The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Customer equity considerations in service recovery: a cross‐industry perspective
Abstract
Service recovery, or “doing things very right the second time” has been identified as a strategic issue in the services marketing and management literature. So far, much of the research on this phenomenon has departed from the disconfirmation paradigm. However, since perceptions of fairness play such an important role in service recovery situations, it seems desirable to supplement extant literature with the equity paradigm. Therefore, we designed an experimental study to assess the impact of customer equity considerations on perceived quality, satisfaction, loyalty and trust with respect to service recovery across different service industries. Our findings reveal that in general, distributional fairness and procedural fairness during the service recovery significantly improve scores for service quality, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty and trust, whereas interactional fairness only enhances customer trust perceptions. Furthermore, our results suggest that the effects of equity considerations in a service recovery situation are idiosyncratic to specific service industries.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions
Oliver, R. L. (1980) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378001700405 · Cited by 14,494
Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298905300202 · Cited by 2,084
Goodwin, C., & Ross, I. (1992) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/0148-2963(92)90014-3 · Cited by 777
Cited by
Consumer responses to compensation, speed of recovery and apology after a service failure
Wirtz, J., & Mattila, A. S. (2004) · International Journal of Service Industry Management · doi:10.1108/09564230410532484 · Cited by 725
Patterson, P. G., Cowley, E., & Prasongsukarn, K. (2006) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2006.02.004 · Cited by 525
A Meta-Analysis of Organizational Complaint Handling and Customer Responses
Gelbrich, K., & Roschk, H. (2011) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510387914 · Cited by 481
Ladhari, R., Souiden, N., & Ladhari, I. (2011) · Journal of Financial Services Marketing · doi:10.1057/fsm.2011.10 · Cited by 153
Varela-Neira, C., Vázquez-Casielles, R., & Iglesias-Argüelles, V. (2008) · The Service Industries Journal · doi:10.1080/02642060801917612 · Cited by 103
Metadata
- Authors
- de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M.
- Venue
- International Journal of Service Industry Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2000-03-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 91-108
- ISSN
- 0956-4233 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2053050475
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 6.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.