability
of return than the satisfaction with
service.
Ha13 Customers' satisfaction with the quality
of food results in a greater probability
of return than the satisfaction with
ambience.
Ha14 Occupation and first-timers/repeaters
are better predictors of return than the
occasional factors for dining out, and
customers' income level.
Ha15 Customers' dining-out frequency has a
positive effect on return patronage in-
tentions.
3. Research methods
The research methods used in this study
were based on gathering of primary data via
a self-administered questionnaire. A review
of hospitality and consumer behaviour lit-
erature and secondary data was used in
support. The purpose of the field survey
research was, first, to identify and address
the deficiencies in the current restaurant
consumer behaviour literature; second, to
identify and measure the strength and direc-
tion of the relationship between dining
satisfaction and return patronage; and, third,
to collect a high-quality sample in order to
test the dining satisfaction and return pa-
tronage model. The dining experience survey
developed for this study advances the find-
ings of previous customer satisfaction re-
search and practices by focusing specifically
on dining satisfaction (as a result of favour-
able dining experience) and return patronage
dimensions that were underpinned by the
dining satisfaction and return patronage
model in Part 1.
Dining satisfaction scores were derived by
multiplying the ``expectations met'' scores
with the ``Importance'' scores. This provided
an indirect questioning technique for soli-
citing and measuring ``satisfaction'' percep-
tions after the respondents had had their
meal. Often, the direct questioning techni-
ques encounter confounding (halo effect)
problems. The methodology for calculating
PrDp and PoDp is presented in Figure 1.
4. Sampling design and survey
methods
Because most convenience or fast-food op-
erations offer consumption on and off the
premises and predominantly trade on a low-
cost-production high-volume-sales formula,
and because most of these operations are
either chained or franchised, this category
was excluded from the study. Fast-food
operations are considerably different from
the more traditional restaurant categories in
terms of how they operate. Therefore, any
comparisons between this category and
others would have been of little value. On the
other hand, fine dining operations accounted
for a smaller percentage of the overall
restaurant market in Hong Kong. It can be
argued that Fine Dining or Gourmet (category
1, see Table I) restaurants operate on a high-
cost-high-profit formula. They have a low
share of the overall restaurant market in
Hong Kong and they generally target smaller
dining out groups who have greater disposa-
ble income and corporate customers. The
middle market was comprised of Theme/
Ambience restaurants and represented a
sizeable and the most volatile share of the
restaurant market in Hong Kong. It is argued
that customer loyalty, therefore, is critical to
these operations, which often have to survive
in a highly competitive environment. Taking
these observations into consideration,
Theme/Ambience restaurants were selected
for the survey in this study.
One of the most salient issues in customer
satisfaction research is the nature of the
study setting used to model the construct.
The debate in the literature has focused on
two data generation methods:
1 experimental designs; and
2 field surveys.
Although experiments have been a popular
study design among many researchers
(Churchill and Surprenant, 1982; Bolton and
Drew, 1991), other researchers have contin-
ued to prefer field survey approaches (Lewis,
1981; Auty, 1992; Almanza et al., 1994; Dube et
[ 273 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
[ 274 ]
Figure 1
Weighting matrix for calculating PrDp (E 6 I) and PoDp (EM 6 I)
al., 1994; Oh and Jeong, 1996; Qu, 1997;
Pettijohn et al., 1997). Although both experi-
mental design and field survey methods have
respective strengths and limitations in
producing generalisable study results, the
results of these studies using either of the
methods have been generally accepted with-
out any critical considerations of the study
designs used.
In general, the field survey approach has
been the dominant study design for customer
satisfaction research in hospitality applica-
tions. For example, Auty (1992) studied
restaurant customers' expectation and satis-
faction perceptions in various restaurants,
while Almanza et al. (1994) collected data
from a university staff and student cafeteria.
Dube et al. (1994) examined dining satisfac-
tion and return patronage by eliciting re-
sponses based on 16 dinner scenarios
(conjoint analysis) from a sample of diners in
a fine dining restaurant. Oh and Jeong (1996)
collected data from fast-food customers in a
south-western city of the USA; and Qu's
(1997) investigation collected data from a
number of Chinese restaurants in the state of
Indiana. However, in all of these studies the
research instrument did not facilitate ``before
and after'' measurement design. Experimen-
tal studies have not been widely used in
hospitality research. One of the major rea-
sons for this is that most hospitality opera-
tions are multifunctional in nature, and the
multifunctionality is more often than not
reactionary to extraneous variables that
were difficult to control, as opposed to a
typical laboratory experimental design. This
study was based on field survey design and
its direction was to measure dining and post-
dining experiences of restaurant customers.
Sample population
The study involved the administration of a
questionnaire (September-December 1997) to
a systematic selection of customers dining in
Theme/Ambience restaurants in Hong Kong.
