Assessing the impact of response styles on cross-cultural service quality evaluation: a simplified approach to eliminating the problem
Assessing the impact of response styles on cross-cultural service quality evaluation: a simplified approach to eliminating the problem
With the proliferation of comparative research, it is important to recognize some of the inherent limitations of cross-cultural measurement. This article examines the impact of response styles on substantive conclusions of cross-cultural service quality research. The authors use relatively simple analysis methods in conditions where more sophisticated approaches are unlikely to be robust. They demonstrate how analysis of covariance and partial regression can be used to assess both differences in mean scores and differences in relationships. Their results demonstrate that conclusions drawn from analysis that ignores the potential impact of response styles differ from those drawn when response styles are considered. For researchers, their findings imply that attempts to understand and explain cultural differences in service quality expectations, and relationships between perceptions and overall quality assessments, may be impeded by the presence of response styles. A further impact relates to the assessment of “gaps” or a “zone of tolerance” in service quality evaluation. For managers, their conclusions have implications relating to the use of research findings as a basis for market segmentation, service design, staff training, and other resource allocation decisions. In particular, the authors question the use of such research as a basis for comparative service evaluation across cultures
230-243
Reynolds, Nina
43f998c7-5bb2-4f15-a7ec-45eaec50dcb8
Smith, Anne
6d6ec676-5585-440b-bf25-fd73a03b233e
May 2010
Reynolds, Nina
43f998c7-5bb2-4f15-a7ec-45eaec50dcb8
Smith, Anne
6d6ec676-5585-440b-bf25-fd73a03b233e
Reynolds, Nina and Smith, Anne
(2010)
Assessing the impact of response styles on cross-cultural service quality evaluation: a simplified approach to eliminating the problem.
Journal of Service Research, 13 (2), .
(doi:10.1177/1094670509360408).
Abstract
With the proliferation of comparative research, it is important to recognize some of the inherent limitations of cross-cultural measurement. This article examines the impact of response styles on substantive conclusions of cross-cultural service quality research. The authors use relatively simple analysis methods in conditions where more sophisticated approaches are unlikely to be robust. They demonstrate how analysis of covariance and partial regression can be used to assess both differences in mean scores and differences in relationships. Their results demonstrate that conclusions drawn from analysis that ignores the potential impact of response styles differ from those drawn when response styles are considered. For researchers, their findings imply that attempts to understand and explain cultural differences in service quality expectations, and relationships between perceptions and overall quality assessments, may be impeded by the presence of response styles. A further impact relates to the assessment of “gaps” or a “zone of tolerance” in service quality evaluation. For managers, their conclusions have implications relating to the use of research findings as a basis for market segmentation, service design, staff training, and other resource allocation decisions. In particular, the authors question the use of such research as a basis for comparative service evaluation across cultures
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: May 2010
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 179955
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/179955
ISSN: 1094-6705
PURE UUID: da778d69-271c-4c61-baf1-a23457a0cb90
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 05 Apr 2011 07:50
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 02:51
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Nina Reynolds
Author:
Anne Smith
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics