The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring Information System Service Quality: Servqual from the Other Side1
Open accessAbstract
There has been much debate as of late over the use of the SERVQUAL instrument to measure Information Systems service quality. Detractors argue that the difference score leads to unreliable measures and that the dimensionality and validity is erratic. Proponents argue for the diagnostic power of the gap between expectations and perceived delivery while demonstrating some empirical stability and reliability. To extend the discussion requires the examination of the instrument from the viewpoint of the information system professional. Importantly, a large variety of samples must view the instrument and measures in the same light for the instrument to have applicability. Likewise, analysis of differences between users and providers requires that both populations have similar structural views of the instrument. Empirical evidence collected from information system professionals demonstrated a structure similar to previously published studies with adequate reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. The structure is the same as is found for a gap between users and IS professionals.
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
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable
DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.3.1.60 · Cited by 10,697
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
Cited by
The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update
(2003) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045748 · Cited by 11,791
Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model
Roca, J. C., Chiu, C.-M., & Martínez, F. J. (2006) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.01.003 · Cited by 1,399
What drives social commerce: The role of social support and relationship quality
Liang, T.-P., Ho, Y.-T., Li, Y.-W., & Turban, E. (2011) · International Journal of Electronic Commerce · doi:10.2753/jec1086-4415160204 · Cited by 1,254
NELSON, R. R., TODD, P. A., & WIXOM, B. H. (2005) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2005.11045823 · Cited by 998
A Framework and Guidelines for Context-Specific Theorizing in Information Systems Research
Hong, W., Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Chasalow, L. C., & Dhillon, G. (2014) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2013.0501 · Cited by 609
Metadata
- Authors
- Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Carr, C. L.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2002-06-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 145-166
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1585650195
- Cited by
- 518
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 23.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Measuring Information System Service Quality: Servqual from the Other Side1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/4132324
- The paper
- Jiang, J. J., Klein, G., & Carr, C. L. (2002). Measuring Information System Service Quality: Servqual from the Other Side1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/4132324
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.