Restaurant Brand Image, Loyalty, Satisfaction for Repeat Customers

This report, based on the journal article "I’ll have the usual: how restaurant brand image, loyalty, and satisfaction keep customers coming back," investigates the relationship between a restaurant's brand image, customer loyalty, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions among repeat customers in the casual-dining sector. The study employs a mixed-methods approach, including focus groups, in-depth interviews, and an online survey, to examine how these factors influence customers' decisions to revisit or recommend a restaurant. The research reveals that brand image positively impacts loyalty and satisfaction, which in turn mediate the relationship between brand image and recommendation intentions. Loyalty alone mediates the relationship between brand image and revisit intentions. The findings suggest that managers should prioritize enhancing brand image, loyalty, and satisfaction to stimulate customer recommendations and focus on building loyalty to increase revisit intentions. The study uniquely highlights the combined mediating roles of loyalty and satisfaction and emphasizes the importance of tailoring strategies for repeat customers, providing valuable insights for the restaurant industry in maintaining customer engagement and driving revenue.

Journal of Product & Brand Management
I’ll have the usual: how restaurant brand image, loyalty, and satisfaction keep customers coming back
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey, Lisa Monahan,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey, Lisa Monahan, (2018) "I’ll have the usual: how restaurant brand image,
loyalty, and satisfaction keep customers coming back", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 27 Issue: 6, pp.599-614,
https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-10-2017-1610
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-10-2017-1610
Downloaded on: 08 April 2019, At: 20:47 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 88 other documents.
To copy this document: [e-mail]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 755 times since 2018*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2018),"The influence of negative publicity on brand equity: attribution, image, attitude and purchase intention", Journal of
Product &amp; Brand Management, Vol. 27 Iss 4 pp. 440-451 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-01-2017-1396">https://
doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-01-2017-1396</a>
(2012),"The influence of the quality of the physical environment, food, and service on restaurant image, customer perceived
value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions", International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 24
Iss 2 pp. 200-223 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111211206141">https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111211206141</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:414810 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of on
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

I’ll have the usual: how restaurant brand image,
loyalty, and satisfaction keep customers
coming back
Jennifer A. Espinosa
Department of Marketing and Business Information Systems, Rowan University, Glassboro, New Jersey
David J. Ortinau
Department of Marketing, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
Nina Krey
Department of Marketing and Business Information Systems, Rowan University, Glassboro, New Jersey,
Lisa Monahan
Department of Marketing, Meredith College, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose ofthis paperis to study how repeatcustomers utilize theirestablished overallrestaurantbrand image (ORBI),
overall restaurant loyalty, satisfaction and behavioral intentions (revisit, recommend) to reengage with a casual-dining rest
Design/methodology/approach – The study design consists of a mixed-methods, two-phase research approach that includes
quantitative data.First,focus groups and in-depth interviews with adult customers revealpreliminary insights on restaurant dining patterns and
familiarity with franchised casualdining restaurants.Second,an online self-administered survey tests the influence of ORBIon repeat customers’
overall restaurant loyalty, satisfaction and behavioral intentions.
Findings – For repeat customers, ORBI positively predicts loyalty and satisfaction. Loyalty and satisfaction mediate the relat
and intentions to recommend, while loyalty alone mediates the relationship between ORBI and intentions to revisit a casual
Practicalimplications – Managers looking to stimulate recommendation intentions can increase ORBI,loyalty orsatisfaction among repeat
customers; or choose some combination of these three predictors. To improve revisit intentions, managers should first incre
ORBI. Importantly, management needs to tailor information given to repeat customers differently than other customers.
Originality/value – This paper provides a first conceptualization of how both loyalty and satisfaction jointly mediate the relat
ORBI and two behavioral intentions (revisit, recommend). The results show that loyalty plays a significant role in these pred
more important than satisfaction for enhancing intentions to revisit a restaurant.
Keywords Brand management, Satisfaction, Brands, Brand image, Brand loyalty
Paper type Research paper
In 2017, the restaurantindustry in the USA produced
approximately $800bn in revenue,with sales in the table
service category of restaurants (which includes casual dining,fine dining and family dining restaurants)reaching about
$260bn (National Restaurant Association, 2017). Among the
different types ofrestaurants making up the US restaurant
industry, casual sit-down dining (CD) restaurantsare
establishmentsthat serve moderatelypriced food and
alcohol, with tables served by a waiter in a laid-back
environment (e.g. Applebee’s, Chili’s, Red Lobster; Mealy,
2016). Historically,CD restaurantexecutives and experts
have relied on a restaurant brand’s image and loyal customer
base to keep their brands profitable and successful (Dick and
Basu, 1994; Dobini and Zinkhan, 1990; Faircloth et al.,
2001; Jin, 2015). Recently, CD restaurants have been
struggling to match the annualgrowth of restaurants in the
quick service category(National RestaurantAssociation,
2017; Taylor, 2017b). The stagnation of sales growth in CD
restaurantsraisesthe question of whethermaintaining a
restaurant’s brand image and building customer loyalty are
still effective strategiesto encourage repeatcustomersto
reengage with the restaurant brand?
Traditionally, CD restaurant managers implement strategic
actions,such as adding craftbeers to their drink menu,to
enhance the overallimage of their restaurant brand (Taylor,
2017a). In the literature,overallrestaurantbrand images
(ORBIs) representcustomers’positiveor negativeglobal
mental impressions of a restaurant brand (Hartman and Spiro,
2005;Lai et al., 2009; Ortinau and Babin,2007). Repeat
customers’(defined as consumerswho have first-hand
consumption experience with a focalrestaurantbrand;for
The current issue and fulltext archive of this journalis available on
Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
Journal of Product & Brand Management
27/6 (2018) 599–614
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 1061-0421]
[DOI 10.1108/JPBM-10-2017-1610]
599
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

example, returning customers) ORBIs often remain impervious
to strategicactionstaken by brand managers,which can
negatively impactrestaurantsalesand foot traffic (Dixon,
2016). The difficulty customers have noticing subtle
differences between similar CD restaurant brands is one reason
why management actions do not always translate into updated
ORBIs (Jones,2017).While brand managers take actions to
enhance the uniquenessof their restaurant’sbrand, these
actions willonly be effective in improving marketposition,
marketshare and overallmarketperformance ifcustomers
subsequently modify theirORBI accordingly (Park etal.,
1986). As the CD segment of the restaurant industry continues
to increase in competitiveness, differentiation from competitors
becomescritical. Managersthat understandhow repeat
customers think about and use their ORBIs to make dining
decisionswill be able to take strategicactionsto boost
customers’behavioralintentionsand subsequentbehaviors
that will lead to sustainable growth in sales and restaurant
profitability (Dixon, 2016; Han et al., 2016; Morgan and Rego,
2006; Taylor, 2017a).
How do repeat CD restaurant customersuse their
established ORBIs to make choices aboutdining behaviors?
Ryu et al.’s (2008) work in the quick-casual restaurant segment
offers initialinsightand shows thatcustomers’ORBIs and
satisfaction togetherinfluencetheir behavioralintentions.
Outside of the restaurant context, Souiden and Pons’ (2009)
research on the brand image ofautomobile manufacturers
offers evidence that customers’ brand image and loyalty jointly
determine their likelihood of repurchasing the brand. Although
Souiden and Pons (2009) assess brand images in the context of
automobile companies,the findings resonate with restaurant
executives’ beliefs about the importance of customer loyalty to
a brand’s survival (Jin, 2015). While these prior studies provide
preliminary insights on how repeat customers use ORBIs to
make dining choices,to fully understand the role ofORBI,
brand loyalty and satisfaction in repeatcustomerdecision-
making,all three constructs need to be studied in tandem.
Therefore,the primary purpose of the current research is to
explore how ORBI together with brand loyalty and satisfaction
influence repeat customers’ behavioralintentions to reengage
with a CD restaurant brand. The present study focuses on two
main research questions:
RQ1. How do repeatcustomers’ORBI, overallrestaurant
loyalty and overallrestaurantsatisfaction influence
their behavioralintentionsto reengage with a CD
restaurant brand?
RQ2. How do the roles of ORBI, overallrestaurant loyalty
and overallrestaurantsatisfaction change,if at all,
between different types of behavioral intentions?
CD restaurant managers can use the answers to these research
questions to more effectively manage repeat customers’ ORBIs,
loyalty and satisfaction and behavioralintentions to maintain
revenues and market share amidst strong competition within
the industry.
The present research is unique from existing literature and
contributesin severalimportantways.First, both overall
restaurantloyalty and overallrestaurantsatisfaction play
important roles in the relationshipsbetween ORBI and
behavioralintentions.Thus, the currentresearch extends
previous work by integrating customer loyalty with customer
satisfaction as important mediators of the ORBI-behavioral
intentions relationships and confirms overall brand loyalty’s
applicability to the restaurantindustry (Ryu et al., 2008;
Souiden and Pons, 2009). Second, the study investigates two
different behavioralintentions applicable to CD restaurant
customers – recommending and revisiting a restaurant.By
studying two behavioral intentions concurrently, rather than
a globalor single behavioralintention, the present research
shows that ORBI,customers’overallrestaurant loyalty and
overallrestaurantsatisfaction play differentially important
roles in shaping repeat customers’ intentions to reengage with
a restaurant brand depending on the type of intention.
Third, the context of the article focuses on repeat customers
exclusively,who have establishedORBIs through direct
consumption experiences. In contrast, much of the literature
investigates how first-time customers (defined as consumers
with perceptual knowledge of a focal restaurant brand, not first-
hand consumption experience;for example,new customers,
non-customers) initially build ORBIs based on their restaurant
brand perceptions (Ha and Jang,2010;Liu and Jang,2009;
Ryu et al., 2012). Once repeat customers establish ORBIs, the
antecedents typically used to construct ORBIs (e.g. customer
loyalty,customersatisfaction;Engel et al., 2006) flip and
become outcomesof ORBI. Thus, defining the target
population ofthe currentresearch as repeatcustomers best
matches restaurant managements’ interest in maintaining loyal
customer bases (Dixon, 2016). Finally, the study utilizes real
CD restaurantbrands (e.g.Applebee’s,Chili’s) rather thanfictitious brands while requiring all subjects to be familiar and
experienced with the focalrestaurant brands.This screening
requirementenhances the quality ofthe data in testing the
hypothesized relational linkages between the key constructs of
interest.
The remainder of the article unfolds as follows: the next
section discusses ORBI and other key constructs important
to the conceptualframework and introduces the proposed
hypotheses.The methodology section presents the mixed-
method, two-phase research design executed to collect the
necessary data and the empiricalresults of the hypotheses
tests.The article closes with a discussion ofthe findings,
contributions,managerialimplicationsand limitationsof
the current research,as well as suggestionsfor future
research.
Conceptual background
Overall restaurant brand image
CD restaurant environments contain numerous features that
customers evaluate and use to describe a restaurant’s overall
brand image (ORBI). In the current study, ORBI is defined as a
repeatcustomer’s globalmentalimpression ofa restaurant
brand, typically expressed in a positive or negative light (e.g.
“Target is an inviting, clean store that offers me a fun shopping
experience;”Hartman and Spiro, 2005; Lai et al., 2009;
Ortinau and Babin, 2007). Some restaurant features customers
evaluate are tangible,such as restaurantlocation,parking
availability,breadth ofmenu offerings,lighting and music
(Baker et al., 2002; Broniarczyk et al., 1998). Other intangible
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
600
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

features include the service quality, product quality, employee
knowledge,socialinteraction and friendliness ofemployees
(Jalilvand et al., 2017; Sirohi and McLaughlin, 1998).
Overtime, repeat customers integrate several of these tangible
and intangible features to form an overall image of a restaurant
brand. For repeat customers,ORBI becomes a key
experienced-based predictor oftheir dining choices (Vroom,
1964).
The theory of reasoned action can be used to explain how
repeat customers integrate separate features of a CD restaurant
together to create ORBIs.In short, the theory ofreasoned
action describes how individuals use their own attitudes and
subjective normsto form behavioralintentions(Ajzen and
Fishbein,1980). According to thistheory,attitudesare a
function of:
beliefs abouta focal object/feature (e.g.Applebee’s will
have clean restrooms); and
subjective evaluationsof how well or poorly the focal
object/feature metthe expected beliefs (e.g.Applebee’s
bathrooms have been dirty on the last three visits,so a
negative attitude towards Applebee’s cleanliness
develops).
An individual’s attitude can contain severaldifferent beliefs
within it, so changing an attitude may require changing more
than just one belief (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). For example,
if a customer’s negative attitude towards restaurant
cleanliness depends 33 percent on the cleanliness ofthe
restrooms, 33 per cent on the cleanliness of the table and 33
per cent on the cleanliness of the parking lot,then the CD
restaurant may need to make improvements in more than just
the cleanlinessof the restroom to improve the overall
attitude. In some circumstances, subjective norms, which are
perceptionsof what othersbelieve orexpectand learned
through indirect experience (e.g. advertising, online reviews,
recommendations from friends, etc.; Fazio and Zanna, 1978;
Marks and Kamins, 1988), can determine an individual’s
behavioralintentions (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). For
example, first-time customers visiting Chili’s will rely
primarily on their subjective norms(quality described in
commercials,similarity to Google reviews,etc.) associated
with dining at Chili’s.During their first dining visit,thesefirst-time customers willevaluate numerous features ofthe
restaurant(food quality,service quality,atmosphere,etc.)
and begin to integrate thatinformation to form attitudes
towards each restaurant feature. With repeat visits to Chili’s,first-time customers will transition into repeat customers with
uniquely tailored ORBIs, which representstheir global
mental impression of the Chili’s brand based upon the
various features of the restaurant they find most important.
The composition of each repeat customer’s ORBI will vary in
relative importance of restaurantfeatures (Dobni and
Zinkhan, 1990).
Once CD restaurant customers establish an ORBI, the ORBI
acts as a heuristic information processing tool in future dining
choices.The conceptualframework ofthe currentresearch
predicts that repeat customers develop relationalassociations
between theirORBI, overallrestaurantloyalty and overall
restaurant satisfaction based on previous dining experiences at
a restaurant.Vroom’s (1964) expectancytheory, which
explainshow individuals use their prior impressionsto
anticipate outcomes and make choices (e.g.a positive ORBI
will relate to positive overallrestaurantloyalty),offersan
explanation of how repeat customers form relational linkages to
ORBI (Vroom, 1964). For example, a repeat customer with the
goalof dining at a CD restaurant willcompare the positive
relational associations between ORBI, overall restaurant loyalty
and overall restaurant satisfaction for different CD brands, and
use the results ofthose quick comparisons to selecta CD
restaurant.This process enables repeat customers to quickly
evaluate dining options and to more easily make a decision than
systematically processing information on multiple restaurant
featuresindividually (Chen and Dubinsky,2003; Sanchez-
Fernandez and Iniesta-Bonillo, 2007; Tversky and Kahneman,
1974; Zeithaml, 1988).
According to the theory of reasoned action and expectancy
theory, first-hand, direct experience results in stronger attitudes
than indirect experience (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Manstead
et al., 1983; Vroom, 1964). The theory of reasoned action, in
particular, specifies that a lack of first-hand, direct experience
results in a higher likelihood of subjective norms outweighing
an individual’s own perceptions.Existing research studying
attitude formation based on advertisementsechoes the
importance of experience, finding that individuals with direct
experience form stronger attitudes than other individuals with
only indirect experience (Fazio and Zanna, 1978; Marks and
Kamins,1988;Smith & Swinyard,1983).In the restaurant
context,first-time CD customers withoutfirst-hand,direct
consumption experiencewill rely more heavily on their
subjective norms learned from indirect experience to make a
dining choice, as they have not yet formed attitudes towards a
new restaurant brand. Because first-time CD customers are still
in the process of establishing their ORBIs, the current research
focusesexclusivelyon repeat customerswith established
ORBIs.
Overall restaurant loyalty
Some researcherssuggestthat brand loyalty represents
customers’ strong feelings of commitment to a brand and has
direct positive influences on a brand’sequity,profitability,
revenue, market share and long-term survival (Chaudhuri and
Holbrook, 2001;Knox and Denison,2000;Tepeci, 1999).
Loyal customers buy more, are willing to pay higher prices and
generate positive word of mouth, leading to a strong positive
relationship between customer loyalty and retailer performance
(Chandrashekaran et al., 2007; Morgan and Rego, 2006; Peng
and Chen,2015).In the currentresearch,overallrestaurant
loyalty represents a specific form of brand loyalty and is defined
as repeatcustomers’strong emotionalfeelingsof overall
commitment to a restaurant brand. In the restaurant context,
loyal customersdevelop emotionalbonds that keep them
connected with the brand and transform them into advocates
for the restaurant (Mattila, 2001).
