The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 83 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 117 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Understanding and managing customer relational benefits in services: a meta-analysis
Open accessOverview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This meta-analysis integrates 1242 effect sizes from 235 independent samples across 224 papers to show that confidence and social relational benefits are stronger drivers of customer loyalty than special treatment benefits. It also finds that the sequential path through perceived value and relationship quality is stronger than the switching-costs path.
Key findings
- All three relational benefits significantly affect customer loyalty, but confidence and social benefits have the strongest effects; special treatment benefits are consistently weaker. In the path model, confidence benefits (.42, p < .001), social benefits (.31, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.06, p < .001) relate to perceived value; relationship quality relates to customer loyalty at .66 (p < .001), and customer loyalty relates to firm sales performance at .60 (p < .001).
- The perceived value/relationship quality mediation path is stronger than the switching-costs path: indirect effects on customer loyalty via perceived value and relationship quality are .14 for confidence, .11 for social, and .02 for special treatment benefits (all p < .001), versus .02, .01, and .01 via switching costs (all p < .001).
- Moderators: special treatment benefits have a weaker relationship with customer outcomes in relationship versus encounter services (γ = -.08, p < .05); confidence (γ = .11, p < .10) and special treatment (γ = .08, p < .10) benefits are marginally stronger in B2B than B2C settings; special treatment benefits are stronger in papers published in or after 2009 (γ = .10, p < .01).
- Student samples show stronger effects for confidence benefits (γ = .15, p < .05), with marginal effects for social (γ = .12, p < .10) and special treatment (γ = .12, p < .10) benefits; confidence benefits are stronger in multiple-industry samples (γ = .15, p < .01).
Methods
- Meta-analysis of 224 papers, 235 independent samples, 97,803 respondents, and 1242 correlations, including published and unpublished studies from 1998 onward that examined at least one of confidence, social, or special treatment benefits and at least one outcome: perceived value, relationship quality, switching costs, customer loyalty, or firm sales performance.
- Effect sizes were reliability-corrected and sample-size-weighted using random-effects models; Fisher z-transformation was not applied. A structural path analysis used a meta-analytic correlation matrix with harmonic mean sample size n = 11,633.
- Moderators were tested with multivariate, multilevel meta-regressions, with three models—one per relational benefit—including type of service, B2B versus B2C, publication year, student sample, number of industries, and publication status.
Limitations
- Stated: meta-analysis is limited by available statistical information; four of seven identified relational benefits were excluded for insufficient studies; relational costs, loyalty toward frontline employees, antecedents of relational benefits, and interaction effects could not be examined.
- Stated: measurement differences may affect effect sizes; most studies rely on survey methods, so experimental designs are needed for causal inference; moderated mediation and other service classifications could not be tested, and publication year is only a proxy for data-collection year.
- Evident from the text: the meta-analytic, correlational input and dominance of cross-sectional surveys limit causal claims, as the authors themselves note in calling for experimental and longitudinal work.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
129 Own result · 96 Not checked yet · 24 Own interpretation · 21 Own method · 8 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the three identified mediation paths through which relational benefits influence customer loyalty, the sequential path through perceived value and relationship quality is the strongest.”
plaindirectn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The t -tests reveal that these average levels do not differ significantly between B2B and B2C contexts (all p > .10).”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“19% of the variance in switching costs”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An inspection of the pairwise correlations among the three relational benefits reveals that they range from .51 to .55”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The average levels are 67 (SD = 16) for confidence benefits”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“36% of the variance in firm sales performance”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“49 (SD = 18) for special treatment benefits”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“51 (SD = 19) for social benefits”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The model in Figure 2 accounts for 46% of the variance in perceived value”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The hypothesized model fits the data well ( χ ²(11) = 1850.99, p < .001; CFI = .96, TLI = .90, SRMR = .05).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“65% of the variance in relationship quality”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“52% of the variance in customer loyalty”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our final sample includes 1242 correlations.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“whereas that of social benefits is significantly higher in relationship services (56) than in encounter services (48; t(77) = 2.404, p < .05).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“perceived value mediates the relationships of all three relational benefits with relationship quality (confidence: .22, p < .001; social: .16, p < .001; special treatment: .03, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.13, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.07, p < .001) are significantly and positively related to switching costs”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“customer loyalty is positively associated with firm sales performance (.60, p < .001)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits ( γ = .11, p < .10) and special treatment benefits ( γ = .08, p < .10) are more strongly associated with customer outcomes in B2B settings than in B2C settings”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the results support a serial mediation model of confidence benefits (.14, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.02, p < .001) on customer loyalty through both perceived value and relationship quality”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“special treatment benefits are more strongly associated with customer outcomes in papers published in or after 2009 than in those released before 2009 (.10, p < .01).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.24, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.07, p < .001) are still directly and positively associated with relationship quality too.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“perceived value mediates the relationships of all three relational benefits with relationship quality (confidence: .22, p < .001; social: .16, p < .001; special treatment: .03, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as well as marginally significant differences across these samples in the strength of the relationships of social benefits ( γ = .12, p < .10) and special treatment benefits ( γ = .12, p < .10) with customer outcomes.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Switching costs are significantly related to customer loyalty (.13, p < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the results support a serial mediation model of confidence benefits (.14, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.02, p < .001) on customer loyalty through both perceived value and relationship quality”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits ( γ = .11, p < .10) and special treatment benefits ( γ = .08, p < .10) are more strongly associated with customer outcomes in B2B settings than in B2C settings”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the low importance of special treatment benefits might represent good news for companies”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“switching costs mediate the relationship between confidence benefits and customer loyalty (.02, p < .001), the relationship between social benefits and customer loyalty (.01, p < .001), and the relationship between special treatment benefits and customer loyalty (.01, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The same effect occurs when constraining the social benefits → switching costs path and the special treatment benefits → switching costs path to equality (Δ χ ²(1) = 4.35, p < .05).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No other effects are significant.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this relationship is marginally significant for special treatment benefits ( γ = .08, p < .10).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The moderating effect of B2B versus B2C on the relationships between social benefits and customer outcomes is not significant ( γ = .05, p > .10).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“all three relational benefits increase perceived value”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The strength of relationships of confidence benefits (-.03, p > .10) and social benefits (.04, p > .10) with customer outcomes do not differ between papers released before 2009 or after 2009.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Imposing equality constraints on these indirect paths significantly worsens model fit (Δχ²(3) = 2590.71, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“relationship quality mediates the perceived valuecustomer loyalty relationship (.34, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.42, p < .001), social benefits (.31, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.06, p < .001) are significantly related to perceived value”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we also find a significant relationship between relationship quality and switching costs (.21, p < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceived value, in turn, is positively associated with relationship quality (.52, p < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.24, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.07, p < .001) are still directly and positively associated with relationship quality too.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effects of both confidence ( γ = -.03, p > .10) and social ( γ = -.04, p > .10) benefits on all customer outcomes do not differ across relationship or encounter services.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The average level of special treatment benefits is marginally significantly higher in relationship services (55) than in encounter services (47; t(77) = 1.929, p < .06).”
