How does product program innovativeness affect customer satisfaction? A comparison of goods and services
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In a pretest (N = 57), participants in the more innovative product condition perceived the suitcase as more innovative than participants in the less innovative condition (M = 5.81 vs. 4.08, t(42.41) = -5.38, p < .001).
“A pretest ( N = 57; 45.60% women; M age = 25.42 years) indicated that participants in the more innovative product condition perceived the suitcase as more innovative ( M moreinnovative = 5.81; M lessinnovative = 4.08; t (42.41) = -5.38, p < .001)”
From Unintended reward costs: the effectiveness of customer referral reward programs for innovative products and services (2019) · cites this paper as Stock (2011)
In Study 2 pretest, participants in the more innovative condition perceived the gym as more innovative than participants in the less innovative condition (M = 5.78 vs. 4.04; t(49) = -5.69, p < .001).
“A pretest ( N = 51; 54.9% women; M age = 25.6 years) indicated that participants in the more innovative condition perceived the gym as more innovative ( M moreinnovative = 5.78; M lessinnovative = 4.04; t (49) = -5.69, p < .001) according to a three-item scale from Stock (2011)”
From Unintended reward costs: the effectiveness of customer referral reward programs for innovative products and services (2019) · cites this paper as Stock 2011
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 111 · Cited by 122
- Authors
- Stock, R. M.
- Affiliations
- Technische Universität Darmstadt (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Stock, Ruth Maria
- ORCID
- Stock, Ruth Maria
- Venue
- Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
- Published
- 2010-09-22
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 813-827
- ISSN
- 0092-0703 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7824
- OpenAlex
- W2050463533
- Cited by
- 122
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 13.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
- Keywords
- product innovativeness, customer satisfaction, goods versus services, inverted U-shaped relationship, information economics, service marketing, marketing managers, dyadic data
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
