Next Article in Journal
Collaborative Processes and Collective Impact in Tourist Rural Villages—Insights from a Comparative Analysis between Argentinian and Italian Cases
Next Article in Special Issue
A Study into Public Awareness of the Environmental Impact of Menstrual Products and Product Choice
Previous Article in Journal
Influence of Green Initiatives on Environmental, Economic and Operational Outcomes: The Case of the Brazilian Packaging Supply Chain
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impacts of Gratifications on Consumers’ Emotions and Continuance Use Intention: An Empirical Study of Weibo in China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Cognitive and Affective Antecedents of Consumers’ Satisfaction: A Systematic Review of Two Research Approaches

1
Department of Social and Organizational Psychology, National Distance Education University (UNED), Street Juan del Rosal, 10, 28040 Madrid, Spain
2
Consumer Council of Castilla La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(2), 431; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020431
Submission received: 26 November 2018 / Revised: 17 December 2018 / Accepted: 11 January 2019 / Published: 15 January 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Conscious Consumption)

Abstract

:
The study of consumers’ satisfaction has generated empirical research in the last few decades, with new challenges, such as a specific lens on online consumers’ satisfaction. During the last decades, two well-differentiated research traditions can be observed: cognitive and affective. A wide range of antecedents of consumers’ satisfaction has been proposed. The present contribution empirical research conducted under these two perspectives to determine which variables are related to satisfaction, the direction of these relationships, and the differences between the two dominant approaches. We conducted a systematic review of 104 empirical studies on consumers’ satisfaction published between 1975 and 2017. The findings showed that both the cognitive and the affective tradition yield statistically significant precursors of satisfaction. A comparison between empirical studies exploring consumers’ satisfaction in traditional versus by Internet purchasing behavior showed an increasing relevance of cognitive facets in traditional consumer behavior. Empirical evidence exploring differences between consumers’ satisfaction with purchasing goods versus hiring services showed that both cognitive and affective predictors strongly impact when services are hired versus consuming goods. This article concludes with a discussion of these results and their implications.

1. Introduction

The old assumptions about consumers’ satisfaction no longer seem useful, because people today can choose between online and face-to-face purchasing for almost all goods and services. This rapid and constant change in consuming trends puts retailers under high pressure to satisfy their consumers. Because literature has firmly established the relationships between customers’ satisfaction and loyalty, defining the main antecedents of satisfaction became a strategic question. Currently, consumers are considered more autonomous, reflective, and critical [1], however, at the same time, they seem to be demanding lower costs and high-quality goods and services [2].
A plethora of studies highlighted that consumers are immersed in their social context, and their thinking and emotion could be partly due to social influences [3] but can also be affected by their knowledge, previous attitudes, personality traits [4], and other variables. Hence, consumers’ satisfaction and other affects associated to consumers’ experiences should be deeper analyzed in order to explore them as predictors of consumption behavior [5].
The study of satisfaction has become a focus of attention, not only for researchers, but also for businesses that offer their goods and services to consumers and that are immersed in an increasingly competitive market [6]. Thus, achieving consumer satisfaction becomes a source of advantage and competitive differentiation [7] that involves a series of beneficial results for organizations, such as “word of mouth” communication among potential clients [8], loyalty [9], and financial profitability [10].
Within this context, there has been much research of the antecedents of consumer satisfaction, with consumers’ psychological processes playing a key role [11,12]. One strong research tradition emphasizes the cognitive processes that underlie consumers’ appraisals [13]. Along with this tradition, researchers have also begun to underline the role of affective experiences in consumption experiences as a source of satisfaction [14]. The diversity of approaches and investigations leads to a variety of satisfaction determinants proposed in the studies, their direction, and magnitude [15].
Since some seminal studies began studying consumer’s satisfaction [16,17], a plethora of variables was added to the dominant approaches, both cognitive and affective. Even though each variable can improve our understanding of the phenomena, these is still a lot of debate in the literature about what model (cognitive versus affective) explains satisfaction better [18]. Moreover, the specific role of affect in the customers’ experience remains unclear and its statistical contribution to explain a higher percentage of variance in satisfaction should be clarified [19].
Thus, the aim of this work was to carry out a synthesis of empirical research to better explain consumers’ satisfaction. We attempted to determine which variables are related to satisfaction, the direction of this relation, and the differences between the two dominant approaches. Emphasis was placed on the constructs that have been investigated more extensively, both in the cognitive and in the affective traditions, as Figure 1 shows.
Moreover, even though our systematic review was focused on cognitive versus affective approaches on customers’ satisfaction, we briefly explored whether the relations among the predictors and satisfaction differ as a function of the kind of transaction (traditional versus Internet) and the type of purchase (consumer goods versus services). We started out from the contingent viewpoint of satisfaction, which can become a stimulus for the advance of investigation and knowledge. Thus, as previous studies confirmed [13,14,15], the processes underlying consumer satisfaction do not always function in the same way. This approach allowed us to move toward a more complete and complex conception of satisfaction.

2. Method

2.1. Literature Search

In order to select the studies that can fulfill the selection criteria, we adopted formal search procedures. The following computerized databases, both thematic (Psycinfo, Econlit) and Multidisciplinary (Academic Search Premier, Jstor), have been used for the electronic search. It was carried out using the search equation [“customer satisfaction” OR “consumer satisfaction”] AND [“expectations” OR “confirmation of expectations” OR “perceived achievement” OR “positive affect” OR “negative affect”]. Additionally, we resorted to descendent searches from the bibliographical references of the articles found and we contacted researchers from the area to locate more studies. At this step, no limits were set for time, language, or document type. The first screening provided us with a total of 12,819 references. The titles and abstracts were examined and we retained 3569 references to academic sources, with peer reviewer processes, published in English, and full text accessible. These references have been retrieved and we applied to them an individualized scrutiny process, which resulted in the exclusion of several sources due to their focus (i.e., customer satisfaction with therapies, mental health services, E-learning services, or educational programs) [20] or due to their methodology (i.e., in-depth interview, observational studies, and secondary analyses of data) [21,22]. Finally, 620 full-text papers were stored and read. Ph.D theses, critiques, commentaries, revisions of the literature, and qualitative and case studies were excluded. A total of 104 primary studies were included in the present review. To sum up, the selected studies fulfilled these inclusion criteria: (a) being a study that included quantitative results about the relation between satisfaction and any of the formerly proposed variables (expectations, confirmation, performance, positive and negative affect); (b) they were based on samples of consumers’ individual level responses, (c) published up to 2017, and (d) written in English. The complete list of studies is provided in Table 1.

2.2. Coding of the Variables

The information retrieved and summarized by this review was: variables related to the primary data collection, country of data collection, commerce sector, the type of purchase (goods versus services), and the type of transaction (Internet versus traditional purchase). Finally, we summarized the information about the different kinds of assessments for the criterion variable: consumers’ satisfaction.

2.3. Sample of Studies

Of the total 104 primary studies, only one was published in 1975, eight between 1980–1984, 13 between 1988–1994, five between 1995–2000, 18 between 2001–2005, 12 between 2006–2010, 22 between 2011–2014, and 24 between 2015–2017. In the case of the variables included in theory of the confirmation of expectations, the time frame of the studies included was broader, given that this theory has awakened interest among investigators since the 1980s, and even before. In the case of the affective variables, the time interval was shorter, because, as mentioned, it was not until the mid-1990s that this began to be clearly incorporated in research. Figure 2 depicts the amount of studies by publication year.
Related to the country where data have been collected, 36 were conducted in the United States of America, eight in Taiwan, seven in South Korea, six in Spain, and the rest were from Germany, Greece, Israel, China, Malaysia, Japan, Belgium, and Scandinavian countries. An increasing amount of studies did not inform the region of data collection, due to their focus on Online consumers. Table 2 summarizes the origin of the sample of the studies.
Related to the purchasing sector, food, automobiles, and household appliances were the most frequent sectors before 1990, while restaurants, travels, gyms, and computers being representative during the 2000s’, and mobile phones-related services and goods increased during the 2010–2015 period. During the period from 2015 to 2017, most of the studies assessed consumers’ satisfaction in online shopping, e-commerce and, more recently, a number of studies have focused on consumers’ websites, such as TripAdvisor, and collaborative consumers websites, such as Groupon.
Most of the studies were based on primary data, collected by the researcher group, and only two or three examples included secondary data, as a re-analysis of wider surveys or other macro-research projects [23]. Related to the type of measure of consumers’ satisfaction, there were a wide range of scales and instruments. The most common were based on SERVQUAL and Oliver’s proposals. There are also different ad hoc measures, adapted from previous questionnaires or even designed for the specific study [24].

3. Results

While a plethora of new studies have recently considered challenging consumers’ topics [4,25,26] in the study of consumers’ satisfaction, two great research traditions emerged consistently: the cognitive and the affective. We organized the presentation of our findings in two steps. First, we summarized the main features of the studies within each theoretical approach. Second, we explained the novel findings related to type of transaction and type of purchase.