The sampling frame included subjects who
were residents of Hong Kong and who were
18 years of age or older. Completed ques-
tionnaires with more than 15 per cent of
items incomplete were excluded from the
analysis. The surveys were conducted on-
site, the sampling target being all lunch and
dinner customers. The selection of survey
restaurants was based on a convenience
sample[2] and respondents were selected by a
systematic sampling method; every fourth
customer who walked into the
restaurant. The sample size for each restau-
rant was 25 per cent of the restaurant's total
seating capacity, as described in Table IV.
According to the Survey of Wholesale,
Retail, and Import/Export Trade, Restau-
rants and Hotels (1996-1997), by the end of
July 1997, there were approximately 8,198
restaurants in Hong Kong, including 1,669
fast-food stores. Included in these figures
were:
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
1 street stalls, congee shops, noodle shops,
and dai pai dongs (street restaurants);
2 curry houses and small coffee shops; and
3 sandwich bars and teahouses.
Excluded from these statistics were the 266
hotel restaurants. Items 1 to 3 above were
excluded from the survey, whilst the hotel
restaurants were included in the survey.
This suggested that there were about 2,100
conventional restaurants in Hong Kong, of
which approximately 900 were Theme/Ambi-
ence restaurants. (Hong Kong Hotels Asso-
ciation, 1995-1997; Hong Kong Restaurateurs
Association, 1995-1997; Hong Kong Govern-
ment of the Special Administrative Region,
Department of Census and Statistics, 1995-
1997a, 1995-1997b, 1995-1997c.) Respective res-
taurant managers and owners were formally
approached and asked if they wished to
participate in this survey. A sample size of
1,028 was set for the survey as noted in Table
IV. Every fourth customer who walked into
the restaurant was the target, until the
sample size for that restaurant was reached.
Similar to the pilot survey, approval to
conduct the survey was granted by the
restaurant owners and managers on the
strict undertaking that the names of the
restaurants would not be disclosed or
published. A formal document to this effect
from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University
was given to owners/managers noting that
their respective commercial interests would
be safeguarded. However, permission to
identify the general location, style of cuisine
and seating capacity of the restaurants was
granted by the various owners/managers.
Survey arrangements
The surveys were conducted while the sub-
jects were already in the restaurant, that is,
subjects had already made their decision to
dine at the restaurant. Every fourth diner in
these restaurants was the sampling target.
The survey procedure is described below.
. The researcher was advised by most
restaurant managers that is was a desir-
able procedure to survey every fourth or
fifth customer. Their reason was that it
was better to be discreet so as to avoid
annoying other diners who were not
participating in the survey. This proce-
dure was then adopted for all survey
restaurants. It should be noted, however,
that this prolonged the survey schedule
because not every fourth customer wanted
to participate in the survey, in which case
the next fourth customer was the sam-
pling target.

Table IV
Sampling frame
Total
Restaurant sites = 15 restaurant
Based on convenience samplea Total lunch sampleb Total dinner sampleb sample
A B C D
Restaurant, cuisine style Location Capacity % of capacity % of capacity
Shanghainese KLN 165 42 25 42 25 84
Mongolian KLN 160 40 25 40 25 80
(H) French KLN 160 40 25 40 25 80
Portuguese KLN 90 23 25 23 25 46
(H) Japanese KLN 80 20 25 20 25 40
Italian (Nouvelle) HKI 90 23 25 23 25 46
Middle Eastern HKI 75 19 25 19 25 38
Cantonese (Seafood) HKI 160 40 25 40 25 80
Contemporary (Californian) HKI 80 20 25 20 25 40
Cantonese (Dim Sum) HKI 215 54 25 54 25 108
Thai NT/I 130 33 25 33 25 66
Sichuan NT/I 190 48 25 48 25 96
American grill NT/I 125 32 25 32 25 64
Cantonese (Roast/BBQ goose/pork) NT/I 170 43 25 43 25 86
(H) Shanghainese NT/I 145 37 25 37 25 74
Total 2035 514 514 1028
(av. 136)
Notes: KLN = Tsim Sha Tsui/Tsim Sha Tsui East; HKI = Hong Kong Island; NT/I = Sha Tin
a
Excludes small coffee shops, sandwich bars, noodle shops, congee shops, fast-food restaurants, dai pai dongs, government/private/college
cafeterias; private clubs; fine dining and family/popular restaurants; H = Hotel restaurant; Total sample size [B and C] rounded off;
b
The sample population for the study was based on a systematic sampling procedure and every 4th customer entering the restaurant during the
survey was the target

[ 275 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and . The survey sample for each restaurant
Robert Inbakaran was determined according to the seating
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part capacity of the restaurant, e.g. the sample
2: Research design and size for the restaurant was set at 25 per
analytical methods
cent of the seating capacity. Again, this
International Journal of
was a constraint imposed by most restau-
Contemporary Hospitality
Management rant owners/managers, who argued that
11/6 [1999] 269±286 this was a more than an appropriate
representation of their dining population.