Researchers studying overall restaurant loyalty conceptualize
the construct in multiple ways, including as an attitude (Han
and Ryu,2009;Jin et al.,2012), a behavior (Jin, 2015) or a
behavioralintention (Peng and Chen, 2015). Attitudinal
researchersconceptualizeoverall restaurantloyalty as a
positive,affective commitment to specific restaurant brands,
often measuring the constructas a preference for a specific
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
601
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

restaurantbrand despite the availabilityof competitive
alternatives (Jin et al., 2012; Wallace et al., 2004). In contrast,
behavioralresearchers define overallrestaurantloyalty as a
deliberate action taken on behalf of a specific restaurant brand
and measure it through repeat purchases of the brand (Magi,
2003; Quester and Lim, 2003). Behavioral intentions
researchers define overall restaurant loyalty as the likelihood of
performing a deliberate action on behalf of a restaurant brand
in the future (Patterson and Spreng,1997).Peng and Chen
(2015) use the behavioralintentionsdefinition of overall
restaurantloyalty in their research on luxury dining
consumption behavior and conceptualize loyalty as customers’
intentions to revisitthe same restaurantin the near future.
Consistent with the first approach, the current research adopts
the attitudinaldefinition of overallrestaurant loyalty because
the theory ofreasoned action explains how attitudes shape
behavioral intentions (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980).
Because some researchers define overall restaurant loyalty
as an attitude and others define it as a behavior that combines
both attitudes and behaviorsinto one construct (e.g.
measuring loyalty with the number repeatvisits),the true
nature of the relationshipbetween ORBI and overall
restaurant loyalty is stillelusive to some extent (Patterson,
1999). Some studies provide empiricalevidence that ORBI
displays symmetric, linear relationships with overall
restaurant loyalty (Jin,2015;Jin et al., 2012;Souiden and
Pons, 2009). Yet other researchersreport alternative
constructs, such as customer satisfaction and dining value as
the real drivers of overallrestaurantloyalty (Agustin and
Singh,2005;Chandrashekaran etal., 2007;Han and Ryu,
2009; Jin et al., 2012; Johnson et al., 2006). Based on
expectancy theory,the currentresearch proposes ORBI to
positively predictcustomers’overallrestaurantloyalty,as
repeatcustomers’positive relationalassociation between
ORBI and overall restaurantloyalty are consulted when
making decisions about reengaging with a restaurant brand.
Thus, ORBI will positively predict overall restaurant loyalty
(ORL):
H1. Repeat customers’overall restaurantbrand image
positively influences overall restaurant loyalty.
Overall restaurant satisfaction
Some researchersdefine satisfactionas customers’strong
feelingsthat a brand can meettheir needs,and customer
satisfaction drivesmany post-consumption retailbehaviors,
such as positive word of mouth, repeat purchasesand
improvementsin retailers’ performance(Anderson,1998;
Anderson etal., 1994;Brown etal., 2005;Zeithamlet al.,
2001). Similarly, the present research defines overall restaurant
satisfaction asa specific type ofconsumersatisfaction that
represents customers’strong feelings that a restaurant brand
has the capabilitiesto meet their dining needs and is
conceptualized as an attitudinalconstruct(Giese and Cote,
2002; Jalilvand et al., 2017; Morgan and Rego, 2006). In the
restaurant context, customers’ needs vary, but typically include
a reasonably priced meal, good service, exotic/inventive menu
offerings,a pleasurable dining atmosphere orhealthy food
options (Yuksel and Yuksel, 2003).
While some researchers suggestthatcustomer satisfaction
aids in creating retailbrand image (Engelet al., 2006), other
researchers offer evidence that ORBI positively predicts overall
restaurantsatisfaction (Etemad-Sajadiand Rizzuto, 2013;
Ryu et al., 2008). Consistent with this latter perspective, this
study predicts ORBI willdirectly influence overallrestaurant
satisfaction. Expectancy theory supports this prediction since
repeatcustomers’positiverelationalassociationsbetween
ORBI and overall restaurantsatisfaction willbe mentally
evaluated when deciding on a CD restaurant (Vroom, 1964).
“A high level of satisfaction provides customers with a repeated
positive reinforcement,thus creating commitment-inducing
emotionalbonds” (Jalilvand etal., 2017,p. 101). Thus, the
current research predicts a positive, direct relationship between
ORBI and overall restaurant satisfaction (ORS):
H2. Repeat customers’overall restaurantbrand image
positively influences overall restaurant satisfaction.
Intentions to recommend the restaurant
The customerloyalty literature discussespositive word of
mouth (e.g.recommending a restaurantto friends) as an
important outcome behavior that relates to strong brand loyalty
and satisfaction (Jalilvand et al., 2017; Kumar and Shah, 2004;
Reichheld,2003). The current study definesintentionsto
recommend a restaurantas repeatcustomers’likelihood of
positively endorsing a restaurantbrand to friends,family or
acquaintances.Examplesof factors that can influence a
customer’s intentions to recommend restaurants include food
quality, desire to help the restaurant,positive dining
experiences and commitment to the establishment (Han et al.,
2016; Jalilvand et al., 2017; Jeong and Jang, 2011).
Some researchers suggest that recommendation behaviors
(e.g. positive word of mouth) are equivalentto overall
restaurantloyalty and view overallrestaurantloyalty as a
behavior (Han and Ryu, 2009; Jin, 2015; Magi, 2003). As the
presentstudy appliesthe theory of reasoned action and
defines overall restaurant loyalty as an attitudinal construct,
intentions to recommend represent behavioral intentions, not
actualbehaviors (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). The theory of
reasoned action conceptualizesbehavioralintentions(e.g.
likelihood ofrecommending a restaurant in a Yelp review)
rather than actual behaviors (e.g. the actual
recommendation),as resource constraints (e.g.customer’s
Yelp account gets hacked and cannot be accessed) or other
factors can prevent intended behaviors from actually
occurring (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). Prior researchers
adopting this behavioralintentions approach note that
attitudinalloyalty influences intentions to recommend the
restaurant(Brown et al., 2005; Reichheld, 2003). For
example, Jalilvand et al. (2017) identify commitment to the
restaurantas a major predictorof tourists’likelihood to
engage in word of mouth behavior.Based on the above
evidence,the current research hypothesizesthat repeat
customers’ORL and ORS will positivelypredict their
intentions to recommend (IREC) a CD restaurant:
H3a. Repeat customers’ overallrestaurant loyalty positively
influences intentions to recommend the restaurant.
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
602
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

H3b. Repeat customers’overall restaurantsatisfaction
positivelyinfluencesintentionsto recommend the
restaurant.
Intentions to revisit the restaurant
The current research defines intentions to revisit a restaurant as a
repeat customers’ likelihood of re-patronizing a restaurant (Han
etal., 2009;Kim et al., 2013).Some researchers,who define
overallrestaurantloyalty as a behavior,consider intentions to
revisit a restaurant to be equivalent to overall restaurant loyalty and
to have a direct influence on retail financial performance metrics
(Kim and Kim, 2004).The customer loyalty,satisfaction and
retailbrand image literaturessuggestthat repeatcustomers’
intentions to revisit a store or repurchase a product are closely
connected to customerloyalty and satisfaction (DuWorsand
Haines, 1990; Magi, 2003; Ryu et al., 2008; Souiden and Pons,
2009). Other researcherssuggestthat a restaurant’simage
positively influencesrestaurantconsumption intentions(Chen
et al., 2014). Still other researchers argue that overall restaurant
satisfaction is the primary driver of intention behavior (Ryu et al.,
2008), but overall restaurant satisfaction alone may not be enough
to assessconsumers’willingnessto repurchase.Alternatively,
Hsiao et al. (2016) conclude that satisfaction should be viewed in
conjunctionwith loyalty to accuratelyevaluatebusiness
performance.Consistent with attitude theory and Hsiao etal.’s
(2016) recommendation that repeat customers’ overall restaurant
satisfaction alone is not enough to understand intentions to revisit
a restaurant, the current research argues overall restaurant loyalty
and overallrestaurantsatisfaction willpositively predictrepeat
customers’ intentions to revisit (IREV) a CD restaurant:
H4a. Repeat customers’ overall restaurant loyalty positively
influences intentions to revisit the restaurant.
H4b. Repeat customers’overall restaurantsatisfaction
positively influences intentions to revisit the restaurant.
Mediation relationships
Managers who understand how customersuse ORBIs
heuristically to make decisions will be able to leverage that
information to influence critical attitudinal outcomes, such
as overall restaurantloyalty and satisfaction and, thus,
subsequentintention behaviors. Increasing customers’
intentions to perform a behavior in turn increases the
likelihood of the behavioractually occurring (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1980; Anderson, 1973; Oliver, 1997; Vroom,
1964). Based on the theory of reasoned action, the current
research argues customers’overall restaurantloyalty and
overall restaurant satisfaction will mediate the relationships
between ORBI and intentions to recommend,as well as
ORBI and intentions to revisit a restaurant. Ryu et al. (2008)
provide initialevidence that customer satisfaction partially
mediates the relationships between ORBIand behavioral
intentions. Souiden and Pons (2009) offer preliminary
support ofcustomer loyalty acting as a mediator between
brand image and repurchaseintentions. The current
research builds on Ryu et al. (2008) and Souiden and Pon’s
(2009) work by integrating overallrestaurantloyalty with
overall restaurant satisfaction as parallel mediators to more
fully explain repeatcustomers’behavioralintentions and
establish the relative importanceof ORL and ORS in
predicting behavioral intentions.
The present study looks at two specific types ofbehavioral
intentions independently of each other.Repeat customers can
possess many types of behavioral intentions, such as intentions t
switch between brands or defraud a store, and it remains unclea
if ORL and ORS play similar or different roles in predicting the
various types of behavioral intentions customers may intend to
perform.The current analysis extends these prior findings by
examiningmediationpathwayspresent in intentionsto
recommend and revisit separately. Findings will help determine i
relationalrolesof ORL and ORS are universally similarin
different types of customer behavioral intentions:
H5. Repeat customers’ overall restaurant loyalty and overall
restaurant satisfaction together mediate the relationship
between overallrestaurant brand image and intentions
to recommend the restaurant.
H6. Repeat customers’ overall restaurant loyalty and overall
restaurant satisfaction together mediate the relationship
Figure 1 Conceptual framework
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
603
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

between overallrestaurant brand image and intentions
to revisit the restaurant.
Figure 1 summarizes the proposed relationships. ORBI directly
predicts the attitudinalmediators of overall restaurant loyalty
and overallrestaurantsatisfaction.These two mediators,in
conjunction, influence repeat customers’ behavioral intentions
to recommend and revisit a CD restaurant.
Methodology
The data for testing the model’s hypothesized relationships
stem from a larger mixed-methods, two-phase comprehensive
restaurant brand image study that includes both qualitative and
quantitative data. In the first phase, three, eight-person focus
groups and ten in-depth interviews were conducted among
adult restaurant customers within a major Southeastern market
of over 3.5 million people in the USA.All participants were
purposively selected based on their extensive dining familiarity
and consumption experiences atCD restaurants.The main
objective ofthe focus groups and interviews was to gather
preliminaryinsights on restaurantdining patterns and
familiarity with franchised CD restaurants. The qualitative data
provides insights on importantfeatures ofa restaurantthat
customersmay use to construct ORBI, ORL, ORS and
behavioral intentions toward CD restaurant establishments.
Using the extant marketing literature on retail brand images
and a content analysis of the transcripts from the qualitative
focus groupsand interviews,key restaurantfeatureswere
identified thatimpact a CD restaurant customer’sORBI.
Among the numerous features mentioned are assortmentof
offerings(Broniarczyket al., 1998; Hoch et al., 1999),
convenience of location, friendliness/courteousnessof
employees, quality of offerings, price of offerings (Chebat et al.,
2006; Haytko and Baker, 2004; Liu and Jang, 2009; Ortinau
and Babin, 2007), cleanliness of store, adequate parking (Finn
and Louviere, 1996), service elements and store atmospherics
such as music, lighting, air conditioning or layout (Babin and
Attaway,2000; Baker et al., 2002). Although respondents
mentioned over 20 different CD restaurant brands, the current
study limits the investigation to Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill
& Bar (Applebee’s) and Chili’s Bar & Grill (Chili’s). These CD
restaurants were the two most recognized and similar brands (i.
e. nationally franchised, menu offerings, sit-down table service)
based on unaided recall.
Main restaurant survey
The second phase ofthe comprehensive restaurantbrand
image study consisted ofa large, online self-administered
Qualtrics survey among repeat restaurant customers.
Restaurant customers familiar with the Applebee’s and Chili’s
brands were specifically recruited from Qualtrics panel groups
and respondents were randomly assigned to a treatment group
and asked questionsabout either Applebee’sor Chili’s
restaurants.The sample consisted ofAmerican consumers
between 18 and 65 years ofage,who were supposed to be
familiar with the two focal CD restaurant brands. In all, 666
respondentscompleted the online restaurantbrand image
survey, but review of the completed survey data revealed that
57 of these respondents were not familiar with the Applebee’s
or Chili’s brands and, thus, were removed from the study. By
limiting the useable data to repeat customers of the Applebee’s
and Chili’s brands, the sample size decreased to 609 responses;
however, overall data quality improved by ensuring participants
met the criteria ofthe study’s defined targetpopulation of
restaurant customers with established ORBI.
Measures
The survey instrument consisted of pre-tested questions and
industry standard,direct rating scale measures that captured
respondents’attitudinalevaluations ofthe performance and
importance of fourteen reflective restaurant image features, as
well as ORL, ORS, IREC and IREV. Overallrestaurant brand
image was derived in two steps (See the Appendixfor the 14
specific restaurant features, scale-item measures and detailed
explanationsof how each constructwas measured).First,
respondents’ORBI towards the CD restaurantbrand were
computed according to Ajzen and Fishbein’s (1980)
multiplicative-additiveattitude model by summatingthe
products ofthe 14 restaurantfeatures’performance ratings
multiplied by their corresponding importance weight factors.
Second, the global ORBI ratings were transposed to enhance
the interpretability of the ORBI values, which resulted in scale
points ranging from “1 = very negative restaurant brand image”
to “6= very positive restaurant brand image”.
Individual three item, six-point bi-polar semantic differential
rating scale measures were standardized for the constructs of
overallrestaurantsatisfaction (1 = very dissatisfying/6= very
satisfying; 1 = very disappointing/6 = very delightful; 1 = very
unpleasant/6 = very pleasant;a= 0.92) and overallrestaurant
loyalty (1 = very weak feeling/6 = very strong feeling; 1 = very
uncommitted/6 = very committed; 1 = eat irregularly/6 = eat
regularly;a = 0.88). Single globalfour-pointsymmetrical
rating scales ranging from “1= definitely would not (0-9 per
cent chance)” to “4= definitelywould (90-100 per cent
chance)” captured customers’likelihood torecommend and
likelihood to revisitthe selected casualdining restaurant(see
Tables I and II for descriptive statistics, reliability and validity
information on these constructs).
From a constructreliability perspective,the ORBI ( a =
0.93), ORL (a= 0.88) and ORS (a= 0.92) constructs reflected
Table IDescriptive statistics and scale assessment
Construct Mean Standard error No. of items Construct reliability % of variance CFA loadings
Overall restaurant brand image4.06 0.04 14 0.93 64.22 0.52-0.86
Overall restaurant loyalty 2.94 0.06 3 0.88 80.20 0.87-0.91
Overall restaurant satisfaction 4.17 0.05 3 0.92 86.39 0.93-0.94
Intentions to recommend 2.91 0.04 1 – – –
Intentions to revisit 2.58 0.04 1 – – –
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
604
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

acceptable internalconsistency and convergent validity,with
confirmatory factor analysis item loadings ranging from 0.52 to
0.86, 0.87 to 0.91 and 0.93 to 0.94, respectively. Discriminant
validity offocal constructs was evaluated by comparing the
square rootof the variance extracted (SQRT(AVE)) to the
inter-constructcorrelations(Fornell and Larcker, 1981;
Hatcher,1994). For the three multi-item focalconstructs,
SQRT(AVE) exceeded correlations with other constructs and
average variance extracted (AVE) exceeded the recommended
cut-off value of 0.5 to show discriminant validity,with AVE
ranges from 0.55 to 0.86 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
Results
The online survey captured the same data from all respondents,
regardlessof their randomly assignedtreatmentgroup
(Applebee’s vs Chili’s). Invariance testing supports combining
the data from the 313 respondents who evaluated Applebee’s
with the data from the 296 respondents who evaluated Chili’s
into one final data set of 609 respondents.