3.1. Synthesis of Both Approaches on Consumers’ Satisfaction

The cognitive tradition was developed earlier and more extensively. In fact, it was not until the 1990s that studies defending the affective factors as complementary determinants of satisfaction began to appear [27,28,29]. From this approach, Oliver [27] defined satisfaction as a response by consumers that is the outcome of their previous expectations and the discrepancy between these expectations and the perceived performance of the product consumed [30].
In the initial models, previous expectations (assimilation) and the confirmation-disconfirmation of these expectations (contrast) were the two variables that were directly and independently related to satisfaction [31]. Performance or perceived quality only played implicit roles. However, it was subsequently observed that perceptions of quality or performance as such had an additional and statistically significant effect [32,33,34]. Hence, the experience of consumption has often been considered as a process of learning about the characteristics of the services and goods. Thus, the perceived quality has a significant impact on satisfaction independently of prior expectations and the processes of confirmation of expectations [35].
Despite the popularity of the cognitive approach, people do not always behave so rationally during their consumption activities; rather, their satisfaction also depends on a series of affective experiences that are partly subconscious and automatically generated, and do not require exhaustive information processing. Thus, during consumption activities, people experience affects that influence their satisfaction [14]. Therefore, it is not surprising that various authors have emphasized the affective nature of satisfaction [36,37,38].
Regarding the study of affect, the arguments about whether positive and negative affect are independent [39] or whether they are the opposite poles of the same construct [36] are well known. However, within the concrete area of consumption, the conception of positive and negative affect as independent constructs has been predominant [40,41]. It is assumed that during consumption activities, people may simultaneously experience both positive and negative emotions. Thus, within this affective tradition in the study of satisfaction, positive and negative affect will be the inputs on which systematic review is applied, considering both as independent constructs.
To summarize, the different attention and interest that each of the two traditions (cognitive versus affective) have generated in the study of satisfaction is reflected in the amount of empirical studies published under them. In the present revision, we have found 61 studies with findings from the theory of the confirmation of expectations compared with the affective variables, which received much less attention in the study of satisfaction. Only 31 studies clearly relied on the affective components of the customers’ satisfaction phenomenon, while the other used mixed approaches. Moreover, the sample sizes in the studies of satisfaction proceeding from the affective tradition present lower values than in the cognitive tradition.

3.2. Potential Moderators: Type of Transaction and Type of Purchase

Our first finding is that an increasing number of studies is devoted to Online transactions and E-commerce. 26% of the studies have been applied to these fields, with a novel group that explored the theoretical models with new kinds of transactions, such as group purchasing (Groupon) or Trip Advisor’s reviewers or users. About the type of transaction, there is no consistent evidence about stable differences between consumers’ satisfaction in Internet commerce than in physical stores [42,43]. However, some differential characteristics that surely affect the relations of the various predictors of satisfaction can be underscored. As Price et al. stated 20 years ago [44], there is no a priori reason why affective variables should have more impact on purchasing by Internet than on the traditional purchase of goods and services. When buying by Internet, there is no spatial proximity between buyer and employee or the people in charge of distributing or providing the goods or services. The specific transactions do not tend to long-lasting, thus, it is hard to imagine interpersonal relations in which affect would have any impact. On the contrary, what buyers seek is a functional and efficient outcome through a powerful media such as the Internet. All this suggests that the rational and cognitive aspects will be more important in purchases through the Internet than in traditional purchases, whereas affective constructs will be more important in traditional purchases than in Internet transactions [45]. Despite this fact, customers’ experiences during online purchasing can exhibit great heterogeneity, as other researchers have stated [46,47,48].
Regarding the type of purchase, it is hard to establish the direction of the differences. One could imagine two scenarios or hypotheses, considering the idiosyncrasies of services versus consumer goods [49,50,51]. It is well known that services have a higher level of intangibility [52]. Although in many cases, it is necessary to use some installations, what is bought is an action that can only be experienced. Given such intangibility, it is difficult to elaborate and anticipate previous expectations in services, so users’ satisfaction can be due to the quality and the experiences derived from the act of consumption [53]. Thus, the first scenario or hypothesis states that expectations and confirmation of expectations will be less important in services than in consumer goods. In contrast, perceived performance during the consumer action, as well as affective experiences, will tend to be more important in services than in consumer goods.
A second scenario or hypothesis is derived from the uncertainty associated with hiring services [54]. In services, the user often participates actively (i.e., educational services), the service is purchased at the same time it is being produced and, in contrast to goods, it is difficult to anticipate the experiences that may emerge during the hiring activity and the use of the services. In contrast, it is clearer and easier to anticipate what may occur when purchasing and using a tangible consumer good. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the existence of different activation levels for services and consumption. The uncertainty associated with services will increase the level of users’ attention towards all the aspects related to the consumption experience. In contrast, to some extent, the purchase of goods will be clarified and will become more routine. In this context, the level of attention to and processing of consumption-related actions will tend to decrease [51]. Thus, this second hypothesis describes a situation in which all the variables involved will be more important to predict satisfaction with services than satisfaction with consumer goods.
The purpose of the present paper was to perform a systematic review of the variables that, both from the theory of the disconfirmation of expectations and the affective tradition, have been proposed in research as determinants of satisfaction. Likewise, we wished to determine the differential behavior of these variables with two potential moderating variables: type of transaction (traditional purchase versus Internet) and type of purchase (consumer goods versus services).
The findings observed in most of the empirical studies are congruent with the idea that satisfaction is both of a cognitive and an affective nature [55]. Both approaches have proposed predictors that have statistically significant relations with consumer satisfaction, as most of the empirical study have stated [56,57]. Thus, we corroborated that people’s assessments in consumption contexts are based on cognitive information processing, but also on the affective experiences derived from the purchase and/or hiring of products. This duality reflects the complexity associated with consumers’ behavior. In satisfaction, there is a subjacent conscious analysis of the outcome and the degree to which it satisfies consumers’ previous expectations. Moreover, people experience affect that are, to some extent, automatic, and therefore, do not require exhaustive information processing. In the same vein, our findings based on this systematic review partially coincide with those offered in previous reviews. In this venue, Szymanski and Henard [58] arrived at similar conclusions, even though they did not consider studies of purchasing by Internet, and their research was not based on European samples.
Perhaps one of the novelties that our review offers is related to the comparison between types of transaction. In fact, the type of transaction would moderate the relations between satisfaction and its determinants, thus, we can propose that purchasing by Internet is not the same as traditional purchasing when addressing the phenomenon of satisfaction [59,60]. Specifically, we observed stronger relationships in the empirical studies in the case of purchasing by Internet for the cognitive variables: expectations, confirmation, and performance. In contrast, it seems that there were lower differences about affect. Thus, cognitive variables probably would have greater impact on satisfaction when consumers purchase by Internet. This is congruent with the characteristics of on-line purchases. This setting does not favor spatial proximity between the buyer and the purveyor and, moreover, the transactions are not usually prolonged over time. People who use the Internet to purchase are seeking an efficient, safe, and functional transaction, thus, the cognitive and rational aspects are more important than in the case of traditional purchases. In accordance with these arguments, affective aspects will not be as important in purchases by Internet. According to Price et al. [32], the lack of physical proximity between purveyor and buyer as well as the short duration of the transactions should decrease the impact of affect. Nevertheless, in some empirical studies, positive affect seems to be just as important as in traditional purchases. A tentative explanation of this result may have to do with affective experiences that are specifically associated with purchases by Internet, as helplessness or fear of being cheated [61].
Finally, the type of purchase would moderate the relation between satisfaction and its determinants: buying consumer goods is not the same thing as hiring services. We had proposed two possible hypotheses or scenarios for explaining this topic. In one of them, considering the intangibility of services [62,63], and therefore, the difficulty of developing previous expectations, we anticipated that the experiences undergone during the consumption activity would have more impact on services than on the purchase of goods. Hence, in this first scenario, perception of performance and the affective experiences during the consumption activity would have more predictive capacity in services than in satisfaction with consumer goods. In contrast, prior expectations and their degree of confirmation would have more predictive power in the case of consumer goods. A second scenario was based on the greater uncertainty that usually accompanies services versus more clarity and definition of consumer goods [64]. This greater uncertainty when hiring services should increase consumers’ attention towards the diverse aspects related with their consumption activities. Our results are congruent with this second hypothesis. Thus, our results indicate that the magnitude of the relations between consumer satisfaction and the diverse precursors we have studied tends to be higher in services than in consumer goods.
Some relevant practical implications were also extracted from the present findings. On the one hand, the idea that consumers base their satisfaction on rational judgments that involve information processing and the instrumentality of their purchase decisions was consolidated (the extent to which their expectations confirmed, and they perceive a good performance or outcome); on the other hand, affective experiences (that are more spontaneous or automatic) were also important. Organization managers should be aware of this duality, and therefore, their decisions should consider not only a functional design, but also an emotional design of the product, which promotes positive affect in consumers. On the other hand, the findings obtained were congruent with a contingent point of view of consumer satisfaction. Consumers do not always assign the same importance to the different elements involved in their satisfaction. Thus, we noted that cognitive judgments tend to be more important in purchases by Internet than in traditional purchases. People and organizations that offer their products by this electronic means are, to some extent, forced to pay more attention to functional aspects (paying attention to the results and fulfilling the expectations of the consumers that are attended). Likewise, we have observed that, when faced with the higher uncertainty associated with hiring services, consumers are more sensitive or attentive to various aspects of their satisfaction, both cognitive and affective. According to this, service purveyors should deal with the uncertainty associated with this sector and the difficulty of standardizing products.
This work has some limitations that may serve as stimulus for future research. Two moderators were suggested (type of transaction and type of purchase). However, there may be more moderating variables, both from the customers’ side (age, gender, education) [65,66] or the purchasing channel (as multichannel context), as others suggested [56], about which there is hardly any information in previous research. Moreover, although some sociodemographic characteristics of consumers can be seen in the list of studies included in the revision, more information is necessary. In future works, it would be appropriate to explore variables that would help to define the way in which consumer satisfaction develops in diverse contexts and/or contingencies. This would enhance a more complete and complex view of consumer assessments. The moderating effects we observed could also be a stimulus for research of consumer satisfaction.
The systematic analysis has allowed us to find indications that the development of satisfaction follows different patterns for buying by Internet versus traditional purchases, and for hiring services versus purchasing goods. Although we suggested some mechanisms that may underlie these differences, we did not examine them specifically [67]. Therefore, it would be appropriate to carry out specific studies, such as wide meta-analyses of empirical studies, that address the differential functioning of the cognitive and affective processes involved in these diverse consumption contexts.