plainn = 235 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Model fit deteriorates significantly when constraining the confidence benefits → switching costs path and the special treatment benefits → switching costs path to equality (Δ χ ²(1) = 13.18, p < .001).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.24, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.07, p < .001) are still directly and positively associated with relationship quality too.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as well as marginally significant differences across these samples in the strength of the relationships of social benefits ( γ = .12, p < .10) and special treatment benefits ( γ = .12, p < .10) with customer outcomes.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“perceived value mediates the relationships of all three relational benefits with relationship quality (confidence: .22, p < .001; social: .16, p < .001; special treatment: .03, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.13, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.07, p < .001) are significantly and positively related to switching costs”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits are more strongly related to customer outcomes for studies conducted in multiple, as opposed to single, industries ( γ = .15, p < .01)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, relationship quality is directly and positively associated with customer loyalty (.66, p < .001).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“switching costs mediate the relationship between confidence benefits and customer loyalty (.02, p < .001), the relationship between social benefits and customer loyalty (.01, p < .001), and the relationship between special treatment benefits and customer loyalty (.01, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, the results support a serial mediation model of confidence benefits (.14, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.02, p < .001) on customer loyalty through both perceived value and relationship quality”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The strength of relationships of confidence benefits (-.03, p > .10) and social benefits (.04, p > .10) with customer outcomes do not differ between papers released before 2009 or after 2009.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the relationship between special treatment benefits and customer outcomes is weaker for relationship services than encounter services ( γ = -.08, p < .05)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.13, p < .001), social benefits (.11, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.07, p < .001) are significantly and positively related to switching costs”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.42, p < .001), social benefits (.31, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.06, p < .001) are significantly related to perceived value”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits (.42, p < .001), social benefits (.31, p < .001), and special treatment benefits (.06, p < .001) are significantly related to perceived value”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the indirect effect from relational benefits to customer loyalty through perceived value and relationship quality (confidence: .14, p < .001; social: .11, p < .001; special treatment: .02, p < .001) is stronger than the indirect effect from relational benefits to customer loyalty through switching costs (confidence: .02, p < .001; social: .01, p < .001; special treatment: .01, p <”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“switching costs mediate the relationship between confidence benefits and customer loyalty (.02, p < .001), the relationship between social benefits and customer loyalty (.01, p < .001), and the relationship between special treatment benefits and customer loyalty (.01, p < .001).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effects of both confidence ( γ = -.03, p > .10) and social ( γ = -.04, p > .10) benefits on all customer outcomes do not differ across relationship or encounter services.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The average level of confidence benefits also does not differ between encounter and relationship services ( p > .10)”
- Also stated in: § Web Appendix H: Average levels of relational benefits · plain
“The average level of confidence benefits does not differ between encounter and relationship services ( p > .10).”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Web Appendix H: Average levels of relational benefits · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“special treatment benefits are more strongly associated with customer outcomes in unpublished studies than in published studies ( γ = .10, p < .05).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our analysis indicates that the PV/RQ path has a greater influence on customer loyalty.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observe a significant difference in the strength of relationships between confidence benefits and customer outcomes for studies that use student versus non-student samples ( γ = .15, p < .05)”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Those switching costs then increase customer loyalty.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Confidence | Social benefits | 60 | 24,474 | 0.51*** | 0.02 | 0.46 | 0.56 | 103,186 | 1449.66*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 24,474 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Switching cost | 12 | 6,183 | 0.36*** | 0.08 | 0.19 | 0.52 | 3,137 | 460.97*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 6,183 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Special | Perceived value | 20 | 12,028 | 0.45*** | 0.04 | 0.37 | 0.53 | 9,615 | 562.46*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 12,028 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Customer loyalty | 90 | 45,273 | 0.47*** | 0.03 | 0.42 | 0.52 | 210,357 | 3407.91*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 45,273 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Firm sales performance | 25 | 20,932 | 0.28*** | 0.04 | 0.20 | 0.35 | 8,821 | 643.83*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 20,932 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Switching cost | 10 | 5,852 | 0.33*** | 0.04 | 0.24 | 0.41 | 2,623 | 115.12*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 5,852 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Social | Special treatment benefits | 87 | 40,365 | 0.55*** | 0.03 | 0.49 | 0.62 | 361,946 | 6083.53*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 40,365 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Perceived value | 18 | 5,468 | 0.61*** | 0.04 | 0.53 | 0.70 | 11,628 | 435.23*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 5,468 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| treatment | Switching cost | 14 | 8,237 | 0.30*** | 0.08 | 0.14 | 0.46 | 4,154 | 637.49*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 8,237 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Relationship quality | 128 | 51,914 | 0.56*** | 0.02 | 0.52 | 0.60 | 447,209 | 4993.77*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 51,914 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| benefits ↔ | Perceived value | 17 | 16,296 | 0.56*** | 0.04 | 0.48 | 0.64 | 11,974 | 789.88*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 16,296 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| benefits ↔ | Special treatment benefits | 67 | 27,328 | 0.52*** | 0.03 | 0.46 | 0.57 | 113,229 | 2068.24*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 27,328 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Customer loyalty | 73 | 40,365 | 0.57*** | 0.03 | 0.51 | 0.63 | 195,298 | 3609.69*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 40,365 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Firm sales performance | 11 | 6,075 | 0.46*** | 0.06 | 0.34 | 0.58 | 2,664 | 253.72*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 6,075 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| benefits ↔ | Relationship quality | 141 | 54,421 | 0.49*** | 0.02 | 0.45 | 0.53 | 461,822 | 4892.85*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 54,421 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Relationship quality | 91 | 31,567 | 0.65*** | 0.02 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 346,724 | 4769.89*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 31,567 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The t-tests reveal that the average level of the three relational benefits does not differ significantly between B2B and B2C contexts (all p -values > .10).