This article was downloaded by: [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de

Mxico]
On: 13 June 2012, At: 18:46
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

Anatolia: An International
Journal of Tourism and
Hospitality Research
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20

Tourist Satisfaction and

Food Service Experience:
Results and Implications of an
Empirical Investigation
a

MKE RMMNGTON & ATLA YKSEL

School of Hotel and Restaurant Management,

Oxford Brookes University, UK
b

Leisure Industries Research Centre, Sheffield

Hallam University, Science Park Unit 1, S1 2LX,
Sheffield, UK
Available online: 26 Jul 2011

To cite this article: MKE RMMNGTON & ATLA YKSEL (1998): Tourist Satisfaction
and Food Service Experience: Results and Implications of an Empirical Investigation,
Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 9:1, 37-57
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.1998.9686958

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,

sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is

expressly forbidden.

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any
representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to
date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be
independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable
for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection
with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Anatolla: An lntemationalJournal of lwrlwn and Hospltdlty Rexarch

Vdume 9. Number 1. pp. 37-57. 1998
Copyright 0 1998 anatolla
hinted in Turkey. All rights resewed
1300-4220/98 $20.00 + 0.00

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service

Experience: Results and Implications
of an Empirical Investigation
MiKE RiMMiNGTON

ATilA YuKSEL

School of Hotel and Restaurant Management,

Leisure IndusMesResearch Centre

Shemeld Hallam University.
Science Park Unit I . S I 2 M Shemeld
UK.

Oxford Brookes Unlverslty

UK

ABSTRACT

The main aim of this study is to ascertain causes of tourist dis/satisfaction and specificallyto investigate whether the food service experience holds any significant effect in determining satisfaction and behavioural intentions. Touristsi perceptions of the facilities and services that they
have experienced are assessed in order to determine what brings satisfaction, intention to recommend and intention to return. What impacts on dissatisfactionis also investigated. The results
indicated that holiday satisfaction is a multifaceted concept consisting of 16 dimensions. The results further revealed that the food service experience is a critical factor which is salient in its potential to cause both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. The study concludes that the food service
experience represents both a threat and an opportunity for destination managers as it has the capability of promoting as well as damaging a destinationis image.
Key words: tourist satisfaction,food service experience, performance, critical factors

Atila Yiiksel (contact author) is a research assistant in Adnan Menders University in Turkey
and is currently pursuing his Ph.D at Sheffield Hallam University, UK. He holds a Masteris in
Tourism Management received from the University of Wales, Cardiff, UK. His major research
interests focus upon tourist satisfaction, quality improvement at food and beverage facilities
and destination management. Address correspondenceto: Leisure Industries Research Centre,
Science Park Unit 1, S12LX Sheffield, UK.
Mike Rimmington, MBA (Hospitality), is a Course Director, School of Hotel and Restaurant
Management, Oxford Brookes University, UK

The authors gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Dr Sheela Agarwal and Fisun
Yiiksel, Sheffield Hallam Universitv Introduction
Volume 9 0

Number

Summer

1998 0

37

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Lxperience

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

INTRODUCTION
The concept of customer satisfaction is essential to the effective delivery of
services. Successful application of this concept may potentially give competitive advantage through generating benefits such as differentiation, increased customer retention and a positive word-of-mouth recommendation
(Yiiksel and Rimmington 1997). In an increasingly competitive business environment, the concept of customer satisfaction represents a vital ingredient in
the recipe for success since it acts as a critical factor in achieving a differential
advantage over competitors.Assae1 (1987:47), for instance, states that
isatisfaction reinforces positive attitudes toward a brand, leading to a greater
likelihood that the same brand will be purchased again "dissatisfactioncreates
a negative attitude toward a brand and lessens the likelihood of buying the
same brand again". Correspondingly, Pearce (1988) stresses that, depending
on the degree of their &/satisfaction, tourists may either return, recommend
a destination to other tourists, or may not return and express negative comments and damage the reputation of the destination. In parallel with Pearceis
comments, Maddox (1985:2)suggests that destination managers need to focus
on providing high quality tourist experiences as ithe consequences of customer dissatisfaction can be sudden and harsh'.
It appears that the sigruficance of tourist satisfaction in generating return
business and creating positive word-of-mouth recommendations has been
recognised by those involved in tourism and hospitality research. However,
in spite of this widespread appreciation, a complete understanding of the
formation of tourist satisfaction within the context of multiple holiday encounters has yet to be extensively researched (Chadee and Mattsson 1996).
This could be attributed largely to the fact that, in spite of increasing efforts in
recent years, there have been only relatively few studies undertaken on tourist
satisfaction assessment. In addition, the focus of past research has been limited, to a great extent, to the examination of the applicability of customer satisfaction models. That is, it has been more to do with theory than practice. As
a consequence, it can be argued that there little is known about the individual
aspects which influence overall satisfaction with the holiday experience and
the extent of their influence. In particular, although it has been recognised as
an integral part of the tourist industry and tourist experience, the extent to
which the food service experience impacts on overall satisfaction, repeat
business and word-of-mouth recommendation has not been fully addressed.
The examination of nature of the relationship between service dimensions,
satisfactionand behaviourd intentions is needed in order to improve the understanding and management of customer satisfaction (Mazursky 1989).
Given the paucity of research in this area, this study aims to extend tourist
satisfaction assessment research by providing new insights into the formation
of tourist overall &/satisfaction. The focus of the study is involved with

38

0 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atila Yuksel- Mike Rimrnlngton

multiple tourist encounters at Turkish holiday destinations. Utilising a factor

analytical approach based on data obtained from a survey carried out with
tourists at an international Airport in Turkey, this paper firstly sets out to ascertain the prime factors affecting tourist satisfaction with holiday destinations as well as repeat visit intention and word-of-mouth recommendation.
Secondly, with particular emphasis on the impact of food service experience,
this paper aims to identlfy the nature of and their extent of influence on
overall satisfaction and behavioural intentions. The findings presented here
will enlighten destination authorities about the holistic nature of tourist satisfaction and the influence of individual components in its formation as well as
fill an empirical vacuum in research.
To this end, the first section of this paper provides a brief literature review
relating to tourist satisfaction and to the sigruficance of food service provision
and the food service experience. In addition, although this research does not
aim to compare and contrast the ability of different satisfactionmeasurement
techniques, a brief review of satisfaction measurement frameworks is included to provide a rationale for the measurement technique that is used. The
research methodology employed in this study is presented in the next section.
The findings are then discussed and suggestions are made for a future research agenda on customer satisfaction.

TOURIST SATISFACTION
According to Bloemer and Poiesz (1989:45)satisfaction can be seen as "the affective outcome with a cognitive comparison of the present situation relative
to any one or combination of several reference points which may be inherent
in the past, in the future, in other persons, or in some personal or external
norm". Similarly, the World Tourism Organisation defines satisfaction as "a
psychological concept involving the feeling of well-being and pleasure that
results from obtaining what one hopes from an appealing product and/ or
service" (WTO 1985).
Although only a few studies have been carried out on the assessment of
tourist satisfaction, results of these studies indicate that satisfaction is a multifaceted concept consisting of a number of independent components or dimensions. A number of researchers (for example, Pizam,Neuman and Reichel
1978) suggest that overall tourist satisfaction may be evaluated along two dimensions; the instrumental performance and the expressive performance. Instrumental performance relates to the physical performance of the product
such as cleanliness and noise level. In contrast, the expressive performance
correspondsto the "psyckological" level of performance (for example, comfort,
hospitality and relaxation). Some researchers argue that tourist satisfaction
with the psychological performance of a product is extremely important. For
instance, based on a study of tourism in India, Ohja (1982) reports that there
Volume9 0 Number I

Summer 1998 0

39

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

iounsr sanstaction and tood Service Lxperience

were tourists who were satisfied despite some problems with the physical
product offered, yet there were tourists who were dissatisfied with the best
physical product. Drawing on this study, Ohja concludes that tourist satisfaction does not come only from good sights but from behaviour one encounters,
from the information one gets, from the efficiency with which needs are
served. Discussingthe relative significanceof these two dimensions, Reisinger
and Turner (1997) remark that even the best physical product can not compensate for psychological dissatisfaction. The relative sigruhcance attached to
each of these two dimensions; however, may vary from individual to individual or from situation to situation. Tourist satisfaction is not a universal
phenomenon and not everyone gets the same satisfaction out of the same
holiday experience (Pizam 1994).
It is also important to note that unlike material products and pure services,
the holiday experienceis an amalgam or an assemblage of products and services.
This assemblage, in fact, is a blend of different tangible and intangible products brought together. Therefore, it is possible to argue that satisfaction with
a holiday experience could be a sum total of satisfactions with the individual
attributes of all the products and services that compose of the holiday experience (Pizam 1994).In addition, Pizam,Neuman and Reitchel (1978) state
that as the tourist product consists of many sub-productssuch as activities and
events, including accommodation, food and beverage purchases, excursions,
participation in recreation and entertainment and so on, a ihalo effect" may
occur in the development of tourist satisfaction. That is, satisfaction or dissatisfaction with one of the components leads to satisfactionor dissatisfaction
with the total tourism product. This suggests that it is vital to examine tourist
satisfactionwith each of the components. Indeed, identification of the holiday
components responsible for dis/satisfaction appears to be prerequisites for
effective destination management and taking effective actions.

FOOD SERVICE EXPERIENCE

Given that the nature of total tourist product is composed of various tangible
and intangible characteristics, it is likely that tourist satisfaction will accumulate through numerous interactions and encounters that is experienced
during the holiday (Pizam 1994). Within this context, it is argued that food
and beverage facilities and food service experiences may contribute extensively to tourist satisfactionwith the entire holiday. If so it is instrumental
and important in engendering tourist loyalty and word-of-mouth recommendation.
The sigruficanceof food service in the tourist industry and in the formation
of overall holiday satisfactionhas been recognised by a number of researchers
(for example, Acheson 1990; Belisle 1983; Elmont 1996; Finkelstein 1989; Fox
and Sheldon 1986; Kruczala 1986; Marris 1986; Ross 1995; Smith 1983). R e

40

0 Anatolla: An International journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atila Yuksel - Mike Rimrnington

ferring to the US tourist industry, for instance, Elmont (1996) emphasises that
the food service industry is an integral part of the tourist industry as it is the
prime generator of jobs and income. Similarly, Fox and Sheldon (1988) report
that expenditure on food service accounts for one quarter of the consumeris
travel budget, generates the largest number of jobs and is one of the largest
earners of receipts in the entire travel industry. From an economic perspective,
Belisle (1983) argues that as food accounts for approximately onethird of
tourist expenditure, the proportion of food imports can affect the economic
and social impact of tourism. Kruczala (1986)argues that food service facilities
are indeed important assets of the tourist industry. In Poland, for instance,
basic catering facilities providing a regional menu fulfil the role of visitor attractions at regional, national and even at international level (Kruczala 1986).
Given the significance of food service in tourism, Elmont (1995) comments
that governments in developing countries should embrace international
tourism, but they should not underestimate the importance of food service as
part of that development.
Criticisingthe limited attention being paid by academia to the examination
of the role of the food service experience, Smith (1983) states that eating out is
an important part of the tourist experience. In parallel with Simthis point of
view, Acheson (1990: 225) states that ihowever, food plays little or no part in
the choice of a holiday destination, except for individual travellers to countries
like France, Italy or more distantly, India, where it may well be an integral part
of the holiday experienceand for short break visitors to country house hotels.
Similarly, Polacek (1986) comments that the main motivation for participation
in tourism and recreation over weekends or longer vacations is, in addition to
the need for rest and relaxation, the desire to escape the everyday routine, to
experience a different environment, activity, and, lust but not least, also diet.
Polacek further suggests that the motivational function of gastronomy in
tourism, despite the fact that only secondary importance is attached to it,
should not be disregarded.
Ryan (1997 62), in a qualitative study of tourists commentson satisfymg
and dissatisfymg aspects of their holiday experiences, reports that iat first
sight the itemfbod (italics added) can be attributed to physiological needs, but
in the case of goodfood many respondents were linking it with aspects of culture and a way of living, and hence n goodfood and ambience in which it was
enjoyed becomes much more than the satisfaction of a basic psychological
need.Correspondingly, Finkelstein (1989: 59) argues that when dining out, in
addition to the prosaic need for bodily substance, icustomers may pursue a
variety of needs and desires; customers may look for a sense of excitement as
they change routines, a feeling of participation in the ongoing stream of social
life as they carry out their affairs within the proximity of others, and a sense
of self enhancement which is derived from conspicuous consumption and the
display of fiscal strength. In parallel with Ryanis finding and Finkelsteinis
V o l u m e 9 0 Number I

Summer 1998 0

41

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

argument, Marris (1986:17)comments that for many people in the world, and
for most of the time " it is true that people eat to live, just to stay alive....but
other times and especially for people on holiday, there are occasions when
people really do live to eat..... people on holiday, look for places where the
meal will be an experience to be enjoyed, an experience to be anticipated with
excitement, to be relished in the fulfilment and to be remembered with satisfaction".
This brief review of literature suggests that high service quality within the
food service context is able to contribute to feelings of overall satisfaction and
thmiSr6eing of tourists as it seems to have the capacity to provide some of
the most positive memories of a vacation (Ross 1995). On the other hand, the
rc\'oi.e is also possible. Poor service quality in the food service context can
ovei hke all of the pleasant memories surrounding the holiday experience
(Ross 1995). This suggests that, unless properly managed, the food service
experience has the potential to induce high level of dissatisfaction with the
entire holiday. It can negatively impact on the image of a destination and
hamper return business. Given all the above, identifying the extent to which
the food service experience impacts on overall holiday satisfaction and behavioural intentions has considerable implications for destination authorities
aiming to enhance tourist satisfaction.

TOURIST SATISFACTION MEASUREMENT

The measurement of customer satisfaction in the most realistic way is a prerequisite for the accurate prediction of tourist behaviour and the development
of a robust theory. Whilst early research considered the satisfaction construct
as a form of attitude, considerable research in the 1980s revealed that satisfaction is notably more complex and that there are numerous measurement
issues (Cooper et a1 1989).Various competing theories and methodologies of
satisfaction have been developed, most notably the expectancydisconfirmation paradigm (EDP) and its variants (Cooper et a1 1989). The EDP, a derivative of adaptation level theory, states that customers compare actual
product and service perfomiance with prior expectations. If expectations are
met or exceeded, the consumer is satisfied or highly satisfied. If perceived
performance falls short of expectations, dissatisfaction results (Oliver 1980).In
the tourist satisfaction context, this suggests that tourist satisfaction is the result of the interaction between a touristis experience at the destination area
and the expectationss/he had about that destination (Pizam et a1 1978).When
the weighted sum of total experiences are compared to expectation results in
feelings of gratification, the tourist is satisfied; when tourists feel displeasure
they are dissatisfied.
The conceptualisation of tourist satisfaction as a comparison between
touristsi expectations and touristsi experiences has been employed in a num-

42

0 Anatolla: An International Journal of Tourlsm and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atila Yuksel- Mike Rirnrnington

ber of tourism studies (for example, Hughes 1991; Pizam and Milman 1993;
Weber 1997). Notwithstanding its growing popularity, the EDP has received
considerable theoretical and operational criticisms. For instance, measuring
expectations prior to service experience was reported to be problematic as
prior expectations might be modified during the service encounter and used
in the process of comparison. It is also argued that the importance attached to
pretrip expectationsmay change during the trip and a new set of expectations
may be formed as a result of experiences during the holiday (Weber 1997).
Thn implies that as the tourists progress from one encounter to the next, say
from reception to the room, there may be a modification in the expectations
about room services due to the performance of the previous encounter (Danaher and Mattsson 1994). It is also argued that events that are completely
unanticipated prior to the trip may become sigruficant contributors to overall
holiday satisfaction (Weber 1997). Similarly, Boulding et al (1993:9) acknowledge that ia personis expectationsjust before a service contact can differ
from the expectations held just after the service contact because of the information that enters the system between service encounters". Botterill(1987
140) further comments that i...the unpredictability of tourism events seems to
lie at the heart of vacational experience". Given these reported problems inherent in the application of the dis/confirmation model, it appears that its
methodology is questionable and problematic to employ. Therefore, based on
its match with human cognitive process, ease of application and potentially
high construct validity (Crompton and Love 1995; Engeset and Heide 1997;
Meyer and Westerbarkey 1996; Yuksel, Rimmington and Yi.ikse1 1997), this
study adopts the use of performance alone in assessing and idenhfymg the
relative influence of individual dimensions on tourist satisfaction.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
A research instrument was developed with the intention of asking touristsi
opinions about the prime components of their vacations. Components such
as accommodation, food and beverage, hospitality, the environment, cost of
vacationing and activities were investigated. The research instrument comprised of a number of items (n=112) grouped into three major areas: general
information about the respondent and holiday, the ratings on 67 holiday attributes, and ratings on overall holiday satisfaction and behavioural intentions. Respondents were also given ample space to make any further written comments (complimentsand complaints).

The respondents were required to assess the performance on a 7-point semantic differential scales of facilities and services (67 destination attributes).
The study adopted the use of a single overall measure of tourist satisfaction.
Although some researchers contend that satisfaction should be measured by
combination of attributes, the ease of use and empirical support for an overall
V o l u m e 9 0 Number 1

Summer 1998 0

43

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Servlce Experlence

measure of satisfaction led to its selection (Halstead 1989). The study employed the "Delight-Terrible"scale for measuring overall tourist satisfaction
as it has been reported to be the most reliable satisfactionscale (Maddox 1985).
Similarly, respondentsi overall satisfaction with food and beverage, return
intention and word-of-mouth recommendationwere assessed by single overall measures. One of the main purposes of gauging overall satisfaction with
the entire holiday and with behavioural intentions was to assess the relative
importance of holiday components in determining the level of tourist satisfaction. A single question concerning overall satisfaction with food and beverage was asked in order to assess its relationship with overall holiday satisfaction and behavioural intentions. In order to provide valid information on
the questionnaire design, wording and measurement scales, a pilot test was
carried out with twelve prospective tourists. The pilot test revealed that there
were no major problems of question clarity and appropriatenessof the items.

PROCEDURE
As this survey aimed to cover the prime components of tourist holiday satisfaction, the best time to question tourists was just before they left Turkey.
Given this fact, the Dalaman Airport, an international airport situated in the
Aegean Region of Turkey, was chosen for the research. This was an extremely
good time and place to conduct the survey, as by this time the departing
tourist had checked in, been through Customs and Immigration, had bought
their souvenirs, and often had time to spare (Danaher and Arweiler 1996).
Tourists were favourably disposed to answer questions about their vacations,
possibly because the interview coincided with a time when they were already
reflecting upon their holiday.

The survey was carried out with 400 tourists during a three-week period in
September 1997. Given the flight time and language (English only), 35 tourists refused to participate and 29 of the returned questionnaires were incomplete. Of all the respondents, 45 YOwere male and 55% were female, and
70% were first-time visitors and 30 Yowere repeat visitors. The majority of respondents were British, SO%, followed by Germans, Benelux, Scandinavian,
Italian and others.

INSTRUMENT RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

Although construct validity lies at the very heart of measurement quality as it
is most directly related to the question of what the measurement is in fact
measuring (Churchill 1979; Yi 1990), explanations conceming the validity of
the instruments used in hospitality and tourism research are almost absent
from studies published in tourism and hospitality journals (Oh and Parks
1997). Given its critical role, the analysis section starts with presenting the
results of reliability and construct validity of the research instrument.

44

0 Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourlsm and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atlla Yuksel - Mike Rimmlngton

The scale was first subjected to a reliability analysis to assess the quality of
the measure. Cronbachis alpha was used to assess the reliability of the measurement scale. The total scale reliability was high, 0.95, indicating that the
sample of the items performed well in capturing the measured construct
(Nunnaly 1967). Following the reliability test, the construct validity of the
scale was assessed. To be considered as having a good construct validity, the
scale must have convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity (Churchill 1979). Convergent validity of a measure is the extent to which the measure
correlates or "converges" with other measures designed to measure the same
concept, indicating that a variable is not just an accident (Cronin and Taylor
1992), while discriminant validity is another theoretically based method of
measuring the underlying truth in a given area (Churchill1979). For a survey
to have discriminant validity, the correlationbetween two different measures
of the same variable should be higher than the correlation between the measure of that variable and those of any other variables (Churchill 1979). Nomological validity of a measure is the extent to which the measure correlates in
a theoretically predicted way with a measure of a different but related construct. In order to help assess convergent, discriminant and nomological validity, the authors used an overall customer satisfaction measure and two b e
havioural intention measures. Pearson Product Moment Correlation and
Multiple Regression procedures were employed to examine the construct validity (Crompton and Love 1995; Cronin and Taylor 1992; Dorfman 1979;
Parasuraman et al1991).
The convergent validity of the performance scale in determining tourist
satisfactionwas supported as the scale correlated relatively high (0.65, pc0.01)
with the overall measure of tourist satisfaction. An examination of the correlation results (see Table 1) further demonstrates that the scale has nomological validity as the correspondence between the models and the two behavioural intentions was as predicted. The Discriminant validity of the scale
was also supported as the correlation between the two measures of satisfaction was higher than the correlation between the scale and other variables.
Relatively high score of R2 (%68) also provides additional support for the

Performance Scale

CorrelationValues

Overall satisfaction

0.6475

Likelihoodto return

0.5487

Likelihoodto recommend

0.5771

Multiple Regression Values

0.82 (R2 = .68)'

All significant at 0.01 level. 'R2 for d l 6 7 attributes

Volume9 0 Number 1

Summer 1998 0

45

Tourlst Satlsfactlon and Food Service Experlence

ability of performance scale to explain the variance in the overall satisfaction

scale. The results of the reliability and validity tests suggest that the scale used
in the research measured what it intended to measure, thus allowing the researcher to proceed with the subsequent analysis.

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

HOLIDAY DIMENSIONS
The analysis of the prime holiday dimensions and their extent of influence on
total holiday satisfaction and behavioual intentions involved the use of Multivariate Analysis, in this case, factor and multiple regression analysis (Danaher and Haddrelll996). The purpose of using factor analysis in thisstudy
was to create correlated variable composites from the original attributes ratings, and to obtain a relatively small number of variables which explain most
of the variance among the attributes. The derived factor scores were then applied to the subsequent multiple regression analysis. Pizam et a1 (1978)suggest that factor analysis is particularly useful in measuring tourist satisfaction
since the tourism product is made up of many interrelated components, each
of which requires a separate measure of satisfaction. The Principal Components and Orthogonal (Varimax) rotation methods were employed in the
factor analysis so as to sununarise most of the on@ information to a minimum number of factors for prediction reasons (Heir et al 1995). The appropriateness of the factor analysis was examined by correlation, measures of
sampling adequacy (MSA) and the reliability alpha to ensure that the factor
analysis is appropriate to the data (Heir et al1995).
The criteria for the number of factors to be extracted were based on the Eigenvalue, the percentage of variance, the significanceof factor loading and the
assessment of structure (Heir et a1 1995). Only the factors with Eigenvalue
equal or greater than one were considered sigmficant (Heir et al1995). The
rationale for considering factors significant whose Eigenvalue were equal or
greater than one was that these factors were able to account for the variance
of at least a single variable (Lewis 1984).The solution that accounted for at
least 60% of the total variance was considered as a satisfactory solution (Lewis
1984). A variable was considered to be significant and was included in a factor, when its factor loading was greater or equal to 0.50 (Lewis1984).Although
lower criteria are often used for factor loading, the higher criteria was selected
to ensure that the items included in the questionnaire were not inappropriately categorised (Wuest et al1996).
The p q o s e of regression analysis in thisstudy was to explore how holiday
dimensions derived from the factor analysis related to the dependent variable
of itotal satisfactionwhich ranges from delighted to terrible (Danaher and
Haddrelll996). Lewis (1985: 84) comments that i regression analysis is one
statistical technique we can use to delve into the problem of identdying how
decisions are made or judgements reached.Regression analysis is suggested
as being a practical and powerful tool that can be referred to in gathering

46

0 Anatolla: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospltality Research

Atlla Yfiksel- Mike Rlmmington

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

critical information for a variety of management decisions (ibid.).The purpose

of using overall satisfaction as a dependent variable in this study was to
idenbfy the relative importance of the dimensions derived from the factor
analysis in determining or predicting a touristis overall satisfaction with the
holiday. Subsequent Multiple Regression analyses were run to identify the
influence of the individual factors on return intentions and likeliness to recommend holidays to the others.

RESULTS OF FACTOR ANALYSIS

The Eigenvalues suggested that a 16 factor solution explained 69.1% of the
overall variance before rotation. The overall significance of the correlation
matrix was O.OOO0 with a Barlett test of Spherity value of 9250.5358. It indicated that the data matrix had sufficient correlation to the factor analysis
(Hair et a1 1995). The Kaiser-Meyer-Okin overall measure of sampling adequacy was 0.88, which was meritorious (Hair et a1 1995)suggesting that data
was appropriate to factor analysis. Varimax rotation was used to produce
orthogonal factors to achieve simpler and theoretically meaningful solutions.
From the Orthogonal (Varimax)rotated factor matrix, 16 factors with 58 variables were defined by the original 67 variables, that loaded most heavily
(loading 0.50) on them (Table 2). It could be said that the analysis produced
a clean factor structure with relatively higher loadings on the appropriate
factors. Most variables loaded heavily on one factor, but did not load heavily
on others. It reflected that there was minimal overlap among these factors and
all factors were independently structured. The communality of each variable
was relatively high ranging from 0.54 to 0.83. It indicated that the variance of
the original values was captured fairly well by the 16 factors (Hair et al1995).
The 16 factor structured in a relatively more workable and meaningful
number of composite dimensions, which could be more easily interpreted and
used for the further regression analysis. Each factor was named based on the
common characteristics of the variables it included (Table 2). A composite
reliability of a construct was calculated to measure the internal consistency of
each factor. The results showed that the reliability coefficients for factors exceeded the recommended level of 0.50 (ranging from 0.53 to 0.90) (Nunnaly
1967). After the rotation, the 16 factors explained 69.1% of variance. It might
be concluded that these 16 dimensions were perceived as particularly important by the sample of tourists making holiday in Turkey at that time.

INFLUENCE OF DIMENSIONS ON SATISFACTION

The results of multiple regression of the 16 holiday dimensions against the
dependent variables (overall satisfaction, return intention and recommendation) are displayed in Tables 3,4 and 5. The regression equation characteristics
of overall holiday satisfaction indicated R2 of 0.53, indicating that 53% of the
Volume9 0 Number I

Summer 1998 0

47

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Servlce Experlence

Table 2. hdor Components, Loadingsand Reliability

Factorl: FDod /Beverage Quality

Factor 2:Servke Quality (.8730)

(.golly
Tastiness d food served in the area
(.74243)"
0 auastydtoodand~((.71911)
0 Accuracy d the temperature d
food s e ~ e d(.63W)
0 PoNw d food (.68601)
0 Presentation of dlshes (.73088)
0 Hyeeruc prepambbnd food (67355)
0 Variety of menu (.73581)
0 Availability d dshes liked (.79621)
0 Avaibbiity d badbbnalfood
(.52161)

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Factor 4: Horpbllty (.arsO)

0

Cwrtesy of residents (.72264)

Cwflesyofempbyees(.62907)
Willingness of employees to help
(.71162)
Willingness d residentsto help
(.71420)
Fdendlness of people (.76867)
Safety in the area (59303)

0
0

Friendlinessof service at my
accommodation (.76588

Efficiencyof service at
accommodation (.72101)

Respoosiveness 01 staff to request

(.67910)

Respiveness of staff to

canplaint (.69331)
0

0
0

0
0

Factor 8: Entertainment (.6965)

PI& of food and drink Served at

accommodation (.79515)

Value of the food services for price

charges at aocomnodatii

0
0

0
0

Ease of c m u n h t i o n in ywr
languagein the area (.61139)
Canmunication in ywr language
with the staff (.68806)

Cleanlinessof he mom ( . E r n )
The physicalc a m of
accommodation(.78732)
W t y of f a c i l i dlered at
accommodabon(.62273)
Comfortoflheroom(.78631)
d water and electriaty

Fador 6:Berchlrnvironmbnt in the

area (-7633)
0

CLkIinessdthebeachandsea
in the area (.75691)

Availability of fadlities at the beach

(.67954)

CroWdlwelinlhearea(.52265)

The natural e n v i r m n t in the

area (59490)

Canfort of sunbathing on the

beach (.59056)

Factor S Quietneu (.7498)

0

Noise level at restaurantbarsd

aaxxmodabon (.72149)

Noise level at acconrodam

(.72695)

Factor 1 2 Security (6991)

0

Safety at hotel (.WE)

Security d room (.50578)

Operating h w n of the
restaurantbarsat accommodation
(.71917)

Factor 1 3 Warn sport8

0

Quality and availability of

restauranls(.65914)
Valueofgoodsandservicesforthe
pricecharges (.50608)

Factor 11: Communication (.7438)

(.62217)

Quality,andavailability of
entertainment (55747)
Availability of tours and cruises

(.66284)
0

Factor 1 0 Convenlenca (3343)

0 L m t i d the restaurantbars

Effciency of s e w at lounsl
facilities (.76332)
Courtesy of services at tourist
facilities (.65173)
Wailing time for service at tourist
facilities (.73237)
Quality d services at tourist
facilities (.71473)
Convenienceoperating hours at
tourist facilities (.54344)
Accuracy of bill and tariffs at tourist
facilities (578%)

Cleanlinessofthe
acwmnodation(.82772)
Cleanliness of restaurant at

accommodation(.60639)

Corrpelency d slaff(.79014)

Factor 5: Tourbt facilities (6683)

0

(.75821)

Factor 7: Prlw/vaiue (.7893)

Effideney of check-in and

checkml at the ammmodabn
(55674)

Availability d water sports

(79969)

Factor 1 4 Transportation
0

Efficiency and timeliness of public

transport (.El%)

Factor 1 5 Airport Wvicas

0

Efficier~ydW-inandd~&at
at the Airport (.74114)

Factor 16: Weather

0

The weather conditionsin the area

(.72063)

48

0 A n a t o l l a : An l n t e r n a t l o n a i J o u r n a l of T o u r l s r n a n d H o s p l t a l l t y R e s e a r c h

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atila Yiiksel - Mike Rlmmlngton

variation could be explained by this equation. The F-ratio of 23.84 was significant (Prob. < 0.0000). The relatively high measure of variance R2 (0.53) indicates that the predictor variables perform well in explaining the variance in
overall satisfaction and the highly sigruhcant F ratio indicates that the results
of the equation could hardly have occurred by chance (behavioural scientists
consider an R2 of 0.50 to .60quite good) (Lewis 1984). In order to have an accurate interpretation of thisstudyis predictor variables, a stepwise regression
procedure was employed (Hair et al1995). In thisprocedure, the first variable
entered into the equation was the one that accounts for the most variance in
the dependent variable (Table 3). The remaining variables were entered one
at a time in descending order of the amount of remaining variance they explain. The procedure was discontinued when the adding of a variable resulted
in an insigruficant increase in R2 .
Table 3. F~xforsDetermining Overnll Wiction

Wn-Whm:1.89187
Volume 9

Number 1

Summer 1998

49

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

The t-statistic test was used for testing whether the 16 independent factors
contributed information to the prediction of the dependent variable ioverall
holiday satisfaction". In this study, if the t-value of an independent variable
was found to be sigruficant at a 0.05 level, that variable was considered in the
model. ten out of the 16 factors emerged as significant (sig. T < 0.05) independent variables in the regression analysis.
The results of regression analysis showed that each coefficient carried positive signs, as expected (see Table 3). This indicated that there was a positive
relationship between those variables and the dependent variable ioverall holiday satisfaction". It also suggested that the overall holiday satisfaction of a
tourist depended largely on these factors. They were, therefore, the determinant factors or the best predictors of overallholiday satisfaction. It could
be concluded that the overall holiday satisfaction increases when there is an
increase in these dimensions.
The relative importance of attributes was first examined by comparing the
magnitude of regression coefficients.The first dimension with the greatest effect on overall satisfactionwas Hospitality (= 0.35, hob. < 0.0000) followed by
Hygiene/ Accommodation (= 0. 34, hob.< 0.0000), Staff/Service quality (=
0.33, Prob.< 0.0000), Food/Beverage Quality (= 0.32, hob.< 0.0000 ) and
Convenience (= 0.30, Prob. c 0.0000). Secondly, the magnitude of each of the
independent variablesi t-statistics was used as an indicator of relative importance as some authors, such as Bring (1994),argue that the beta coefficients
may not give a very reliable measure of the relative importance of regression
independent variables. An examination of the t-values revealed an identical
descending order of factors contributing to overall holiday satisfaction.
Given the relative factor weights (Beta2 ), it could be said that Hospitality
dimension (Bets= 0.10) was almost six times as powerful in determiningsatisfactionas the Beach/Environment in the area (Beta2= 0.016).The hospitality
dimension was almost eight times as powerful as Price/value of services
(Beta2 = 0.012) in influencing satisfaction. In addition, Food and Beverage
(Beta2 = 0.086) has almost seven times as much impact on determining satisfaction as Price/value of services (Beta2= 0.012).Further, the results predicted
that, the probability of a touristis overall holiday satisfaction changes by 2.28
(0.34 + 0.34 + 0.33+ 0.32 + 0.30 + 0.17 + 0.14 + 0.12 + 0.11 + 0.11) for each unit
change in the ten variables. The units refer to one unit on the seven point
scale. It could be argued that an increase in these variables results in an increase in overall satisfaction.
The values of variance of inflation (VIF) and tolerance for each variable, and
the tests of the extent of multi-collinearity and collinearity, indicated that there
was no multi-collinearity in the model (Hair et a1 1995). No VIF value exceeded 10.0, and the values of tolerance showed that no case did collinearity
explain more than 10%of the any predictor variableis variance. The Durbin-

50

0 Anatolla: An international Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atlla Ytiksel- Mike Wmmington

Watson value was 1.829 indicating that there was no residual correlation in
the model (Hair et a1 1995). The results were validated by dividing the sample
into two sub-samples to estimate the regression model for each sub-sample,
and comparing the results (ibid.). Comparing overall model fit demonstrated
that a high level of similarity of the results in terms of R2 ( overall = 0.53;
split-sample 1= 0.51; split-sample 2= 0.55), the standard error (overall = 0.77;
split-sample 1=0.74; split-sample 2= 0.85), and individual coefficients (Probs.
c 0.05).
In addition, a subsequent multiple regression analysis was run to idenbfy
factors leading to dissatisfaction. Dissatisfied respondentsi (n=35) ratings on
overall satisfactionwere regressed on the factor scores. The followingfactors;
convenience, the food/beverage quality, the hygiene/accommodation, the
weather, and the beach/environment emerged as signrficant factors (pcO.05)
contributingto dissatisfaction.

INFLUENCE OF DIMENSIONS ON BEHAVIOURAL INTENTIONS

In order to understand the factors that contribute most to likeliness to return
and to recommend, the respondentsi ratings on return and recommendation
were regressed on the factor scores. It would be comforting for service providers to find a similar set of attributes coming out as being important as in the
previous regression (Table 3), otherwise it would be difficult to decide how
best to proceed with performance improvement programme (Danaher and
Haddrelll996). Results of the regression analysis are presented in Tables 4
and 5.
The results in Table 4 indicate that the most sigruhcant factor affecting
touristsi return intention was food and beverage quality ( 6.373, p<O.oooO),
followed by hospitality, service quality, hygiene/accommodation, quietness,
beach/environment, convenience and tourist facilities. An examination of
Beta2 scores suggests that food/beverage quality (Beta2 = 0.127) was almost
eight times as powerful as tourist facilities in the area (Beta2 = 0.016) in determining repeat visit. The food/beverage quality factor has almost four
times as much impact on return intentions as the quality of beach and surrounding environment in the area (Beta2 = 0.033).
The results in Table 5 suggest that the factor with the greatest impact on
word of mouth recommendation was the hospitality (5.501, pcO.oo00) followed by food/beverage quality, service quality, beach/environment, hygiene accommodation and convenience. A close examination of Beta2 scores
reveal that hospitality (Beta2 = 0.088) was almost two times as powerful as
quality of the beach/environment in the area (Beta2= 0.046) in recommending
destination to others. In addition, the Beta scores suggest that food/beverage
quality (Beta2 = 0.086) has almost two times as much impact on tourist word
of mouth recommendation as the quality of the beach/environment in the
area.
Volume9 0 Number 1

Summer 1998 0

51

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Service Experience

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

The results predicted further that the probability of a touristis likeliness to

return and likeliness to recommend changes by 2.11 and 1.48 respectively for
each unit change in the variables. The units refer to one unit on the seven point
scale. It could be argued that an increase in these variables results in an increase in likelihood to return and likelihood to recommend the holiday experience to others.

In addition, the impact of satisfaction with food and beverage on total holiday satisfaction and behavioural intentions was assessed empirically by examining the association between the respondentsi score on satisfaction with
food and beverage and their scores on overall holiday satisfaction and other
dependent variables (see Table 6). It was hypothesised that a high satisfaction
with food/beverage would increase the overall satisfaction with holiday,
likeliness of repeat visit and word-of-mouth recommendation. On the other
hand, dissatisfaction with food and beverage would lead to a low level of
overall satisfaction with the holiday.

Table 4.

Return Intention
Awlpsis of V n h u

Muhipk R

.62142

R*a

,38616

Adjusted RSqumc

361 23

Regrenion

DF
8

YDndardE~ru

,92115

BhI

197

52

Sum of Iqwrts
105.1 5681
167.15867

Maon

13.14461
.84852

Anatolla: An International journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atila Yuksel - Mike Rlmmington

Both parametric and non parametric tests revealed that respondents who
are dissatisfied with food and beverage rated significantly lower scores
(p<0.05)on the overall satisfaction scale (mean= 4.83). On the other hand, respondents who are satisfied with food and beverage services rated significantly higher scores (p<0.05) on the overall holiday satisfaction scale
(mean= 6.22). A similar trend was found with respect to the likelihood to return and recommend the holiday to others. Respondents dissatisfied with
food and beverage rated significantlylower scores on the scales assessing their
return intentions and recommendation (mean= 4.39 and 4.57 respectively).
Respondents who indicated satisfaction with the food and beverages rated
significantly higher scores on return intention and recommendation scales
(mean=5.76 and 6.12 respectively).The strength and persistence of the linkage
between satisfaction with food and beverage and satisfaction with the other
offers a great degree of support for the role of the food service experience in
affecting overall holiday satisfaction and behavioural intentions.

By assessing how separate factors influence the holistic tourist satisfaction,the

results of this study fill a clear gap in the literature and provide destination
managers, particularly in Turkey, with invaluable information.
Table 5. Word of Mouth Recommendation
Muhipb R

,57033

RSqwrs

,32528

Adprted R S q u ~ a

30183

Raglession

Stmdardhor

.80444

Radd

f=

15.90905

holysir of Variam

DF
6
198

Sum of ~

6177113
128.13131

h qUM0
10.29519
.64713

S i i I= .OOOO

Hygene/ktPmmodalin

.191?91

-058309

.192515

hwnienrs

,186764

,057573

.1W2

((onflantl

6.014707

!I56667

396841
,987062

1.W

3.293

.HI2

0.037

1.013

3.244

.MI4

0.0%

106.141

.oooo

V o l u m e 9 0 Number 1

Summer 1998 0

53

Tourist Satisfaction and Food Servlce Experlence

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Table 6. Relatianship between Food Service, Holiday Satisfactionand BehaviouralIntentions

SPtbfadb~w i l l Food od &mqr

O v t d Saliiadioa

R t l m InlelliOl

Ruommoddiol

DisWiM

4.83 (MY

4.39 (33)

4.57 (33)

Naidmr rotirfi#l nor d i i M

5.26 (26)

4.80 (26)

5.19(26)

W i

6.22 (279)

5.76 (273)

6.12 (2721

The result of factor analysis suggests that the holiday experience involves
several independent components. Emerged components in this study were
food and beverage quality, service quality, accommodation and hygiene,
hospitality, tourist facilities, beach and environment, price and value, entertainment, quietness, convenience, communication, safety, water sports,
transportation, airport services and the weather. This suggests that the holiday experience is an amalgam of services and products. It can be said that
tourist satisfaction or dissatisfaction is likely to be accumulated through numerous interactions with each of these components during the holiday experience. That is, satisfaction with the individual elements or attributes of all
the products and services that compose the holiday experience add up to
overall holiday satisfaction .
The multiple regression analysis suggests that ten out of 16 dimensions
have a sigruficant level of influence on the formation of overall satisfaction
with the entire holiday and a one unit change in the performance of any of
these dimensions brings about a unite change in the overall satisfaction gained
by visitors. The multiplicity and variety of holiday dimensions means that
destination managers must consider the synergy that exists between these dimensions in order to provide a high quality product and standard of service.
This implies that a detailed understanding of the holistic perspective of the
holiday experience is essential to manage tourist satisfaction more effectively.
That is, for instance, a hotelier should not only be concerned about the performance of hidher own premise, but also with the performance provided in
other areas, such as in restaurants, so as to achieve and enhance tourist satisfaction and repeat business. In addition, an examination of the results presented in Tables 3,4 and 5 suggests that there exists almost a similar set of dimensions impacting on overall satisfaction and behavioural intentions. This
suggests that Turkish destination managers need to pay particular attention to
such dimensions as hospitality, service quality, food/beverage quality, quietness, hygiene and accommodation, beach and environment and tourist facilities so as to compete effectively in todayis tourism market.

54

Anatolia: An fnternatlonal journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Atila Yilksei - Mike Rimmington

Based on the results of the multiple regression analyses, it could be said that
food service experience constitutes an integral part of the overall holiday experience, though it may be true that it generally plays no or little part in the
choice of Turkey as a holiday destination. An examination of the results in
Table 6 demonstrates that the food service experience has the potential to induce both satisfaction and dissatisfaction.This indicates that food service experience has the capacity to provide tourists with some of the highest and
lowest points of their total holiday experience. Based on these findings, the
food service experience maybe a critical factor that represent both a threat and
an opportunity to destination managers. Destination managers and service
providers in Turkey are; therefore, advised to endeavour to provide meal experiences to be enjoyed and to be remembered with satisfaction. In order to
understand what constitutes satisfaction with the food service experience, a
comprehensive investigation needs to be undertaken in Turkey.
The findings relating to dimensions and their relative influence; however,
cannot be automatically generalised beyond Turkey on the grounds that these
dimensions probably may not be universal and depend on the sample, on the
destination area, on its facilities, attractions, weather and so forth. They may
also be to an extent time specific. However, an appropriate conclusion would
appear to be that destinations bearing features similar to those of Turkey could
be affected by the same dimensions as identified here.

REFERENCES
Acheson, D. (1990). Food -the Vital Ingredient, in Handbook of Totirism, Horwath and Horwath,
Macmillan Press, London
Assael, H. (1987) Consumer Behnuioirr and Marketing Action. 3rd edition, Boston, PWS,-Kent
Belisle, J. F. (1963).Tourism and the Food Production in the Caribbean, Annals ofTourism Research,
(10):497-513
Bloemer, J. M. M. and Poiesz, T. 8. C (1989)The Illusion of Customer Satisfaction, Iournal ofconsunzer Sntisfaction, Dissatisfaction and Complaining Behaviour, (2): 4348
Botterill, T. D. (1987). Dissatisfaction with a construction of Satisfaction, Annals of Tourism Re-

search, 14: 139-141

Boulding, W; Karla, A; Staelin, R; Zeithaml, V.A. (1993). A Dynamic Process Model of service
quality, From Expectations to Behavioural Intentions. Journal ofMnrketing Research 30 (February):
7-27
Bring, J. (1994).How to standardise regression coefficients, American Statistician, 48 (3): 209-13
Chadee, D and Mattsson, J. (1996). Measuring Customer Satisfaction in Tourist Service Encounters, \oirrrral of Travel and Toirrism Marketing, 4, (4):97-107
Churchill, A. G.Jr. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs,
Iournal of Marketing Rrsenrch, 16, February: 64-73
Cooper, R. N., Cooper, B. M. and Duhan, F. D. (1989). Measurement Instrument Development
Using Two Competing Concepts of Customer Satisfaction, Journal of Consumer Sntisfacfionl Dissutisfaction and Complaining Behauiour, 2: 28-35
V o l u m e 9 0 Number I

Summer

1998 0

55

Tourist Satlsfaction and Food Service Experlence

Crompton, L. J., and Love, L. L. (1995). The Predictive Validity of Alternative Approaches to
Evaluating Quality of a Festival. Journal of Travel Research 34 (1)Summer: 11-25
Crompton, L. J., and Love, L. L. (1995). The Predictive Validity of Alternative Approaches to
Evaluating Quality of a Festival, Journal of Travel Research, 34 (l),11-24

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Cronin, J .J. Jr. And Taylor, S. A. (1992).Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. Journal ofMarketing 56: 55-68.
Danaher, P. J. and Haddrell, V. (1996).A comparison of question scales used for measuring customer satisfaction. International Journal of Service Industry Management 17 (4):4-26
Danaher, P. J. and Mattsson, J. (1994).Customer Satisfaction during the Service Delivery Process,
European Journal of Marketing, 28 (5):5-16
Danaher, P.J.,and Arweiler, W. (1996).Customer satisfaction in the tourism industry, a case study
of visitors to New Zealand. Journal of Trauel Resenrch: 89-93
Dorfman, P. W. (1979).Measurement and Meaning of Recreation Satisfaction: A Case study in
camping. Environment and Behuviour 11 (4):483-510
Elmont, S. (1995). Tourism and Food Service- two sides of the same coin, The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quurterly, February: 57-63
Engeset, G. M., Heide, M. (1997).Managing hotel guest satisfaction, towards a more focused approach, The Tourist Review, 2 23-33
Finkelstein, J. (1988).Dining out: A Sociology ofModern Manners. Polity Press, Cambridge
Fox, M. and Sheldon, J. P. (1988).Food service, a vital part of the tourist industry, journal ofFood
Sentice Sjstem~,4 259-275
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R.,& Black, W. C. (1995).Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, New Jersey, Prentice Hall Inc
Halstead, D. (1989).Expectations and Disconfirmation Beliefs as Predictors of CS, Repurchase
Intentions, and Complaining Behaviour: An Empirical Study, Journal of Consumer Satisfaction /
Dissatisfiction and Complaining Behaviour, 2 17-21
Hughes, K. (1991).Tourist satisfaction: A Guided Tour in North Queensland, Australian Psychologist, 26 (3):166-171
Kruczala, K. J. (1986). The Role of Catering Facilities in the local and regional tourist facilities
complexes, Tourist Rariew, 4 16-25
Maddox, N. R (1965).MeasuringSatisfaction with Tourism, Jouml OfTrawI Research, Winter: 2-5
Marris, T. (1986).Does Food Matter, Tourist Review, 4 17-20
Mazursky, D. (1989). Past Experience and Future Tourism Decisions, Annals of Tourism Research,
16:333-344
Meyer, A. and Westerbarkey, P. (1996).Measuring and Managing Hotel Guest Satisfaction., in
Olsen, D. M., Teare, R and Gummesson, E. (Eds.) Service Qualify in Hospitality Organisations,
Cassell, New York, NY 185-204
Nunnaly, J. C. (1967).Psychometric Theory, New York, McGraw-HillBook Company
Oh, H. and Parks, C. S.(1997).Customer Satisfactionand Service Quality: A critical Review of the
Literature and Research Implications for the Hospitality Industry, Hospitality Research Journal, 20
(3):36-64

Ohja, J .M. (1982).Selling Benign Tourism: Case References from Indian Scene, Tourism Recreation
Research, June: 23-24

56

0 Anatolla: A n International Journal of Tourlsm and Hospitality Research

Atila Yclksel - Mike Rlrnrnington

Oliver. R. L. (1980). A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents of Satisfaction Decisions, journal of
Marketing Research, 1 7 4649.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. and Berry, L. L (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the
Servqual scale. journal of Retailing, 67 (4): 420-50

Downloaded by [Universidad Autnoma del Estado de Mxico] at 18:46 13 June 2012

Pearce, P. L. (1988). The lllyssesfactor: Evaluating visitors in tourist scttings. New York, SpringerVerlag
Pizam, A. (1994) .Monitoring customer satisfaction., in Davis, B., and Lockwood, A. (Eds.) Food
and Bwerage Management: A selection ofreadings, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., Oxford
Pizam, A. and Milman, A. (1993). Predicting Satisfaction Among First Time Visitors to a Destination by Using the Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory, International journal of Hospitality
Management, 12: 197-209.
Pizam, A,, Neurnann, Y, and Rcichel, A. (1978) . Dimensions of tourist satisfaction with a destination area, Annals ofTourisni Research, July/September: 314-322
Ploacek, M (1986) Eating Habits of Czechoslovak Population and Gastronomy as a Tourism Motivation, Tourist Rwieii, (4): 22-25
Reisineger, Y., and Turner, L. (1997) . Tourist Satisfaction with Hosts: A Cultural Approach
Comparing Thai tourists and Australian Hosts, Pacific Tourism Review, 1: 147-159
Ross, F. G. (1995). Tourist Dissatisfaction with Food service: Service quality typologies among
secondary college graduates from a tourism community, journal of Food Service Systenis, 8: 291309
Ryan, C. (1997) From Motivations to Assessment, in The Tourist Experience: The New Introdiiction,
(ed.) Chris Ryan, Cassell, London
Smith, L. 1. S. (1983) Restaurants and Dining out: Geography of a Tourism Business, Ann& of
Tourism Research (lo): 514
Weber, K. (1997) . Assessment of Tourist Satisfaction, Using the Expectancy disconfirmation theory, a study of German Travel Market in Australia, Pacific Tourism Review, 1:35-45

WTO (1985). Identification and Evaluation of those Components of Tourism Services which havea Bearing
on Tourist Satisfaction and which can 6e regulnted, and State Measures to Ensurr Adequate Qualit!/ of
Tourism Srruices. Madrid: World Tourism Organisation
Wuest, E. S. B, Tas, F. R. and Emenheiser, D. A. (1996).What Do Mature Travellers Perceive As
Important Hotel/Motel Customer Services?,Hospitality Research ]aural, 20 (2): 76-93

Yi. Y. (1990),A Critical Review of Consumer Satisfaction, in V. A. Zeithaml (Ed.), Review ofMarketing, Chicago: American Marketing Association: 68-123
Yuksel, A. and Rimmington, M. (1997), An Integrated Approach to Customer Service Evaluation,
Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, Proceedings of the Second Conference on Graduate
Education and Graduate Students Research, (2): 31-45

Yuksel, A,; Rimmington, M. and Yuksel, F. (1997) .Concepts of Customer Satisfaction and their
Measurement: Results and Implications of an Empirical Investigation, Hospitality Business Development, Conference Proceedings: 123-28.

V o l u m e 9 0 Number I

Summer 1998 0

57