4. Conclusions

Despite its limitations, this work intended to offer some contributions to the study of consumer satisfaction. Firstly, it helped consolidate a complete image of satisfaction with the participation of cognitive and affective processes. Secondly, it allowed us to advance in a contingent perspective of satisfaction in which the importance of the processes involved varies as a function of contexts and contingencies. Moreover, the results are a stimulus for future research.

Author Contributions

F.P., A.S. and G.T. conceptualized the study, executed the empirical research and write the first draft. The manuscript has been revised several times for both F.P. and G.T. Finally, the final version of the article has been approved by F.P., A.S. and G.T.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Figueroa-García, E.C.; García-Machado, J.J.; Pérez-Bustamante Yábar, D.C. Modeling the Social Factors That Determine Sustainable Consumption Behavior in the Community of Madrid. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Bell, C.R.; Patterson, J.R. Wired and Dangerous: How Your Customers Have Changed and What to Do About It; Berrett-Koehler Publishers: Oakland, CA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  3. Rychalski, A.; Palmer, A. Customer Satisfaction and Emotion in the Call Centre Context. In The Customer Is NOT Always Right? Marketing Orientations in a Dynamic Business World; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 67–70. [Google Scholar]
  4. Yu, T.-Y.; Yu, T.-K. The Moderating Effects of Students’ Personality Traits on Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intentions in Response to Climate Change. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Morgeson, F.V., III; Sharma, P.N.; Hult, G.T.M. Cross-National Differences in Consumer Satisfaction: Mobile Services in Emerging and Developed Markets. J. Int. Mark. 2015, 23, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hill, N.; Alexander, J. The Handbook of Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Measurement; Routledge: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  7. Ramanathan, U.; Subramanian, N.; Parrott, G. Role of social media in retail network operations and marketing to enhance customer satisfaction. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2017, 37, 105–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chu, S.C.; Lien, C.H.; Cao, Y. Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) on WeChat: Examining the influence of sense of belonging, need for self-enhancement, and consumer engagement on Chinese travellers’ eWOM. Int. J. Advert. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kaur, D.; Mustika, M.D.; Sjabadhyni, B. Affect or cognition: Which is more influencing older adult consumers’ loyalty? Heliyon 2018, 4, e00610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Hegner-Kakar, A.K.; Richter, N.F.; Ringle, C.M. The customer loyalty cascade and its impact on profitability in financial services. In Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling; Avkiran, N.K., Ringle, C.M., Eds.; Recent Advances in Banking and Finance; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 53–75. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ali, M.; Raza, S.A. Service quality perception and customer satisfaction in Islamic banks of Pakistan: The modified SERVQUAL model. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2017, 28, 559–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gong, T.; Yi, Y. The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction, loyalty, and happiness in five Asian countries. Psychol. Mark. 2018, 35, 427–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Shankar, V.; Smith, A.K.; Rangaswamy, A. Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty in Online and Offline Environments. Int. J. Res. Mark. 2003, 20, 153–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Riquelme, I.P.; Román, S.; Iacobucci, D. Consumers’ Perceptions of Online and Offline Retailer Deception: A Moderated Mediation Analysis. J. Interact. Mark. 2016, 35, 16–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Rigdon, E.E.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M.; Gudergan, S.P. Assessing Heterogeneity in Customer Satisfaction Studies: Across Industry Similarities and Within Industry Differences. Adv. Int. Mark. 2011, 22, 169–194. [Google Scholar]
  16. Tessler, R.; Mechanic, D. Consumer satisfaction with prepaid group practice: A comparative study. J. Health Soc. Behav. 1975, 16, 95–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Westbrook, R.A. A rating scale for measuring product/service satisfaction. J. Mark. 1980, 44, 68–72. [Google Scholar]
  18. Vásquez, A.; Sahagún, M.; Escobedo, P. Customer Sore Loyalty: Process, Explanation Chain and Moderating Factors. In Handbook of research on Retailer-Consumer Relationship Development; Musso, F., Druica, E., Eds.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2014; pp. 70–85. [Google Scholar]
  19. Drewery, D.; McCarville, R. Service, Emotional Satisfaction and Behavior patterns. In The Routledge Handbook of Consumer Behaviour in Hospitality and Tourism; Dixit, S., Ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 177–184. [Google Scholar]
  20. Vojvodic, K.; Terzic-Supic, Z.; Santric-Milicevic, M.; Wolf, G.W. Socio-Economic Inequalities, Out-of-Pocket Payment and Consumers’ Satisfaction with Primary Health Care: Data from the National Adult Consumers’ Satisfaction Survey in Serbia 2009–2015. Front. Pharmacol. 2017, 8, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Medrano, N.; Olarte-Pascual, C.; Pelegrín-Borondo, J.; Sierra-Murillo, Y. Consumer behavior in shopping streets: The importance of the salesperson’s professional personal attention. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Gutiérrez-Broncano, S.; Jiménez-Estévez, P.; Zabala-Baños, M. Behavior of Internal Customer in Family Business: Strategies and Actions for Improving Their Satisfaction. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 1266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Nisar, T.M.; Prabhakar, G. What factors determine e-satisfaction and consumer spending in e-commerce retailing? J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 39, 135–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Martínez-Tur, V.; Estreder, Y.; Moliner, C.; García-Buades, E.; Ramos, J.; Peiró, J.M. Linking Employees’ Extra-Role Efforts to Customer Satisfaction. Soc. Psychol. 2017, 48, 104–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Boeve-de Pauw, J.; Van Petegem, P. Because My Friends Insist or Because It Makes Sense? Adolescents’ Motivation towards the Environment. Sustainability 2017, 9, 750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rajapaksa, D.; Islam, M.; Managi, S. Pro-Environmental Behavior: The Role of Public Perception in Infrastructure and the Social Factors for Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2018, 10, 937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Oliver, R.L. Cognitive, affective and attributive bases of the satisfaction response. J. Consum. Res. 1993, 20, 418–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Taylor, S.A. Waiting for service: The relationship between delays and evaluation of service. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 56–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hsu, M.; Yen, C.; Chiu, C.; Chang, C. A longitudinal investigation of continued online shopping behavior: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 2006, 64, 889–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Oliver, R.L.; Swan, J.E. Equity and disconfirmation perceptions as influences on merchant and product satisfaction. J. Consum. Res. 1989, 16, 372–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bitner, M.J. Evaluating service encounters: The effects of physical surroundings and employee responses. J. Mark. 1990, 54, 69–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Jiang, P.; Rosenbloom, B. Customer Intention to Return Online: Price Perception, Attribute-Level Performance, and Satisfaction Unfolding Over Time. Eur. J. Mark. 2005, 39, 150–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Churchill, G.A.; Surprenant, C. An investigation into the determinants of consumer satisfaction. J. Mark. Res. 1982, 19, 491–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Patterson, P.G.; Johnson, L.W.; Spreng, R.A. Modelling the determinants of customer satisfaction for bussiness—To business professional services. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1997, 25, 4–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Swan, J.E. Consumer satisfaction related to disconfirmation of expectations and product performance. J. Consum. Satisf. Dissatisfaction Complain. Behav. 1988, 1, 40–47. [Google Scholar]
  36. Lynch, J.G., Jr.; Ariely, D. Wine Online: Search Costs Affect Competition on Price, Quality, and Distribution. Mark. Sci. 2000, 19, 83–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Szymanski, D.M.; Henard, D.H. Customer satisfaction. A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2001, 29, 16–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dai, B.; Forsythe, S.; Kwon, W.-S. The Impact of Online Shopping Experience on Risk Perceptions and Online Purchase Intentions: Does Product Category Matter? J. Electron. Commerce Res. 2014, 15, 13–24. [Google Scholar]
  39. Hunt, H. Consumer satisfaction, dissatisfaction and complaining behavior. J. Soc. Issues 1991, 4, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Price, L.L.; Arnould, E.J.; Tierney, P. Going to extremes: Managing service encounters and assessing provider performance. J. Mark. 1995, 59, 83–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Watson, D.; Tallegen, A. Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin 1985, 98, 219–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Russell, J.A. A circumplex model of affect. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1980, 39, 1161–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Winkielman, P.; Gogolushko, Y. Influence of suboptimally and optimally presented affective pictures and words on consumption-related behavior. Front. Psychol. 2018, 8, 2261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kranzbühler, A.M.; Kleijnen, M.H.; Morgan, R.E.; Teerling, M. The multilevel nature of customer experience research: An integrative review and research agenda. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2018, 20, 433–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bell, D.; Gallino, S.; Moreno, A. How to Win in an Omnichannel World. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2014, 56, 45–50. [Google Scholar]
  46. Rajamma, R.K.; Paswan, A.K.; Ganesh, G. Services Purchased at Brick and Mortar versus Online Stores, and Shopping Motivation. J. Serv. Mark. 2007, 21, 200–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Kozlenkova, I.; Hult, G.T.M.; Lund, D.; Mena, J.A.; Kekec, P. The Role of Marketing Channels in Supply Chain Management: A Review of the Literature and Takeaways for Future Research. J. Retail. 2015, 91, 586–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Skvarciany, V.; Jurevičienė, D. Factors Influencing Individual Customers Trust in Internet Banking: Case of Baltic States. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Campo, K.; Breugelmans, E. Buying Groceries in Brick and Click Stores: Category Allocation Decisions and the Moderating Effect of Online Buying Experience. J. Interact. Mark. 2015, 31, 63–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chintagunta, P.K.; Chu, J.; Cebollada, J. Quantifying Transaction Costs in Online/Off-Line Grocery Channel Choice. Mark. Sci. 2012, 31, 96–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Brynjolfsson, E.; Hu, Y.J.; Rahman, M.S. Competing in the Age of Omnichannel Retailing. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2013, 54, 23–29. [Google Scholar]
