Cited by 777Customer Service Quality and LoyaltyService and Product InnovationEmotional Labor in Professions

Consumer responses to service failures: Influence of procedural and interactional fairness perceptions

Open access
Goodwin, Cathy, Ross, Ivan·1992·Journal of Business Research

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0148-2963(92)90014-3

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goodwin, C., & Ross, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Manitoba (CA)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Goodwin, Cathy
Venue
Journal of Business Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1992-09
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
149-163
ISSN
0148-2963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2031564884
Cited by
777
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 37
FWCI
4.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Business Research (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • 기초학문자료센터(KRM) (Korea Research Foundation) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Emotional Labor in Professions
Keywords
service failure, consumer response, procedural justice, interactional justice, apology, voice, customer satisfaction, tangible benefits

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review