BMO 6630: Dining Consumption Theory and Research Analysis Report

This report presents a structured abstract of research on dining consumption, focusing on the impact of restaurant experiences on brand image, customer loyalty, and the moderating role of dining motivation. The analysis draws upon four academic articles, including seminal work by Thorstein Veblen on conspicuous consumption and more recent studies employing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research designs. The report synthesizes the evolution of the theory, identifying common and divergent themes across the articles, such as the influence of environment and food quality on brand image and satisfaction. It also examines study limitations inherent in each research approach and proposes directions for future research, including further investigation of the link between brand image and customer satisfaction and loyalty. The research highlights the importance of understanding consumer behavior in the restaurant industry, particularly the influence of dining motivations on the formation of brand image and customer loyalty. This research contributes to the development of effective marketing strategies for full-service restaurants.

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254379362
Impact of Restaurant Experience on Brand Image and Customer Loyalty:
Moderating Role of Dining Motivation
Article in Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing · August 2012
DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2012.701552
CITATIONS
53
READS
6,980
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Quality Parameters for Ranking Hospitality ProgramsView project
Naehyun Paul Jin
George Mason University
27PUBLICATIONS385CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Lynn Huffman
Texas Tech University
36PUBLICATIONS528CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Naehyun Paul Jin on 08 October 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin]
On: 08 August 2012, At: 08:29
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttm20
Impact of Restaurant Experience on Brand Image
Customer Loyalty: Moderating Role of Dining Mot
Naehyun (Paul) Jin
a , Sangmook Lee
a & Lynn Huffman
b
a Department of Nutrition Hospitality, and Retailing, Texas Tech University, College of Hu
Sciences, Lubbock, TX, 79409, USA
b Department of Nutrition Hospitality, and Retailing, Texas Tech University, College of
Human Sciences, Lubbock, TX, USA
Version of record first published: 08 Aug 2012
To cite this article: Naehyun (Paul) Jin, Sangmook Lee & Lynn Huffman (2012): Impact of Restaurant Experience on
Image and Customer Loyalty: Moderating Role of Dining Motivation, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29:6, 532-5
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2012.701552
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should
be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims,
proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29:532–551, 2012
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1054-8408 print / 1540-7306 online
DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2012.701552
IMPACT OF RESTAURANT EXPERIENCE ON
BRAND IMAGE AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY:
MODERATING ROLE OF DINING MOTIVATION
Naehyun (Paul) Jin
Sangmook Lee
Lynn Huffman
ABSTRACT. This study seeks to determine which restaurant experiences influence the image of a
restaurant’s brand and formation of customers’ loyalty. The research examines the connections among
restaurant experiences, brand image, satisfaction, and loyalty in the context of full-service restaurants.
This study also investigates the moderating effect of customers’ dining motivations on the formation of
brand image. The results of this study suggest that: (a) A restaurant’s environment and food quality pos-
itively influences brand image and customers’ satisfaction, (b) customers’ perceptions of price fairness
do not influence brand image but does affect customers’ satisfaction, (c) development of customers’
positive brand image does not drive satisfaction but does influence loyalty in full-service restaurants,
and (d) customers’ dining motivations moderate the relationship between restaurant experiences and
perceptions of brand image. These results provide a basis for investigating which restaurant experiences
are critical in eliciting development of a positive brand image and which have behavioral consequences.
This study also offers mangers a perspective for developing marketing strategies to strengthen brand
image in full-service restaurants.
KEYWORDS. Restaurant experiences, brand image, customer loyalty, dining motivation
INTRODUCTION
A well-respected brand—a message to the
customer of a certain level of product / service
quality—is, arguably, one of the most important
sources of information at the point of purchase
because brand image reduces the complexity
of purchasing products/ services with confi-
dence (Muller, 1998). Once customers associate
positive experiences with a brand, they are often
Naehyun (Paul) Jin (E-mail: [e-mail]) and Sangmook Lee (E-mail: [e-mail]) are doc-
toral students in the Department of Nutrition, Hospitality, and Retailing at Texas Tech University, College of
Human Sciences, P.O. Box 41240, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Lynn Huffman, PhD, is Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Hospitality, and Retailing at Texas Tech
University, College of Human Sciences, Lubbock, TX, USA (E-mail: [e-mail]).
Address correspondence to: Naehyun (Paul) Jin at the above address.
loyal to that brand and recommend it to oth-
ers (Tepeci, 1999). Consequently, building a
favorable brand image is an important market-
ing strategy in order for companies to sustain
an increased revenue stream in today’s market-
place.
