The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring customer loyalty with multi‐item scales: A case for caution
Abstract
Purpose: The contemporary interest in customer loyalty has resulted in a proliferation of multi‐item scales containing an aggregated mix of items that appears to reflect different aspects of loyalty. The most common application of this aggregation approach is to include two specific loyalty facets, repatronage intentions and word‐of‐mouth intentions, in the same loyalty measure and to proceed as if they reflect the same underlying construct. The purpose of this paper is to examine – and question – this practice in conceptual, methodological, and empirical terms. Design/methodology/approach: Two empirical studies in service settings were conducted and multi‐item measures were used to collect data on repatronage intentions, word‐of‐mouth intentions, and satisfaction. A structural equation model approach was used to compare an aggregated measurement approach with an approach which models the two loyalty constructs as two separate factors. Findings: The results indicate that repatronage intentions and word‐of‐mouth intentions can indeed be seen as two discrete constructs. Practical implications: The results indicate that caution is called for when the investigator is measuring customer loyalty with multi‐item measures. Indeed, the lumping together of such facets as repatronage intentions and word‐of‐mouth intentions is likely to conceal significant aspects of loyalty per se and its relation to other variables in the nomological net. Originality/value: Only a very limited number of existing studies measure customer loyalty with multi‐item scales and with an explicit assumption that several discrete facets of loyalty exist.
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 Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1251929 · Cited by 12,003
Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development.
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309 · Cited by 6,567
A national customer satisfaction barometer: the Swedish experience
Fornell, C. (1992) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252129 · Cited by 5,641
Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges
Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.66.1.15.18449 · Cited by 4,196
Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective.
Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305 · Cited by 3,618
Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298905300202 · Cited by 2,084
Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A Holistic Construal
Bagozzi, R. P., & Phillips, L. W. (1982) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392322 · Cited by 2,064
Bolton, R. N. (1998) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.17.1.45 · Cited by 1,948
The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an empirical study
Hallowell, R. (1996) · International Journal of Service Industry Management · doi:10.1108/09564239610129931 · Cited by 1,862
Cited by
Building, measuring, and profiting from customer loyalty
Watson, G. F., Beck, J. T., Henderson, C. M., & Palmatier, R. W. (2015) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-015-0439-4 · Cited by 375
Huang, D., Markovitch, D. G., & Stough, R. A. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103600 · Cited by 125
Markovitch, D. G., Stough, R. A., & Huang, D. (2024) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2024.103847 · Cited by 100
Developing a Scale to Measure Customer Loyalty
Bobâlcă, C., Gătej(Bradu), C., & Ciobanu, O. (2012) · Procedia Economics and Finance · doi:10.1016/s2212-5671(12)00205-5 · Cited by 94
A model to evaluate the effects of price fairness perception in online hotel booking
Andrés-Martínez, M.-E., Gómez-Borja, M.-Á., & Mondéjar-Jiménez, J.-A. (2014) · Electronic Commerce Research · doi:10.1007/s10660-014-9137-4 · Cited by 40
Wang, W.-T., & Lu, C.-C. (2014) · Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce · doi:10.1080/10919392.2014.866501 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Söderlund, M.
- Venue
- International Journal of Service Industry Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2006-01-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 76-98
- ISSN
- 0956-4233 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1894686024
- Cited by
- 280
- References
- 16
- FWCI
- 21.14
- 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.