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Switching | Relationship quality | 14 | 6,820 | 0.39*** | 0.07 | 0.26 | 0.52 | 3,604 | 407.12*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 6,820 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The average level of special treatment benefits is marginally significantly higher in relationship services (55) than in encounter services (47; t (77) = 1.929, p < .06).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Relationship | Customer loyalty | 96 | 39,597 | 0.71*** | 0.02 | 0.67 | 0.76 | 525,494 | 8316.81*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 39,597 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Customers perceive higher levels of confidence benefits (67) than social benefits and special treatment benefits (49).”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| costs ↔ | Customer loyalty | 16 | 7,179 | 0.39*** | 0.04 | 0.31 | 0.47 | 3,910 | 239.56*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 7,179 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Customers perceive higher levels of confidence benefits (67) than social benefits and special treatment benefits (49).”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Customer | Firm sales performance | 21 | 18,045 | 0.60*** | 0.05 | 0.49 | 0.70 | 2,879 | 1711.99*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 18,045 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| quality ↔ | Firm sales performance | 32 | 17,957 | 0.52*** | 0.05 | 0.43 | 0.61 | 30,289 | 1600.37*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 17,957 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Customer loyalty | 104 | 45,853 | 0.40*** | 0.02 | 0.36 | 0.44 | 200,037 | 2627.98*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 45,853 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Customer loyalty | 23 | 15,159 | 0.61*** | 0.04 | 0.52 | 0.69 | 31,739 | 1633.81*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 15,159 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| Perceived value ↔ | Switching cost | 6 | 4,147 | 0.30*** | 0.03 | 0.24 | 0.37 | 374 | 35.72*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 4,147 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Firm sales performance | 9 | 9,883 | 0.36*** | 0.03 | 0.30 | 0.42 | 2,084 | 137.18*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 9,883 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The average level of social benefits is significantly higher in relationship services (57) than in encounter services (48; t (77) = 2.404, p < .05).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Relationship quality | 20 | 12,896 | 0.76*** | 0.03 | 0.71 | 0.81 | 31,189 | 1946.45*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 12,896 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Firm sales performance | 7 | 4,737 | 0.35*** | 0.05 | 0.26 | 0.44 | 748 | 75.02*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 4,737 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“| | Firm sales performance | 30 | 18,536 | 0.21*** | 0.03 | 0.16 | 0.27 | 5,380 | 377.79*** |”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) source
plaincorrelationaln = 18,536 ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“On the relationship quality path, research has shown that relational benefits contribute to the perceived value that customers receive from firms (e.g., Martin-Ruiz et al. 2008), which helps strengthen customer-firm relationships and improve customer loyalty (e.g., Gil-Saura et al. 2011; Ruiz-Molina et al. 2015).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Martin-Ruiz et al. 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Second, in prior meta-analyses that have shaped relationship marketing theory (Palmatier et al. 2006; Verma et al. 2016), the authors identify relationship quality as a mediator of the relational benefits-customer loyalty relationship.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, relational benefits might induce switching costs that can drive customer loyalty too (Chang and Chen 2007; Gremler and Gwinner 2015).”
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Prior meta-analyses (Palmatier et al. 2006; Verma et al. 2016) often conceptualize relational benefits as a single, general construct, discounting the potentially divergent effects of different relational benefits on customer outcomes.”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, we lack a comprehensive overview of the absolute and relative strengths by which different relational benefit dimensions induce different customer responses.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Palmatier et al.'s (2006) meta-analysis reveals that the broad concept of relationship quality-rather than its specific dimensions-best captures the strength and breadth of a relationship between customers and service providers.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Palmatier et al. 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“If being loyal to a service provider brings several benefits to the table that make customers perceive this exchange relationship as more valuable, they prefer to restore the imbalance (i.e., having received several benefits) and reciprocate by developing a stronger relationship with that firm (Crosby et al. 1990).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Crosby et al. 1990 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Relational benefits often create switching costs because when people decide to leave a service provider, they also risk losing all benefits they have accrued for being loyal to that particular organization (Chang and Chen 2007).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chang and Chen 2007 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The basic principle guiding social exchange in a relationship marketing context is reciprocity (Bagozzi 1995), in that a person who receives something favorable or valuable from another person wants to restore the balance by being more favorable toward that person and displaying more favorable behavior (Adams 1965).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bagozzi 1995 source
- Not checked yetcites Adams 1965
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Perceived value is positively associated with relationship quality (Moliner 2009; Ravald and Grönroos 1996), and several studies support a positive relationship between relationship quality and customer loyalty (e.g., Palmatier et al. 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Palmatier et al. 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Perceived value is positively associated with relationship quality (Moliner 2009; Ravald and Grönroos 1996), and several studies support a positive relationship between relationship quality and customer loyalty (e.g., Palmatier et al. 2006).”
