The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Self-Service Technologies: Understanding Customer Satisfaction with Technology-Based Service Encounters
Abstract
Self-service technologies (SSTs) are increasingly changing the way customers interact with firms to create service outcomes. Given that the emphasis in the academic literature has focused almost exclusively on the interpersonal dynamics of service encounters, there is much to be learned about customer interactions with technology-based self-service delivery options. In this research, the authors describe the results of a critical incident study based on more than 800 incidents involving SSTs solicited from customers through a Web-based survey. The authors categorize these incidents to discern the sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with SSTs. The authors present a discussion of the resulting critical incident categories and their relationship to customer attributions, complaining behavior, word of mouth, and repeat purchase intentions, which is followed by implications for managers and researchers.
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
The critical incident technique.
Flanagan, J. C. (1954) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0061470 · Cited by 8,191
The Service Encounter: Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents
Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H., & Tetreault, M. S. (1990) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252174 · Cited by 4,860
Self-citationMano, H., & Oliver, R. L. (1993) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209361 · Cited by 1,973
Reliability of Nominal Data Based on Qualitative Judgments
Perreault, W. D., & Leigh, L. E. (1989) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3172601 · Cited by 1,575
Cited by
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
Artificial intelligence in service
Huang, M.-H., & Rust, R. T. (2018) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670517752459 · Cited by 3,978
Customer experience creation: Determinants, dynamics and management strategies
Verhoef, P. C., Lemon, K. N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M., & Schlesinger, L. A. (2009) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.001 · Cited by 3,140
eTailQ: dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting etail quality
Wolfinbarger, M., & Gilly, M. C. (2003) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/s0022-4359(03)00034-4 · Cited by 2,340
Dabholkar, P. A., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2002) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1177/0092070302303001 · Cited by 1,898
Metadata
- Authors
- Meuter, M. L., Ostrom, A. L., Roundtree, R. I., & Bitner, M. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-07
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 50-64
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2150563888
- Cited by
- 2,905
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 101.96
- 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.