  52. Berkley, B.J.; Gupta, A. Identifying the information requirements to deliver quality service. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 1995, 6, 16–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zeithaml, V.; Parasuraman, A.; Berry, L. Problems and strategies in service marketing. J. Mark. 1985, 49, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Laroche, M.; Yang, Z.; McDougall, G.H.G.; Bergeron, J. Internet versus Bricks-and-Mortar Retailers: An Investigation into Intangibility and Its Consequences. J. Retail. 2005, 81, 251–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Lee, D.; Moon, J.; Kim, Y.J.; Yi, M. Antecedents and Consequences of Mobile Phone Usability: Linking Simplicity and Interactivity to Satisfaction, Trust, and Brand Loyalty. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jones, M.A.; Mothersbaugh, D.L.; Beatty, S.E. Switching Barriers and Repurchase Intentions in Services. J. Retail. 2000, 76, 259–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Heitz-Spahn, S. Cross-Channel Free-Riding Consumer Behavior in a Multichannel Environment: An Investigation of Shopping Motives, Sociodemographics and Product Categories. J. Retail. Consumer Serv. 2013, 20, 570–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chiu, C.-M.; Wang, E.T.G.; Fang, Y.-H.; Huang, H.-Y. Understanding Customers’ Repeat Purchase Intentions in B2C E- Commerce: The Roles of Utilitarian Value, Hedonic Value and Perceived risk. Inf. Syst. J. 2014, 24, 85–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hult, G.T.M.; Mena, J.A.; Gonzalez-Perez, M.A.; Lagerström, K.; Hult, D.T. A Ten Country-Company Study of Sustainability and Product-Market Performance: Influences of Doing Good, Warm Glow, and Price Fairness. J. Macromark. 2018, 38, 242–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ijaz, M.F.; Rhee, J. Constituents and Consequences of Online-Shopping in Sustainable E-Business: An Experimental Study of Online-Shopping Malls. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Fornell, C.; Morgeson, F.V., III; Hult, G.T. Stock Returns on Customer Satisfaction Do Beat the Market: Gauging the Effect of a Marketing Intangible. J. Mark. 2016, 80, 92–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Nepomuceno, M.; Laroche, M.; Richard, M. How to Reduce Perceived Risk When Buying Online: The Interactions between Intangibility, Product Knowledge, Brand Familiarity, Privacy and Security Concerns. J. Retail. Consumer Serv. 2014, 21, 619–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhang, K.Z.K.; Cheung, C.M.K.; Lee, M.K.O. Online Service Switching Behavior: The Case of Blog Service Providers. J. Electron. Commerce Res. 2012, 13, 184–197. [Google Scholar]
  64. Palfrey, J.; Gasser, U.; Simun, M.; Barnes, R.F. Youth, Creativity, and Copyright in the Digital Age. Int. J. Learn. Media 2009, 1, 79–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Okazaki, S.; Mendez, F. Exploring Convenience in Mobile Commerce: Moderating Effects of Gender. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 1234–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Tung, T.T.-Y.; Koenig, H.F.; Chen, H.-L. Effects of Green Self-Identity and Cognitive and Affective Involvement on Patronage Intention in Eco-Friendly Apparel Consumption: A Gender Comparison. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Schirmer, N.; Ringle, C.M.; Gudergan, S.P.; Feistel, M.S. The link between customer satisfaction and loyalty: The moderating role of customer characteristics. J. Strat. Mark. 2018, 26, 298–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Mixed model of consumer satisfaction.
Figure 1. Mixed model of consumer satisfaction.
Sustainability 11 00431 g001
Figure 2. Amount of studies as a function of Year of publication.
Figure 2. Amount of studies as a function of Year of publication.
Sustainability 11 00431 g002
Table 1. Primary studies included in this systematic review.
Table 1. Primary studies included in this systematic review.
No.YearContributionVariables IncludedCountryCommerce AreaInstrument for Measuring Consumers’ Satisfaction
11975Tessler, R., & Mechanic, D. (1975). Consumer satisfaction with prepaid group practice: a comparative study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 95–113.Age, skepticism, readiness to seek care, social desirability bias, worries, time to get to doctor in minutes, reporting that it is inconvenient to get to a doctor, number of days wait to get an appointment, difficulty in getting appointments, waiting time at doctor´s office, waiting time at doctor´s office is too longUSAChild care and own health careNot available
21980Westbrook, R. A. (1980). A rating scale for measuring product/service satisfaction. The Journal of Marketing, 68–72.Expectations realizations for favorable outcomes, realization of expectations for unfavorable outcomes, frequency of repairs, possession of desired features, evoked set composition, insert set composition, complaint activityUSAAutomobiles, banks, watches, washing machines, refrigerators, TV, othersD-T scale: how do you feel about…?
7 point scale from delighted (7) to terrible (1)
31980Westbrook, R. A. (1980). Consumer satisfaction as a function of personal competence/efficacy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 8(4), 427–437.Personal competence/efficacy, sex, age, education, washer, dryer, refrigerator, freezer, dishwasher, range/oven.USAMajor households appliancesFive interval-scale ranging from “very satisfied” to “very dissatisfied” with a middle response category of neither satisfied or dissatisfied
41980Westbrook, R. A. (1980). Intrapersonal affective influences on consumer satisfaction with products. Journal of consumer research, 7(1), 49–54.Realization of expectations, optimism, pessimism, life satisfaction, consumer discontent, mood, social desirabilityUSAAutomobiles and footwearHow satisfied are you with this product? 100% completely satisfied/0% not at all satisfied
51982Churchill Jr, G. A., & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investigation into the determinants of customer satisfaction. Journal of marketing research, 491–504.Expectations, performance, disconfirmation, purchase probabilityUSAHybrid plant; video disk playerUsing both belief and affect multi item measures of satisfaction
61982Crosby, L. A., & Taylor, J. R. (1982). Consumer satisfaction with Michigan’s container deposit law: An ecological perspective. The Journal of Marketing, 47–60.Effectiveness, task convenience, price effect, availability, customer serviceUSADeposit lawNot available
71982Gilly, M. C., & Gelb, B. D. (1982). Post-purchase consumer processes and the complaining consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 323–328.Percent received; days until complaint resolutionUSAConsumers who complained to the oil companyNot available
81983Bearden, W. O., & Teel, J. E. (1983). Selected determinants of consumer satisfaction and complaint reports. Journal of marketing Research, 21–28.Expectations, attitudes, intention, complaint reports, disconfirmationsUSAAutomobile repair servicesSatisfaction defined via for “agree-disagree” statements like those used by Oliver
91984Prakash, V., & Lounsbury, J. W. (1984). The role of expectations in the determination of consumer satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 12(3), 1–17.Predictive expectations, normative expectations, comparative expectations, confirmation of predictive, normative and comparative expectative, post purchase evaluation, intention to repurchaseUSAFast food, beerSeven-point semantic differential scale ranging from extremely dissatisfied (1) to extremely satisfied (7)
101984Prakash, V. (1984). Validity and reliability of the confirmation of expectations paradigm as a determinant of consumer satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 12(4), 63–76.Confirmation of predictive, normative, and comparative expectative, post purchase evaluation, predictive expectations, normative expectations, pre-purchase expectations, repurchaseUSABeerNot available
111988Tse, D. K., & Wilton, P. C. (1988). Models of consumer satisfaction formation: An extension. Journal of marketing research, 204–212.Comparison standard, expectation, ideal, equity, disconfirmation, subjective disconfirmation, perceived minus expected, perceived minus equitable, perceived minus ideal, perceived performanceUSAMiniature record player“… Considering everything, how satisfied are you?” on a five-point bipolar scale ranging from very satisfied to very dissatisfied
121989Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989). Consumer perceptions of interpersonal equity and satisfaction in transactions: a field survey approach. The Journal of Marketing, 21–35.Buyer’s and seller’s perceptions of fairness, preferences, disconfirmation of expectations, satisfaction and intention of repurchasing. USAAutomobile buyingNot available
131989Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989). Equity and disconfirmation perceptions as influences on merchant and product satisfaction. Journal of consumer research, 16(3), 372–383.Salesperson equity advantage, salesperson fairness, salesperson preference, salesperson disconfirmationUSAAutomobile buyingNot available
141991Swan, J. E., & Oliver, R. L. (1991). An applied analysis of buyer equity perceptions and satisfaction with automobile salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 11(2), 15–26.Buyer inputs, amount of attention, large number of visits, amount of bargaining, amount of frustration, amount of time, little energy, overall satisfactionUSAAutomobile buyingSix-item bipolar adjective scale tested in Westbrook and Oliver (1982)
151991Westbrook, R. A., & Oliver, R. L. (1991). The dimensionality of consumption emotion patterns and consumer satisfaction. Journal of consumer research, 18(1), 84–91.Hostility, pleasant surprise, interestUSAAutomobile buying12 Item Likert type scale; seven interval bipolar scale from very satisfied to very satisfied and single item circles scale (Andrews and Witthey
161993Mano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993). Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer research, 20(3), 451–466.Arousal, elation, pleasantness, calmness, quietness, boredom, unpleasantness, distress, positive affectivity, negative affectivity, need, value, interest, positivity appealUSASoap, cereal, toothpaste, personal computer, expensive suitOliver´s 12 item Likert type scales
171993Oliver, R. L. (1993). Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response. Journal of consumer research, 20(3), 418–430.Attribute satisfaction, attribute dissatisfaction, Positive affect, Negative affect, disconfirmationUSACars12 Item Likert type scale
181993Lai, M., & Widdows, R. (1993). Determinants of consumers’ satisfaction with service: a preliminary study. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 6, 166–174.Reliance, assurance, responsiveness, tangible, empathy, billing process, service outcome (repaired at the 1st time)USAElectronic products that need repairs until warrantySatisfaction index is the sum of three five-point Likert scales
191994Taylor, S. A., & Baker, T. L. (1994). An assessment of the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction. Journal of retailing, 70(2), 163–178.Purchase intentions, service qualityUSAMallsIf I needed X services, I believe that I would be satisfied with XYZ´s services seven-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree
201994Djupvik, H., & Eilertsen, D. (1994). Customer satisfaction monitoring to understand the market-Norwegian Telecom. Marketing and Research Today, 22(1), 4–18.Cognitive part of corporative image, emotional part of cognitive image, loyaltyNorwayTelephone serviceNot available
211994Liljander, V. (1994). Modeling perceived service quality using different comparison standards. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 7, 126–142.Acceptable service, average of predictive expectations, average of product norm, average of brand norm, average of best brand norm, average of excellent service, average of performance this time, average of performance over time, deserved service, equity in relation to restaurant, equity in relation to friends, performance this time on attributes, performance over time on attributes, intention to revisit the local, satisfaction over timeFinlandRestaurantsA seven-point scale ranging from very unsatisfied to very satisfied
221994Bloemer, J. M., & Kasper, H. D. (1994). The impact of satisfaction on brand loyalty: urging on classifying satisfaction and brand loyalty. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 7, 152–160.Involvement, deliberation, commitment, repeat buying behavior, loyaltyDenmarkLocal newspaperHow much are you (dis)satisfied in terms of a percentage varying from 0% to 100%
231995Spreng, R. A., Harrell, G. D., & Mackoy, R. D. (1995). Service recovery: impact on satisfaction and intentions. Journal of Services marketing, 9(1), 15–23.Satisfaction with proper packing, with driver, with pick up time, with damage, with claims personnel, repurchase intentions, word of mouthUSAService recoveryfive-points scales anchored by “extremely dissatisfied (1) and “extremely satisfied” (5)
241996Spreng, R. A., MacKenzie, S. B., & Olshavsky, R. W. (1996). A reexamination of the determinants of consumer satisfaction. The Journal of Marketing, 60, 15–32.Desires versatility, desires picture, perceived performance versatility, perceived performance picture, expectations versatility, expectations picture, desires congruency versatility, desires congruency picture, expectations congruency versatility, expectations congruency picture, attribute satisfaction versatility, attribute satisfaction picture, information satisfaction versatility, information satisfaction pictureUSACamcorderFour seven-point scales + M14 anchored as very satisfied/very dissatisfied, very pleased/very displeased, contented/frustrated and delighted/terrible
251997Oliver, R. L., Rust, R. T., & Varki, S. (1997). Customer delight: foundations, findings, and managerial insight. Journal of retailing, 73(3), 311–336.Surprising, disconfirmation, arousal, positive affect, delight, intentionUSARecreational wildlife theme park and music concert programA 10-point Likert type satisfaction scale (Oliver 1997)
261999Jamal, A., & Naser, K. (2003). Factors influencing customer satisfaction in the retail banking sector in Pakistan. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 13(2), 29–53.Core part of service quality, relational part of service quality, tangible part of service quality, genderPakistanBankNot available
272000Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with computers, 13(2), 127–145.Aesthetic, usability, aesthetic expectations, usability expectationsIsraelPc applicationNot available
282000Athanassopoulos, A. D. (2000). Customer satisfaction cues to support market segmentation and explain switching behavior. Journal of business research, 47(3), 191–207.Service speed, convenient location, staff competence bank friendlinessNot availableServices, bricks mortgagesCustomer satisfaction associated with value and value with price. Service speed, convenient location.
292001Bei, L. T., & Chiao, Y. C. (2001). An integrated model for the effects of perceived product, perceived service quality, and perceived price fairness on consumer satisfaction and loyalty. Journal of consumer satisfaction, dissatisfaction and complaining behavior, 14, 125.Service quality, product quality, price fairness, loyaltyTaiwanAutomobile repair servicesA single item asking respondents how satisfied you are with the maintenance center, where 1 is very dissatisfied and 5 very satisfied
302001Malm, U., Lewander, T., OTP Research Group at the University of Gothenburg. Consumer satisfaction in schizophrenia: A 2-year randomized controlled study of two community-based treatment programs. Nordic journal of psychiatry, 55 (44), 91–96.Symptoms, side effects, social function, distress, career distressSwedenClinical care programsNot available
312001Martínez-Tur, V., Ramos, J., Peiró, J. M., & García-Buades, E. (2001). Relationships among perceived justice, customers’ satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: The moderating role of gender. Psychological Reports, 88(3), 805–811.Distributive justice, procedural justice, interactional justice, intentionsSpainHotelsThree seven-point scales ranging from 1: strongly disagree to 7: strongly agree
322001Jun, S., Hyun, Y. J., Gentry, J. W., & Song, C. S. (2001). The relative influence of affective experience on consumer satisfaction under positive versus negative discrepancies. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 14, 141–153.Performance, discrepancy, positive affect, negative affect dejection related, negative affect agitation relatedSouth KoreaNot available Unipolar scale modified from Oliver´s with five points
332001Mittal, V., & Kamakura, W. A. (2001). Satisfaction, repurchase intent, and repurchase behavior: Investigating the moderating effect of customer characteristics. Journal of marketing research, 38(1), 131–142.Consumer satisfaction, repurchase intention and repurchase behavior.USAVehiclesSatisfaction was measured on a five-point scale (5 = “very satisfied,” 4 = “somewhat satisfied,” 3 = “neither satisfied nor dissatisfied,” 2 = “somewhat dissatisfied,” and 1 = “very dis-satisfied”) to answer the question, “Based on your ownership experience, how would you rate your satisfaction with this vehicle’s manufacturer?”
342002Caughey, C. C., Francis, S. K., Grobe, D., & Hyunchang, E. (2002). Application of satisfaction theory to a predicted event: The Y2K computer problem. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 15, 99.Knowledge, expectations, involvement, view of technology, gender, age, education, religion, incomeUSACase of the Y2K computer bugA seven-point scale ranging from very unsatisfied to very satisfied
352003Taylor, S. A., & Hunter, G. (2014). An exploratory investigation into the antecedents of satisfaction, brand attitude and loyalty within the B2B ECRM industry. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction & Complaining Behavior, 27.Loyalty, Trust, attitude, affect, valueUSAElectronic customer relationship managementFive nine-point Likert type scales
362003Soderlund, M., & Ohman, N. (2003). Behavioral intentions in satisfaction research revisited. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 16, 53.Intentions as expectations, intentions as plans, intentions as wantsSwedenRestaurantNot available
372003Davidow, M. (2003). Have you heard the word? The effect of word of mouth on perceived justice, satisfaction and repurchase intentions following complaint handling. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 16, 67.Word of mouth balance, repurchase, word of mouth dissemination, procedural justice, distributive justice, interactional justiceIsraelPost complaintThree items based on a seven-point Likert scale anchored by strongly disagree to strongly agree
382003Wangenheim, F. (2003). Situational characteristics as moderators of the satisfaction-loyalty link: an investigation in a business-to-business context. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behavior, 16, 145.Active loyalty, passive loyalty, purchase uncertainty, product importance, switching costsGermanyEnergy providerA six-item instrument
392003Jones, M. A., Taylor, V. A., Becherer, R. C., & Halstead, D. (2003). The impact of instruction understanding on satisfaction and switching intentions. Journal of consumer satisfaction, dissatisfaction and complaining behavior, 16, 10.Positive word of mouth, switching intentions, instruction understandingUSAHealth care InsuranceA seven-point scale
402004Shih, H. P. (2006). Assessing the effects of self-efficacy and competence on individual satisfaction with computer use: An IT student perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(6), 1012–1026.Self-efficacy, competence, near term consequences, long term consequencesTaiwanComputer usersThree items based on a seven-point Likert scale: I was satisfied with computer use, after using it I’m pleased with it, after using it I feel it meets my needs
412004Lee, E. J.; Overby, J. W. (2004). Creating value for online shoppers: Implications for satisfaction and loyalty. Creating value for Online Shoppers. Implications for Satisfaction and Loyalty, 54–67.Price savings, service time savings, selection entertainment, visual escape interaction, loyalty, utilitarian, hedonic, loyaltyUSAInternet commerceThree item scales: (a) I like doing business with this internet retailer (b) I’ve a favorable attitude to continuing to do business (c) this internet retailer has desirable features
422004Moshavi, D. (2004). He Said, She Said: Gender Bias and Customer Satisfaction with Phone-Based Service Encounters. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(1), 162–176.Employee gender, gender dyad matchUSACall center environmentFive-point scale ranging from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent)
432004Alcañiz, J. E. B., & Simó, L. A. (2004). Modelo cognitivo-afectivo de la satisfacción en servicios de ocio y turismo. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, (21), 89–120.Disconfirmation, arousal, loyalty, intention to repurchaseSpainRecreational park and interactive museum clientsFive items based on a five-point Likert scale
442004Ribbink, D., Van Riel, A. C., Liljander, V., & Streukens, S. (2004). Comfort your online customer: quality, trust and loyalty on the internet. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 14(6), 446–456.Ease of use, website design, customized approachNot availableOnline serviceImpact functionality, accessibility of information, ease of ordering and navigation impact satisfaction
452005Martínez-Tur, V., Peiró, J. M., & Ramos, J. (2005). Linking situational constraints to customer satisfaction in a service environment. Applied Psychology, 54(1), 25–36.Social elements, technical elementsSpainGymAsking the subject about 10 attributes of the gym using a seven-point Likert scale where 1: very dissatisfied and 7: very satisfied
462005Homburg, C., Koschate, N., & Hoyer, W. D. (2005). Do satisfied customers really pay more? A study of the relationship between customer satisfaction and willingness to pay. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 84–96.Price the consumers would be willing to pay forNot availableNew restaurantMultiple items: All in all, I would be satisfied with this restaurant.
The restaurant would meet my expectations
Overall, how satisfied would you be with the restaurant visit just described? Strongly disagree to Strongly agree or Very dissatisfied to Very satisfied (nine-point scale)
472006Yu, Chang-Hsi;Chang, Hsiu-Chen;Huang, Gow-Liang. A study of service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in Taiwanese leisure industry. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 2006, vol. 9, no 1.Tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, loyaltyTaiwanSugar industryModified version of the Service Quality (SERVQUAL)
482006Hsu, H. (2006). An empirical study of web site quality, customer value, and customer satisfaction based on e-shop. The Business Review, 5(1), 190–193.Website quality, web information quality, product quality, customer value, performance outcomesUSAInternet shoppersFour items using a five-point Likert scale ranging from strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (2)
I was very satisfied after shopping online
I had a pleasurable experience in my online shopping
I’m satisfied with the function
I like shopping on line
492006Suh, J. C., & Youjae, Y. (2006). When brand attitudes affect the customer satisfaction-loyalty relation: the moderating role of product involvement. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 145–155.Satisfaction with proper packing, with driver, with pick up time, with damage, with claims personnel, repurchase intentions, word of mouthKoreaGoods and Cosmetics companySatisfaction as an evaluative summary of the consumption experience, based on the differences between expectation and the actual performance perceived
502007Heitmann, M., Lehmann, D. R., & Herrmann, A. (2007). Choice goal attainment and decision and consumption satisfaction. Journal of marketing research, 44(2), 234–250.Five goals (justifiability, confidence, anticipated regret, evaluation costs, and final negative affect), decision and consumption satisfaction, loyalty, product recommendations, and the amount and valence of wordGermanyConsumer electronics marketConsumption satisfaction adapted from Oliver (1997) and decision satisfaction, based on Fitzsimons (2000); Fitzsimons, Greenleaf, and Lehmann (1997); Zhang and Fitzsimons (1999)
512007Herrmann, A., Xia, L., Monroe, K. B., & Huber, F. (2007). The influence of price fairness on customer satisfaction: an empirical test in the context of automobile purchases. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 16(1), 49–58.Price perceptions, satisfaction, perceptions of price fairness, consumers’ vulnerability, and the urgency of need from the consumers’ sideGermanyAutomobile purchasesTwo measures of satisfaction: with the dealer’s service, and overall. The first includes items related to friendliness of the staff, the impression obtained when purchasing accessories, satisfaction with the information provided by the dealer, and satisfaction with the dealer’s general commitment (Burmann, 1991; Ostrom and Spreng et al., 1996). The second assessment includes items related to overall satisfaction with the purchase and intention to complain.
522007Cristobal, E., Flavian, C., & Guinaliu, M. (2007). Perceived e-service quality (PeSQ) Measurement validation and effects on consumer satisfaction and web site loyalty. Managing service quality: An international journal, 17(3), 317–340.Service qualityNot available Online serviceDimensions of web design, customer service assurance, and order management are found.
532009Kim, J., Jin, B., & Swinney, J. L. (2009). The role of etail quality, e-satisfaction and e-trust in online loyalty development process. Journal of retailing and Consumer services, 16(4), 239–247.Purchase experience by focusing on four dimensions of etail quality that go beyond website functionality or system quality aspects: fulfillment/reliability, website design, security/privacy and responsiveness, e-loyalty, e-satisfaction, and e-trustUSAOnline purchase experienceE-satisfaction items were developed by the researcher based on Fornell et al. (1996). The final set of items included a total of 11 items for etail quality and 14 items for e-trust, e-loyalty, and e-satisfaction. E-satisfaction was measured with: I am satisfied with the product of this online retailer; I am overall satisfied with this online retailer; I am satisfied with the purchase experience at this online retailer.
542010Gounaris, S., Dimitriadis, S., & Stathakopoulos, V. (2010). An examination of the effects of service quality and satisfaction on customers’ behavioral intentions in e-shopping. Journal of services marketing, 24(2), 142–156.Service quality and satisfaction, three consumer behavioral intentions, namely word-of-mouth, site revisit, and purchase intentionsGreeceInternet shoppingTwo aspects of satisfaction: satisfaction with the e-encounter and satisfaction with the process. Satisfaction with the encounter: four items with a 10-point answer scale. Satisfaction from the process with the e-store experience: four items and a 10-point measurement.
552010Tung, F. (2010). Exploring customer satisfaction, perceived quality and image: An empirical study in the mobile services industry. The Business Review, 14(2), 63–69.Perceived quality, perceived value, image, ease of useNot availableMobile phone servicesExpectations of service quality, perceived quality, perceived value, image, ease of use lead to satisfaction
562010Chung, K. H., & Shin, J. I. (2010). The antecedents and consequents of relationship quality in internet shopping. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 22(4), 473–491.Site characteristics (communication of site characteristics, shopping convenience, site design, informativeness, and security), e-commitment, e-trust, customer satisfaction, trust, positive word of mouth (WOM), and commitment in offlineSouth KoreaOnline retailingCustomer satisfaction was measured using three items developed by Sahadev and Purani (2008) and Ha and Fanda (2008).
572010Carlson, J., & O’Cass, A. (2010). Exploring the relationships between e-service quality, satisfaction, attitudes and behaviours in content-driven e-service web sites. Journal of services marketing, 24(2), 112–127.Website factors influencing attitude entertainment, informativeness, and organizationAustralia Online serviceWebsite factors influencing attitude are entertainment, informativeness, and organization
582010Ha, H. Y., Muthaly, S. K., & Akamavi, R. K. (2010). Alternative explanations of online repurchasing behavioral intentions: A comparison study of Korean and UK young customers. European Journal of Marketing, 44(6), 874–904.Customized information and perceived interactivityKorea and the UKOnline productsConsumers rely more on peer recommendations than experience with vendor in making purchases
592011Dong, S., Ding, M., Grewal, R., & Zhao, P. (2011). Functional forms of the satisfaction–loyalty relationship. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 28(1), 38–50.Expectancy disconfirmation performance versus other product or service in the category, performance versus the customer’s ideal product or service in the category, repurchase intentionChinaAir conditioner, computer, mobile, phone, refrigeratorSingle item: overall satisfaction
602011Anderson, R. E., & Swaminathan, S. (2011). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in e-markets: A PLS path modeling approach. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 221–234.Customer satisfaction and Loyalty. Inertia and trustNot availableNot availableNew instruments with multiple scaled items for customer satisfaction, loyalty, inertia and trust. Likert-type response scale with seven items.
612011Yao, C., & Liao, S. (2011). Measuring the Antecedent Effects of Service Cognition and Internet Shopping Anxiety on Consumer Satisfaction with E-Tailing Service. Management & Marketing, 6(1), 59–78.Reliability, attentiveness, ease of use, access, security, credibilityNot availableE-goods and services shoppingInternet shopping as inherently riskier for shoppers
622011Al-Maghrabi, T., Dennis, C., & Vaux Halliday, S. (2011). Antecedents of continuance intentions towards e-shopping: the case of Saudi Arabia. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 24(1), 85–111.Site-quality, trust, gender, age, educations, amount of internet spendingNot availableE-shopping; goods and services unspecifiedPerceived usefulness, enjoyment, and subjective norms, and online shopping continuance.
632011Vila, N., & Kuster, I. (2011). Consumer feelings and behaviours towards well designed websites. Information & Management, 48(4–5), 166–177.Purchase intention, positive attitudes, trust, satisfaction and perceived riskSpainSpanish textile industryPS.1. I think I made the correct decision in using this website. PS.2. Experience of this website has been satisfactory, PS.3. I am satisfied with this website, PS.4. I am satisfied with the service provided by this website
642011Cho, Y., Park, J., Han, S. H., & Kang, S. (2011). Development of a web-based survey system for evaluating affective satisfaction. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 41(3), 247–254.Affective satisfaction and design features of the mobile phonesSouth KoreaMobile phonesThe six dimensions of affective satisfaction proposed by Hong (2005) were used in this study (Delicacy, Simplicity, Color, Attractiveness, Luxuriousness, Overall satisfaction).
652011Thirumalai, S., & Sinha, K. K. (2011). Customization of the online purchase process in electronic retailing and customer satisfaction: An online field study. Journal of Operations Management, 29(5), 477–487.Decision customization, transaction customization, customer satisfaction with different aspects of the online decision-making and transaction sub-processes website (customer sup- port, order tracking, ease of ordering, shipping & handling, and on-time performance).Not available Electronic retailingCustomer satisfaction with the decision-making sub-process is reflective of the decision-making sub-process, we identified variables (product information and ease of ordering) that were directly affected by decision customization features, such as personalized product recommendation, and capture customer satisfaction with the pre-purchase decision making at a retailer’s website.
662011Anderson, R. E., & Swaminathan, S. (2011). Customer satisfaction and loyalty in e-markets: A PLS path modeling approach. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 221–234.Adaptation, commitment, network, assortment, transaction ease, engagement, Satisfaction, loyalty, customer trust, and inertiaNot availableOnline shoppingScale items for satisfaction were adapted from Oliver (1980)
672011Lin, C. C., Wu, H. Y., & Chang, Y. F. (2011). The critical factors impact on online customer satisfaction. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 276–281.Information quality, system quality, service quality, product quality, delivery quality and perceived price, and customers’ satisfactionTaiwanOnline purchase experienceUser satisfaction items were adapted from Anderson and Srinivasan, 2003
682012Myers, C. A., & Mintu-Wimsatt, A. (2012). Exploring antecedents influencing internet shopping satisfaction: the case of the apparel industry. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(8).Attitudes towards using the web for retailing, interest, convenience, prior experience, shopping innovativeness, perceived usefulness and tactile importance, and e-satisfactionUSAOnline apparelE-satisfaction: a seven-point highly likely/unlikely bipolar scale was developed by the researchers to capture Internet satisfaction. This was adopted from Yoh et al. (2003).