Effective management of positive brand
image is also imperative in the restaurant indus-
try to differentiate one restaurant from its com-
petitors and to elicit customers’ satisfaction
532
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

Jin, Lee, and Huffman 533
and loyalty in the midst of rapid increases in
the number of restaurants and fierce competi-
tion among them (Ryu, Han, & Kim, 2008).
Since customers’ positive brand images lead
to continuing purchases of the same brand
from among the various alternatives, under-
standing the mechanism for developing a dis-
tinctive brand image in the restaurant industry is
important.
A meaningful examination involves the rela-
tionship between customer experience in restau-
rants and brand image. Customers’ perceptions
of brand image and their post-consumption
responses may differ based on their experiences
in a restaurant. Generating high-quality cus-
tomer experience is one of the central concepts
to creating a loyal customer base and a sustain-
able competitive advantage (Berry, Carbone, &
Haeckel, 2002; Berry, Wall, & Carbone, 2006;
Pine & Gilmore, 1998; Verhoef et al., 2009).
In line with this view, Pine and Gilmore (1998)
stressed that creating a distinctive customer
experience can bring enormous economic value
to firms. Encouraging these experiences has
become the core focus of the hospitality sector
because many products in the hospitality indus-
try are experiential and can be categorized as a
“total experiences” (Williams, 2006). Moreover,
the relationship between customer experience
and brand image inextricably links to business
success in the restaurant industry (Kim & Kim,
2004).
Despite the increasing importance of brand
image in the hospitality industry, particularly
in the restaurant industry, the subject has not
enjoyed scrutiny in depth. Although research
has considered restaurant experiences and brand
image separately in a number of studies, simul-
taneous examination of the two in the restau-
rant context has not occurred. In other words,
investigators have not considered the mecha-
nism for the effect of customers’ experiences
with restaurant service on formation of brand
image. In addition, little research has explained
the relationships among restaurant experiences,
brand image, customers’ satisfaction, and cus-
tomers’ loyalty. For example, one question that
remains unanswered concerns whether or not
brand image predicts both customer satisfaction
and customer loyalty in the restaurant industry.
Furthermore, this study examines the mod-
erating effect of dining motivation in order to
deepen the holistic framework for formation
of consumer brand image. Research has shown
that dining motives vary according to restau-
rant types (Kim, Raab, & Bergman, 2010). For
example, a customer’s motivation at a quick
service restaurant is different from that at a full-
service restaurant. Understanding of customer
dining motivations and their impacts on dining
experiences is a critical issue to restaurateurs
who must develop effective marketing strate-
gies to satisfy customers and encourage them
to patronize the restaurant. Identifying the influ-
ence of dining motivation on consumer behav-
ior allows marketers to better tailor services
for specific market segments. To the best of
current knowledge, no prior research has stud-
ied the moderating role of dining motivation
on the relationship among restaurant experi-
ences, brand image, and consumers’ postdin-
ing behavior. Dining motivation may affect this
relationship because it determines consumers’
evaluative judgments during their dining expe-
riences (Park, 2004). This study proposes that
quick service / convenience dining consumers
will be more positively affected by functional
aspects (food quality) in evaluating brand image
than people who value hedonic aspects (envi-
ronment) of social occasions in dining experi-
ences. Thus, the study attempts to incorporate
the moderator “dining motivation” to evaluate
how customers’ main reasons for dining out
(quick service / convenience versus social occa-
sion) strengthen or lessen the effect of their per-
ceived restaurant experiences on brand image
and satisfaction.
The primary objectives of this study, there-
fore, are to: (a) propose a theoretical model that
focuses on the relationships among restaurant
experience, brand image, and customer loyalty;
(b) empirically examine which restaurant expe-
riences elicit positive brand images; (c) investi-
gate the relationship among brand image, cus-
tomer satisfaction, and loyalty in the restaurant
industry, and (d) explore the moderating effect
of dining motivations (differentiating customers
for quick service / convenience and customers
for social occasion) on restaurant experiences,
brand image, satisfaction, and loyalty.
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

534 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
LITERATURE REVIEW AND
HYPOTHESES
Brand Image
Brand image has been a vital concept in con-
sumer behavior research because it affects indi-
viduals’ subjective perceptions and consumers’
senses of value, satisfaction, and consequent
behavior (Cretu & Brodie, 2007; Dobni &
Zinkhan, 1990; Pavesic, 1989; Verhoef et al.,
2009). Due to the complex nature of brand
image, little consensus exists for a definition.
For instance, Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) defined
it as “a subjective and perceptual phenomenon
that is formed through consumer interpreta-
tion, whether reasoned or emotional” (p. 118).
Further, Keller (1993) described brand image
as a set of perceptions that the consumers
form as reflected by brand associations. Despite
conceptual deviations, clearly marketing activi-
ties, contextual variables, and each customer’s
characteristics affect and form brand image
(Dobni & Zinkhan, 1990). Hence, brand image
plays an important role, especially in situations
that make differentiation of products or ser-
vices based on tangible quality features difficult
(Mudambi, Doyle, & Wong, 1997). Moreover,
since brand image for a restaurant is often
beyond visible or tangible factors, crucial to the
success of food-service firms is strong brand
image, which aids customers’ visualizing and
therefore developing positive attitudes toward
services prior to purchasing (Pavesic, 1989).
Based on these ideas and theories, this study
views brand image as made up of emotions,
ideas, or attitudes that customers associate with
full-service dining restaurants.
Restaurant Experiences
Environment
Kotler (1973) defined atmospherics as the
conscious designing of space to elicit specific
emotional effects in consumers and increase
their purchasing probability. Investigating the
influence of physical surroundings on customers
and employees, Bitner (1992) introduced the
term servicescape to explain “the built envi-
ronment” or, more specifically, “the man-made,
physical surroundings as opposed to the natu-
ral or social environment” (p. 58), and identi-
fied three dimensions of atmospherics: “ambient
conditions”; “spatial layout and functionality”;
and “signs, symbols, and artifacts.”
Additionally, Wakefield and Blodgett (1999)
proposed that the tangible physical environment
functions as a pivotal factor in strengthening
excitement in leisure settings, which, in turn,
results in determining customers’ intentions to
re-patronize and willingness to recommend.
A potentially important role of atmospherics is
to generate a positive first impression that will
enhance customers’ service experiences (Berry
et al., 2006). For example, creative use of phys-
ical design in a restaurant’s service leads to
specific marketing achievements such as pos-
itive customer perception of quality, positive
evaluation of experience, and positive attitude
(Han & Ryu, 2009).Thus, in this study, envi-
ronment refers to the man-made physical condi-
tions in restaurants, organized by the restaurant
operators, as opposed to a naturally occurring
environment.
Food Quality
In a restaurant setting, food quality is the
most essential factor influencing customers’
decisions to patronize a restaurant, and it is an
influential element for customer loyalty (Ha &
Jang, 2010b; Namkung & Jang, 2007; Sulek &
Hensley, 2004). Emphasizing the importance of
food quality in the dining experience, previous
studies evaluated food quality according to vari-
ous characteristics (Josiam & Monteiro, 2004;
Kivela, Inbakaran, & Reece, 2000; Raajpoot,
2002). For example, Kivela et al. (2000) iden-
tified the tastiness of food, menu variety, and
nutrition as major attributes of food quality and
investigated the impact of excellence of food on
customer satisfaction and revisiting patronage.
Focusing on the food service industry,
Raajppot (2002) included food presentation,
serving size, menu design, and variety of food
to assess food quality. In another study, Josiam
and Monteiro (2004) stated that seven general
food attributes determine quality: taste, presen-
tation, menu variety, healthful options, fresh-
ness, appropriate temperature, and food safety.
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

Jin, Lee, and Huffman 535
More recently, Ha and Jang (2010b) chose taste,
portion, menu variety, and healthful options to
measure food quality.
Price Fairness
Zeithaml (1988) conceptualized price as
“what is given up or sacrificed to obtain a prod-
uct” (p. 10). Further, price can represent both
objective price and perceived price (Jacoby &
Olson, 1977). Objective price is the actual price
of serving the product; whereas, perceived price
refers to the price as understood by the customer
(Jacoby & Olson, 1977). A further suggestion
is that the objective price of a product / service
becomes meaningful to the customer when
interpreting the price subjectively (Oh, 2000).
In line with this view, price fairness can
become “a consumer’s assessment and asso-
ciated emotions of whether the difference (or
lack of difference) between a seller’s price and
the price offered by a comparable other party
is reasonable, acceptable, or justifiable” (Xia,
Monroe, & Cox, 2004, p. 3). This shows that
the basis for a price evaluation is the comparison
between actual price and reference price, com-
petitors’ prices, costs, and / or other consumers’
costs (Kahneman, Knetsch, & Thaler, 1986).
Thus, a widely accepted notion is that price
fairness or unfairness derives from comparing
one’s reference price and the actual price paid
(Petrick, 2005). The impact of this price percep-
tion on consumers’ behavior is likely prominent
in the restaurant industry because customers’
experiences will not be identical, despite pro-
viding similar services from the same service
providers (Han & Ryu, 2009). This suggests
that the prices offered at a restaurant should
reflect what the market expects to pay in order to
reduce consumers’ perceptions of unfair prices.
Thus, price fairness, in this study, is consumers’
subjective perceptions of sellers’ prices.
Customer Satisfaction
As one of the most critical factors influenc-
ing customers’ future behavior, satisfaction has
undergone extensive research as an organiza-
tional goal, especially in the highly competitive
hospitality and tourism industry. Westbrook and
Oliver (1991) defined satisfaction as “a com-
parison of the level of product or service per-
formance, quality, or other outcomes perceived
by the consumer with an evaluative standard”
(p. 85). The key foundational concept of satis-
faction is the expectancy-disconfirmation model
(Lewin, 1938), which posits that perceived per-
formance exceeding consumers’ expectations
elicits customers’ satisfaction. In contrast, if
perceived performance fails to meet consumers’
expectations, a negative disconfirmation leads to
consumers’ dissatisfaction (Oliver, 1980).
However, another suggestion is that eval-
uation of satisfaction includes affective and
cognitive variables since emotion is an impor-
tant source of human motivation and relates
to judgments of satisfaction (Westbrook, 1987;
Westbrook & Oliver, 1991). As an example,
Westbrook (1987) argued that incorporation of
emotional aspects contributes to evaluations of
satisfaction beyond expectancy-disconfirmation
beliefs. Hence, understanding both the cogni-
tive and affective aspects of satisfaction can aid
restaurateurs’ designing and delivering appro-
priate services that cater to customers’ demands
(Ha & Jang, 2010a; Namkung & Jang, 2008).
Accordingly, in this study, customer satisfaction
refers to cognitive evaluation of service quality
and affective aspects generated by experiences
during consumption.
Customer Loyalty
Customer loyalty is an important goal for
marketing in service marketing industries as it is
a pivotal component for a company’s long-term
competitive edge. Oliver (2010) defined loyalty
as “a deeply held commitment to re-buy or repa-
tronize a preferred product or service consis-
tently in the future, despite situational influences
and marketing efforts having the potential to
cause switching behavior” (p. 432). According
to Oliver (1999, 2010), four sequential stages
constitute achievement of customers’ loyalty
(cognition-affective-conative-action): (a) Brand
attribute aspects are the bases for cognition loy-
alty, (b) affective loyalty focuses on a positive
attitude toward a brand, (c) conative loyalty
refers to strong intentions for future exchange,
and (d) action loyalty is a commitment to a
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

536 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
specific product or service regardless of the
marketing efforts of competitors.
Both behavioral and attitudinal aspects are
useful assessing loyalty (Alan & Kunal, 1994;
Jacoby & Chestnut, 1978; Oliver, 1999). The
behavioral measure refers to the concept of
repeat patronage or repeat purchase frequency,
while the attitudinal measure associates with
psychological commitment toward the physi-
cal business or brand (Alan & Kunal, 1994).
Both aspects of loyalty have lead to several
perspectives useful for measuring each aspect.
Thus, Jacoby and Chestnut (1978) investigated
loyalty measurements classifying them as atti-
tudinal, behavioral, and compound measure-
ments. They argued that consistent purchas-
ing as an indicator of loyalty could be invalid
due to customers’ preferences for convenience
and multibrand loyalty, suggesting that elabo-
ration of an attitude-based framework is neces-
sary. Similarly, Dick and Basu (1994) claimed
that behavioral approaches are insufficient for
explaining the mechanics of brand loyalty’s
development.
In recent years, the attitudinal approach has
received much attention in gauging the level
of customer loyalty, especially in the hospital-
ity industry (Han & Ryu, 2009; Mattila, 2001;
Schall, 2003). Compared to manufacturing
industries, hospitality businesses more closely
involve attitudinal and emotional commitments
to providers of products or services (Schall,
2003). Thus, frequency of purchasing would not
necessarily represent the only indicator of cus-
tomers’ loyalties. For instance, restaurants’ fre-
quency programs provide a limited view of cus-
tomers’ loyalties because the programs’ focuses
are not toward attitudinal or emotional com-
mitments (Mattila, 2001). That is, customers
with a high-frequency patronage are also sus-
ceptible to competitors’ marketing efforts unless
patrons have high levels of emotional commit-
ments to a product or service provider (Mattila,
2001; Tepeci, 1999). In this respect, Mattila
(2001) showed empirical support for affective
commitments to a service provider strengthen-
ing customers’ brand perceptions and behav-
ioral responses. Accordingly, the current study
applies attitudinal concepts to assess restaurant
customers’ loyalties.
Relationships Between Environment and
Brand Image/ Satisfaction
Many previous conceptual and empirical
studies showed that physical environment
influences the image of a product/ service
and customers’ satisfaction with the set-
tings for consumption (Baker, Grewal, &
Parasuraman, 1994; Han & Ryu, 2009; Oh,
Fiorito, Cho, & Hofacker, 2008; Wu & Liang,
2009). Employing the Stimulus-Organism-
Response (S-O-R) model for online outlets,
Oh et al. (2008) examined the design factors
of stores’ environments to discover the rela-
tionship between store image and consumers’
expectations of merchandise quality. The
results of empirical study of online purveyors
suggested that a thematic and picture-based
atmosphere is more efficient for generating a
safe and entertaining image than non-thematic,
text-based atmosphere. Further, Baker et al.
(1994) claimed that store environment, mer-
chandise quality, and service quality could
be predictors of store image in the gift shop
merchandising sector.
Using 279 data sets collected from three full-
service restaurants, Han and Ryu (2009) inves-
tigated the influence of three components of
physical environment (i.e., artifacts, spatial lay-
out, and ambient conditions) on customers’ sat-
isfaction and loyalty. Their findings indicated
that customers’ perception of a restaurant’s
environment impact perceptions of price, and
this price perception, in turn, strengthened cus-
tomers’ satisfaction and loyalty. In addition,
Wu and Liang (2009) investigated the effect of
service encounters (i.e., environment, interac-
tion with employees, and interaction with cus-
tomers) on experiential value and customers’
satisfaction. Their findings indicated that restau-
rants’ environmental factors and interactions
with other consumers indirectly and positively
influence consumers’ satisfaction through expe-
riential value. Based on the above discussions,
this study proposes:
H1. Environment has a positive effect on
brand image.
H2. Environment has a positive effect on
customers’ satisfaction.
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

Jin, Lee, and Huffman 537
Relationship Between Food Quality and
Brand Image/ Satisfaction
Grönroos (1984) claimed that formulation of
corporate image occurs through both technical
and functional qualities. In the context of the
hotel industry, Hu, Kandampully, and Juwaheer
(2009) examined the relationship among per-
ceived service quality, perceived value, cus-
tomers’ satisfaction, and hotels’ images. Their
findings indicated that a customer’s perceived
service quality affected a hotel’s positive image.
Empirical studies also showed the influence
of food quality on customers’ satisfaction in
service settings (Clark & Wood, 1999; Fu &
Parks, 2001; Mattila, 2001). Clark and Wood
(1998) determined dimensions related to creat-
ing customers’ loyalty in the restaurant indus-
try. Results of that study showed that food
quality was the critical predictor of customers’
loyalty when selecting restaurants. Using “the
quality of food” item, Fu and Parks (2001)
tested family-style restaurants’ service quality
dimensions when focusing on older diners’ re-
patronage intentions. According to Sulek and
Hensley (2004), food quality is the most critical
component of customers’ satisfaction compared
to other elements (e.g., environment and service
qualities) during restaurant experiences. Further,
Mattila (2001) stated that food quality is the
main factor for casual-dining restaurants’ retain-
ing customers. Recently, Ha and Jang (2010b)
examined the influence of food quality on cus-
tomers’ satisfaction and loyalty and found that
a positive relationship exists between food qual-
ity and satisfaction / loyalty. Based on a review
of the literature, this study proposes:
H3. Food quality has a positive effect on
brand image.
H4. Food quality has a positive effect on
customers’ satisfaction.
Relationship Between Price Fairness and
Brand Image/ Satisfaction
Although empirical support for price
perception-brand image and price perception-
satisfaction links is scant in the restaurant
industry’s literature, much recent research
attempted to verify marketing’s specific role
in price perception when explaining con-
sumers’ behavior (Erdem, Swait, & Louviere,
2002; Han & Ryu, 2009; Martin-Consuegra,
Molina, & Esteban, 2007; Ranaweera & Neely,
2003; Villarejo-Ramos & Sanchez-Franco,
2005).
Villarejo-Ramos and Sanchez-Franco (2005)
examined the influence of marketing commu-
nication and price deals on brand image. Their
findings revealed that the hypothesized causal
relationship between price deals and brand
image, established in terms of a negative influ-
ence, was unverifiable due to a lack of meaning
in its structural coefficient. In addition, Erdem
et al. (2002) found that credibility toward a
brand decreased customers’ price sensitivity for
the product. Han and Ryu (2009) tested the role
of price perception in the restaurant industry,
when explaining the relationship among phys-
ical environment, price perception, customers’
satisfaction, and customers’ loyalty. Their find-
ings indicated that price perception strengthened
customers’ satisfaction level and influenced
customers’ loyalty. With the data collected
from airline passengers, Martin-Consuegra et al.
(2007) empirically investigated the relationships
among price fairness, customer satisfaction, and
price acceptance. Their findings revealed that
price fairness among travelers influenced cus-
tomers’ satisfaction, which, in turn, leads to
price acceptance. Customer feelings toward the
reasonableness of prices relate to price per-
ception. In this respect, Ranaweera and Neely
(2003) argued that price perception could be an
important avenue to strengthen a firm’s profit
level as well as the levels of customers’ service
experience and satisfaction. Thus, if customers
believe that they are being overcharged, they
will not trust the restaurant resulting in nega-
tive dining experiences from the perception of
price unfairness. Hence, based on these the-
oretical and empirical supports, the inference
is that price fairness significantly drives brand
image and customer satisfaction in the restau-
rant industry. Based on the literature review, this
study proposes:
H5. Price fairness has a positive effect on
brand image.
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

538 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
H6. Price fairness has a positive effect on
customer satisfaction.
Relationship Between Brand Image,
Satisfaction, and Customer Loyalty
Previous research showed that image can be
a significant factor affecting customers’ satis-
faction and loyalty (Bloemer & Ruyter, 1998;
Faullant, Matzler, & Füller, 2008; Martenson,
2007; Ryu et al., 2008). In the ski resort setting,
the findings of Faullant et al. (2008) revealed
that image and overall satisfaction generate a
strong influence on intentional loyalty, espe-
cially if the visitors held the intention to revisit
a destination.
Thus, the interrelationship between satisfac-
tion and image results in a relatively stable
perception of image. Using data collected from
a department store, Bloemer and Ruyter (1998)
showed that customer satisfaction is a medi-
ator between a store’s image and customers’
loyalty. Further, in the grocery retailing sector,
Martenson (2007) examined the influence of a
corporate store’s image on customer satisfaction
and loyalty. That study indicated that retailers’
job performances were more influential than
were store brands for eliciting customers’ sat-
isfaction. Specifically, in the restaurant industry,
Ryu et al. (2008) found that a restaurant’s image
can be a predictor for both customers’ satisfac-
tion and behavioral intentions.
In the service industry’s context, scores of
studies investigated the relationship between
customer’s satisfaction and customer’s loy-
alty (Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998; Bloemer
et al., 1998; Han & Ryu, 2009; Hyun, 2010;
Kim, Suh, & Eves, 2010; Sweeney & Swait,
2008). A study conducted by Andreassen and
Lindestad (1998) in the package tour industry
showed that corporate image directly influences
customer loyalty; whereas, customer’s satisfac-
tion does not, thereby, challenge the disconfir-
mation paradigm that customer satisfaction is
the primary route to customer loyalty.
Bloemer et al. (1998) verified that service
quality indirectly relates to loyalty via sat-
isfaction, and satisfaction also has a direct
effect on loyalty. In addition, Sweeney and
Swait (2008), in investigating the relationship
among brand credibility, satisfaction, loyalty,
and brand / business-switching propensity, sug-
gested that satisfaction serves to enhance cus-
tomers’ loyalty as well as to reduce the propen-
sity to switch to an alternative service / product.
Hyun (2010) assessed the role of relationship
quality as a link between five dimensions and
customers’ loyalty in the chain restaurant indus-
try, and found that satisfaction influences loy-
alty formation directly and indirectly via trust.
Additionally, Han and Ryu (2009) indicated that
in the restaurant industry customers’ satisfaction
has a positive influence on customers’ loyalty.
Integrating previous theoretical and empirical
results, the derived hypotheses are:
H7. Brand image has a positive effect on
customers’ satisfaction.
H8. Brand image has a positive effect on
customers’ loyalty.
H9. Customers’ satisfaction has a positive
effect on customers’ loyalty.
The Moderating Effects: Quick
Service/ Convenience Versus Social
Occasion
In consumer behavior research, motivation
has the reputation for being an important factor,
which impacts customers’ perceptions of ser-
vice and evaluative judgments. Tauber (1972)
attempted to find the motivation behind shop-
ping behavior and suggested that purchases not
only satisfy functional values but also satisfy
entertainment and emotional needs. In a related
vein, Babin, Darden, and Griffin (1994) found
that customers with functional shopping motiva-
tions regard achieving their goals and effective
decisions as important factors. They attain value
from shopping when a purchasing a product is
intentional and effective. In contrast, customers
with hedonic shopping motivations are seeking
happiness, fantasy, and enjoyment (Babin et al.,
1994).
Furthermore, consumers’ motivations for
restaurant dining include quick service, con-
venience, entertainment, and social interaction.
Dining outside the home provides consumers
with functional and hedonic values (Park,
2004). Park (2004) demonstrated that hedonic
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

Jin, Lee, and Huffman 539
motivations (good mood, interior design, and
fun) are stronger influences than functional
(convenience and economical) ones for restau-
rant patrons of Korean fast-food restaurants.
Likewise, Ha and Jang (2010a) suggested that
American customers consider the utilitarian
more so than the hedonic aspects for dining in
Korean restaurants. Focusing on the fast-casual
restaurant industry, Ryu, Han, and Jang (2010)
found that the impact of utilitarian motivation on
both satisfaction and behavioral intention was
greater than that of hedonic value. Clark and
Wood (1998) indicated that customers choose
a restaurant based on relatively concrete fac-
tors. Thus, according to their main reasons for
dining-out at restaurants, consumers evaluate
their overall restaurant experiences with differ-
ent standards. For example, if consumers regard
a restaurant as an eat-out operation or a substi-
tute for cooking at home, they tend to respond to
price sensitively. Meanwhile, if customers visit
a restaurant for a social occasion, price is not
the critical factor (Pavesic, 1989). Based on this
rationale, although it may be difficult to predict
the exact relationship among restaurant expe-
riences, brand image, satisfaction, and loyalty,
it can be assumed that the effect of restau-
rant experiences on brand image and satisfaction
could vary depending on the dining motivator.
Therefore, to fully understand the rela-
tionship among restaurant experiences, brand
image, satisfaction, and loyalty, this study
investigated whether the effect of restau-
rant experiences on consumer behaviors actu-
ally vary across different dining motivation
types. That is, the evaluative judgments of
customers with functional motivation (quick
service/ convenience) are likely to differ from
customers with hedonic motivation (social inter-
action), resulting in different restaurant experi-
ences regarding brand image. The results of this
investigation will suggest whether dining moti-
vations matter in brand image formation and
service evaluation. Despite the potential impor-
tance of these findings, to our best knowledge,
no previous studies examined the moderating
role of dining motivation in conjunction with
brand image and satisfaction in the context of
full-service restaurants. Thus, this study pro-
posed the following hypothesis:
H10. The links among restaurant experi-
ences, brand image, satisfaction, and
customer loyalty are different accord-
ing to the motivation for dining at
restaurants.
Hypothesized relationships among variables
are presented in Figure 1.
METHODOLOGY
Measurement Items
A self-administrated questionnaire was
designed for this study. The questionnaire com-
prised six sections. The first three parts included
three constructs related to customer restaurant
experiences: environment, food quality, and
FIGURE 1. Conceptual Model
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

540 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
price fairness. All items from Sections 1–4 were
measured using a 7-point Likert-type scale
(1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree)
for the following: “Please indicate your level
of agreement with the following statement.”
To measure the perception of restaurant envi-
ronment, our study adopted three items from
Baker, Parasuraman, Grewal, and Voss (2002)
and Mathwick, Malhotra, and Rigdon (2001).
Perception of food quality was measured with
three items (taste, presentation, and variety)
based on a study by Namkung and Jang (2007).
Perception of price fairness was measured
using three items from a study by Oh (2000).
In Section 4, response to brand image—such as
fashionable and trendy image, reputation, and
familiarity—were measured based on the Kim
and Kim (2004) study. Section 5 was designed
to identify the impact of restaurant experience
and brand image. The three items for customer
satisfaction were based on earlier research by
the Hellier, Geursen, Carr, and Rickard (2003)
and Oliver (1980) studies. Customer loyalty was
measured using three items that were modified
from Baloglu (2002).The final section of the
questionnaire included respondents’ relevant
personal information—such as age, gender,
household income, and dining motivation.
Data Collection
Modification of an initial questionnaire
occurred after pretesting with a sample of nine
graduate students and faculty members from
a university’s hospitality department. A pilot
test, to ensure the reliability of the scales, used
66 United States’ Southwestern university stu-
dents who had visited a full-service restaurant
within the previous four weeks. Slight modi-
fications to the instrument’s wording were the
result of feedback from the pilot test. The main
study conducted an online survey. Distribution
of the questionnaire encompassed 1,528 full-
service restaurant customers in the United States
via an online survey company’s system. From
these samples, 628 customers participated in the
survey (41% response rate). Of the 628 partic-
ipants, eliminations included 30 questionnaires
with missing values and 100 disqualifications
because last visits to a full-service restaurant
was more than one month earlier. An additional
97 disqualifications arose from participants’
first visit to the most-recently visited restau-
rant was less than three months prior. Last, tests
for multivariate and univariate outliers found
33 outliers. After all checks for sample valid-
ity, 368 responses from participants remained
for hypotheses testing.
Data Analysis
Following the two-step approach proposed by
Anderson and Gerbing (1988), a confirmatory
factor analysis (CFA) examined whether or not
the observed variables reflected the hypothe-
sized latent constructs (factors) using a covari-
ance matrix. Calculation of composite relia-
bility confirmed the measurement’s reliability.
Checking factor loading and average variance
extracted (AVE) assessed convergent validity
and discriminate validity. After confirming the
measurement model, structural equation mod-
eling (SEM) tested overall fit of the proposed
model and assessed hypotheses. To verify the
moderating effect of dining motivation, two
models (constrained model and unconstrained
model), which are different only concerning
each path coefficient, were compared.
RESULTS
Descriptive Statistics
Table 1 shows the respondents’ demographic
profiles. Among the 368 valid respondents,
50.5% were female and 49.5% were male.
The majority of respondents were Caucasian
(88.9%), the occupations of more than half of
the respondents were professional or retired
(33.2% for the former and 22.8% for the lat-
ter), and 31% reported that their annual incomes
were over $100,000.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
To refine all measures for the struc-
tural model, assessment of the measurement
model used the maximum likelihood estimation
method. The results show a proper fit to the
data, χ2 = 414.68, df = 120, p < .001,
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012

Jin, Lee, and Huffman 541
TABLE 1. Demographic and Dining-Out Profiles
Variable Frequency
(n = 368)
Percentage
Gender
Male 182 49.5
Female 186 50.5
Ethnicity
African American 8 2.2
Hispanic 6 1.6
Asian 21 5.7
Caucasian (White) 327 88.9
Other 6 1.6
Occupation
Trades and related 21 5.7
Professional 122 33.2
Manager or administrator 49 13.3
Students 10 2.7
Clerical, services, sales 45 12.2
Retiree 84 22.8
Homemakers 22 6.0
Unemployed 15 4.1
Annual income ($)
Under 25,000 7 1.9
25,000–39,999 10 2.7
40,000–54,999 36 9.8
55,000–69,999 70 19.0
70,000–84,999 71 19.3
85,000–99,000 60 16.3
Over 100,000 114 31.0
Main reason for dining out
Quick meal/ convenience 161 43.8
Social occasion 160 43.5
Others 47 12.7
χ 2/ df = 3.46, root mean square error of approx-
imation (RMSEA) = .082, comparative fit index
(CFI) = .948, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI)= .934,
and normed fit index (NFI) = .929.
Composite reliability was the method for
assessing the instrument’s reliability, as shown
in Table 2. Multiple measures achieved relia-
bility for assessing each construct because all
values of composite reliability estimates were
over .70. The study satisfies convergent validity
because all items had relatively high standard-
ized factor loadings on their underlying con-
structs (values ranged from .67 to .94), and
all were significant at an alpha level of .01
(Table 2). Furthermore, the average variance
extracted (AVE) from all constructs exceeded
the minimum standard of .50, showing that
constructs explain the majority of the vari-
ances (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair, Anderson,
Tatham, & Black, 1995). Comparison of AVE
values for each construct and squared correla-
tions between the paired constructs tested for
discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
Table 3 indicates that AVE for each construct
is greater than the squared correlations between
paired constructs, showing discriminant validity.
Structural Model
The integrated model provides an adequate
fit to the data in the restaurant service setting,
χ2 = 425.46, df = 123, p < .001, χ 2/ df = 3.46,
RMSEA = .082, CFI = .947, TLI = .934, and
NFI = .927. Table 4 summarizes the path coef-
ficients for all hypothesized paths in the model
and Figure 2 visualizes the paths.
All but two of the path coefficients in the
model were positive and significant. Therefore,
empirical support accrues to all the hypotheses
except for Hypotheses 5 and 7, which referred
to the path from price fairness to brand image
and from brand image to customers’ satisfac-
tion. In other words, although a full-service
restaurant’s environment and food quality pos-
itively and significantly affects brand image,
price fairness did not. Furthermore, brand image
affected customers’ loyalty; whereas, the impact
of brand image on customer satisfaction was not
statistically significant.
The results confirm the proposed effects of
environment and food quality on brand image
(Hypothesis 1: β = .50, t = 5.46; Hypothesis
3: β = .25, t = 3.73), as were the proposed
effects of environment and food quality on sat-
isfaction (Hypothesis 2: β = .35, t = 4.22;
Hypothesis 4: β = .25, t = 3.44). Apparently,
both environment and food quality have a direct
effect and an indirect effect (mediated by brand
image) on customers’ satisfaction. In contrast,
price fairness has only a direct effect on cus-
tomers’ satisfaction (Hypothesis 6: β = .36,
t = 8.55), and the impact of price fairness
on brand image was not statistically significant
(Hypothesis 5: β = .09, t = 1.63). Among
the three predictors of brand image, environ-
ment has the strongest effect on brand image;
whereas, price fairness has the strongest effect
on customer satisfaction. In accordance with
the hypotheses, brand image has a direct effect
on customers’ loyalty (Hypothesis 8: β = .22,
Downloaded by [Texas Technology University], [Naehyun (Paul) Jin] at 08:29 08 August 2012