Next Article in Journal
Why Do Consumers Switch to Biodegradable Plastic Consumption? The Effect of Push, Pull and Mooring on the Plastic Consumption Intention of Young Consumers
Previous Article in Journal
Bibliometric Review of Magnetorheological Materials
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 23
10.3390/su142315818
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Travelers’ Perceived Value of Robot Services in the Airline Industry: Focusing on Demographic Characteristics

by
Jinsoo Hwang
1,
Heather Markham Kim
1,
Kyuhyeon Joo
1,
Muhammad Nawaz
2 and
Joonho Moon
3,*
1
The College of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Republic of Korea
2
School of Business Administration, National College of Business Administration & Economics, Lahore 54660, Pakistan
3
Department of Tourism Administration, Kangwon National University, Chooncheon 24341, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(23), 15818; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315818
Submission received: 14 November 2022 / Revised: 25 November 2022 / Accepted: 25 November 2022 / Published: 28 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Tourism, Culture, and Heritage)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study examined travelers’ perceived value for a service robot at an airport. The study explored the differences in perceived value, which included utilitarian value and hedonic value, based on the travelers’ demographic characteristics. In addition, we investigated the effect of the two subcategories of perceived value on intentions to use an airport. The study included 322 samples for the statistical analysis. The results of the analysis revealed significant differences in the perceived utilitarian value in regards to age, education, and marital status. A significant difference in perceived hedonic value was also found in relation to marital status. Lastly, the results of the regression revealed that utilitarian and hedonic value positively affected intentions to use an airport. This study presents theoretical contributions as the first examination of the perceived value of robot services at an airport, as well as offering practical suggestions for the airline industry.

1. Introduction

Technology plays an important role in making our lives easier, and it is an essential factor for providing innovative services to consumers in the hospitality and tourism industry [1,2]. Among the various forms of technology, which include big data, drones, robots, self-driving vehicles, and facial recognition, robots are attracting a lot of attention due to their following advantages. First, robots can replace humans, so they have the advantage of saving labor costs [3]. Second, people are more likely to use non-face-to-face services after the COVID-19 pandemic because of the risk of infection [4,5], so they prefer to interacts with robots in the service industry [6].
The role of robots in the airline industry has recently attracted attention. Travelers often look for staff at an airport in order to obtain various types of information regarding, for example, baggage check-in, airport administration, how to enter and exit the terminal, the boarding of passengers, and departure lounges, and it is sometimes difficult to meet these demands during rush hour. It is somewhat difficult for travelers to find information desks, since airports are spacious. Airports have recently introduced service robots in order to solve this problem [7].
Service robots can be found in several major airports around the world. For example, in the Frankfurt Airport, self-driven guide robots have been employed [8], and Spencer is an airport service robot that leads passengers to their boarding gate in the Amsterdam Schiphol Airport [9]. A service robot named Josie Pepper helps passengers in the Munich Airport with shuttle services, shopping, and restaurant information, as well as answering questions regarding flights [9]. Troika can be found in the Incheon Airport in Seoul, escorting passengers to their gates and providing weather information for destination cities [10,11]. In the Mt. Fuji Shizuoka Airport in Japan, Reborg-Z is a robot that provides guiding and security services and can interpret passengers’ emotions to communicate with them [12]. The robots employed in the Pittsburgh Airport take on other roles by cleaning the airport’s floors with ultraviolet rays [13]. Overall, airport service robots help guests with shuttle services, provide directions, answer questions, and even help scan boarding passes and luggage tags [14]. Some robots expand their customer service role by taking photos with guests or providing entertainment by singing songs [14]. In general, airport patrons are satisfied with service robot interactions; however, passengers were unsatisfied with Spencer’s service failures [12].
Studies conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic focused on social responsibilities in the airline industry [15,16]; in the current study, we tried to apply the concept of perceived value to the service robots in the airline industry. Perceived value has been studied for a long time in the field of consumer behavior [17,18]. The concept of perceived value can be defined as an overall evaluation of the utility of a product/service for consumers [19]. Perceived value is more importantly considered a crucial factor for forming behavioral intentions in the service industry [20,21]. Studies have been conducted on perceived value across several industries, but the research on perceived value in relation to robots in the airport industry is very limited. For example, Ryu et al. [22] confirmed the positive effect of perceived value in the fast casual restaurant industry. Ozturk et al. [23] assessed utilitarian and hedonic value in relation to mobile hotel booking technology and found that both utilitarian and hedonic value had a significantly positive effect on continued use. In the context of Airbnb, hedonic and utilitarian value was positively correlated with customer satisfaction [24]. Teng and Wu [25] discovered that utilitarian and hedonic value positively impacted preference in the green restaurant field. Lastly, perceived utilitarian and hedonic value had a positive effect on purchase intention regarding AI technology for online shopping platforms [26].
This study also focused on travelers’ demographic characteristics when identifying the importance of perceived value, which distinguishes it from prior research. It is widely known that demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, education, and income, are a key factors that affect consumer behavior, because customers’ perceptions of a product/service differ according to their gender, age, education, and income [27,28]. These demographic characteristics are also deemed to be significant factors in the context of new technology [29,30]. This study examined the differences in perceived value according to demographic characteristics.
In summary, the importance of robot service in airports has recently been emphasized, but there is no research related to this issue. More importantly, previous studies have investigated perceived value in diverse industries, but it still is necessary to extend the exploration of perceived value to service robots in the airline industry. To overcome this gap, the purposes of the current study were to explore the differences in perceived value based the demographic characteristics, such as gender, age, education level, marital status, and monthly income. Additionally, we investigated the effects of perceived value on intention to use. The results of this study will aid in the development of marketing strategies for introducing service robots in the airline industry.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Perceived Value

The concept of perceived value has been studied for a long time in order to explain the process of behavioral intention formation in the field of consumer behavior [31,32]. The most commonly accepted definition of perceived value is “the consumer’s overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given” [19] (p. 14). In other words, consumers perceive value according to the difference between the benefits obtained from a product and the payment that is made in order to purchase the product [33]. Thus, consumers would have a high level of perceived value when the benefits are greater than the costs, whereas they are more likely to have a low level of perceived value when the benefits are lower than the costs.
When the concept was first introduced, perceived value was measured based on a one-dimensional construct, which tried to understand consumer behavior [19]. For example, Chi et al. [34] studied perceived value in rural tourism and discovered that perceived value significantly affected tourist satisfaction. However, the limitation that it is difficult to fully understand consumer behavior with a one-dimensional construct has been raised [35]. Consequently, various researchers have suggested a multidimensional construct of perceived value in order to identify consumer behavior. For instance, Mattsson [36] categorized perceived value into five subdimensions, namely functional, social, emotional, epistemic, and conditional. Grewal et al. [37] divided perceived value into acquisition value and transaction value. In the study of Sweeney and Soutar [38], perceived value was categorized into four groups: quality, emotional, social, and price. In this model, quality, emotional, and social are the types of benefits, and price is the cost. Sanchez et al. [39] classified perceived value into three subgroups, namely functional, emotional, and social. Lee et al. [40] applied emotional value, functional value, and overall value to explain tourist satisfaction. The two perceived-value dimensions of utilitarian value and hedonic value, which were suggested by Babin, Darden, and Griffin [40], are used the most. Consumer behavior includes both utilitarian and hedonic outputs; however, research in the early 1980s only considered the utilitarian element [41,42]. Hence, Babin et al. [40] created a multidimensional concept of perceived value that included utilitarian and hedonic value.
Utilitarian value refers to efficient, functional, and practical attributes, whereas hedonic value indicates esthetic, experiential, and emotional characteristics [42,43]. For example, when consumers evaluate a certain product/service, their perceived hedonic value is more subjective than their perceived utilitarian value, because it is evaluated from an emotional perspective [41,44]. In addition, utilitarian and hedonic value has been consistently applied to the new-technology-based service field. First, Chiu et al. [45] showed that utilitarian and hedonic value is the key factor that affects repeat purchase intention in the context of B2C e-commerce. Lee and Lyu [46] also discovered that utilitarian and hedonic value enhances intentions to use in the context of self-service technology.

2.2. Effects of Demographic Characteristics on Perceived Value

It is necessary for companies to establish marketing strategies according to the demographic characteristics of consumers, because consumers behave differently according to their gender, age, education level, marital status, income level, and occupation [47]. These types of marketing strategies that consider demographic characteristics play an important role in improving corporate sales [48]. Empirical research has also been carried out on the differences in consumer behavior based on demographic characteristics. For example, Cho and Hwang [49] investigated the differences in motivated consumer innovativeness, considering functional, hedonic, cognitive, and social motivations based on demographic characteristics in the context of drone food delivery services, and they found significant differences in regards to gender. Joo and Hwang [50] explored the importance of demographic characteristics based on SERVQUAL, which assessed tangibles, responsiveness, empathy, reliability, and assurance, in the context of robotic restaurants. The results of the data analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences in terms of gender, age, education level, and income level. In addition, Yarimoglu [51] investigated demographic differences in service quality and perceived value in private online shopping clubs, finding significant differences in regards to age. Ahn [52] also studied the effectiveness of demographic characteristics in understanding Malaysian customers’ perceived value of the integrated resort sector. The results of the data analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences in terms of gender and marital status. Zhao et al. [53] also found demographic differences in tourists’ perceived value, with significant differences observed in regards to gender. They based their study the stratification theory [54], which considers the differences between social members and groups that arise due to individuals’ social resources and characteristics. Based on the above empirical evidence and theory, it can be inferred that there are significant differences in perceived value according to travelers’ demographic characteristics. As a result, the following hypotheses were postulated.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
There are significant differences in the mean for perceived value based on demographic characteristics.

2.3. Intetion to Use

The concept of intention to use can be defined as “the degree to which a person has formulated conscious plans to perform or not perform some specified future behavior” [55] (p. 214). Consumers are more likely to have a high level of intention to use a certain product/service when they have made a favorable evaluation of the product/service [56]. For instance, Pandža Bajs [57] found that the perceived value of tourist destinations had a positive effect on intentions to visit in the future. Gan and Wang [58] discovered that the perceived value of social commerce positively affected intentions to use. There is also sufficient evidence of the effect of perceived value on intentions to use in the context of technology [59,60]. For example, Ozturk et al. [23] identified utilitarian and hedonic value as key factors affecting intentions to use in the field of a mobile hotel booking environment. Ashraf, Hou, and Ahmad [59] also found that utilitarian and hedonic value played an important role in the formation of intentions to use in the context of WeChat. As a result, the following hypotheses were postulated.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Utilitarian value has a positive influence on intentions to use an airport.
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Hedonic value has a positive influence on intentions to use an airport.

3. Methodology

3.1. Measurement and Analysis

We constructed measurement items based on previous studies to test the proposed hypotheses [23,56,59,60]. First, utilitarian value was measured based on three items related to the usefulness, practicality, and convenience of the robot service. Second, hedonic value was measured by three items related to the experience of using the robot service, i.e., whether it was happy, joyful, or pleasing. Third, intentions to use were measured by three items regarding willingness to use an airport in the future, the likelihood of using an airport in the future, and the continuation of airport use. All 9 items were measured using a Likert scale, which ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Lastly, demographic characteristics such as gender, age, education level, marital status, and monthly income were included in the questionnaire.
In addition, in order to test the reliability of the measurement items, we performed a pre-test online survey involving 30 tourists. According to this test, there were no problems with the questionnaire.
We used the SPSS statistical program as an analysis tool. First, the collected responses were subjected to data cleaning, and frequency analysis was conducted in order to identify the characteristics of the sample. Prior to hypothesis testing, principal component analysis was conducted to verify the reliability and validity of the constructs. We carried out a t-test (gender) and one-way ANOVA (age, education, marital status, and monthly income) to test differences according to demographic characteristics. Lastly, multiple regression analysis was performed to test the hypotheses on causal relationships: (1) the effect of utilitarian value on intentions to use and (2) the effect of hedonic value on intentions to use.

3.2. Data Collection

The data for this study were collected by a market research company via the distribution of an online survey. The participants for the study included consumers who had previously received information from service robots (SRs). Consumers have different perceptions of service robots due to the COVID-19 pandemic [3,61]. Therefore, the survey sample consisted of visitors to the Incheon International Airport, which is located in South Korea, after the beginning of the pandemic. Troika is the name of the service robots employed in Incheon Airport [11]. The service robots at Incheon Airport are self-driven robots who guide passengers to their departing gates or other locations within the airport; scan boarding passes to provide flight information; offer weather information; and can answer questions in four different languages, namely English, Korean, Chinese, and Japanese [10,62]. A total of 2225 surveys were distributed online via email. Three hundred and thirty surveys were collected, and eight of them were excluded upon a visual inspection and a Mahalanobis distance check. A total of 322 samples were used for the final analysis.

4. Data Analysis

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

The demographic profiles of the participants included gender, age, education, marital status, and income, which are shown in Table 1. Of the respondents, 50.6% were female and 49.4% were male. Approximately 37.0% (n = 119) of the respondents were between 30 and 39 years old, and 29.2% (n = 94) were between 20 and 29 years old. The majority of the respondents, i.e., 68.9%, held a bachelor’s degree (n = 222). In regards to marital status, 50.0% of the respondents were married (n = 161) and 48.8% were single (n = 157). In regards to income, 32.6% earned between USD 2001 and 3000 each month (n = 105).

4.2. Principal Components Analysis

Table 2 illustrates the results of the principal components analysis that was employed to assess the subdimensions of perceived value. All four factors were found to be unidimensional with eigenvalues greater than 1.0. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value was 0.856, which verified the validity of the model. The Bartlett’s test of sphericity was statistically significant at p < 0.001. All the values of the factor loadings were revealed to be greater than 0.787. The variance of the factor model was found to be 81.202%, with a 42.810% variance in the first domain and a 38.393% variance in the second domain. The Cronbach’s alpha value was revealed to be greater than 0.70 in each domain, which confirmed a suitable internal consistency [63]. The first domain was classified as utilitarian value, and the second domain was classified as hedonic value.
Table 3 shows the dimensions of intentions to use, which were confirmed via the PCA. The eigenvalue for intentions to use was found to be above 1.0. The KMO value was 0.763, which meant that the suitability of the PCA was verified. The Bartlett’s test of sphericity result was found to be statistically significant at the p < 0.001 level. A total model variance of 88.473% was observed. All of the factor loadings were greater than 0.934. The model was found to be internally consistent, because the Cronbach’s alpha value exceeded 0.70 [63].

4.3. Results of the t-Tests and One-Way ANOVA: Effects of Demographic Characteristics on Perceived Value

The t-tests and one-way ANOVA were conducted to assess the differences in perceived value based demographic characteristics. The results can be seen in Table 4. The differences according to gender were insignificant in two subdimensions of perceived value. According to the results of the one-way ANOVA, the differences among age groups and education levels were significant for perceived utilitarian value. Significant differences according to marital status were also found for both the utilitarian and hedonic value. Lastly, the differences in perceived value according to the monthly income were found to be insignificant.

4.4. Results of the Regression

A regression analysis was performed to test H2 and H3. The results are shown in Table 5. According to the results, utilitarian value had a significant positive relationship with intentions to use (β = 0.251, t = 3.910, and p < 0.05), which supported H2. Hedonic value also had a significant positive impact on intentions to use (β = 0.301, t = 4.681, and p < 0.05), which supported H3.

5. Discussion and Implications

5.1. Theoretical Implications

First, the present study examined travelers’ perceived value of a robot service at an airport. Perceived value refers to a consumer’s judgement of the utility of a product or a service, including its utilitarian value and hedonic value [19,42,43]. Numerous scholars have studied this concept in the field of consumer behavior [18,31,33]. Recent studies have applied this concept to explain why consumers try new-technology-based services [1,46]. Service robots at an airport demonstrate utility by helping travelers, providing an enjoyable new experience. Thus, the present study applied the concept of perceived value and its subcategories. This study presents a theoretical contribution as an empirical study on the utilitarian value and hedonic value of robot services in the context of the airline industry.
Second, we found significant differences in perceived value based on demographic characteristics. Demographic characteristics are regarded as crucial factors for establishing a marketing strategy [47,48], so recent studies in the field of new-technology-based products/services have examined differences in consumer behavior based on demographic characteristics [49,50]. For instance, Joo and Hwang [50] identified significant differences in SERVQUAL results based on demographic characteristics in the context of robotic restaurants. The present study proposed the hypothesis that there are significant, empirical differences in perceived value according to demographic characteristics. The results of the analysis revealed significant differences in perceived utilitarian value according to age, education, and marital status but not gender and monthly income. A significant difference in perceived hedonic value was found only according to marital status. Previous studies have emphasized the gender differences in the context of new-technology-based services [49,50], but we discovered no significant difference in perceived value according to gender. Whereas these previous studies focused on the foodservice industry, the present study focused on the airline industry. This suggests that the importance of demographic characteristics can differ depending on the industry background, even for the same technology-based service. As a result, the present study offers novel findings related to significant differences in perceived value based on demographic characteristics, including age, education, and marital status.
Third, this study proved the effect of travelers’ perceived value of robot services on intentions to use an airport. Consumers are more likely to try a specific product/service when they have positively evaluated the product/service [56]. Numerous scholars have investigated intentions to use and their antecedents in the context of new-technology-based products/services [23,64,65]. Perceived value is considered a crucial factor in forming behavioral intentions in the service industry [20,23,59]. For instance, Ozturk et al. [23] and Ashraf et al. [59] demonstrated the positive effects of utilitarian and hedonic value on intentions to use in the context of new-technology-based mobile services. The present study proposed the hypothesis that perceived value has an effect on intentions to use in the context of robot services at an airport, which was based on theoretical and empirical evidence. The results of the regression revealed that utilitarian and hedonic value positively affected intentions to use an airport. More specifically, the results of this study revealed that the path coefficient of hedonic value was higher than that of utilitarian value. This conflicted with the results of a previous study on robot services in restaurants [66]. In a study on unmanned robotic coffee shops [67], utilitarian but not hedonic value was found to be significant. This implies that utilitarian value is important in the context of foodservices where products are provided. More importantly, it suggests that hedonic value is more significant in the context of travel for the purpose of happiness or well-being. This represents the first finding of a causal relationship between perceived value and intentions to use an airport in the context of robot services.

5.2. Managerial Implications

First, the hedonic value of robot services positively influences intentions to use an airport. Service robots in the travel and tourism industry are developed for utilitarian services to provide intelligent automation [7], but this study illustrated that hedonic value more positively affects intentions to use than utilitarian value. Thus, the dialog systems of service robots at airports should be friendly and joyful as opposed to formal and businesslike. For instance, a service robot could make a joke after helping travelers by saying “Have a wonderful trip, and don’t forget to buy a souvenir for me when you get back from your trip. See you!” as opposed to “Thank you, have a good flight”. This would remain a memorable and hedonistic experience for travelers, rather than just the use of a robot service.
Second, the utilitarian value of robot services also has a positive effect on intentions to use at an airport. Managers should constantly consider how travelers experience utilitarian services with robots at an airport. For instance, it would be more useful if a service robot that moved a travelers’ luggage could be reserved or called up by a mobile app. Managers could periodically dispatch mystery shoppers to find improvement points in order to make robot services more utilitarian, and focus group interviews gathering travelers’ opinions should be conducted in order to develop new utilitarian services.
Third, the service managers at airports should consider demographic characteristics when establishing robot service systems. For instance, a navigation app in South Korea called Kakao Navi provides directions using the voice of the children’s animation character Pororo [68]. This service entertains children while their parents drive, so it is hedonic for children and utilitarian for parents. The results of this study revealed that married travelers evaluated the utilitarian and hedonic values of robot services at airports higher than those who were single. Service robots would be particularly helpful to married travelers who have to take care of children. The ability to choose a child-friendly interface for a service robot at an airport would provide a utilitarian and hedonic experience for married travelers with children.

6. Conclusions

This study successfully examined travelers’ perceived value, including utilitarian value and hedonic value, of a robot service at an airport. We found significant differences in perceived value based on demographic characteristics, which included age, education, and marital status. Moreover, the study proved the positive effects of the two types of perceived value among travelers regarding robot services on intentions to use airports. The findings of this study present theoretical contributions and practical suggestions for robot services in the context of the airline industry. The study demonstrated for the first time that there are significant differences in perceived value based on demographic characteristics. It also presents empirical evidence for the causal relationship between travelers’ perceived value of robot services and intentions to use in the context of the airline industry. In addition, we suggested that friendly and joyful dialog systems should be implemented in service robots at airports in order to enhance their hedonic value. We also suggested that it would be more useful if a service robot that moved a travelers’ luggage could be reserved or called up by a mobile app.
Nevertheless, the present paper has some research limitations. First, this study only involved respondents who visited the Incheon International Airport in South Korea, so the findings are difficult to generalize. Second, we identified significant differences in perceived value based on demographic characteristics, but a more detailed demographic survey should have been conducted. For instance, married travelers may evaluate perceived value differently depending on whether they have children or not. Numerous scholars have focused on the DINK (dual-income, no kids) family type, because this family type is increasing in prevalence worldwide [69,70,71]. We suggest that future studies should investigate married travelers’ perceived value of service robots at airports, focusing on whether or not they have children. Lastly, travelers with insufficient experience of new-technology-based services may be hesitant to use robot services, even if they have utilitarian and hedonic value. People worry about unexpected negative outcomes, a phenomenon referred to as perceived risk [72,73,74]. Thus, it is necessary to study travelers’ perceived risks for robot services at airports.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.H. and J.M.; methodology, J.H. and H.M.K.; software, J.H.; validation, J.H.; formal analysis, K.J.; investigation, M.N., H.M.K. and J.M.; resources, J.M.; data curation, K.J. and J.M.; writing—original draft preparation, M.N., H.M.K. and J.M.; writing—review and editing, J.H. and K.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hwang, J.; Choe, J.Y.J.; Kim, H.M.; Kim, J.J. Human baristas and robot baristas: How does brand experience affect brand satisfaction, brand attitude, brand attachment, and brand loyalty? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 99, 103050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Li, M.; Yin, D.; Qiu, H.; Bai, B. A systematic review of AI technology-based service encounters: Implications for hospitality and tourism operations. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 95, 102930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kim, J.J.; Choe, J.Y.J.; Hwang, J. Application of consumer innovativeness to the context of robotic restaurants. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 33, 224–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chi, X.; Meng, B.; Zhou, H.; Han, H. Cultivating and disseminating a festival image: The case of the Qingdao International Beer Festival. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2015, 39, 373–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chi, X.; Han, H.; Kim, S. Protecting yourself and others: Festival tourists’ pro-social intentions for wearing a mask, maintaining social distancing, and practicing sanitary/hygiene actions. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020, 30, 1915–1936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Seyitoğlu, F.; Ivanov, S. Service robots as a tool for physical distancing in tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2021, 24, 1631–1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chen, C.F.; Girish, V.G. Antecedents and outcomes of use experience of airport service robot: The stimulus-organism-response (SOR) framework. J. Vacat. Mark. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chuah, S.H.W.; Aw, E.C.X.; Yee, D. Unveiling the complexity of consumers’ intention to use service robots: An fsQCA approach. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 123, 106870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Milman, A.; Tasci, A.; Zhang, T. Perceived robotic server qualities and functions explaining customer loyalty in the theme park context. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 32, 3895–3923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. SCMP.com. Meet Troika, the Chinese-Speaking Robot Helping Tourists at a South Korean Airport. 2020. Available online: https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/2101253/meet-troika-chinese-speaking-robot-helping-tourists-south-korean (accessed on 25 November 2022).
  11. Miskolczi, M.; Jászberényi, M.; Tóth, D. Technology-Enhanced Airport Services—Attractiveness from the Travelers’ Perspective. Sustainability 2021, 13, 705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Hornyak, T. Meet the Robots That May Be Coming to an Airport Near You. CNBC. Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/10/meet-the-robots-that-may-be-coming-to-an-airport-near-you.html (accessed on 25 November 2022).
  13. Sreenath, S.; Sudhakar, K.; Yusop, A.F. Sustainability at airports: Technologies and best practices from ASEAN countries. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 299, 113639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, I.; Yildiz, B.; Cigdem, S.; Cincikaite, R. The effect of COVID-19 on airline transportation services: A study on service robot usage intention. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Han, H.; Al-Ansi, A.; Chi, X.; Baek, H.; Lee, K.S. Impact of environmental CSR, service quality, emotional, and price perception on word-of-mouth for full-service airlines. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Han, H.; Chi, X.; Kim, C.S.; Ryu, H.B. Activators of airline customers’ sense of moral obligation to engage in pro-social behaviors: Impact of CSR in the Korean marketplace. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. El-Adly, M.I. Modelling the relationship between hotel perceived value, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 50, 322–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sánchez-Fernández, R.; Iniesta-Bonillo, M.Á. The concept of perceived value: A systematic review of the research. Mark. Theory 2007, 7, 427–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zeithaml, V.A. Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark. 1988, 52, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cheng, T.M.; Lu, C.C. Destination image, novelty, hedonics, perceived value, and revisiting behavioral intention for island tourism. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2013, 18, 766–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tuncer, İ.; Unusan, C.; Cobanoglu, C. Service quality, perceived value and customer satisfaction on behavioral intention in restaurants: An integrated structural model. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour. 2013, 22, 447–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ryu, K.; Han, H.; Kim, T.H. The relationships among overall quick-casual restaurant image, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2008, 27, 459–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ozturk, A.B.; Nusair, K.; Okumus, F.; Hua, N. The role of utilitarian and hedonic values on users’ continued usage intention in a mobile hotel booking environment. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2016, 57, 106–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lee, S.; Kim, D.Y. The effect of hedonic and utilitarian values on satisfaction and loyalty of Airbnb users. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 30, 1332–1351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Teng, Y.M.; Wu, K.S. Sustainability development in hospitality: The effect of perceived value on customers’ green restaurant behavioral intention. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Yin, J.; Qiu, X. AI technology and online purchase intention: Structural equation model based on perceived value. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hwang, J.; Kim, S.S.; Choe, J.Y.J.; Chung, C.H. Exploration of the successful glocalization of ethnic food: A case of Korean food. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 30, 3656–3676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sandy, C.J.; Gosling, S.D.; Durant, J. Predicting consumer behavior and media preferences: The comparative validity of personality traits and demographic variables. Psychol. Mark. 2013, 30, 937–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cruz-Cárdenas, J.; Zabelina, E.; Deyneka, O.; Guadalupe-Lanas, J.; Velín-Fárez, M. Role of demographic factors, attitudes toward technology, and cultural values in the prediction of technology-based consumer behaviors: A study in developing and emerging countries. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2019, 149, 119768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hwang, J.; Lee, J.S.; Kim, H. Perceived innovativeness of drone food delivery services and its impacts on attitude and behavioral intentions: The moderating role of gender and age. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 81, 94–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Boksberger, P.E.; Melsen, L. Perceived value: A critical examination of definitions, concepts and measures for the service industry. J. Serv. Mark. 2019, 25, 229–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hwang, J.; Lyu, S.O. Understanding first-class passengers’ luxury value perceptions in the US airline industry. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2019, 28, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hellier, P.K.; Geursen, G.M.; Carr, R.A.; Rickard, J.A. Customer repurchase intention: A general structural equation model. Eur. J. Mark. 2019, 37, 1762–1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Chi, X.; Lee, S.K.; Ahn, Y.J.; Kiatkawsin, K. Tourist-perceived quality and loyalty intentions towards rural tourism in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hwang, J.; Ok, C. The antecedents and consequence of consumer attitudes toward restaurant brands: A comparative study between casual and fine dining restaurants. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2019, 32, 121–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Mattsson, J. Better Business by the Abc of Values; Studdentlitteratur: Lund, Sweden, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  37. Grewal, D.; Monroe, K.B.; Krishnan, R. The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyers’ perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value, and behavioral intentions. J. Mark. 1998, 62, 46–59. [Google Scholar]
  38. Sweeney, J.C.; Soutar, G.N. Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. J. Retail. 2001, 77, 203–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sanchez, J.; Callarisa, L.; Rodriguez, R.M.; Moliner, M.A. Perceived value of the purchase of a tourism product. Tour. Manag. 2006, 27, 394–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lee, C.K.; Yoon, Y.S.; Lee, S.K. Investigating the relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and recommendations: The case of the Korean DMZ. Tour. Manag. 2007, 28, 204–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Holbrook, M.B.; Hirschman, E.C. The Experiential Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Fun. J. Consum. Res. 1982, 9, 132–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Batra, R.; Ahtola, O.T. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer attitudes. Mark. Lett. 1991, 2, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Cottet, P.; Lichtlé, M.C.; Plichon, V. The role of value in services: A study in a retail environment. J. Consum. Mark. 2006, 23, 219–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Babin, B.J.; Darden, W.R.; Griffin, M. Work and/or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. J. Consum. Res. 1994, 20, 644–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Chiu, C.M.; Wang, E.T.; 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. 1982, 24, 85–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lee, H.J.; Lyu, J. Personal values as determinants of intentions to use self-service technology in retailing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 60, 322–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Evanschitzky, H.; Wunderlich, M. An examination of moderator effects in the four-stage loyalty model. J. Serv. Res. 2006, 8, 330–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kotler, P.; Rackham, N.; Krishnaswamy, S. Ending the war between sales and marketing. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2006, 84, 68. [Google Scholar]
  49. Cho, A.; Hwang, J. Application of Motivated Consumer Innovativeness to the Context of Drone Food Delivery Services: Focusing on the Different Test of Demographic Factors. J. MICE Tour. Res. 2021, 21, 7–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Joo, K.; Hwang, J. A study on the effect of SERVQUAL on word-of-mouth intentions in the context of robotic restaurants: Focusing on demographic properties differences. Culin. Sci. Hosp. Res. 2022, 28, 12–22. [Google Scholar]
  51. Yarimoglu, E.K. Demographic differences on service quality and perceived value in private online shopping clubs. J. Strateg. Mark. 2017, 25, 240–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ahn, J. Effectiveness of demographic characteristics in understanding Malaysian customers’ perceived value of the integrated resort sector. J. Vacat. Mark. 2020, 26, 195–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhao, Y.; Chau, K.Y.; Shen, H.; Duan, X.; Huang, S. The influence of tourists’ perceived value and demographic characteristics on the homestay industry: A study based on social stratification theory. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2020, 45, 479–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Grusky, D. Social Stratification, Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective; Routledge: England, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  55. Warshaw, P.R.; Davis, F.D. Disentangling behavioral intention and behavioral expectation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1985, 21, 213–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hwang, J.; Kim, J.J.; Lee, K.W. Investigating consumer innovativeness in the context of drone food delivery services: Its impact on attitude and behavioral intentions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2021, 163, 120433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Pandža Bajs, I. Tourist perceived value, relationship to satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: The example of the Croatian tourist destination Dubrovnik. J. Travel Res. 2015, 54, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gan, C.; Wang, W. The influence of perceived value on purchase intention in social commerce context. Internet Res. 2017, 27, 772–785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ashraf, R.U.; Hou, F.; Ahmad, W. Understanding continuance intention to use social media in China: The roles of personality drivers, hedonic value, and utilitarian value. Int. J. Hum. -Comput. Interact. 2019, 35, 1216–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L.; Parasuraman, A. The behavioral consequences of service quality. J. Mark. 1996, 60, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Kim, S.S.; Kim, J.; Badu-Baiden, F.; Giroux, M.; Choi, Y. Preference for robot service or human service in hotels? Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 93, 102795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lo, A. Will Robots Take over Our Airports? Available online: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/robots-in-airports/index.html (accessed on 25 November 2022).
  63. Nunnally, J.C. Psychometric Theory; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  64. Bondzie-Micah, V.; Qigui, S.; Arkorful, V.E.; Lugu, B.K.; Bentum-Micah, G.; Ayi-Bonte, A.N.A. Predicting consumer intention to use electronic health service: An empirical structural equation modeling approach. J. Public Aff. 2021, 22, e2677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wang, Y.S.; Lin, H.H.; Luarn, P. Predicting consumer intention to use mobile service. Inf. Syst. J. 2006, 16, 157–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kwak, M.K.; Lee, J.; Cha, S.S. Senior consumer motivations and perceived value of robot service restaurants in Korea. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Bae, J.H.; Jeon, H.M. Exploring the Relationships among Brand Experience, Perceived Product Quality, Hedonic Value, Utilitarian Value, and Brand Loyalty in Unmanned Coffee Shops during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Cho, H. On the Way Home during the Lunar New Year Holidays, Listen Carefully to the Navigation Guide. Available online: https://www.vop.co.kr/A00001463189.html (accessed on 29 October 2022).
  69. Yiwen, W.; Yiqiu, Y. From the Four Generations Cohabitation Family to the Dink Family: The Evolution of Chinese Young People’s Family Concept. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2019, 7, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Vélez, I.C.B.; Villa, S.G.; David, A.T.; Salas, J.D. Consumer society, hedonism and healthy selfishness on dink-double income no kids–couples in the city of Medellin, Colombia. Latinoam. De Estud. De Fam. 2019, 11, 157–170. [Google Scholar]
  71. Vyas, M. Dink Family: Boon or Bane. Int. J. Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 8, 713–717. [Google Scholar]
  72. Dowling, G.R. Perceived risk: The concept and its measurement. Psychol. Mark. 1986, 3, 193–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Jacoby, J.; Kaplan, L.B. The components of perceived risk. In Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research, Chicago, IL, USA, 3–5 November 1972; pp. 382–393. [Google Scholar]
  74. Mitchell, V.W. Consumer perceived risk: Conceptualisations and models. Eur. J. Mark. 1999, 33, 163–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Respondent profile (n = 322).
Table 1. Respondent profile (n = 322).
VariablenPercentage
Gender
  Male15949.4
  Female16350.6
Age
  20s9429.2
  30s11937.0
  40s7222.4
  Over 50s3711.5
Education Level
  High school diploma206.2
  Associate’s degree3611.2
  Bachelor’s degree22268.9
  Graduate degree4413.7
Marital Status
  Single 15748.8
  Married 16150.0
  Other (divorced and widow/widower)41.2
Monthly income (USD)
  6001 and over309.3
  5001–6000134.0
  4001–50004915.2
  3001–40005015.5
  2001–300010532.6
  1001–20005216.1
  Under 1000237.1
Table
Table 2. Results of principal components analysis for perceive value.
Table 2. Results of principal components analysis for perceive value.
Variables (Mean and Standard Deviation)Factor LoadingEigen ValueExplained VarianceCronbach’s α
Utilitarian value (5.14 and 0.97) 2.56942.8100.917
It was useful.0.881
It was practical.0.874
It was convenient.0.852
Hedonic value (5.21 and 0.90) 2.30438.3920.837
I was happy.0.844
I was joyful.0.814
I was pleased.0.787
Note: KMO measure of sampling adequacy = 0.856; Bartlett’s test of sphericity p < 0.001; and total explained variance = 81.202%.
Table
Table 3. Results of principal components analysis for intentions to use.
Table 3. Results of principal components analysis for intentions to use.
Variables (Mean and Standard Deviation)Factor LoadingEigen ValueExplained VarianceCronbach’s α
Intentions to use (5.67 and 0.97) 2.65488.4730.935
I am willing to use an airport in the future.0.951
I am likely to use an airport later.0.935
I will continue to use an airport.0.934
KMO measure of sampling adequacy = 0.763 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.001).
Table
Table 4. Results of t-tests and one-way ANOVA: differences in perceived value based on respondents’ demographic characteristics.
Table 4. Results of t-tests and one-way ANOVA: differences in perceived value based on respondents’ demographic characteristics.
GenderMaleFemalet-Valuep-Value
Utilitarian value5.055.221.6360.103
Hedonic value5.215.220.1510.880
Age20s30s40s50sF-valuep-value
Utilitarian value4.965.175.165.432.2440.083 *
Hedonic value5.055.285.225.401.7570.155
EducationHigh school
diploma		Associate’s
degree		Bachelor’s
degree		Graduate
degree		F-valuep-value
Utilitarian value5.355.265.174.792.4800.061 *
Hedonic value5.135.345.225.140.3820.766
Marital statusSingleMarriedOthersF-valuep-value
Utilitarian value4.985.285.664.3850.013 **
Hedonic value5.105.325.412.6240.074 *
Monthly income
(Korean won,
units: million)		Less
than
1.00		1.01
~2.00		2.01
~3.00		3.01
~4.00		4.01
~5.00		5.01
~6.00		More
than
6.01		F-valuep-value
Utilitarian value5.135.005.195.015.215.105.300.5520.768
Hedonic value5.375.085.195.175.255.255.400.5390.779
Note: * p < 0.1 and ** p < 0.05.
Table
Table 5. Results of regression: the effect of perceived value on intentions to use.
Table 5. Results of regression: the effect of perceived value on intentions to use.
Independent Variable Dependent VariableBetat-ValueHypothesis
H1Utilitarian value→Intentions to use0.2513.910 *Supported
H2Hedonic value0.3014.681 *Supported
Note: * p < 0.05, F-value = 53.889, and adjusted R2 = 0.24.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hwang, J.; Kim, H.M.; Joo, K.; Nawaz, M.; Moon, J. Travelers’ Perceived Value of Robot Services in the Airline Industry: Focusing on Demographic Characteristics. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15818. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315818

AMA Style

Hwang J, Kim HM, Joo K, Nawaz M, Moon J. Travelers’ Perceived Value of Robot Services in the Airline Industry: Focusing on Demographic Characteristics. Sustainability. 2022; 14(23):15818. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315818

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hwang, Jinsoo, Heather Markham Kim, Kyuhyeon Joo, Muhammad Nawaz, and Joonho Moon. 2022. "Travelers’ Perceived Value of Robot Services in the Airline Industry: Focusing on Demographic Characteristics" Sustainability 14, no. 23: 15818. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315818

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