692013Ariff, M. S. M., Yun, L. O., Zakuan, N., & Ismail, K. (2013). The impacts of service quality and customer satisfaction on customer loyalty in internet banking. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 81, 469–473.Assurance-fulfillment, efficiency-system availability, privacy, contact-responsiveness and website aesthetics and guide constitute, e-Service quality, e-satisfaction, e-loyaltyMalaysiaInternet bankingE-satisfaction of internet banking, adapted based on the construct of e-satisfaction proposed by Schaupp & Bélanger (2005).
702013Liu, W. Y., Lin, C. C., Lee, Y. S., & Deng, D. J. (2013). On gender differences in consumer behavior for online financial transaction of cosmetics. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 58(1–2), 238–253.Consumers’ perception, importance, satisfaction for online shopping, and the same variables for purchasing cosmetics on lineTaiwanInternet marketing and online financial transactions on cosmetic productsLevel of satisfaction with the most recent online purchase of cosmetics. A Likert five-point scale was used, with 1 meaning ‘‘strongly disagree, very unimportant, very dissatisfied’’, 2 meaning ‘‘disagree, unimportant, dissatisfied’’, 3 meaning ‘‘average’’, 4 meaning ‘‘agree, important, satisfied’’ and 5 meaning ‘‘strongly agree, very important, very satisfied’’
712013Al-Manasra, E., Khair, M., Zaid, S. A., & Taher Qutaishat, F. (2013). Investigating the impact of website quality on consumers’ satisfaction in Jordanian telecommunication sector. Arab Economic and Business Journal, 8(1–2), 31–37.Websites quality (usability, information quality and service interaction) and consumer’s satisfaction.JordanTelecommunication organizationsNine items (seven-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree). (‘‘I am satisfied with my decision to purchase from this website”). Adapted from Billy, Rob & Ivan, 2008; Flavian, Guinaliu & Gurrea, 2006; Chang & Cheng, 2008).
722014Polychronidou, P., Valsamidis, S., Kazanidis, I., Theodosiou, T., & Karasavvoglou, A. (2014). E-consumers’ Perception–An Empirical Research. Procedia Economics and Finance, 9, 433–438.Relation of e-consumers with the applications of e-commerce (reasons for not shopping online, perception of security for e-commerce, their attitude when buying and their consuming satisfactionGreece E-commerceCustomer’s satisfaction was measured by five questions about e-commerce (use of e-commerce is good, smart, useful, and pleasant).
732014Bressolles, G., Durrieu, F., & Senecal, S. (2014). A consumer typology based on e-service quality and e-satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(6), 889–896.E-service quality five dimensions: Information, Ease-of-use, aesthetics, reliability, and security/privacy. Additionally: cognitive, affective, and conative e-consumers’ satisfactionFranceOnline travel, cultural goods (books, CDs, DVDs, etc.), and electronics goods, e-commerceE-satisfaction was assessed with a measurement scale adapted from Oliver’s (1997) scale. This scale measures the cognitive, affective, and conative dimensions of satisfaction on a commercial website. All items were assessed with five-point Likert-type scales.
742014Hsiao, W. H., & Chang, T. S. (2014). Understanding consumers’ continuance intention towards mobile advertising: a theoretical framework and empirical study. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(7), 730–742.Perceived value, perceived usefulness, trust, continuance intention, consumer satisfaction, and confirmation of expectationsNot availableMobile advertisingSatisfaction: How do you feel about your overall experience of mobile ads use: SAT 1: Very dissatisfied/Very satisfied. SAT 2: Very displeased/Very pleased. SAT 3: Very frustrated/Very contented. SAT 4: Terrible/Absolutely delighted. With a seven-point Likert scale, in which 1 indicates ‘strongly disagree’ and 7 ‘strongly agree’.
752014Tsai, M. H., Liao, C., & Hsieh, R. G. (2014). Customer dissemination of negative word-of-mouth: Influence of expected or unexpected events. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(10), 1675–1687.Expected or unexpected costs affect restaurant customers’ attitudes toward the dissemination of negative word-of-mouth (WOM) when service failure occursNot availableRestaurant’s servicesSeven-point Likert-type scale, with response alternatives ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree, to measure how strong the customer’s intention was to spread negative WOM as each event occurred, and used items developed by Wetzer, Zeelenberg, and Pieters (2007)
762014Eisenbeiss, M., Cornelißen, M., Backhaus, K., & Hoyer, W. D. (2014). Nonlinear and asymmetric returns on customer satisfaction: do they vary across situations and consumers?. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(3), 242–263.Share of wallet and willingness to payNot available Rail freight transportSingle item and multiple items seven-point scale. Customer Satisfaction was predicted as a second-order formative construct of expectations, performance, and disconfirmation of expectations
772014Hsu, J. S., Lin, T. C., & Tsai, J. (2014). Does confirmation always matter? Extending confirmation-based theories. Behaviour & Information Technology, 33(11), 1219–1230.Perceived utilitarian Benefit, perceived hedonic benefit, satisfaction, continuance intentionTaiwanOnline services Facebook usersSatisfaction four items adopted from Spreng et al. (1996) were used to capture the extent to which respondents feel satisfied, pleased, contented, and delighted through the use of Facebook.
782014Yang, Y., Liu, X., Jing, F., & Li, J. (2014). How does perceived value affect travelers’ satisfaction and loyalty?. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(10), 1733–1744.Quality value, Emotional value, Price value, Experiential value, Satisfaction, LoyaltyChinaTourismCustomer satisfaction from the measure by Gallarza and Gil Saura (2006) and Konecnik and Gartner (2007).
Seven-point Likert scale rated from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
792014Yu, H. S., Zhang, J. J., Kim, D. H., Chen, K. K., Henderson, C., Min, S. D., & Huang, H. (2014). Service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intention among fitness center members aged 60 years and over. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(5), 757–767.Service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentionSeoul, South KoreaSport and fitness centersFour customer satisfaction items were adapted from Oliver (1980) Participants rated each item on a seven-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
802015Wu, I. L., & Huang, C. Y. (2015). Analyzing complaint intentions in online shopping: the antecedents of justice and technology use and the mediator of customer satisfaction. Behavior & Information Technology, 34(1), 69–80.Distributive justice, procedural justice, interactional justice, confirmation, perceived usefulness, satisfaction, complaint intentionTaiwanOnline ShoppingSatisfaction five items Satisfaction: My experience of using online stores is very satisfactory. My experience of using online stores is very pleasing. My experience of using online stores is very encouraging. Purchasing products from online stores is a good idea. I like to purchase products from online stores.
812015Kim, J. W., & Jeong, S. H. (2015). The role of causal attributions in sport consumers’ emotions and satisfaction judgment. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 43(5), 803–814.Internal control and stability causal attribution dimensions and consumer satisfactionUSAFocal university football teamConsumer Satisfaction Scale developed by Madrigal and Chen (2008). It is composed of four items rated on a 10-point Likert type scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 10 = strongly agree, for example, “I am satisfied with the way my favorite team performed in this week’s game” and “If I had to do it over again, I would feel differently about selecting this team as my favorite this week” (reverse scored).
822015Möhlmann, M. (2015). Collaborative consumption: determinants of satisfaction and the likelihood of using a sharing economy option again. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14(3), 193–207.Community belonging, cost savings, environmental impact, familiarity, Internet capability, service quality, smartphone capability, trend affinity, trust, utility, satisfaction, likelihood of choosingGermanyCollaborative consumption services (CCS)Satisfaction with sharing option: (Fornell et al., 1996). Overall, I am satisfied with [CCS]. The last use of [CCS] fulfilled my expectations. [CCS] represents the ideal version of a car/accommodation sharing option.
Scale answer options anchored 1 = “strongly disagree” and 7 = “strongly agree” and included the additional option = “I cannot tell”.
832015Li, Y. (2015). Impact of impulsive buying behavior on post impulsive buying satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 43(2), 339–351.Impulsive buying behavior, mixed emotion response, and consumers’ post impulsive buying satisfactionChinaShopping in generalSelf-developed scale to measure post impulsive buying satisfaction according to the definition of post impulsive buying satisfaction and with reference to Lin et al. (2005). Responses were rated on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The scale contains three items, such as “This purchase meets my expectations.”
842016Moriuchi, E., & Takahashi, I. (2016). Satisfaction trust and loyalty of repeat online consumer within the Japanese online supermarket trade. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 24(2), 146–156.Marketing mix (product, place, promotion, and price), experience, loyalty, e-satisfaction, e-trustJapanOnline supermarketE-satisfaction was measured by a three-item scale, which included items on product choices, overall satisfaction with purchases and overall satisfying online shopping experiences.
852015Gao, L., Waechter, K. A., & Bai, X. (2015). Understanding consumers’ continuance intention towards mobile purchase: A theoretical framework and empirical study–A case of China. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 249–262.System information quality, privacy and security concerns, trust, service quality, flow, and satisfactionChinaMobile purchaseItems measuring satisfaction towards mobile purchase adapted from Bhattacherjee (2001). Items of satisfaction reflect respondents’ satisfaction, contentment and pleasure. All items were measured using a seven-point Likert-type scale with anchors from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree
862016Rivera, J. J., Bigne, E., & Curras-Perez, R. (2016). Effects of corporate social responsibility perception on consumer satisfaction with the brand. Spanish Journal of Marketing-ESIC, 20(2), 104–114.Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR, brand attitudes) and consumer satisfactionSpainSportswear sectorCustomer satisfaction, sat1: The brand meets my expectations, sat2: The brand has the expected quality, sat3: I am satisfied to buy this brand; sat4: I have done the right thing by buying this brand
872016Keng, C. J., Chang, W. H., Chen, C. H., & Chang, Y. Y. (2016). Mere virtual presence with product experience affects brand attitude and purchase intention. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 44(3), 431–444.Mere virtual presence and mere virtual presence with product experience) led to different brand attitude and purchase intentionTaipei, TaiwanApparel brands consumeNot available