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Palmatier et al.'s (2006) meta-analysis also offers support for a positive relationship between relationship quality and customer loyalty.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Palmatier et al. 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The utilitarian notion of customer value cannot capture, for example, a close connection between customers and service providers that creates more enjoyable interactions or motivates customers to develop favorable perceptions of that relationship (Price and Arnould 1999).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Price and Arnould 1999
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Switching costs also are associated with customer loyalty: Higher switching costs reduce the likelihood that customers leave the organization (Blut et al. 2015; Lam et al. 2004; Pick and Eisend 2014).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These customers also tend to invest more in long-term relationships once the relationship is established (Pick and Eisend 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pick and Eisend 2014 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The effect of relational benefits may differ depending on whether the service is encounter-based (e.g., fast food) or relationship-based (e.g., hairstylist) (Brown and Lam 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Brown and Lam 2008 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Multilevel meta-regressions account for these dependencies.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accordingly, customers tend to remain loyal to an organization if they perceive the benefits they accrue from being loyal to that organization would be lost if they were to switch providers.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Students are atypical respondents in many contexts, due to their limited consumption experiences and different cognitive structures, leading them to weight attributes differently than other customers (Peterson and Merunka 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Peterson and Merunka 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“meta-regressions often suffer from a lack of statistical power, due to the limited number of observations per individual relationship (Hox 2010)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hox 2010 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“First, as Geyskens et al. (1998, p. 223) note, 'multiple industries yield more variation in the data than a single industry … this should increase the range on the constructs of interest and consequently have a positive effect on the magnitude of the correlation coefficient.'”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Geyskens et al. 1998 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With a random-effects model, we integrate the correlations as a mean effect size.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Consumer behavior research also reveals that older people tend to form habits more easily, rather than engaging in extensive information processing (Gilly and Zeithaml 1985).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gilly and Zeithaml 1985 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting the usefulness of treating these variables as separate constructs in our analysis.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Third, published papers typically report stronger effect sizes than unpublished papers (McAuley et al. 2000).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites McAuley et al. 2000 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“we correct for sampling error by weighting the reliability-corrected correlation coefficients by sample size (Hunter and Schmidt 2004).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hunter and Schmidt 2004 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the presence of relational benefits makes it more difficult for customers to switch providers.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to the direct effect of relational benefits on relationship quality, perceived value partially mediates this relationship.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“when the customer views a special treatment benefit as essential (i.e., benefit-based dependence, Scheer et al. 2010), failing to offer it might exclude the firm from the customer's consideration set.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Scheer et al. 2010 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because these benefits generally can be copied easily by competitors, they are less likely to lead to a sustainable competitive advantage.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Special treatment benefits can be copied easily by competitors.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our examination of all of these mediation paths-the first meta-analysis to do so simultaneously-suggests that relational benefits influence customer loyalty through all three paths.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, perceived value partially mediates the relationships of relational benefits with relationship quality”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relational benefits are slightly more important in B2B than in B2C service contexts”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Special treatment benefits consistently have a much weaker, though significant, effect on perceived value, relationship quality, switching costs, and thus on customer loyalty.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Customers driven by special treatment benefits may remain loyal only until a competitor offers better benefits”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a meta-analysis, examining such conditions is not possible, because we rely on the summary statistics reported in each article rather than the original data.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the 224 papers included in this meta-analysis, we consistently find that special treatment is a weak contributor to the process of creating customer loyalty.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“switching costs are what customers perceive when they must relinquish relational benefits received.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“they are unlikely to have had a significant impact on our empirical generalizations, which are based on 1242 correlations from 235 independent samples reported in 224 papers.”
hedgedn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, the availability of information is limited, because some articles do not report sufficient statistical information to be included.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we can conclude that a positive perspective (i.e., focus on why customers want to stay, based on value, trust, commitment, and satisfaction) rather than a negative perspective (i.e., focus on customers' perceptions that they have to stay in a relationship) provides greater insights into customer loyalty.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our findings suggest that the use of student samples (a relatively small percentage of studies in our data set) may lead to an overestimation of the effects of confidence and special treatment benefits.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The relationships of confidence and social benefits with customer outcomes remain equivalently strong over time though.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These results also suggest that a unidimensional approach to relational benefits (e.g., Palmatier et al. 2006; Verma et al. 2016) might not adequately capture the influence of each benefit component on customer loyalty.”
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overlapping confidence intervals suggest that, overall, customers perceive an equal level of social benefits and special treatment benefits.”
hedgedn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings suggest that the level of relational benefits is very similar for different types of services.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 78
- Probably not a substantial claim. 83
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results reveal that all three relational benefits affect loyalty, though confidence benefits and social benefits have the strongest effects.”
plaindirectn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the 224 papers, about 84% were published in academic journals; the remaining 16% include unpublished doctoral dissertations, master's theses, working papers, or conference proceedings.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies focusing on encounter services in which customers interact with a different service provider each time account for 49% of our sample”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“while 37% refer to relationship services in which customers interact with the same employee for each service provision (Gutek et al. 1999).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gutek et al. 1999 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eighty-six percent of studies examine relational benefits in a single industry.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study participants are students in 7% of the studies”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The three relational benefits correlate significantly with perceived value, switching costs, relationship quality, customer loyalty, and firm sales performance.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The remaining 14% of studies examine relational benefits in multiindustry settings.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thirty percent of the studies include only one of the three relational benefits in their research models, 33% include two relational benefits, and the remaining 37% examine all three relational benefits simultaneously.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This procedure resulted in a set of 224 papers, some of which included more than one independent sample.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, this meta-analysis thus covers 235 independent samples, with a combined total of 97,803 respondents.”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“confidence and social benefits increase customers' relationship dependency”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“raise the costs of switching to another organization”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which improves relationship quality and customer loyalty”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both processes for realizing the impact of relational benefits (PV/RQ path and switching costs path) drive the effect of relational benefits on customer outcomes.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| 2010+ | 135 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Percentage of samples studying two of the three benefits | | | 33% |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Social benefits | 20 | 9% |”
plainn = 20- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Other (Dutch, French, German, Portuguese) | 4 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Social benefits + Special treatment benefits | 57 | 24% |”
plainn = 57- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Marketing journals a | 60 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Unpublished (versus published) research | | .01 | (.06) | n.s. | .03 | (.05) | n.s. | .10 | (.05) | * |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Other journals | 25 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Korean | 2 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Student (versus non-student) sample | | .15 | (.07) | * | .12 | (.08) | + | .12 | (.08) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Multiple (versus single) industries | | .15 | (.06) | ** | .04 | (.05) | n.s. | .08 | (.06) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| B2B (versus B2C) setting | H11a,b,c | .11 | (.07) | + | .05 | (.05) | n.s. | .08 | (.06) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Relationship (versus encounter) services | H10a,b,c | -.03 | (.05) | n.s. | -.04 | (.04) | n.s. | -.08 | (.04) | * |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Working papers | 3 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Percentage of samples studying one of the three benefits | | | 30% |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Service journals b | 35 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Special treatment benefits | 36 | 15% |”
plainn = 36- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Relationship (versus encounter) services | H10a,b,c | -.03 | (.05) | n.s. | -.04 | (.04) | n.s. | -.08 | (.04) | * |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Percentage of samples studying all three relational benefits | | | 37% |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Year of publication | H12a,b,c | -.03 | (.05) | n.s. | .04 | (.04) | n.s. | .10 | (.04) | ** |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| 2000's | 85 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Confidence benefits + Social benefits + Special treatment benefits | 88 | 37% |”
plainn = 88- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Year of publication | H12a,b,c | -.03 | (.05) | n.s. | .04 | (.04) | n.s. | .10 | (.04) | ** |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| B2B (versus B2C) setting | H11a,b,c | .11 | (.07) | + | .05 | (.05) | n.s. | .08 | (.06) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Indonesian | 2 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Confidence benefits + Social benefits | 7 | 3% |”
plainn = 7- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Year of publication | H12a,b,c | -.03 | (.05) | n.s. | .04 | (.04) | n.s. | .10 | (.04) | ** |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Hospitality and Tourism journals c | 25 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Total number of papers | 224 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Student (versus non-student) sample | | .15 | (.07) | * | .12 | (.08) | + | .12 | (.08) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Student (versus non-student) sample | | .15 | (.07) | * | .12 | (.08) | + | .12 | (.08) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| English | 213 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Relationship (versus encounter) services | H10a,b,c | -.03 | (.05) | n.s. | -.04 | (.04) | n.s. | -.08 | (.04) | * |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Conference proceedings | 19 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Management journals d | 25 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Bachelor and master dissertations | 5 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Spanish | 3 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| B2B (versus B2C) setting | H11a,b,c | .11 | (.07) | + | .05 | (.05) | n.s. | .08 | (.06) | + |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Doctoral dissertations | 9 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Confidence benefits | 14 | 6% |”
plainn = 14- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Confidence benefits + Special treatment benefits | 13 | 6% |”
plainn = 13- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Pre-2000 | 4 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Multiple (versus single) industries | | .15 | (.06) | ** | .04 | (.05) | n.s. | .08 | (.06) | + |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Unpublished (versus published) research | | .01 | (.06) | n.s. | .03 | (.05) | n.s. | .10 | (.05) | * |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Unpublished (versus published) research | | .01 | (.06) | n.s. | .03 | (.05) | n.s. | .10 | (.05) | * |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Multiple (versus single) industries | | .15 | (.06) | ** | .04 | (.05) | n.s. | .08 | (.06) | + |”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Information Technology journals e | 18 |”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This difference appears significant, as the confidence intervals for confidence benefits do not overlap with the confidence intervals for social and special treatment benefits.”
hedgedn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only about one-third of studies reported this information.”
plainn = 235- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although the concept of relational benefits was introduced more than two decades ago, and many studies have investigated it since then (Hult and Ferrell 2012; Zinkhan 2005), several issues continue to limit our understanding of customer relational benefits.”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“On the relationship quality path, research has shown that relational benefits contribute to the perceived value that customers receive from firms (e.g., Martin-Ruiz et al. 2008), which helps strengthen customer-firm relationships and improve customer loyalty (e.g., Gil-Saura et al. 2011; Ruiz-Molina et al. 2015).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, Hennig-Thurau et al. (2002) report a stronger effect of confidence benefits on customer outcomes, relative to social or special treatment benefits, whereas Meldrum and Kaczynski (2007) find a stronger effect of social benefits.”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“An overwhelming majority of studies examine relational benefits as antecedents of customer loyalty (e.g., Hennig-Thurau et al. 2002), though Gwinner et al. (1998) originally conceptualized them as a consequence of customers' demonstrations of loyalty.”
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Finally, special treatment benefits imply better deals or lower prices for loyal customers, so if they switch, they would have to give up these benefits (Chang and Chen 2007).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chang and Chen 2007 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To date, extant literature has not examined the extent to which these two paths simultaneously drive the connections between relational benefits and customer loyalty, which path has a stronger influence, or how these three mediators relate.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Investing time, effort, and other resources create psychological bonds (De Wulf et al. 2001) and cultivate mutual understanding, trust, satisfaction, and commitment (e.g., Gwinner et al. 1998; Palmatier et al. 2009).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The reasons firms would want to form relationships with customers had been well-documented (Morgan and Hunt 1994; Reichheld 1996), but customers' reasons and the benefits that they might derive had not been as well articulated prior to that study.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Morgan and Hunt 1994 source
- Not checked yetcites Reichheld 1996
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Emerson's (1976, p. 340) value proposition (i.e., the more valuable the exchange is to a person, the more likely he or she is to perform that action) and rationality proposition (i.e., people tend to choose options with higher value and a higher chance of occurring) both suggest that if the outcome and the process of an exchange is valuable, people engage in more exchanges.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Emerson 1976 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Value is a core concept in social exchange theory, because each actor evaluates the input and output of another actor, against his or her own input and output, during an interaction (Adams 1965).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Adams 1965
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In particular, Lam et al. (2004) predict higher switching costs when customers have developed well-known routines and procedures for dealing with a certain organization, which we consider confidence benefits.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lam et al. 2004 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Hennig-Thurau et al. (2002) assert that relational benefits increase customer-perceived switching costs.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hennig-Thurau et al. 2002 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Ravald and Grönroos (1996) similarly propose that relationships develop because of the value that customers extract from a relationship with a service provider.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ravald and Grönroos 1996 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Several scholars propose a relationship between relational benefits and perceived value (e.g., Chen and Hu 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chen and Hu 2010 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“This relationship is theoretically rooted in utility theory, which holds that customers derive value according to the difference between the utility provided by buying a certain service (or engaging in a certain activity) and the disutility represented by the price paid or the sacrifices made to attain the service (or engaging in that particular activity) (Sánchez-Fernández and Iniesta-Bonillo 200”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sánchez-Fernández and Iniesta-Bonillo 2007 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In contrast, competitors often use price discounts or other promotions to attract new customers (Villanueva et al. 2008), making it easier for customers to attain similar special treatment benefits by switching to a competitor.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Villanueva et al. 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Lam et al. (2004, p. 297) suggest that switching decisions 'may involve loyalty benefits that have to be given up by a customer when his or her relationship with the service provider ends.'”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lam et al. 2004 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, customers who enjoy social benefits due to friendly relations with employees often express loyalty toward a particular employee (Bove and Johnson 2006; Palmatier et al. 2007), which makes it harder to switch (Jones et al. 2002).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Gummesson (1987) accordingly considers relationship quality a consequence of an accumulation of value over multiple interactions between a customer and a provider.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gummesson 1987 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Confidence benefits are derived from an intimate relationship with the service provider and make a customer feel more secure, escalating the customer's trust level (Chou and Chen 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Chou and Chen 2018 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Customers maintain relationships not only because they want to (PV/RQ perspective) but also because they have to (i.e., switching costs perspective; Geiger et al. 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Geiger et al. 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Typically conceived of as the result of a rational decision-making process (Zeithaml 1988), perceived value primarily captures the utilitarian outcomes of being in a relationship with a service provider.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zeithaml 1988 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“For relational benefits to be provided, customers need to exhibit some level of patronage; experiencing relational benefits from such patronage then reinforces that loyalty (Hennig-Thurau et al. 2002).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hennig-Thurau et al. 2002 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Customers planning to switch from an organization risk not only incurring direct financial costs (i.e., set-up costs and monetary losses) but also losing knowledge (i.e., learning the service provider's processes), forgoing special benefits (e.g., customized services), and perhaps relinquishing personal relationships (Burnham et al. 2003).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Burnham et al. 2003 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Lam et al. (2004) conceptualize value as a cognition-based construct and suggest perceived value influences customer loyalty through a cognition-affect-behavior model.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lam et al. 2004 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although debate continues about which dimensions constitute relationship quality, prior conceptualizations typically include (relationship) satisfaction, trust, and commitment as indicators (e.g., De Wulf et al. 2001).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites De Wulf et al. 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In a similar manner, Ulaga and Eggert (2006) rely on Fishbein and Ajzen's (1975) theory of reasoned action to predict a relationship between customer value and loyalty, such that the effect of the cognitive variable (i.e., perceived value) is mediated by an affective variable (i.e., relationship quality) to result in a behavior (i.e., customer loyalty).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ulaga and Eggert 2006 source
- Not checked yetcites Fishbein and Ajzen 1975
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In relationship services, customers seek out and mostly interact with the same service provider over an extended period of time, which provides more opportunities for the diffusion of affect and creation of social bonds (Brown and Lam 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Brown and Lam 2008 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used several approaches to retrieve published and unpublished articles examining relational benefits.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Moreover, relational benefits have been studied in both business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) domains, with potential implications for the relationship marketing outcomes (e.g., Palmatier et al. 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Palmatier et al. 2006 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“two independent reviewers coded the moderators using a predefined coding scheme (see Web Appendix E), with an agreement rate of 98%.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Watson et al. (2015) report a significant effect of a higher-order construct of customer loyalty, which includes both attitudinal and behavioral elements, on performance.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Watson et al. 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Giving up valuable and high-quality relationships may be difficult and increase switching costs.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“we did not apply a Fisher z-transformation when integrating effect sizes, because these correlations would underestimate the coefficients' actual variance and overestimate the effect size of heterogeneous correlations (as are typical in marketing studies) by 15% to 45%.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Field 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we first correct the correlation coefficients for measurement error by dividing them by the product of the square root of the reliabilities for both constructs.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used the harmonic mean of the cumulative sample sizes across all relationships as the sample size for the analysis ( n = 11,633).”
plainn = 11,633- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Lam et al. (2004) consider switching costs independent of the PV/RQ perspective; Scheer et al. (2010) support a bidimensional model, with separate paths from benefit-based dependence (i.e., relational benefits) versus cost-based dependence (i.e., switching costs) to loyalty.”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Relative to B2C customers, B2B customers tend to exhibit lower levels of customer loyalty, more carefully consider the trade-offs between costs and benefits, and focus more on long-term benefits (Lam et al. 2004; Palmatier et al. 2006; Ulaga and Eggert 2006).”
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Multiple effect sizes provided by one sample cannot be considered independent (Hox 2010), and ignoring these dependencies can lead to an underestimation of standard errors.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hox 2010 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Customers also place greater emphasis on convenience and the value the organization adds beyond the core service (Kumar and Reinartz 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kumar and Reinartz 2018
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, customers of encounter services generally have weaker bonds with the service provider, and social interactions are less frequent (Brown and Lam 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Brown and Lam 2008 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The accessibility-diagnosticity perspective also suggests that information that is more diagnostic and clearly discriminates among alternate categorizations strongly informs judgments and choice (e.g., Herr et al. 1991).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Herr et al. 1991 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The harmonic mean assigns less weight to larger samples, so it offers a more conservative test than the arithmetic mean.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“If this information is missing, the sample size-weighted mean reliability provides an approximation (Van Vaerenbergh et al. 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Van Vaerenbergh et al. 2018 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“During the 20-year period in which research on relational benefits has emerged, a variety of relationship marketing practices also have emerged (Kumar and Reinartz 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kumar and Reinartz 2018
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A multivariate approach thus is becoming increasingly common in meta-analyses in marketing (e.g., Pick and Eisend 2016; Van Vaerenbergh et al. 2018).”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In recent years, marketplaces have changed dramatically. Competition has increased significantly due to globalization, technology allows customers to make better comparisons across competitors, customers have increasing expectations regarding services, and customers are less loyal than ever (Kumar and Reinartz 2018).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kumar and Reinartz 2018
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, Pick and Eisend (2014) propose a path from relationship quality to switching costs-suggesting that customers lose the benefits from their relationship with a firm when they leave.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pick and Eisend 2014 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, methodological concerns cannot be ruled out completely”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, relational benefits may engender switching costs, but it appears that switching costs also entail other perceptions of the quality of the customer-firm relationship, beyond its relational benefits.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The majority of papers in our meta-analysis have been published in peer-reviewed journals, which assures a certain level of quality.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, differences in the strengths of the effects of the relational benefit variables could be attributed to measurement issues.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings also indicate that the effect of relational benefits has changed over time. Specifically, relationships between special treatment benefits and customer outcomes appear stronger in more recent studies”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With respect to the PV/RQ path, all three relational benefits strengthen customer perceived value and thus relationship quality, which in turn increases customer loyalty.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we use publication year as a proxy for the year of data collection, which typically is not reported.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It thus seems that confidence and social benefits are equally important across encounter and relationship services, but special treatments benefits provide a differential advantage for encounter services.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings suggest that they are distinct constructs-both conceptually and empirically”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings suggest that even though both paths have direct effects on customer loyalty, the PV/RQ path also reinforces the switching costs path.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both confidence and social benefits exert significant impacts on loyalty, through customer perceived value, relationship quality, and switching costs-each of which serves as a mediator in the relationships.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our moderator analysis relies on a multivariate approach, which enhances its statistical power.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“this meta-analysis includes only customer loyalty toward an organization as an insufficient number of studies examine customer loyalty toward a frontline employee.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Palmatier et al. (2007) source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we identify seven distinct relational benefits in prior literature but had to exclude four that do not appear in a sufficient number of studies.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the path to loyalty from relational benefits is stronger through the PV/RQ path.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“Moreover, other mediating mechanisms may be at work, such as gratitude and entitlement (Wetzel et al. 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Wetzel et al. 2014 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fifth, factors such as products versus services or contractual versus non-contractual settings also could affect the results.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our meta-analysis draws inferences from existing studies on relational benefits that have not addressed these context factors fully.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fourth, relatively few studies examine antecedents of customer relational benefits, so we could not include them in the current study.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our meta-analysis is limited in that we must rely on statistics reported by other authors in their papers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this study, we consider relational benefits independent”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Virtually all these studies examine only the main effects of relational benefits, so we cannot include interaction effects.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We asked native speakers of the foreign languages (or people who are very fluent in a particular language) to help coding articles in a different language.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Customers often value their social relationships with frontline service providers that result from repeated, interpersonal interactions.
“Customers often value their social relationships with frontline service providers that result from repeated, interpersonal interactions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
When customers switch, they must become familiar with a new organization, which invokes psychological (increased anxiety) and economic costs.
“When they switch, customers must become familiar with a new organization, which invokes psychological (i.e., increased anxiety) and economic costs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Confidence benefits and social benefits build up gradually over the course of multiple interactions between customers and service providers, and both are very difficult for competitors to mimic when acquiring a new customer.
“Confidence benefits and social benefits build up gradually over the course of multiple interactions between customers and service providers, and both are very difficult for competitors to mimic when acquiring a new customer.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The interactions with different employees create greater variability and uncertainty in service performance.
