The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Study of Experiential Quality, Experiential Value, Experiential Satisfaction, Theme Park Image, and Revisit Intention
Abstract
This study aims at identifying the dimensions of experiential quality and investigating the interrelationships among experiential quality, experiential value, experiential satisfaction, theme park image, and revisit intention perceived by theme park visitors. Analysis of data from 424 visitors in Janfusan Fancyworld of Taiwan indicates that the proposed model fits the data well. The results reveal that there are 4 primary dimensions and 11 subdimensions of experiential quality perceived by theme park visitors. In addition, the results indicate that physical environment quality is identified as the most primary dimension of experiential quality perceived by theme park visitors.
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
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.
Triandis, H. C., & Hofstede, G. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393257 · Cited by 17,696
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
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
Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150783 · Cited by 12,222
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
Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377701400320 · Cited by 10,390
A Reliability Coefficient for Maximum Likelihood Factor Analysis
Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02291170 · Cited by 7,330 · cited 1×
“[GFI], incremental fit index [IFI], and nonnormed fit index [NNFI] estimates) were greater than the recommended .90 (e.g., Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Kline, 1998; Tucker & Lewis, 1973).”
BackgroundServicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on Customers and Employees
Bitner, M. J. (1992) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252042 · Cited by 7,271
Oliver, R. L., & Swan, J. E. (1989) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298905300202 · Cited by 2,084
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, H.-C., Li, M.-Y., & Li, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-12-28
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 26-73
- ISSN
- 0741-5095 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-3480
- 1557-7554
- OpenAlex
- W2330060764
- Cited by
- 354
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 22.70
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Study of Experiential Quality, Experiential Value, Experiential Satisfaction, Theme Park Image, and Revisit Intention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1096348014563396
- The paper
- Wu, H.-C., Li, M.-Y., & Li, T. (2018). A Study of Experiential Quality, Experiential Value, Experiential Satisfaction, Theme Park Image, and Revisit Intention. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348014563396
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.