882016Yu, Y., Jing, F., Su, C. T., Zhou, N., & Nguyen, B. (2016). Impact of material versus experiential purchase types on happiness: The moderating role of self-discrepancy. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(6), 571–579.Self-discrepancy, purchase happiness, type of purchase (experiential versus material)ChinaMaterial purchasesNot available
892016Hopp, T., & Barker, V. (2016). Investigating the influence of age, social capital affinity, and flow on positive outcomes reported by e-commerce site users. Behaviour & Information Technology, 35(5), 380–393.Age, social capital affinity (the sense of community and likeness felt for people online), experience of flow (concentrated engagement in/enjoyment of an activity), e-commerce sites’ satisfaction, affirmation, incidental knowledge gain, and focused knowledge gain.USAE-commerce sitesE-commerce site satisfaction; three items were adapted from Hennig-Thurau, Gwinner, and Gremler’s (2002) customer satisfaction scale, Casaló, Flavián, and Guinaliu’s (2008), and O’Cass and Carlson’s (2010) website satisfaction scales. The measures were as follows: choosing to visit this site was a wise one; this site does a good job of satisfying my needs; and I did the right thing in visiting this site
902016Zboja, J. J., Laird, M. D., & Bouchet, A. (2016). The moderating role of consumer entitlement on the relationship of value with customer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(3), 216–224.Consumer entitlement, satisfaction, service quality, and valueUSASeason ticket holders of the National Hockey League franchiseSatisfaction was measured via a five-item subscale of Oliver’s (1997) consumption satisfaction scale. Five-point Likert- type format with endpoints of strongly disagree (1) and strongly agree (5).
912016Chung, B. D., Park, J. H., Koh, Y. J., & Lee, S. (2016). User satisfaction and retention of mobile telecommunications services in Korea. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32(7), 532–543.Mobile telecommunications features and services (usability, connection stability and speed, apps directly provided and managed by mobile telecommunications companies, packet loss) and customers satisfactionSouth KoreaMobile telecommunications services and featuresQuestionnaire for user satisfaction (translated into English). Overall Satisfaction (I am satisfied with my mobile telecommunications services), and 13 items for detailed satisfaction:
922016Savoy, A., & Salvendy, G. (2016). Factors for Customer Information Satisfaction: User Approved and Empirically Evaluated. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 32(9), 695–707.Content preparation: general product description, member trans- action, product appearance, customer service, product quality, company reputation, policies., and customer satisfaction.USAOnline customersCustomer information satisfaction
932016Doucé, L., Janssens, W., Leroi-Werelds, S., & Streukens, S. (2016). What to diffuse in a gender-specific store? The effect of male and female perfumes on customer value and behaviour. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(3), 271–280.The pleasantness and stimulating nature of the perfumes, product excellence, and social dimension of customer value (aesthetic value and altruistic value), play and efficiency, customer satisfaction, and repurchase intentionBelgiumPerfume consumeCustomer satisfaction, Wirtz and Lee’s (2003) 11-point scale was used, answered on seven-point Likert scales
942017Tudoran, A. A., & Olsen, S. O. (2017). Analyzing the returns of the first transaction satisfaction on intention to purchase and willingness to pay: Evidence for new food products. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 16(4), 372–386.First transaction consumer satisfaction, purchase intention, willingness to pay for new food productsSpain (A Coruna, Valencia, and Madrid)Three product-testing field experiments with consumers in different natural settingsA multi-item seven-point semantic differential scale from −3 to 3 was used to measure consumers’ degree of satisfaction with the new product
952017Park, E., Kim, K. J., & Kwon, S. J. (2017). Corporate social responsibility as a determinant of consumer loyalty: An examination of ethical standard, satisfaction, and trust. Journal of Business Research, 76, 8–13.Value relevance, ethical standard, commitment to Corporate Social Responsibility, satisfaction, trust, and loyaltySouth KoreaRetail consumersST1: My experience with the company has been satisfactory.ST2: The company provides excellent services or products. ST3: My choice to contact the company was a wise one. Chen, Lai, and Ho (2015), Loureiro, Sardinha, and Reijnders (2012)
962017Nisar, T. M., & Prabhakar, G. (2017). What factors determine e-satisfaction and consumer spending in e-commerce retailing? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 39, 135–144.E- satisfaction on consumer spending in e-commerce retailersUSAE-commerce retailersCustomer satisfaction (the America’s customer satisfaction index (ACSI) score is calculated as a weighted average of three survey questions that measure different facets of satisfaction with a product or service). First, please consider all your experiences to date with (Company/Brand). Using a ten-point scale on which “1” means “very dissatisfied” and “10” means “very satisfied, how satisfied are you with (Company/Brand)?
972017Shi, X., & Liao, Z. (2017). Online consumer review and group-buying participation: The mediating effects of consumer beliefs. Telematics and Informatics, 34(5), 605–617.Online consumer review, consumer perceptions of effectiveness, structure assurance, and familiarity with intermediary, consumer satisfaction and trust in intermediary, consumer continuance use of online group-buyingHong KongIndividual consumers of GrouponSAT1: I make effective decisions of group-buying. SAT2: I am satisfied with online group-buying services. SAT3: My expectation is met from online group-buying. SAT4: I am happy with the online group-buying process
982017Qazi, A., Tamjidyamcholo, A., Raj, R. G., Hardaker, G., & Standing, C. (2017). Assessing consumers’ satisfaction and expectations through online opinions: Expectation and disconfirmation approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 450–460.Online opinions, expectations, perceived performance, disconfirmation, and satisfactionNot available Users of the groups online information systems, such as digital marketing, tourism, business intelligence, and the hotel industry.Satisfaction 1. Using the online review makes me feel very satisfied, 2. Using the online reviews makes me feel very connected with others, 3. Using the online reviews makes me feel pleased with others
992017Garaus, M. (2017). Atmospheric harmony in the retail environment: Its influence on store satisfaction and re-patronage intention. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 16(3), 265–278.Atmospheric harmony, environmental pleasure, satisfaction, re-patronage intention, atmospheric responsivenessNot available Shopping experience local wine retail store during a wine tasting eventA single item assessed store satisfaction (Bloemer and de Ruyter, 1998). Example: I am satisfied with this store.
1002017Qazi, A., Tamjidyamcholo, A., Raj, R. G., Hardaker, G., & Standing, C. (2017). Assessing consumers’ satisfaction and expectations through online opinions: Expectation and disconfirmation approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 450–460.Positive, negative and neutral sentiment words, online opinions, expectations, perceived performance, disconfirmation, and satisfactionMalaysiaTourism, business intelligence, and the hotel industrySatisfaction level of users associated with online reviews is calculated by three items (SA1–3). 1. Using the online review makes me feel very satisfied (strongly disagree … strongly agree), 2. Using the online reviews makes me feel very connected with others (strongly disagree/strongly agree); 3. Using the online reviews makes me feel pleased with others
1012017Ruiz-Mafe, C., Chatzipanagiotou, K., & Curras-Perez, R. (2018). The role of emotions and conflicting online reviews on consumers’ purchase intentions. Journal of Business Research, 89, 336–344.Informativeness, persuasiveness, helpfulness, credibility, empathy, pleasure, arousal, intention to visitSpainSpanish users of the TripAdvisor websiteMultiple items scale from Cheung et al. (2012); Zhang et al. (2014), Yin et al. (2014)
1022017Zhao, Y., Xu, X., & Wang, M. (2019). Predicting overall customer satisfaction: Big data evidence from hotel online textual reviews. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 76, 111–121.Subjectivity, diversity, readability, polarity, length, involvementNot availableReviews from tripadvisor.comCustomer Ratings, overall customer evaluation of the hotel from one to five ratings
1032017Han, H., Kim, W., Lee, S., & Kim, H. R. (2018). How image congruity and satisfaction impact customer retention at luxury restaurants: A moderated mediation framework. Social Behavior and Personality, 46(6), 891–904.Image congruity and customer satisfaction, and customer retentionSouth KoreaLuxury restaurantsThree items were used to measure customer satisfaction (e.g., “Overall, I am satisfied with my experience at this restaurant.”). five-point Likert type scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree)
1042017Martínez-Tur, V., Estreder, Y., Moliner, C., García-Buades, E., Ramos, J., & Peiró, J. M. (2017). Linking Employees’ Extra-Role Efforts to Customer Satisfaction. Social Psychology, 48 (2), 104–112.Customer complaints (“presence” versus “absence”), extra-role customer service, and customer satisfactionSpainHotel’s customers and service centersThree-item reduced version (Gotlieb, Grewal, & Brown, 1994) of the measure of customer satisfaction developed by Oliver (1980): “I feel happy about my decision concerning the choice of this hotel”; “I believe I did the right thing when I used this hotel”; and “In the future, I will be happy to come to this hotel.” Likert type scale”: 1 (=strongly disagree); 7 (=strongly agree).
Table 2. Amount of primary studies as a function of the country.
Table 2. Amount of primary studies as a function of the country.
QuantityCountry
1Belgium
1Denmark
1Finland
1France
1Hong Kong
1Japan
1Jordanian
1Norway
1Pakistan
2Greece
2Israel
2Malaysia
2Sweden
20Unidentified
36USA
4China
4Germany
7South Korea
8Spain
8Taipei, Taiwan

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Palací, F.; Salcedo, A.; Topa, G. Cognitive and Affective Antecedents of Consumers’ Satisfaction: A Systematic Review of Two Research Approaches. Sustainability 2019, 11, 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020431

AMA Style

Palací F, Salcedo A, Topa G. Cognitive and Affective Antecedents of Consumers’ Satisfaction: A Systematic Review of Two Research Approaches. Sustainability. 2019; 11(2):431. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020431

Chicago/Turabian Style

Palací, Francisco, Alejandro Salcedo, and Gabriela Topa. 2019. "Cognitive and Affective Antecedents of Consumers’ Satisfaction: A Systematic Review of Two Research Approaches" Sustainability 11, no. 2: 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020431

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop