Next Article in Journal
Nutrient Remediation Efficiency of the Sedge Plant (Cyperus alopecuroides Rottb.) to Restore Eutrophic Freshwater Ecosystems
Next Article in Special Issue
The Case of South Korean Airlines-Within-Airlines Model: Helping Full-Service Carriers Challenge Low-Cost Carriers
Previous Article in Journal
Doing Well by Creating Economic Value through Social Values among Craft Beer Breweries: A Case Study in Responsible Innovation and Growth
Previous Article in Special Issue
An Exploratory Research on Blockchain in Aviation: The Case of Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) Organizations
 
 
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 5
10.3390/su14052819
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

The Effects of the In-Flight Safety Information Characteristics on the Safety Behavioral Intention of Airline Passengers

by
Hayoung Kim
1 and
Namryoung Lee
2,*
1
Department of Aviation Service, Joong Bu University, Geumsan-gun 32713, Chungcheongnam-do, Korea
2
School of Business, Korea Aerospace University, Goyang-si 10540, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(5), 2819; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052819
Submission received: 15 November 2021 / Revised: 22 February 2022 / Accepted: 24 February 2022 / Published: 28 February 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aviation Management and Air Transport Industry II)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This research aims to explore the effects that In-flight Safety Information Characteristics of airlines have on attitude, customer satisfaction, customer trust, and safety behavioral intentions. A total of 477 passengers with air travel experience were surveyed and responses were analyzed using a structural equation model. Among four in-flight safety information characteristics, reliability, informative, utility turned out to have positive effects on attitude, interactivity are not significant antecedents of attitude. In turn, Attitude had a positive effect on customer satisfaction, customer trust, and safety behavioral intentions. It is believed that this research can serve as a starting point for future studies on the diverse servicescapes of airport facilities. It is believed that this research can serve as an important basic data and strategy for securing passenger safety and efficient measures for airlines’ in-flight safety information operation.

1. Introduction

In the aviation sector, safety is the first concern and is eventually related to profitability, and eventually, this is to accomplish their sustainability goals. Since the amount of damage caused by an aircraft disaster is typically substantial, safety is given first priority. For 61 years from 1959 to 2020, total 1666 cases of accidents occurred at passenger aircrafts in the whole world, and the number of deaths was total 30,132. Furthermore, from 2011 to 2020, there were casualties in 31 cases of 271 passenger aircraft accidents, and the number of deaths was total 1752, so average about 170 people are killed by aircraft accidents each year [1]. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has prepared international safety standards and standards for navigation safety and accident prevention and recommends that 193 contracting countries follow them (ICAO, 2016) [2]. This provision reflects the implementation of the aviation safety management system (SMS) to improve overall safety management and aviation safety in airlines’ management plans. It also includes safety risk management for the sustainability of the aviation industry.
All companies are undertaking diverse attempts to achieve sustainable development, and these efforts are being evaluated in various aspects. Special assessments may be added depending on the industry. According to Statista, a database company, the average number of fatalities from commercial air travel incidents is dropping. Manual handling (flight controls) and safety management account for 41% and 37% of the overall contributing factors to airplane accidents globally between 2016 and 2020, respectively. According to AirlineRatings, Qatar Airways, Air New Zealand, and Singapore Airlines are the top three safest airlines in the world for 2021.
According to ICAO, ‘safety’ is a state in which the level of risk that can cause personal injury or property loss is maintained below an acceptable level through risk management (ICAO, 2013) [3]. Airline accidents not only directly cause financial loss to airlines and a decrease in productivity of workers, but also indirectly cause distrust and anxiety about safety in society as a whole [4]. This eventually damages the company’s sustainable development. Bae and Park [5] also underline that airport safety is critical for the sustainability of the aviation industry, therefore risk tolerance that can cause accidents must be reduced to prevent accidents. Airline accidents have a significant impact on the level of safety awareness of airline users and change their preference for other modes of transportation [6].
An aircraft accident not only causes the anxiety and distrust of domestic/foreign passengers and the loss of airline’s reputation and image, but also lowers the international safety grade evaluation of the relevant country. This brings down the value and competitiveness of the relevant airline in the long term, which is working as a factor threatening the sustainability of management.
The National Transportation Safety Board of the United States reported that 96% of passengers survived from freight aircraft accidents, and in 46% of severe accidents, the survival rate was 80% for last 20 years. It also stated that the survival rate could become much higher if the passengers are fully aware of flight safety equipment and rules [7]. Thus, for the survival from aircraft accidents, the importance of passengers’ escape from aircraft in case of accident was rising up, and through the results of research on the in-flight safety for several years, people started perceiving the necessity of passengers’ interest in the provision of in-flight safety information and communication of information. Especially, in the results of examining the factors affecting the survivability in survivable accidents, the improvement of passengers’ perception of emergency escape method is a major factor [8].
To reduce the unnecessary violation of regulations and avoidable risks when traveling by plane, it is essential to acquire the in-flight safety information [9]. Especially, considering that the emergency coping method could be smoothly performed simply when the passengers pay more attention to the in-flight safety information and carefully read the safety briefing card, the importance of communication is more emphasized [10]. The safety information provided to aircraft passengers could be divided according to time, situation, and method of provision, and the contents are also different. The method of provision could be largely classified into in-flight safety information, in-flight safety announcement, and in-flight safety briefing card while the time could be divided into before departure, all times during flight, before landing, and after landing. In addition, this includes the emergency landing instructions for the survival in case of emergency.
As the prior in-flight safety information about safety functions of passenger aircraft, the in-flight safety briefing that comprehensively expresses all these types is provided in the form of live briefing performed by in-flight attendants, or in the form of images through the in-flight entertainment system [11]. Furthermore, this must be performed under the regulations related to before take-off, and the detailed items are composed and requested by the International Aviation Safety Standard [12,13] decided by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) [14] explained when the passengers know what to do in emergency situation, the possibility to survive could be increasing, and the safety briefing and safety information card furnished nearby seats provide such important information about the location of exit and emergency equipment. The safety equipment generally includes life jacket, oxygen mask, seat belt/harness, and floor lamp.
However, many aircraft passengers do not pay attention to the briefing before departure, and more than 2/3 of them do not review the safety measures [15]. Especially, Fennell and Muir [16], Seneviratne and Molesworth [17] reported that the passengers who frequently use airplanes think the safety briefing before departure is repetitive, uninteresting, and boring. In addition, the modern society is producing various information [18], so it is an important task to attract the aircraft passengers’ attention to safety information from environmental factors. Thus, the optimum measures should be researched by considering the aircraft passengers’ possible repulsion and evasion of in-flight safety information provided when boarding a plane.
As the emphasis on the in-flight safety information was increasing, many research on its effects have been performed, and most of them focused on the effects on the cognition of in-flight safety information such as emotional responses to in-flight safety information image and perception of safety information education [14,19,20]. Similar to this, there have been researches on the effects of in-flight safety information contents on the behavioral intention, so the analysis on responses to the characteristics of in-flight safety information could attract more special attention.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. First, a conceptual background and literature review are presented, followed by a section outlining the methodology and design of the research. Subsequently, results are presented followed by a section discussing the findings as well as the conclusions.

2. Theoretical Background, Literature Review, and Hypothesis Development

2.1. In-Flight Safety Information Characteristics

This study perceived the safety information provided through in-flight safety information image as communication with the airline and flight attendants, and also classified its attributes (reliability, informativeness, utility, interactivity) based on the information delivered by the image media, and then applied them to this research. The traditional role of cabin crew to maintain cabin safety focuses on evacuation of aircraft in the event of an accident. In addition, flight attendants play an important proactive role in safety management that can contribute to accident prevention (ICAO, 2019) [21]. An airline operating an aircraft has an obligation to oversee all matters ranging from crew management, evaluation, training, and establishment of safety procedures and systems to maintain cabin safety [6]. In other words, it means that all passengers, including the airline operating the plane and the cabin crew on the plane, have an obligation to maintain safety. This set of roles has an ultimate impact on airline sustainability. The level of safety awareness among airline passengers is directly tied to the airline’s sustainable growth [22].
Reliability means the degree of perceiving that the information provider has the knowledge, technique, and experience related to the topic of communication with the information receiver, and also provides unbiased opinions and objective information [23]. Furthermore, it was defined as positive energy or personal act towards the results of behavior, which would have important effects on the efficient group operation and organizational function [24]. Up to recently, there have been research aiming to manage the relationship with consumers as a fundamental element for successful business in the marketing area regarding this reliability factor [25]. Thus, the formation of reliability with customers is one of the most important elements for successful relationship marketing [26]. According to McKinney et al. [27], when the reliability of information is higher, it has positive effects on users’ behavior and attitude, and it is the most representative characteristic of information source. DeLone and Mclean [28] said that the information of websites should be the newest information for obtaining the reliability, and when it was easier to understand, it had positive effects on users’ attitude. Thus, the reliability of information is an important variable affecting the consumers’ product purchasing behavior, and when the information receivers form high trust in the information provider, it is possible to see some changes in their attitude towards the direction intended by the information [29].
Informativeness or information offering was defined as the degree in which the information provider would provide meaningful information to customers [30,31]. This brings about mutually-positive benefits through the trade of information, and also has significant effects on the formation of reliability [32]. Especially, Wulf et al. [33] explained it as the degree in which the companies would provide meaningful information to customers, which would have positive effects on mutual benefits, and also show significant effects on the formation of reliability. Jung [34] said it would mean the contents and quality of information delivered to information users. The quality of information has effects on user satisfaction and use intention based on its own characteristics such as reliability, accuracy, and vividness while the high-quality information is working as a factor that makes the users continuously use the system [35]. In addition, the judgment of service could be different depending on the quality and quantity of information obtained through accumulated consumption experience, which also has effects on the repurchasing behavior or recommendation to others [36,37].
Davis [38] presented the concept of perceived utility and perceived ease of use as the major factors affecting the acceptance and selection of a specific information technology such as computer technology, service, and software. The utility was defined as something meaning the benefit of collected information, and it could be reflected into decision-making in case when the value of collected information was highly judged [38,39]. In research on the characteristics of tourism information service through mobile devices, the perceived utility generally means the degree of thinking that using a specific product or service was helpful for the improvement of users’ usability [38]. Examining the research on the utility based on online, the consumers were highly dependent on other users’ reviews out of various product information. Thus, when the perceived utility through information was higher, the reliability of information was increased [40]. In addition, Heijden [41] explained that the perceived utility would have direct effects on the attitude toward information or use intention, and then emphasized it as an important element of positive behavior. According to the information acceptance model, the trust in the quality of information and information provider would increase the utility of information to people who would accept the information, which would have positive effects on the information acceptance [42].
In relation to interaction, its definition in diverse perspectives has been presented in academic areas such as marketing communication, advertising, and psychology [43,44]. The interactivity was conceptualized as a series of message exchange process of understanding the characteristics of an individual in the category of human communication, collecting/memorizing the individual’s responses, and re-responding suitable for the individual’s characteristics based on the data collected in the communication process afterwards [45]. Expanding it to a broader meaning, the interactivity was expressed as the characteristics of media providing the possibility of acts conducted with others in the environmental scope provided to individuals, or acts that were given and received between everything including human and object [46]. This interactive communication increases the user satisfaction, the closeness toward the counterpart of communication, and also immersion in the counterpart [47]. In online community, the interactivity is communication with the mediation of computer, plays important roles in sharing information, thinking, and experience between consumers, and also increases the closeness toward the counterpart or the favorable attitude toward the website [48]. Zhao and Lu [49] presented the results showing that the perceived interactivity of Social Network Service (hereafter, SNS) had important effects on the satisfaction, and especially, the interactivity according to the network effects of SNS had important effects on the formation of satisfaction.
Recently, there have been many research reflecting the characteristics of information quality provided through SNS and online, and this study verified the influence relation between in-flight safety information and attitude. Lien and Cao [50] studied the characteristics of WeChat social media service of China, and the motivation, trust, attitude, and positive Word of Mouth (hereafter, WOM) intention of service users. This study classified the characteristics of SNS contents information into playfulness, sociality, information offering, and reliability, and then verified the positive effects on the attitude of WeChat users. Im [51] understood the effects of health food-related SNS contents information characteristics on the brand attitude and purchasing intention of consumers. Its results verified that the information offering, interactivity, and information reliability had effects on the brand attitude, and the interactivity and information reliability had effects on the purchasing intention. The present study has drawn the following hypotheses based on the literature.
Hypothesis 1 (H1).
In-flight Safety Information Characteristics have a positively significant effect on Attitude.
1-1
Reliability has a positively significant effect on Attitude.
1-2
Informative has a positively significant effect on Attitude.
1-3
Utility has a positively significant effect on Attitude.
1-4
Interactivity has a positively significant effect on Attitude.

2.2. Attitude, Customer Satisfaction, Customer Trust

Attitude means that a person who believes a specific behavior could bring about positive results forms a desirable attitude toward the behavior [52]. In addition, an individual’s attitude toward the targeted behavior is a positive or negative anticipatory belief in the results of performing the behavior. The attitude toward a behavior includes the emotional elements of likes and dislikes such as feelings or emotional responses to an object of the behavior [53]. Tonglet, Phillips and Adam [54] explained the attitude which would be composed of favorable or unfavorable evaluation of performing a behavior. If some benefits are anticipated when performing a certain behavior, more favorable and positive attitude is formed. When no benefits are anticipated or unfavorable feelings are formed, such negative attitude and feelings are formed. Thus, an individual’s attitude could be used for inferring a specific behavior that person would perform afterwards [55]. Therefore, to draw some behavioral changes, the attitude towards the behavior is important [56]. In this study, it means the individual aircraft passenger’s attitude toward the in-flight safety information.
Customer satisfaction is a core element that is an important basis of corporate management [57]. In addition, on top of grabbing attention in the service industrial area, it is discussed by various researchers through research in the level of consumer behavior and marketing. Customer satisfaction means the psychological degree of overall satisfaction or pleasure felt by customers as a result of performing service to meet their expectation and needs [58,59]. Kotler [60] explains the concept of satisfaction as the actual performance responding to customers’ expectation. In other words, the customer satisfaction similar to their expectation of products and services and performance they felt after actually using the products, could be decided by the expectation and perceived performance. Fornell and Westbrook [61] say that the success/failure evaluation standard of corporate activities should be based on customers, instead of company itself, so the customer advantage management strategies would be needed. This study argued that the customer satisfaction would be much influenced by the process of purchasing products and services, and the customer satisfaction would be individual’s preference-based subjective evaluation of various outputs. Therefore, in this study, the customer satisfaction means the overall satisfaction with the information provider such as airline and safety including the in-flight safety information.
As a kind of expectation formed by an individual or group such as document, words, and promise, the customer trust was presented as a major behavioral factor deciding the long-term relationship between individuals or companies as confidence in a specific promise including the potential risk or trust in the counterpart [25]. Morgan and Hunt [26] explained that this trust could reduce the uncertainty when a consumer was feeling difficulties to make a decision, and divided the trust into trust targeting human and trust between organizations according to the object of interaction. As a similar concept, it could be also divided into cognitive trust formed based on others’ ability and responsibility, and affective trust meaning the favorable communication by fully understanding the purpose and intention of the counterpart based on emotional ties [62]. Mostly in the marketing area, the trust means customers’ belief in a service company, the employees’ words, behaviors, and promises [63,64], and also means their belief in which the possibility of bad results when experiencing the service would be eliminated [32]. This customer trust is perceived as an important variable for the formation of relationships with customers, and it is an essential element deciding the quality of successful relationship [65]. Therefore, in this study, the customer trust means the customers’ overall trust in the airline and safety formed through the in-flight safety information.
According to Ajzen and Fishbein [66], the customer attitude is an important variable that has significant effects on the customer satisfaction. Homer and Yoon [67] verified that the brand attitude based on consumers’ emotion and tendency would have direct effects on the customer satisfaction. Ko and Chihwei [68] analyzed the relation between attitude and satisfaction with coffee-chain brands of university students, and reported that their brand attitude had effects on the revisit intention with the mediation of satisfaction. Keller [69] said that the consumers’ strong association or favorable attitude toward the corporate social contribution activities would have positive effects on the trust.
Thus, based on the results of preceding research, this study set up the hypotheses as follows, in order to examine the influence relations of attitude, customer satisfaction, and customer trust.
Hypothesis 2 (H2).
Attitude has a positively significant effect on Customer Satisfaction.
Hypothesis 3 (H3).
Attitude has a positively significant effect on Customer Trust.

2.3. Safety Behavioral Intention

As a will to perform a specific behavior to achieve one’s own thought, plan, and goal, the intention is a will to choose a proper means. In addition, as a future behavior that an individual expected and planned, the behavioral intention is the percentage showing the transference of attitude and belief into behavior, so the effects of intention on the behavior are relatively huge [70,71]. Goode and Harris [72] explained the intention as a conscious plan aiming to put efforts to perform a specific behavior with an intention formed from individual consumer’s evaluation and normative structure. Similar to this, generally, the behavioral intention is defined as individual’s subjective will and belief aiming to show a specific future behavior after forming the attitude toward a certain object, which could be variously defined depending on research subjects [73]. Fishbein and Ajzen [74] said when deciding the matter of performing a certain behavior, each individual would rationally think about the result to increase the predictability. Furthermore, when the result was regarded as positive, the probability to perform the same behavior would be increased.
According to much research, the customers who are concretely satisfied with the objects such as service and product, show such behavioral intentions such as repurchasing intention, purchasing intention, and recommendation intention, which would be led to positive corporate performance [75,76,77,78]. According to Oliver [79], when the state and experience of satisfaction with products or services are accumulated, the state of continuous preference is shown, which is called loyalty. Furthermore, a subfactor of loyalty could be revisit (repurchasing) intention. This could show the relation with behavioral intention shown as a following behavioral factor of satisfaction. Kozak [80] examined if the tourists who visited Majorca, Spain were satisfied with their tourism activities, the possibility of their revisit intention and positive WOM intention would be high. In addition, Ganesan [81] said that the trust would have effects on the purchasing intention in the future; the uncertainty of environment, characteristics of exchange, reputation, and consumer satisfaction would have effects on the trust; and the trust would have effects on the formation of long-term relationships such as repurchasing intention between customer and company. In addition, Sam and Tahir [82] explained that the trust would have direct effects on the purchasing intention, so when the trust was higher, the purchasing intention was increased, which was led to repurchase and recommendation while maintaining the continuous trade relation.
Thus, based on the results of preceding research, this study set up the hypotheses as follows, in order to examine the influence relations of customer satisfaction, customer trust, and safety behavioral intention.
Hypothesis 4 (H4).
Customer Satisfaction has a positively significant effect on Safety Behavioral Intention.
Hypothesis 5 (H5).
Customer Trust has a positively significant effect on Safety Behavioral Intention.

2.4. Research Model and Hypotheses

The research model was developed through a review of preceding studies on In-flight safety information characteristics, attitude, customer satisfaction, customer trust and behavioral intentions. The research model of the present research and related hypotheses are shown in Figure 1. Research hypotheses are represented by arrows, and all paths are set up as having positive effects.

3. Research Design

The survey questionnaire was composed of 17 measurement items on four In-flight safety information characteristics [32,83,84,85], including four measurement items on attitude [53,86], four measurement items on customer satisfaction [59], three measurement items on customer trust [87] and four measurement items on behavioral intentions [20]. For each item, a 5-point Likert scale was used to mark an appropriate point, ranging between ‘Very much so’ (5) and ‘Not very much so’ (1). The measurement items for the questionnaire are shown in Table 1.
The survey was conducted from 1 February to 3 March 2019, on Korean tourists who have experienced on-board safety communication video through air travel within the prior year. Of the 500 copies collected, 23 copies contained insincere or definitely insufficient entries. They were excluded from the analysis. In the final analysis, 477 copies were used and a model analysis for the structural equation was conducted to verify the hypotheses using AMOS 21.0. Full sample demographics are reported in Table 2.

4. Results

4.1. Measurement Model Evaluation

Before verifying the study hypotheses, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify the validity and reliability of the measurement model. Being built on theory, this study conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) without going through an exploratory factor analysis. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is mainly used when the relationship between variables and factors is not established theoretically or logically systematized [88]. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) utilizes specific measurement variables based on a strong theoretical background or prior research [89]. Therefore, in this study, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted, which is close to the theory verification process. Initial results of the CFA resulted in the low loading of some items. From factors such as utility of In-flight safety information characteristics, customer satisfaction and safety behavioral intention, one and two factor for each variable was removed because their squared multiple correlations (SMC) values appeared under 0.4, and their standardized regression coefficients were under 0.5. From the analysis, proper fit was calculated for reliability, Interactivity of In-flight safety information characteristics using two or more observed variables. However, only three observed variables were used for the factors of subjective norms and safety behavioral intention.
The results for the factor analysis on In-flight safety information characteristics were x2/df = 3.040, GFI = 0.929, AGFI = 0.910, CFI = 0.973, NFI = 0.961, IFI = 0.973 and RMR = 0.032, revealing that the fit index was acceptable. For attitude, the results were x2/df = 5.760, GFI = 0.987, AGFI = 0.937, CFI = 0.988, NFI = 0.986, IFI = 0.988 and RMR = 0.013. Customer satisfaction, customer trust, and safety behavior intention were measured together so that analysis of the model fit was possible due to the limitation of measurement variables, they were x2/df = 1.681, GFI = 0.985, AGFI = 0.969, CFI = 0.996, NFI = 0.990, IFI = 0.996 and RMR = 0.010, indicating an acceptable fit index.

4.2. Reliability, Convergent Validity and Discriminant Validity

The tests performed on the questionnaire concerning reliability and validity included internal consistency, convergent validity and discriminant validity tests. The reliability and convergent validity of the factors were estimated using Cronbach’s α, composite reliability and average variance extracted. Factor loadings of all items were significant at the p < 0.01 level, and the Cronbach’s α of each construct ranged from 0.801 to 0.922. All of the latent constructs had a composite reliability of at least 0.70 and AVE of at least 0.50. Therefore, it was concluded that the measurement model had an adequate convergent validity level (see Table 3). To confirm discriminant validity among the eight constructs, following the criterion suggested by Fornell and Larcker [90], the discriminant validity was determined by comparing the square root of the AVE values with the correlations among the constructs. The results showed that the AVE value was somewhat lower than the square root of the correlation coefficient in the construct between all variables. Results of the correlation are displayed in detail in Table 4.

4.3. Hypotheses Test and Discussion

The results of the goodness of fit analysis of the research model showed that the goodness of fit index of the model was x2/df = 3.281, GFI = 0.869, AGFI = 0.836, CFI = 0.938, NFI = 0.914, IFI = 0.938, RMSEA = 0.069 and RMR = 0.036. Most of the other indices were also within the goodness of fit range, but the values for GFI and AGFI did not adequately fall within this range. Still, because the values for most of the other indices were within the goodness of fit range, and because those that failed to reach the goodness of fit range did not deviate significantly in terms of difference, the measurement model of this research was judged to be appropriate [91,92,93]. The results of the hypotheses verification of the final research model are shown in Figure 2 and Table 5.
The results of testing the antecedents affecting attitude showed that for reliability, β = 0.340 and C.R. = 5.173 (p < 0.01), for informative, β = 0.311 and C.R. = 4.641 (p < 0.01), and for utility, β = 0.309 and C.R. = 4.271 (p < 0.01), statistically significant except Interactivity.
This suggests that communication through safety information experienced in the airplane is recognized as a positive role of knowledge, skills, experience, mutual benefit, and efficient delivery of safety information related to the safety subject. The attitude to focus and acquire in-flight safety information can be improved. Especially, reliability was the most important factor. On the other hand, for interactivity, the results were not significant at β = 0.015 and C.R. = 0.308. In contrast with the purpose of this study, in which cabin safety communication was defined as the concept of communication, the results of the study showed that the attributes of interaction were not influenced by the relationship with customers. Therefore, Hypothesis H1-4 was not supported.
Looking at the relationship between attitude and customer satisfaction, customer trust that customer satisfaction (β = 0.926 and C.R. = 12.771) showed significance and customer trust (β = 0.964 and C.R. = 12.860) showed significance at a significance level of 1%. This suggests that an increase in the attitude toward viewing in-flight safety information increases the satisfaction and value of the airline providing the information, and builds trust.
Lastly, the effect that customer satisfaction and customer trust had on safety behavioral intentions were β = 0.457, C.R. = 3.812 (p < 0.001) and β = 0.247, C.R. = 2.049 (p < 0.05), indicating it had statistically significant effects. This suggests that if the positive satisfaction and trust are formed through the factors of the safety information characteristic, the intention of the action to implement the safety information also increases.

5. Conclusions

Sustainability is a recurring issue that comes up year after year. Sustainability, as it has always been, will be a challenge for all businesses in 2022. The consequences of an aviation accident are enormous. Entrepreneurship that prioritizes safety is the key to ultimately enhancing profitability and building a sustainable company in the aviation sector.
This study endeavored to analyze the effects that the factors of the In-flight safety information characteristics (reliability, informativeness, utility, interactivity) had on the safety behavioral intentions of air travel’s passengers. The results can be summarized as follows.
First, the findings suggested that the in-flight safety information characteristics such as reliability, informativeness, and utility had positive effects on the attitude. On the other hand, it was verified that Interactivity did not have significant effects. This presents several important considerations for forming the aircraft passengers’ attitude according to the characteristics of in-flight safety information. Once the passengers perceive the trust in contents and source of in-flight safety information, they start forming positive attitude. In addition, the qualitative excellence of in-flight safety information brings about the favorable attitude aiming to accept the information. Furthermore, the customers’ perception of value of in-flight safety information that would be helpful for safe trip shows positive effects. However, contrary to the purpose of this study specifying that the in-flight safety information would be the concept of bidirectional communication between airline and passenger, the interaction did not have effects on the relation with passengers. This result might be because the perception in which the flight attendants could provide a reply to information about image media has not been generalized.
Second, Attitude turned out to have statistically significant effects on the customer satisfaction. Passengers who understand the importance of communication and have positive anticipatory belief as a result of in-flight safety information have a satisfied anticipation of safe travel.
Third, Attitude turned out to have statistically significant effects on the customer trust.
McKnight, Choudhury and Kacmar [94] said that it would be essential to have the trust between customer and brand, and the customers’ favorable attitude would have important effects on the formation of trust. Thus, the passengers’ positive attitude could increase the trust which is an important factor for the establishment of continuous relationships.
Forth, Customer satisfaction had positive effects on the safety behavioral intentions. This means once the passengers are overall satisfied by perceiving the anticipation and belief in the factors of in-flight safety information characteristics, they would perform better the rules and procedures of safety information. It is also possible to positively predict that the passengers would actively perform the safety behaviors in emergency situations. Similar to this, much research related to the attributes of service quality presented that the satisfaction would be generally an indirect path connecting to customers’ behavioral intention [95,96].
Fifth, Customer trust had positive effects on the safety behavioral intentions. This means once the customers perceive the overall trust and confidence in the airline and safety, their safety behavioral will could be improved. The high trust in airlines includes the anticipation of reducing the risk factors in emergency situations.
In addition, based on the results of this research, the practical implications can be presented as follows. First, especially, the informativeness of in-flight safety information is the characteristic in which the information provided by the company is judged as excellent, so it is formed based on trust in the airline. Thus, the airlines should utilize the communication of in-flight safety information as a medium of reflecting the safety culture and consciousness of airline, rather than approaching it as mandatory regulations based on the Aviation Act. Second, the attitude by the perception of theme, relevant knowledge, technique, and experience of safety information forms the passengers’ overall psychological satisfaction and trust in airline and safety, and also inspires the safety behavioral will. Thus, the airlines should carefully approach the contents of safety information by fully analyzing the current status and foreign cases of safety information for the provision of in-flight safety information. They also need to deeply research the methods of communication. Third, contrary to the value-satisfaction-attitude model, this study verified the satisfaction through attitude. As the in-flight safety information has the aspect of mandatory acceptance of information for in-flight safety maintenance, it would be necessary to research the proper time and method of information exposure that could contribute to the formation of attitude. Thus, the results of this study could be used for establishing the efficient measures for the operation of in-flight safety information of airlines, and also used as basic data and strategies for the safety maintenance of passengers.
Despite the analytic results of the study above and the theoretical and practical implications, this study has limitations. This study researched the in-flight safety information provided through image before departure. The safety information provided to passengers could be divided depending on time, situation, and method of provision, and the contents could be also different. The method of provision could be largely classified into in-flight safety information image, in-flight safety announcement, and in-flight safety briefing card while the time could be divided into before departure, all times during flight, before landing, and after landing. The situation is divided into general flight situation and emergency situation. Thus, if further research verifies differences according to time or method of provision of in-flight safety information, it could draw more significant results based on the comprehensive analysis on the in-flight safety information. Second, this study conducted research on the in-flight safety information characteristics based on the samples of general airline passengers. Considering the theme of this study is related to safety, if the differences in the effects of perception of in-flight safety information on the safety behavioral intention are examined by dividing the subjects into the general occupational cluster and the safety-related occupational cluster such as firefighter, police officer, and security officer, it could be used as the definite basic standard for the roles of emergency evacuation assistants.

Author Contributions

Investigation, H.K.; resources, H.K.; Methodology, H.K.; writing—original draft preparation, H.K.; writing—review and editing, N.L.; supervision, N.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This paper was supported by Joong Bu University Research and Development fund, in 2021.

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. Boeing. Annual Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents 1959–2020; Boeing Commercial Airplanes: Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Doc 10004(GASP-Global Aviation Safety Plan 2017–2019); ICAO: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2016; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
  3. ICAO. Annex 19, Safety Management. 2013. Available online: https://www.icao.int/safety/SafetyManagement/Documents/Annex%2019%20-%20ICAO%20presentation%20-%20self%20instruction%2024September2013.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2021).
  4. Lim, J.L.; Han, J.H.; Lee, H.C. A study on the improvement plan of the safety management system in the air transportation industry. J. Korean Soc. Aviat. Manag. 2015, 13, 55–76. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bae, J.-H.; Park, J.-W. Research into Individual Factors Affecting Safety within Airport Subsidiaries. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chang, Y.H.; Yang, H.H. Cabin safety and emergency evacuation: Passenger experience of flight CI-120 accident. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2011, 43, 1049–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Survivability of Accidents Involving Part 121 US Air Carrier Operations, 1983 through 2000; Reference NTSB/SR-01/01, PB2001-917001; NTSB: Washington, DC, USA, 2001.
  8. Keoing, R. Exit-locating devices, air-craft structural strengthening and improved crew drill called “most practicable” accident-survivability factors. Cabin Crew Saf. 1997, 32, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  9. Chang, Y.; Liao, M. The effect of aviation safety education on passenger cabin safety awareness. Saf. Sci. 2009, 47, 1337–1345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Transport Canada (TC). Passenger Safety Briefings. Available online: https://tc.canada.ca/sites/default/files/migrated/700_012e.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2021).
  11. Yoo, K.I. A study on improving the perception of cabin safety information of aircraft passengers. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2017, 21, 103–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. ICAO. ICAO Requirements Related to Cabin Safety. Available online: https://www.icao.int/safety/airnavigation/ops/cabinsafety/pages/icao-requirements-related-to-cabin-safety.aspx (accessed on 14 June 2021).
  13. European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). Passenger Safety Briefing. Available online: https://www.easa.europa.eu/the-agency/faqs/passenger-safety-briefing (accessed on 14 June 2021).
  14. Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). CAA Passenger Survey Report 2019; CAA: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  15. Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB). Public Attitudes, Perceptions and Behaviours towards Cabin Safety Communications; ATSB: Canberra, Australia, 2006; p. 20.
  16. Fennell, P.J.; Muir, H.C. Passenger Attitudes towards Airline Safety Information and Comprehension of Safety Briefings and Cards; Great Britain, Civil Aviation Authority: London, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  17. Seneviratne, D.; Molesworth, B.R. Employing humour and celebrities to manipulate passengers’ attention to pre-flight safety briefing videos in commercial aviation. Saf. Sci. 2015, 75, 130–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Jung, S. The Effect of Blog Information and Blog Characteristics on Information Diffusion Intention: Moderating Effects of Blogger Journalism Disposition. Ph.D. Thesis, Dong-Eui University, Busan, Korea, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  19. Tehrani, M.; Molesworth, B.R. Pre-flight safety briefings, mood and information retention. Appl. Ergon. 2015, 51, 377–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Lee, C.C.; Wang, S.W.; Hsu, M.K.; Jan, S.M. Air passenger’s perception toward pre-flight safety briefing videos: Does it matter? J. Air Transp. Manag. 2018, 72, 20–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. International Air Transportation Association (ICAO). Cabin Crew Role. 2019. Available online: https://www.icao.int/safety/AirNavigation/OPS/CabinSafety/Pages/default.aspx (accessed on 14 June 2021).
  22. Lee, K.S. Effect of Aviation Safety on Aviation User Behavior. J. Korean Transp. Assoc. 2001, 19, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
  23. Pan, X.; Ratchford, B.T.; Shankar, V. Price dispersion on the internet: A review and directions for future research. J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 116–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Dirks, K.T.; Ferrin, D.L. The role of trust in organizational settings. Organ. Sci. 2001, 12, 450–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Moorman, C.; Deshpande, R.; Zaltman, G. Factors Affecting Trust in Market Research Relationships. J. Mark. 1993, 57, 81–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Morgan, R.; Hunt, S. The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 20–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. McKinney, V.; Yoon, K.; Zahedi, F. The Measurement of Web-Customer Satisfaction: An Expectation and Disconfirmation Approach. Inf. Syst. Res. 2002, 13, 296–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. DeLone, W.H.; McLean, E.R. The DeLone and McLean Model of information Systems Success: A Ten-Years Update. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2003, 19, 9–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Oh, M.H.; Kim, I. The effect of fashion product consumer attitudes on purchase intention and online word-of-mouth by SNS characteristics. J. Korean Soc. Fash. Des. 2014, 14, 101–120. [Google Scholar]
  30. Wulf, G.; Prinz, W. Directing Attention to Movement Effects Enhances Learning: A Review. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2001, 8, 648–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Deraz, H. Assessments of Advertisements on Social Networking Sites. Doctoral Thesis, Halmstad University, Halmstad, Sweden, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  32. Anderson, J.C.; Narus, J.A. A Model of Distributor Firm and Manufacturer Firm Working Partnerships. J. Mark. 1990, 54, 42–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. De Wulf, K.; Schillewaert, N.; Muylle, S.; Rangarajan, D. The role of pleasure in web site success. Inf. Manag. 2006, 43, 434–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jung, B.B. The Effect of SNS Characteristics on User Satisfaction: Focusing on the Mediating Effect of SNS Usage Propensity. Master’s Thesis, Hongik University, Seoul, Korea, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  35. Chaudhry, B.; Wang, J.; Wu, S.; Maglione, M.; Mojica, W.; Roth, E.; Morton, S.C.; Shekelle, P.G. Systematic review: Impact of health information technology on quality, efficiency, and costs of medical care. Ann. Intern. Med. 2006, 144, 742–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Baker, J.; Parasuraman, A.; Grewal, D.; Voss, G.B. The Influence of Multiple Store Environment Cues on Perceived Merchandise Value and Patronage Intentions. J. Mark. 2002, 66, 120–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Maddox, L.; Patino, A. Katsanis, L.; Pitta, D. The Obesity Epidemic: The Effect of Pre-existing Lifestyle on Attitude to The Ad, Attitude to The Brand and Purchase Intention. Adv. Econ. Bus. 2017, 5, 575–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Davis, F.D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Q. 1989, 12, 319–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Kuada, J.; Serles, D. Customer Relationship Marketing (CRM) Practices in Danish Small Businesses. Int. Manag. Rev. 2006, 2, 28–44. [Google Scholar]
  40. Schindler, R.M.; Bickart, B. Published Word of Mouth: Referable, Consumer-Generated Information on the Internet, in Online Consumer Psychology: Understanding and Influencing Consumer Behavior in the Virtual World; Haugtvedt, C.P., Machleit, K.A., Yalch, R.F., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 2005; pp. 35–61. [Google Scholar]
  41. Heijden, H. Factors Influencing the Usage of Web Sites: The Case of a Generic portal in The Netherlands. Inf. Manag. 2003, 40, 541–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Sussman, S.W.; Siegal, W.S. Informational influence in organizations: An integrated approach to knowledge adoption. Inf. Syst. Res. 2003, 14, 47–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Heeter, C. Interactivity in context of designed experiences. J. Interact. Advert. 2000, 1, 4–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Quiring, O.; Schweiger, W. Interactivity: A review of the concept and a framework for analysis. Communications 2008, 33, 147–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Deighton, J.A. The Future of Interactive Marketing. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1996, 74, 151–160. [Google Scholar]
  46. Lombard, M.S.D.; Snyder-Dutch, J.J. Interactive Advertising and Presence: A Framework. J. Interact. Advert. 2001, 1, 581–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Anderson, E.W. Cross-Category Variation in Customer Satisfaction and Retention. Mark. Lett. 1994, 5, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Liang, T.; Lai, H. Effect of store design on consumer purchases: An empirical study of on-line bookstores. Inf. Manag. 2002, 39, 431–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhao, L.; Lu, Y. Enhancing perceived interactivity through network externalities: An empirical study on micro-blogging service satisfaction and continuance intention. Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 53, 825–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Lien, C.H.; Cao, Y. Examining Wechat users’ motivations, trust, attitudes, and positive word-of-mouth. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 41, 104–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Im, H.J. The Effect of SNS Content Information Characteristics on Health Food Brand Attitude and Purchase Intention: Focusing on General Characteristics. Master’s Thesis, Cha Medical University, Pocheon-si, Korea, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  52. Pee, L.; Woon, I.; Kankanhalli, A. Explaining non-work-related computing in the workplace: A comparison of alternative models. Inf. Manag. 2008, 45, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Processes 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tonglet, M.; Phillips, P.S.; Read, A.D. Using the theory of planned behaviour to investigate the determinants of recycling behaviour: A case study from Brixworth, UK Resources. Conserv. Recycl. 2004, 41, 191–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. De Pelsmacker, P.; Janssens, W.; Sterckx, E.; Mielants, C. Consumer preferences for the marketing of ethically labelled coffee. Int. Mark. Rev. 2005, 22, 512–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Schiavo, R. Health Communication: From Theory to Practice, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  57. 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]
  58. Heller, P.K.; Geursen, G.M.; Carr, R.A.; Richard, J.A. Customer Repurchase Intention: A General Structural Equation Model. Eur. J. Mark. 2003, 37, 1762–1800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Verhoef, P.C.; Lemon, K.N.; Parasuraman, A.; Roggeveen, A.; Tsiros, M.; Schlesinger, L.A. Customer experience creation: Determinants, dynamics & management strategies. J. Retail. 2009, 85, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Kotler, P. Marketing Management: The Millennium Edition; Person Prentice Hall: Bergen County, NJ, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  61. Fornell, C.; Westbrook, R.A. The viciouscircle of consumer complaints. J. Mark. 1984, 48, 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. McAllister, D.J. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad. Manag. J. 1995, 38, 24–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Swan, J.; Trawick, I.; Rink, D.; Roberts, J. Measuring Dimensions of Purchaser Trust of Industrial Salespeople. J. Pers. Sell. Sales Manag. 1988, 8, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tax, S.S. The Role of Perceived Justice in Compliant Resolution Implications for Service and Relationship Marketing. Ph.D. Thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  65. Swan, J.; Newell, S.; Scarbrough, H.; Hislop, D. Knowledge Management and Innovation: Networks and Networking. J. Knowl. Manag. 1999, 3, 262–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  67. Homer, P.M.; Yoon, S.G. Message Framing and the Interrelationships among Ad-Based Feelings, Affect, and Cognition. J. Advert. 1992, 21, 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ko, W.H.; Chihwei, P.C. The relationship between brand attitude, customers’ satisfaction and revisiting intentions of the university students: A case study of coffee chain stores in Taiwan. J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2008, 11, 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Keller, K.L. Strategic Brand Management, Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  70. Engel, J.F.; Blackwell, R.D. Consumer Behavior, 4th ed.; The Dryden Press: New York, NY, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
  71. Ajzen, I.; Albarracin, D.; Hornik, R. Prediction and Change of Health Behavior; Applying the Reasoned Action Approach; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  72. Goode, M.M.H.; Harris, L.C. Online behavioral intentions, An empirical investigation of antecedents and moderators. Eur. J. Mark. 2007, 41, 512–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Boulding, W.; Staelin, R.; Kalra, A.; Zeithaml, V. A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality: From Expectations to Behavioral Intentions. J. Mark. Res. 1993, 30, 36–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley: Boston, MA, USA, 1975. [Google Scholar]
  75. Bagozzi, R.P.; Gopinath, M.; Nyer, P.U. The role of emotions in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1999, 27, 184–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Anderson, E.W.; Mittal, V. Strengthening the Satisfaction-Profit Chain. J. Serv. Res. 2000, 3, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Szivas, E.; Riley, M.; Airey, D. Labor mobility into tourism: Attraction and satisfaction. Ann. Tour. Res. 2003, 30, 64–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Seiders, K.; Berry, L.L.; Gresham, L.G. Attention, Retailers!: How Convenient, Is Your Convenience Strategy? Sloan Manag. Rev. 2000, 41, 79–90. [Google Scholar]
  79. Oliver, R.L. Whence consumer loyalty? J. Mark. 1999, 63, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Kozak, M. Comparative Analysis of Tourist Motivations by Nationality and Destinations. Tour. Manag. 2002, 23, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ganesan, S. Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationship. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sam, M.F.M.; Tahir, M.N.H. Website quality and consumer online purchase intention of air ticket. Int. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2010, 9, 20–25. [Google Scholar]
  83. Elliott, M.A.; Armitage, C.J.; Baughan, C.J. Using the theory of planned behaviour to predict observed driving behaviour. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2007, 46, 69–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Benbunan-Fich, R. Using protocol analysis to evaluate the usability of a commercial web site. Inf. Manag. 2001, 39, 151–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Lee, S.G. The Effect of UCC Information Characteristics on Consumer Satisfaction, Trust and Behavioral Intention: Focusing on Portable Electronic Products. Master’s Thesis, Sejong University, Seoul, Korea, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  86. Johnston, K.L.; White, K.M. Binge-drinking: A test of the role of group norms in the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Psychol. Health 2003, 18, 63–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Huff, A.S. 1999 presidential address: Changes in organizational knowledge production. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2000, 25, 288–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Choi, C.H.; You, Y.Y. The study on comparative analysis of the same data through regression analysis model and structural equation model. J. Korea Converg. Soc. 2016, 14, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Van Prooijen, J.-W.; Van der Kloot, W.A. Confirmatory analysis of exploratively obtained factor structures. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2001, 61, 777–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Joreskog, K.G.; Sorbom, D. LISREL 6: User’s Guide; Scientific Software: Mooresville, IN, USA, 1984. [Google Scholar]
  92. Gerging, D.W.; Anderson, J.C. Monte Carlo Evaluations of Goodness-of-fit Indices for Structural Equation Models. In Testing Structural Equation Models; Bollen, K.A., Long, J.S., Eds.; SAGE Publications, Inc.: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1993; pp. 40–65. [Google Scholar]
  93. Yu, J.P. A study on the item bundle bias of the concept of multidimensionality in the structural equation model. Bus. Stud. 2015, 44, 1131–1147. [Google Scholar]
  94. McKnight, D.H.; Choudhury, V.; Kacmar, C. The impact of initial consumer trust on intentions to transact with a web site: A trust building model. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2002, 11, 297–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Anderson, E.W.; Fornell, C.; Lehmann, D.R. Customer satisfaction, market share and profitability: Findings from Sweden. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 53–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Brady, M.K.; Robertson, C.J.; Cronin, J.J. Managing behavioral intentions in diverse cultural environments. An investigation of service quality, service value and satisfaction for American and Education fast-food customers. J. Int. Manag. 2001, 7, 129–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 14 02819 g001 550
Figure 1. Hypothetical Model.
Figure 1. Hypothetical Model.
Sustainability 14 02819 g001
Sustainability 14 02819 g002 550
Figure 2. Result of the structural equation modeling (Total N = 477). Notes: The amount of variance explained. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Figure 2. Result of the structural equation modeling (Total N = 477). Notes: The amount of variance explained. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Sustainability 14 02819 g002
Table
Table 1. Measurement items.
Table 1. Measurement items.
ConstructItem
ReliabilityThe in-flight safety information is reliable.
The in-flight safety information is realistic.
The in-flight safety information provides the specialized information.
The in-flight safety information provides the information I desire.
The delivery method of in-flight safety information is stable.
InformativenessThe in-flight safety information is the source of great information for safe air travel.
The in-flight safety information provides the proper information characteristics.
The in-flight safety information provides the information suitable for situations.
The in-flight safety information is convenient data that provides the safety information.
UtilityThe in-flight safety information is beneficial.
The in-flight safety information helps decision-making related to safety.
The in-flight safety information reduces time for me to understand the safety rules.
The in-flight safety information is helpful for choosing my safety behavior.
The in-flight safety information provides useful information.
InteractivityThe in-flight safety information becomes a sufficient communication means for getting information.
The in-flight safety information helps sharing the safety information between passengers.
Regarding the in-flight safety information, it is always possible to have mutual dialogues with the information provider (airline, flight attendant).
AttitudeI think it is important to watch the in-flight safety information before flight.
I think it is easy to understand the in-flight safety information.
I think it is wise to watch the in-flight safety information before flight.
If I know the in-flight safety information, it would be helpful for emergency situations.
Customer SatisfactionI think the in-flight safety information is fully valuable.
I feel friendly toward airlines because of the in-flight safety information.
I think the in-flight safety information is useful.
I positively think of the in-flight safety information.
Customer TrustI overall tend to trust the provider (airline, flight attendant) of in-flight safety information.
I regard the provider (airline, flight attendant) of in-flight safety information is fully equipped with expertise.
The provider (airline, flight attendant) of in-flight safety information has great effects on my decision-making related to safety behavior.
Safety Behavioral IntentionI think every passenger should watch the in-flight safety information.
I will obey the rules related to safety in the future.
I will ask my company to perform the safety behavior.
Table
Table 2. Sample characteristics (Total N = 477).
Table 2. Sample characteristics (Total N = 477).
CharacteristicN (%)CharacteristicN (%)
Gender Purpose of Travel
Male251 (52.6)Tourism380 (79.7)
Female226 (47.4)Personal business30 (6.3)
Age Business Trip45 (9.4)
Under 205 (1.0)Study-abroad1 (0.02)
20–29137 (28.7)Others21 (4.4)
30–39116 (24.3)Travel Frequency(1 year)
40–49161 (33.8)1–2292 (61.2)
50–5966 (11.5)3–4119 (24.9)
Over 60 3 (1.6)5–627 (5.7)
Occupation Over 739 (8.2)
Office Staff181 (37.9)Experience of sitting in the emergency exit row
Businessman23 (4.8)
Expert53 (11.1)Yes229 (48.0)
Civil servant16 (3.4)No248 (52.0)
Soldier/Police/Fire fighter51 (11.1)
Student80 (16.8)Total477 (100)
Others73 (15.3)
Table
Table 3. Result of Measurement model analysis.
Table 3. Result of Measurement model analysis.
ConstructsMeasurement ItemsSMC aRegression Weights (C.R.) bStandardized Regression WeightsAVE cC.R. dα e
ReliabilityR20.6330.942 (20.673 *)0.8250.7590.9260.898
R30.5881.065 (21.035 *)0.835
R40.6941.093 (21.415 *)0.846
R50.7001.000 (Fix)0.815
InformativeI20.6900.914 (24.154 *)0.8310.8130.9280.904
I30.7991.001 (27.628 *)0.892
I40.7881.000 (Fix)0.889
UtilityU20.6581.113 (22.995 *)0.8100.8110.9450.922
U30.7621.057 (26.434 *)0.872
U40.8491.081 (29.609 *)0.922
U50.7621.000 (Fix)0.873
InteractivityIT10.8291.039 (17.522 *)0.8640.6340.8430.858
IT20.6701.143 (17.671 *)0.875
IT30.4281.000 (Fix)0.718
AttitudeA10.6481.000 (Fix)0.8050.6260.9430.847
A20.6351.048 (18.199 *)0.797
A30.6450.981 (18.343 *)0.803
A40.4500.936 (14.884 *)0.771
Customer SatisfactionCS10.6631.000 (Fix)0.7930.8490.9140.801
CS30.8811.221 (23.985 *)0.925
CS40.8151.156 (23.654 *)0.916
Customer TrustCT10.7721.004 (22.042 *)0.8830.7810.8990.880
CT20.7551.069 (21.525 *)0.867
CT30.6201.000 (Fix)0.791
Safety Behavioral IntentionBI10.6921.000 (Fix)0.8460.8170.9010.817
BI20.7041.136 (16.599 *)0.826
χ2 = 717.543, df = 271, CMIN/DF = 2.648, p = 0.000
GFI f = 0.895, NFI g = 0.932, IFI h = 0.957, CFI i = 0.957, RMR j = 0.033, RMSEA k = 0.059
Note: * Values in parentheses are critical ratios and all the values are significant (p < 0.01). a Squared multiple correlations, b Critical ratio, c Average variance extracted, d Composite reliability, e Cronbach’s.a, f Goodness of fit index, g Normed fit index, h Incremental fit index, i Comparative fit index, j Root mean residual, k Root mean square error approximation.
Table
Table 4. Correlation matrix of variables.
Table 4. Correlation matrix of variables.
Construct12345678
Reliability1
Informative0.782 **1
−0.035
Utility0.762 **0.814 **1
−0.031−0.035
Interactivity0.602 **0.595 **0.744 **1
−0.037−0.04−0.04
Attitude0.632 **0.585 **0.565 **0.354 **1
−0.027−0.029−0.026−0.029
Customer0.731 **0.793 **0.782 **0.617 **0.614 **1
Satisfaction−0.029−0.032−0.029−0.034−0.024
Customer0.795 **0.806 **0.807 **0.635 **0.920 **0.627 **1
Trust−0.034−0.037−0.033−0.039−0.033−0.028
Safety Behavioral0.552 **0.635 **0.643 **0.477 **0.676 **0.629 **0.551 **1
Intention−0.024−0.027−0.025−0.029−0.023−0.022−0.026
Note: off-diagonal scores are the squared correlations between the constructs. The numbers in parentheses refer to standard error of the covariance. ** Significant at the 0.01 overall.
Table
Table 5. Results of research hypotheses testing (Total N = 477).
Table 5. Results of research hypotheses testing (Total N = 477).
HypothesisPathStandardized EstimateC.R.p-ValueDecision
H1-1Reliability → Attitude0.3405.1730.000 **Supported
H1-2Informative → Attitude0.3114.6410.000 **Supported
H1-3Utility → Attitude0.3094.2710.000 **Supported
H1-4Interactivity → Attitude0.0150.3080.758Not Supported
H2Attitude → Customer Satisfaction0.92612.7710.000 **Supported
H3Attitude → Customer Trust0.96412.8600.000 **Supported
H4Customer Satisfaction →
Safety Behavioral Intention		0.4573.8120.000 **Supported
H5Customer Trust →
Safety Behavioral Intention		0.2472.0490.040 *Supported
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kim, H.; Lee, N. The Effects of the In-Flight Safety Information Characteristics on the Safety Behavioral Intention of Airline Passengers. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2819. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052819

AMA Style

Kim H, Lee N. The Effects of the In-Flight Safety Information Characteristics on the Safety Behavioral Intention of Airline Passengers. Sustainability. 2022; 14(5):2819. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052819

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kim, Hayoung, and Namryoung Lee. 2022. "The Effects of the In-Flight Safety Information Characteristics on the Safety Behavioral Intention of Airline Passengers" Sustainability 14, no. 5: 2819. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052819

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