. The researcher, first to introduce himself
and second to seek their participation,
approached all potential subjects. The
researcher then explained the nature and
concept of the survey and what was
required from them. They were also
informed and instructed that the ques-
tionnaire was in two sections, A and B. It
was explained to them that section A had
to be completed before their meal and
section B after their meal. At the end of
the survey the researcher then collected
the completed questionnaires. While some
researchers suggest that there should be a
sufficient time lag in measuring these
constructs so as to minimise any con-
founding effects, the research to date
supports the reliability of this sampling
method (Johnson et al., 1995). For this
reason part B of the questionnaire was
positioned on the back page.
. At the beginning of the survey process all
subjects were informed that the survey
was voluntary and without any obligation,
and that all responses and data would be
kept confidential by the researcher and
would only be used for academic pur-
poses. A consent form was presented to
each subject seeking his or her consent, in
writing, to participate in the survey.
However, only 16 subjects signed the
consent form. The vast majority of sub-
jects argued that the consent form was
unnecessary as they had already con-
sented to participate in the survey by the
fact that they were willing to answer the
questionnaire. The researcher thought it
was more prudent to secure the necessary
sample size rather than take issue on this
point with the respondents.
Questionnaire
As suggested by Veal (1992), it is desirable to
develop a research instrument that operatio-
nalises the research questions and research
objectives, and the theoretical model. To
recall from Part 1, the research questions in
this study were:
1 Can a new conceptual model of dining
satisfaction and return patronage based on
disconfirmation theory be operationalised
that provides a more effective way of
predicting dining behaviour?; and
[ 276 ]
2 Does satisfaction with restaurant attri-
butes increase the probability of return
patronage?
To operationalise the theoretical model, an-
swer to questions such as, What were your
expectations of each one of these items (res-
taurant attributes) when you decided to dine
out in this restaurant?, and How important to
you was each one of these items (restaurant
attributes) when you decided to dine in this
restaurant?, give insights into customers'
initial reference point about restaurant at-
tribute perceptions that they would use to
make comparisons with the restaurant's
actual performance after they had had their
meal. Also, answers to these two questions
give insights into customers' pre-dining per-
ceptions (Objective 2 in Part 1).
The answer to the question Did the restau-
rant meet with your expectations for each of
these items? (restaurant attributes), anchored
to a scale of 1 = Has not met my expectations
and 5 = Has exceeded my expectations, pro-
vides an insight into the disconfirmatory
effect between expectations and actual per-
formance perceptions. The answer to the
question Will you return to this restaurant?,
anchored to the scale 1 = I will definitely not
return and 2 = I will definitely return, reveals
the customers' post-purchase behavioural
intentions (Objective 3 in Part 1). More
importantly, however, it operationalises the
most salient feature of the theoretical model ±
how dining satisfaction influences return. As
noted in Figure 1, indirect weighted measure
(expectations met scores 6 importance scores)
was used to calculate customers' dining satis-
faction scores (Objective 4 in Part 1).
5. Pilot study
A self-administered, closed-ended question-
naire was used to survey a systematic selec-
tion of diners for piloting purposes. The
questionnaire comprised 174 variables di-
vided into two major sections.
Section A. Pre-dining perceptions
1 Rating on a five-point scale of 28 attri-
butes: Q1 ± ``expectations'', and Q2 ±
``importance''.
2 Customer demographic profile; dining-out
occasion; constraints.
Section B. Post-dining perceptions
1 Dining-out frequency; whether or not they
had been to the restaurant before, and
intention of returning to the restaurant.
2 Rating on a five-point scale of 28 attri-
butes: Q12 ± ``expectations met''.
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
A pilot survey was conducted in seven
Theme/Ambience restaurants (see Table V) in
Tsim Sha Tsui, Kowloon (KLN), Sha Tin,
New Territories (NT/I) and Hong Kong
Island (HKI) in order to provide valid and
reliable information on the questionnaire
design and layout, wording and measure-
ment scales.
Reliability
Cronbach's (1951) alpha statistic is the most
frequently used indicator of instrument re-
liability in survey research. A number of
studies have reported reliability indices of
adopted scales; Westbrook and Oliver (1981)
and Maddox (1985), for example, compared
the test-retest reliability of several single-
item scales such as the Delighted-Terrible (D-
T) content analytic and graphic scales. As a
result they found the D-T scale to be the most
reliable among the examined scales, with an
alpha value ranging from 0.65 to 0.85. How-
ever, most of the reliability estimates for
these repeated single-item scales were low to
moderate, suggesting that caution is needed
when using single-item measures.
Reliability scores may also vary for multi-
item instruments in consumer behaviour
research. Several researchers have studied
the reliability of selected multi-item scales:
Oh and Jeong (1996) (alpha 0.90 to 0.66), and
Qu (1997) (alpha 0.70 to 0.85) for the Likert
scale. Westbrook and Oliver (1991) investi-
gated four different scales to assess their
reliability: Likert, semantic, differential,
graphic and verbal. The results of their study
showed that the Likert and semantic-differ-
ential scales performed equally well for
multi-item customer satisfaction measures
with alpha values of 0.75 to 0.96 and 0.90 to
0.95, respectively. In comparing these results
with those of single-item measures, it was
found that the multi-item measures out-
performed most of the single-item measures
in customer satisfaction instruments.
A reliability analysis (Cronbach's alpha)
was performed to test the reliability and
internal consistency of each of 28 attributes
measured. The results showed that the alpha
coefficients for all 28 attributes were high,
ranging from: Q1. 0.92; Q2. 0.84; to Q12. 0.95
for the combined English and Cantonese
questionnaires. Alpha scores for the English
version of the questionnaire (n = 93) were:
Q1. 0.92; Q2. 0.85; and Q12. 0.95. Alpha scores
for the Cantonese version of the question-
naire (n = 88) were: Q1. 0.95; Q2. 0.91; and Q12.
0.83. The reliability test for ``dining satisfac-
tion'' (S I 6 EM) was as follows: Q1. 0.92; Q2.
0.87; and Q12. 0.95. These were well above the
minimum value of 0.5, which is considered
acceptable as an indication of reliability
(Hair et al., 1995).
As a result of pilot testing, the layout of the
instrument was modified from the four single
(A4 size paper) page format, to one single
page (A3 size paper) back-to-back format; the
wording of some of the items was also
changed and the order of some of the demo-
graphic questions was rearranged.
6. Data analysis
The Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences, Windows Version 6.1. (SPSS 6.1)
was used to analyse the quantitative data

Table V
Sampling frame and sample selection methodology (PILOT)
Restaurant sites = 7 Total dinner
Based on a convenience selectiona Total lunch sampleb sampleb
Total pilot
Restaurant % of % of sample per
cuisine style Location Capacity capacity capacity restaurant
Szechuan KLN 75 19 25 19 25 38
Californian KLN 70 18 25 18 25 35
Thai NT/I 50 13 25 13 25 25
Cantones NT/I 75 19 25 19 25 38
Shanghainese H HKI 60 15 25 15 25 30
French HKI 60 15 25 15 25 30
Italian 55 14 25 14 25 28
Total 55 111 25 111 25 222
Notes: KLN = Tsim Sha Tsui/Tsim Sha Tsui East; HKI = Hong Kong Island; NT/I = Sha Tin
a
Excludes small coffee shops, sandwich bars, noodle shops, congee shops, fast-food restaurants, dai pai dongs,
government/private/college cafeterias; private clubs; fine dining and family/popular restaurants;
H = Hotel restaurant
b
The pilot study was based on a systematic sampling procedure and every 4th customer entering the restaurant
during the survey was the target

[ 277 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
[ 278 ]
obtained from the research instrument. Six
types of procedures for the analysis of data
were prepared in this study: reliability
analysis; descriptive statistics; t-tests; cross-
tabulation and chi-square analysis; factor
analysis; and logistic regression analysis.
Reliability analysis, according to Dillon et
al. (1990, pp. 361-75), is when ``a measure is
reliable if independent but comparable mea-
sures of the same construct agree''. A reliable
instrument will, therefore, consistently yield
similar reliability scores. However, reliabil-
ity depends on how much random error is
present. The sources of error are generally
transitory, that is, respondents' personal
characteristics influence the survey results
differently each time the survey is adminis-
tered, i.e. pre-dining and post-dining experi-
ence perceptions in the model. In the context
of this study, it is important to note that data
were reliable because a low sampling error
had greater reliability over samples, whereas
the greater the random error, the lower the
reliability scores (Tabachnick and Fidell,
1996; NorusÏis, 1994). Moreover, Lord and
Novick (1968) suggested that the ``true score''
represents the actual information, i.e. if the
actual information (from the entire popula-
tion) was obtained without error. The incon-
gruity between this score and the observed
(survey information) attests to the level of
error present, and deviation from this actual
score is the prime source of unreliability.
Measurement error includes systematic and
random error sources. Only the random
error is likely to vary with each survey.
Other measures, such as the internal consis-
tency, apply when there is a large number of
items in a survey. In this study, a Cronbach's
alpha was performed to test the reliability
and internal consistency of each 28 restau-
rant attributes measured, for each attribute
category and for each factor (rotated factor
matrix) indicator (Tabachnick and Fidell,
1996).
A descriptive statistics procedure was re-
quired to develop profiles of the total sample.
This typically includes frequencies, mean
scores and standard deviations. Frequencies
were tabulated to identify the distributions of
Hong Kong respondents' demographic vari-
ables, their occasional factors for dining out,
their dining-out frequency, whether or not
the respondents were first-time diners or
repeaters, and whether or not they would
return to the (surveyed) restaurant in the
future. Means and standard deviations were
computed to describe the respondents' per-
ceived expectations of restaurant attributes,
their perceived importance about the res-
taurant attributes, whether or not their
dining expectations had been met, their pre-
dining perceptions (PrDp) or their antici-
pated level of dining satisfaction, and their
post-dining (PoDp) perceptions or their ac-
tual level of dining satisfaction.
A t-test procedure was computed for the
pre-dining and post-dining sample, as ex-
plained in sections 1 and 4 above, which
facilitated the testing of hypothesis Ha1, that
the difference between PrDp and PoDp mean
scores is statistically significant (at 0.05 and
0.01 level).
A cross-tabulation and chi-square analysis
was performed in order to test the
association/relationship of the joint fre-
quency of two or more variables in the study.
The variables are usually divided into sub-
groups to reveal how a variable's value
changes from one sub-group to another,
therefore allowing the study of each variable
alone while holding the other variable con-
stant. Unlike the one-way frequency analysis,
cross-tabulation procedure also allows sta-
tistical tests of significance that measure
whether a systematic relationship exists
between two or more variables. Cross-tabu-
lation and the Pearson Chi-square statistic
can be used to test the null hypotheses about
a dichotomous variable. Furthermore, it is
often of interest to the researchers to test the
null hypothesis that the cross-tabulated
variables are independent of each other.
As with frequency tables, a visual presen-
tation of a cross-tabulation also simplifies the
search for association, i.e. bar charts, to
present the frequency or percentage for each
category of a variable. Although an exam-
ination of the various row and column
percentages in a cross-tabulation is a useful
first step in studying the relationship be-
tween the variables, row and column per-
centages do not allow for quantification or
testing of that relationship. For this purpose,
it is useful to consider various indexes that
measure the extent of association, as well as
statistical tests of the hypotheses that there is
or is not any association between the vari-
ables tested.
A statistic often used to test the null
hypotheses, i.e. that the row and column
variables are independent, is the Pearson chi-
square. The calculated chi-square that is
computed is then compared to the critical
points of the theoretical chi-square distribu-
tion to produce an estimate of how likely (or
unlikely) this calculated value is if the two
variables are in fact independent. The deci-
sion to reject (or accept) the null hypothesis
is based on the probability, often known as
observed significance level. If the probability
is small enough, usually less than 0.05 or 0.01,
then the hypothesis that the two variables
are independent is rejected, i.e. there is a
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
relationship between variables. Therefore,
the decision rule is:
. calculated value > critical value = reject
null hypothesis and conclude that there is
a relationship/association between the
variables, or
. calculated value < critical value = accept
null hypothesis and conclude that the
variables are independent of each other
(NorusÏis, 1994).
A chi-square test of significance was used in
this study to determine whether or not a
relationship, other than chance, existed be-
tween the following variables investigated
(Objectives 5 to 7 in Part 1):
. ``expectations''; ``importance''; ``expecta-
tions met''; ``pre-dining''; and ``post-din-
ing'' perceptions and customers'
characteristics;
. dining out frequency and return patron-
age intentions;
. customers' age and their return inten-
tions;
. customers' income and their return in-
tentions;
. customers' gender and their return inten-
tions; and
. dining-out occasions and the return fre-
quencies.
The following null hypotheses were tested:
H01 There is no significant relationship
between the dining out frequency and
return patronage intentions.
H02 The is no significant relationship be-
tween the dining out occasions and
return patronage intentions.
H03 There is no significant relationship
between the customers who have dined
in the restaurant before and return
patronage.
H04 There is no significant relationship
between the dining frequency and the
dining out occasion.
H05 There is no significant relationship
between the customers' age and return
patronage intention.
H06 There is no significant relationship
between the customers' gender and
return patronage intentions.
H07 There is no significant relationship
between the customers' occupation and
return patronage intentions.
H08 There is no significant relationship
between the customers' income and
return patronage intentions.
H010 There is no significant relationship
between the customers' situational
constraints such as time and money and
return patronage intentions.
A multivariate analysis (factor and regression
analysis) was used in this study to:
create correlated variable composites
.
from the original attributes ratings (i.e. to
reduce original data to a manageable
stage) and to obtain a relatively small
number of variables that explain most of
the variances among the attributes; and
. to apply the derived factor scores in
subsequent regression analysis (i.e. to
predict return and non-return).
Correlation, measures of sampling adequacy
(MSA), partial correlation among variables
and reliability alpha to ensure that the factor
analysis is appropriate to the data usually
assess the appropriateness of factor analysis.
The criteria for the number of factors to be
extracted is based on eigenvalue, percentage
of variance, significance of factor loading,
and assessment of structure. Only the factors
with eigenvalue equal to or greater than one
are considered significant. In this study,
factors that were considered insignificant
were disregarded. The solution that accounts
for at least 60 per cent of the total variance is
considered as a satisfactory solution. A
variable is considered of practical signifi-
cance and is included in a factor when its
factor loading is equal to or greater than 0.5
(Hair et al, 1995).
The data for the analysis in this study was
28 PoDp restaurant attribute items measured
on a weighted matrix scale, as described in
Figure 1, ranging from ``very dissatisfied''
(±7.5) to ``very satisfied'' (7.5). The principal
components and orthogonal (VARIMAX) ro-
tation methods were used in the factor
analysis.
A logistic regression analysis was selected
for this study because the logistic regression
analysis allows one to predict a discrete
outcome such as a group membership from a
set of variables that may be continuous,
discrete, dichotomous or a mix. The discrete
outcome in logistic regression is either that
an event ``will happen'' or ``will not happen''
(i.e. return or non-return. It is difficult to deal
with a ``maybe return'' when actually trying
to predict whether or not a customer will
return or not return) (Tabachnik and Fidell,
1996). Stated in another way, for example, can
return or non-return patronage be predicted
as a consequence of dining satisfaction:
which resulted from the customer's overall
favourable assessment of the dining experi-
ence? The selection of logistic regression in
this study is based on a premise that `when
the dependent variable has two dichotomous
values, (i.e. will happen and will not happen)
the assumptions necessary for hypothesis
testing in regression analysis are necessarily
[ 279 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
[ 280 ]
violated. Therefore, the difficulty with mul-
tiple regression analysis [as opposed to logis-
tic regression analysis] for example, is that
predicted values cannot be interpreted as
probabilities. They are not constrained to fall
in the interval between 0 and 1, that is, will
happen ± will not happen. (NorusÏis, 1994, p. 1).
Testing hypotheses about the coefficients
For large sample sizes such as in this study,
the test that a coefficient is 0 can be based on
the Wald statistic that has a chi-square
distribution. For example, when a variable
has a single degree of freedom, the Wald
statistic is just the square of the ratio of the
coefficient to its standard error. For catego-
rical variables, the Wald statistic has degrees
of freedom equal to one less than the number
of categories. However, it should be noted
that the Wald statistic has an undesirable
property. When the absolute value of the
regression coefficient becomes large, the
estimated standard error is very large also.
This produces a small Wald statistic value,
leading the researcher to fail to reject the
null hypothesis that the coefficient is 0, when
in fact the null hypotheses should be rejected.
Therefore, whenever there is a large coeffi-
cient, the Wald statistic for hypothesis test-
ing should not be relied upon. Instead, the
researcher should build a model (sequential
logistic regression) with and without that
variable and base the hypothesis test on the
change in the log likelihood (Hauck and
Donner, 1977).
Sequential logistic regression is similar to
sequential multiple regression and sequen-
tial discriminant function analysis, in that
the researcher specifies the order of entry of
predictors into the model. For example, one
might start with a run predicting dining
satisfaction based on food and service
excellence. Then, in a second run, respon-
dents' income and occupation are added to
food and service excellence. The difference
between the two models is evaluated to
determine whether income and occupation
significantly add to prediction above that
afforded by restaurant attributes. In stepwise
logistic regression, inclusion and removal of
predictors from the equation are based solely
on statistical criteria. Thus, a stepwise
logistic regression is best seen as a screening
or hypothesis-generating technique, as it
suffers from the same problems as statistical
multiple regression and discriminant func-
tion analysis.
The purpose of logistic regression analysis
in this study was to explore how the PoDp
(dining satisfaction) dimensions derived
from the factor analysis related to the
dependent variable Will you return to this
restaurant? outcome. The purpose of using
Will you return to this restaurant? as a
dependent variable was to identify the rela-
tive importance of the dimensions derived
from factor analysis in predicting respon-
dents' return to the restaurant. Because the
model produced by logistic regression is
nonlinear, the equations used to describe the
outcomes (prediction) are more complex than
those for multiple regression, i.e. it directly
estimates the probability of an event occur-
ring. The outcome variable (YÂ) is the prob-
ability of having one outcome or another
based on a nonlinear function of the best
linear combination of predictors, i.e. with
two outcomes.
The regression model for Will you return to
this restaurant? was written as follows:
 ˆ 1
Y
1 ‡ eÿZ
Z ˆ A ‡ B0 ‡ B1 X1 ‡ B2 X2 ‡ B3 X3 ‡ B4 X4 ‡
B5 X5 . . . Bp Xp ; where,
YÂ = Probability (``will return''/``will not
return'') ± dependent variable ± will you
return to the restaurant?
A = Constant.
Bi = Coefficients estimated from data.
Xi = Independent variables (factor dimen-
sions, dining-out occasions, dining-out
frequency, occupation, age, income, and
customer characteristics).
Z = Linear regression equation.
The probability of return patronage is esti-
 (will not return = 1 ± Y
mated as: Y Â (will
return).
7. Limitations of the study
The following limitations of the study should
be addressed:
. The sample was drawn from restaurants
in Hong Kong only and was represented
by a systematic sample of 861 diners. The
findings were limited to the population
studied in Theme/Ambience restaurants,
which limits generalisability to other
restaurant categories, in particular the
fast-food and convenience restaurant ca-
tegory (Category 4 in Table I).
. The design of the study allowed the results
of the sample to be drawn exclusively
from respondents who dined in these
restaurants at the time only.
. The findings of this study may not have
sufficiently robust generalisability to
Theme/Ambience restaurants in other
countries due to the study's different
geographical and socio-economic setting.
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286
However, the methodology described and
employed in this study was sufficiently
vigorous and comprehensive to provide in-
sights and translatability about customers'
dining satisfaction perceptions and their
post-dining behavioural intentions as a re-
sult of their dining experience. It is suggested
that the methodology and the theoretical
underpinning applied to support the model in
this study can also be used for other restau-
rant segments and in other geographical
settings to measure customer satisfaction
and probability of return factors.
Notes
1 The restaurant categorisation presented in
Table I is an adaptation and elaboration of the
restaurant categories developed by
Finkelstein (1989), and was used to guide the
sampling procedure in this study.
2 Initially, the 15 survey sites were randomly
selected from a listing of about 900 theme/
ambience restaurants. However, when the
respective restaurateurs were approached
about conducting the survey in their restau-
rants, nine refused the request. At a second
attempt in random selection, 11 restaurants
declined the request. This proved to be very
time consuming which discouraged a third
attempt. The researcher then decided it was
best to approach restaurateurs and restau-
rant managers whom he knew to seek their
permission to conduct the surveys in their
restaurants. A representative sample of
theme/atmosphere restaurants was then se-
lected for the surveys. Ethical issues were
addressed and the sampling procedure was
approved by the RMIT University and the
Hong Kong Polytechnic University's respec-
tive ethics committee.
References
Almanza, B.A., Jaffe, W. and Lin, L.C. (1994), ``Use
of the service attribute matrix to measure
consumer satisfaction'', Hospitality Research
Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 63-75.
Auty, S. (1992), ``Consumer choice and segmenta-
tion in the restaurant industry'', The Service
Industries Journal, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 324-39.
Barsky, J.D. (1992), ``Consumer satisfaction in the
hotel industry: meaning and measurement'',
Hospitality Research Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1,
pp. 50-73.
Barsky, J.D. (1995), World-Class Customer
Satisfaction, Irwin, Burr Ridge, IL.
Bolton, R.N. and Drew, J.H. (1991), ``A multistage
model of customers' assessments of service
quality and value'', Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 375-84.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml,
V.A. (1993), ``A dynamic process model of
service quality: from expectations to beha-
vioral intentions'', Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 7-27.
Cadotte, E.R., Woodruff, R.B. and Jenkins, R.L.
(1987), ``Expectations and norms in models of
consumer satisfaction'', Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 7-27.
Carman, J.M. (1990), ``Consumer perceptions of
service quality: an assessment of the
SERVQUAL dimensions'', Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 49-50.
Churchill, G.A. and Surprenant, C. (1982), ``An
investigation into the determinants of custo-
mer satisfaction'', Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 491-504.
Cronbach, L.J. (1951), ``Coefficient alpha and the
internal structure of tests'', Psychometrika,
Vol. 16, pp. 297-334.
Dillon, W.R., Madden, T.J. and Firtle, N.H. (1990),
``Attitude scaling and concepts in reliability
and validity'', Marketing Research &
Marketing Environment, 2nd ed., Irwin
Homewood, IL, pp. 361-75.
Dube, L., Renaghan, L.M. and Miller, J.M. (1994),
``Measuring customer satisfaction for strate-
gic management'', The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 35
No. 1, pp. 39-47.
Finkelstein, J. (1989), Dining Out: A Sociology of
Modern Manners, Polity Press, Cambridge,
MA.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R. and Black, W.C. (1995),
Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hauck, W.W. and Donner, A. (1977), ``Wald's test
as applied to hypotheses in logit analysis'',
Journal of the American Statistical
Association, Vol. 72 No. 3, pp. 851-53.
Hong Kong Hotels Association (1995-1997), HKHA
Annual Report, HKHA, Hong Kong.
Hong Kong Restaurateurs Association (1995-1997),
HKRA Annual Report, HKRA, Hong Kong.
Hong Kong Government of the Special Adminis-
trative Region, Department of Census and
Statistics (1996-1997a), Hong Kong Annual
Digest of Statistics, Hong Kong SAR Govern-
ment Printer, Hong Kong.
Hong Kong Government of the Special Adminis-
trative Region, Department of Census and
Statistics (1995-1997b), Hong Kong Monthly
Digest of Statistics, Hong Kong SAR Govern-
ment Printer, Hong Kong.
Hong Kong Government of the Special
Administrative Region, Department of Cen-
sus and Statistics (1996-1997c), Survey of
Wholesale, Retail, and Import/Export Trade,
Restaurants, and Hotels, Hong Kong SAR
Government Printer, Hong Kong.
Johnson, M.D., Anderson, E.W. and Fornell, C.
(1995), ``Rational and adaptive performance
expectations in a customer satisfaction fra-
mework'', Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 695-706.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1986), Foundations of Behavioral
Research, Holt, Reinhart and Winston, New
York, NY.
Lewis, R.C. (1981), ``Restaurant advertising:
appeals and consumers intentions'', Journal
[ 281 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and of Advertising Research, Vol. 21 No. 5,
Robert Inbakaran pp. 60-74.
Consumer research in the Likert, R. (1967), The Human Organization,
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
analytical methods Lord, F.M. and Novick, M.R. (1968), Statistical
International Journal of Theories of Mental Test Scores, Addison-
Contemporary Hospitality Wesley, Reading, MA.
Management Lowenberg, M.E., Todhunter, E.N., Wilson, E.D.,
11/6 [1999] 269±286
Savage, J.R. and Lubawski, J.L. (1979), Food
and People, Wiley, New York, NY.
Maddox, N. (1985), ``Measuring satisfaction with
tourism'', Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 24
No. 2, pp. 2-5.
NorusÏis, M.J. (1994), SPSS Advanced Statistics 6.1,
SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL.
Oh, H. and Jeong, M. (1996), ``Improving market-
ers' predictive power of customer satisfaction
on expectation-based target market levels'',
Hospitality Research Journal, Vol. 19 No. 4,
pp. 65-86.
Pettijohn, L.S., Pettijohn, C.E. and Luke, R.H.
(1997), ``An evaluation of fast food restaurant
satisfaction: determinants, competitive com-
parisons and impact on future patronage'',
Journal of Restaurant & Foodservice Market-
ing, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 3-20.
This research project was
supported by the Hong Kong Qu, H. (1997), ``Determinant factors and choice
Polytechnic University and intention for Chinese restaurant dining: a
RMIT University in multivariate approach'', Journal of Restau-
Melbourne, Australia. The rant & Foodservice Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2,
nature of support was non-
financial. pp. 35-49.
[ 282 ]
Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. (1996), Using
Multivariate Statistics, 3rd ed., CSU, Harper-
Collins, Northridge, CA.
Tse, D.K. and Wilton, P.C. (1988), ``Models of
consumer satisfaction formation: an exten-
sion'', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25
No. 2, pp. 204-12.
Tull, D.A. and Hawkins, D.I. (1990), ``Measure-
ment techniques in marketing research'',
Marketing Research: Measurement and
Method, 5th ed., Macmillan, New York, NY,
pp. 255-77.
Veal, A.J. (1992), Research Methods for Leisure and
Tourism: A Practical Guide, Longman,
London.
Westbrook, R.A. and Oliver, R.L. (1991), ``Devel-
oping better measures of consumer satisfac-
tion: some preliminary results'', in Monroe,
K.B. (Ed.), Advances in Consumer Research,
Association for Consumer Research, Ann
Arbor, MI, pp. 94-9.
Further reading
Miller, J.A. (1977), ``Studying satisfaction, mod-
ifying models, eliciting expectations, posing
problems, and making meaningful measure-
ments'', in Hunt, H.K. (Ed.), Conceptualization
and Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction
and Dissatisfaction, Marketing Science Insti-
tute, Cambridge, MA, pp. 72-92.
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Appendix
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286

DINING EXPERIENCE SURVEY

[ 283 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286

[ 284 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286

[ 285 ]
JaksÏa Kivela, John Reece and
Robert Inbakaran
Consumer research in the
restaurant environment. Part
2: Research design and
analytical methods
International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
11/6 [1999] 269±286

[ 286 ]