“The interactions with different employees create greater variability and uncertainty in service performance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Customers of relationship services likely know what to expect.
“Customers of relationship services likely know what to expect.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Customers face more and more time constraints, meaning they do not always have time to engage in an extensive comparison of alternatives.
“First, customers face more and more time constraints, meaning they do not always have time to engage in an extensive comparison of alternatives.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Marketing activities involve fewer customer-employee interactions (e.g., technology replacing customer-employee interactions).
“Second, marketing activities involve fewer customer-employee interactions (e.g., technology replacing customer-employee interactions), so social benefits may become more important to customers seeking a personal connection.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Customers are increasingly price sensitive, looking for good deals and ways to save money.
“Third, customers are increasingly price sensitive, looking for good deals and ways to save money.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Studies of relational benefits differ in their use of a student or non-student sample.
“Second, studies of relational benefits differ in their use of a student or non-student sample.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Approaches to relationship marketing changed notably around 2005/2006 due to changes in technology, consumer behavior, and markets.
“Approaches to relationship marketing changed notably around the midpoint of the time of our sample (i.e., 2005/2006), due to the various changes in technology (e.g., introduction of Facebook and Twitter), consumer behavior, and markets, as we noted previously.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The average time lag between data collection and publication is about three years, such that a paper published in 2009 likely reflects data collected in 2006.
“we anticipate an average time lag of about three years, such that a paper published in 2009 likely reflects data collected in 2006.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Special treatment benefits can be copied easily by competitors.
“Because these benefits generally can be copied easily by competitors”
The paper relies on this without support.
Special treatment benefits can be expensive to provide.
“these benefits can be expensive to provide”
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 the citing paper
“Recent studies have revealed that switching costs are diverse and multidimensional in nature (Barroso and Picón 2012; Gremler et al. 2020; Kuo 2020).”
From Health insurance policy renewal: an exploration of reputation, performance, and affect to understand customer inertia (2022) · cites this paper as Gremler et al. 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Path model results
“whereas that of social benefits is significantly higher in relationship services (56) than in encounter services (48; t(77) = 2.404, p < .05).”
§ Web Appendix H: Average levels of relational benefits
“| Relationship services | 69 | 57 | 55 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ REFERENCES
“Full results of the pairwise analyses can be found in Web Appendix E.”
§ A Meta-Analysis
“Web Appendix G: Results of the pairwise analyses”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Table 3: Mediation analysis
“| Confidence benefits → Customer loyalty | Switching costs | H5a | .02*** | Yes |”
§ H7: Switching costs mediate the relationships of (a) confidence, (b) social, and (c) special treatment benefits with customer loyalty.
“H7: Switching costs mediate the relationships of (a) confidence, (b) social, and (c) special treatment benefits with customer loyalty.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Web Appendix B: List of papers included in the meta-analysis
“Njoku, B. P. (2009). The role of emotional relational behaviors on interpersonal consumer service loyalty. Doctoral Dissertation , Cleveland, OH: Cleveland State University.”
§ Web Appendix F: Sample characteristics
“| Njoku (2009) | 204 | - | - | ✓ | Encounter services | B2C | Published | Nonstudents |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Web Appendix B: List of papers included in the meta-analysis
“Varela-Neira, C., Vázquez-Casielles, R., & Iglesias, V. (2010). Lack of preferential treatment: Effects on dissatisfaction after a service failure. Journal of Service Management, 21 (1), 45-68.”
§ Web Appendix F: Sample characteristics
“| Varela-Neira et al. (2010) | 344 | - | - | ✓ | Encounter services | B2C | Unpublished | Nonstudents |”
Citations
Cites
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299405800302 · Cited by 22,355
Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298805200302 · Cited by 18,292
Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036 · Cited by 14,779
Adams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research
Fournier, S. (1998) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209515 · Cited by 7,542
Multilevel analysis techniques and applications
Hox, J. J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2002) · Cited by 6,006
Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey
Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.15.0420 · Cited by 5,765
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542
The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer Relationships
Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299906300205 · Cited by 4,899
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Meta‐analysis and traditional systematic literature reviews—What, why, when, where, and how?
Paul, J., & Barari, M. M. (2022) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21657 · Cited by 640
Hulland, J. S., & Houston, M. B. (2020) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-020-00721-7 · Cited by 343
A meta‐analysis of customer engagement behaviour
Barari, M. M., Ross, M., Quach, S., & Surachartkumtonkun, J. (2020) · International Journal of Consumer Studies · doi:10.1111/ijcs.12609 · Cited by 305
Vieira, V. A., Rafael, D., & Agnihotri, R. (2022) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.06.030 · Cited by 121
Consumer Trust: Meta-Analysis of 50 Years of Empirical Research
Khamitov, M., Rajavi, K., Huang, D.-W., & Hong, Y. (2023) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucad065 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- Gremler, D. D., Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Brüggen, E. C., & Gwinner, K. P.
- Affiliations
- Bowling Green State University (US)
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Kansas State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Gremler, Dwayne D.
- Venue
- Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
- Published
- 2019-10-29
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 565-583
- ISSN
- 0092-0703 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7824
- OpenAlex
- W2982458389
- Semantic Scholar
- 6f4068c80c0f161e3b44179a6f533aee3113a172
- Cited by
- 148
- References
- 83
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 8
- FWCI
- 2.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Arizona State University Center for Services Leadership (Leading Edge Service Research Award)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Customer churn and segmentation
- Keywords
- relationship marketing, customer loyalty, confidence benefits, social benefits, perceived value, relationship quality, switching costs, service marketing, mediation pathways
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