Repeat restaurant customers
The 609 respondents in the current study are characterized as
being adult females (54 per cent) and males (46 per cent) who
are familiarwith and have patronage experience with CD
restaurants. In all, 100 per cent of respondents expressed some
levelof familiarity with both Applebee’s and Chili’s brands,
with approximately 70 percent of respondentsself-rating
themselves as very to extremely familiar with Applebee’s and
Chili’s. Approximately 65 per cent of respondents have eaten at
Applebee’s or Chili’s at least once in the 90 days preceding the
online survey.Respondents’ages ranged between 18 and 73
years,with an average age ofapproximately 36 years ofage
(standard deviation of 6 16.49 years). About 55 per cent of the
respondents were youngerthan 35 years ofage.Table III
summarizes the demographic information of respondents.
Overall restaurant brand image hypotheses
The current study uses linear and multiple regression analyses
to empirically investigate the hypothesized relationships. The
presentanalysis also uses process’bootstrapping resampling
technique to evaluate the proposed mediatorrelationships.
Following the recommended guidelines, unstandardized effects
for 10,000 bias-corrected bootstrap samples are reported at the
95 per centconfidence levelfor all mediation tests (Hayes,
2013).
In testing H1, which predicts a positive relationship between
repeat customers’ ORBI and ORL, ORBI is regressed on ORL
(see Table IV for a summary of regression results).The
standardized regression coefficientfor ORBI is statistically
significant( bORBI = 0.56, p < 0.01), providing empirical
evidence of a positive relationship between ORBI and ORL and
supporting H1. To investigatethe predicted positive
relationship between ORBI and ORS in H2, ORBI is regressed
on ORS. The resulting standardized regression coefficient for
Table IICorrelations, means, standard deviations, SQRT(AVE) and AVE for
model variablesa,b
Construct ORBI ORL ORS IREC IREV
ORBI 0.74
ORL 0.56 0.90
ORS 0.63 0.62 0.93
IREC 0.64 0.63 0.66 1
IREV 0.55 0.73 0.55 0.73 1
l 4.06 2.94 4.17 2.91 2.58
r 0.93 1.44 1.16 0.86 0.98
AVE 0.55 0.81 0.86 1.00 1.00
Notes:aSQRT(AVE)italicized along the diagonal;bAll correlations were
significantat p = 0.01 level(two-tailed test);cORBIrepresents Overall
RestaurantBrand Image;ORS represents OverallSatisfaction ofDining
Experiences;ORL represents OverallRestaurantLoyalty;IREC represents
Intention to Recommend the Restaurant;IREV represents Intentions to
Revisit the Restaurant
Table IIIDefined target population demographics
Demographic characteristics N (%)
Gender
Male 282 46
Female 327 54
Age
l 35.68 –
Standard Error 16.49 –
Marital Status
Single 330 54
Married 150 25
Separated 5 1
Divorced 39 6
Widowed 6 1
Living with significant other 26 4
N/A 53 9
Employment Status
Not currently employed 236 38
Part-time 201 33
Full-time 119 20
N/A 53 9
Annual Income
l $45,343 –
Standard Error $34,015 –
Education Level
Less than high school 8 1
High school/GED 129 21
Some college 218 36
2-year college degree 108 18
4-year college degree 114 19
Master’s degree 20 3
Doctorate degree 8 1
Professional degree 4 1
Number of Children
l 1.45 –
Standard Error 0.92 –
Times dining out per month
l 7.02 –
Standard Error 4.17 –
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
605
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

ORBI is significant (bORBI = 0.63, p < 0.01), supporting the
positive relationship between ORBI and ORS of H2.
H3a and H3b look at the influence of repeat customers’ ORL
and ORS on IREC. Both standardized regression coefficients
are statistically significant (bORL = 0.36,p < 0.01; bORS =
0.44, p <0.01), empirically confirming the positive
relationships between ORL and IREC proposed in H3a and
between ORS and IREC predicted in H3b. Finally, H4a and
H4b predict repeat customers’ORL and ORS will positively
influenceIREV, respectively.The standardized regression
coefficients are statistically significant (bORL = 0.64, p <0.01;
bORS = 0.15, p < 0.01), confirming H4a and H4b.
Mediation analyses
H5 predicts ORL and ORS together mediate the relationship
between ORBI and IREC (Figure 2). As depicted in Panel A
of Figure 2, a positive and significant indirect total effect of
ORBI on IREC exists, as the 95 per cent confidence interval
is completely above zero (a b = 0.32, CI = (0.25, 0.39)).
The indirect effect through ORS is larger (a2 b 2 = 0.18,
CI = (0.13, 0.23)) than the indirecteffectthrough ORL
((a1 b 1 = 0.14, CI = (0.10, 0.19)). Findings indicate that
ORBI positively predicts ORL (B = 0.86, p <0.01) and ORS
(B = 0.78, p < 0.01), which in turn positively predict IREC
(B ORL = 0.17, BORS = 0.23, p < 0.01). The total direct effect
of ORBI on IREC is significant(c’ = 0.59, p < 0.01).
Supporting H5, the direct effect of ORBI on IREC drops to
B = 0.27 (p < 0.01) with the addition of the attitudinal
mediators,suggesting ORL and ORS partially mediate the
direct relationship.
Panel B of Figure 2 shows the results for H6, which predicts
ORL and ORS will together mediate the relationship between
ORBI and IREV. A positive and significant indirect total effect
of ORBI on IREV prevails, as the 95 percent confidence
interval is entirely above zero (a b = 0.39, CI = (0.32, 0.47)).
The indirect effect through ORL is much larger (a1 b 1 =
0.34, CI = (0.29, 0.41)) than the non-significant indirect effect
through ORS (a2 b 2 = 0.05, CI = (0.01, 0.10)). Results
reveal that ORBI positively predicts ORL (B = 0.86, p <0.01)
and ORS (B = 0.78, p < 0.01). ORL in turn positively predicts
IREV (B ORL = 0.40, p < 0.01), but not ORS (BORS = 0.06,
p > 0.05). The total direct effect of ORBI on IREV is significant
(c’ = 0.58, p <0.01). The direct effect of ORBI on IREV drops
to B = 0.19 (p < 0.01) with the addition ofthe ORL as a
mediator, indicating a partial mediation of the direct
relationship. As a result, H6 lacks support since ORL is the sole
mediator of the relationship between ORBI and IREV.
General discussion
CD restaurantmanagers rely on their ability to strategically
shape customers’ORBI and loyalty to keep theirbrands
profitable (Dixon,2016).However,recentslower sales and
lower foot traffic have hurt some CD restaurant brands, leading
researchers to question how repeat customers’ ORBI, overall
restaurantloyalty and overallrestaurantsatisfaction impact
dining decision-makingbehaviors (National Restaurant
Association,2017). This research contributes to restaurant
managersand experts’understanding ofhow to increase
repeat customers’ behavioral intentions.
In line with some previous research (Jin,2015;Ryu et al.,
2008; Souiden and Pons, 2009) investigating the relationships
between ORBI and overall restaurantloyalty or overall
restaurant satisfaction separately, results of the current research
show thatORBI positively predictsboth overallrestaurant
loyalty and satisfaction concurrently.These insights provide
confirmation thatfor repeatcustomers,overallrestaurant
loyalty and satisfaction actually “flip” position and become
outcome constructs of ORBI. Repeat customers create positive
relational associations between ORBI, overall restaurant loyalty
and overallrestaurant satisfaction and rely on these positive
linkages when forming their intentions to recommend and/or
revisit a CD restaurant brand.
Results also demonstrate that overall restaurant satisfaction
alone is not sufficient in predicting different types of behavioral
intentions. For intentions to recommend a restaurant, ORBI,
overallrestaurantloyalty and overallrestaurantsatisfaction
jointly predict behavioralintentions,with each construct
contributing approximately the same effect size (BORBI = 0.27,
B ORL = 0.17,B ORS = 0.23).In contrast,when it comes to
repeat customers’intentionsto revisit a restaurant,the
influence of overall restaurant loyalty in conjunction with ORBI
actually negatesthe predictive ability ofoverallrestaurant
satisfaction, with overall restaurant loyalty contributing double
Table IV Standardized beta coefficients between constructs’ relationship linkagesb
Hypothesized relationship linkage Standardized beta coefficienta t-value Adjusted R2
H1: ORBI positively influences ORL 0.31
ORBI fi ORL 0.56 16.42
H2: ORBI positively influences ORS 0.39
ORBI fi ORS 0.63 19.83
H3: ORL and ORS positively influence IREC 0.51
H3a: ORL fi IREC 0.36 9.96
H3b: ORS fi IREC 0.44 12.27
H4: ORL and ORS positively influence IREV 0.55
H4a: ORL fi IREV 0.64 18.51
H4b: ORS fi IREV 0.15 4.43
Notes:aAll the standardized beta coefficients were significant at p < 0.001;bORBIrepresents OverallRestaurant Brand Image;ORS represents Overall
Satisfaction ofDining Experiences;ORL represents OverallRestaurant Loyalty;IREC represents Intention to Recommend the Restaurant;IREV represents
Intentions to Revisit the Restaurant
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
606
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

the effect size of ORBI (B ORL = 0.40, B ORBI = 0.19).
Therefore, the different mediation pathways for intentions to
recommend and revisita restaurantrevealthat behavioral
intentionscannot be treated identically,and additional
research is needed to identify how overall restaurant loyalty and
satisfaction predictother typesof behavioralintentionsof
repeat customers (e.g. switch brands).
The currentresearch makes severalimportanttheoretical
contributions to the marketing and branding literatures and the
results have several important implications for CD restaurant
managers, which are outlined next.
Theoretical contributions
Given the growing similarityand competitivenessof CD
restaurants in the current table service restaurant landscape,
CD restaurant managers need to understand repeat customers’
decision-making to protect the sales and profitability of their
brands. The present results take a significant step in enhancing
managers’insights into repeat customers’attitudesand
intentions and in doing so,contribute to the knowledge of
marketing researchers in four main ways.
First, the currentresearch contributes to the restaurant,
ORBI, loyalty and satisfaction literaturesby integrating
theories of persuasion (expectancy theory and the theory of
reasoned action)with a theory of information processing
(heuristics) to explain what drives customers’intentions to
recommend and/orrevisit a restaurantbrand (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1980; Tversky and Kahneman, 1974; Vroom,
1964). Heuristic information processing outlines how repeat
customers network information about a CD restaurant brand
by forming relational associationsbetween important
constructs (e.g. ORBI relates to ORL, ORBI relates to ORS)
that can be used as mental shortcuts in future decisions about
dining behaviors, instead of thinking comprehensively about
Figure 2 Mediation analyses for overall restaurant brand image
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
607
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

every feature of a CD restaurant.For example,rather than
remembering every tangible and intangible attribute ofa
specific CD restaurant, a repeat customer will simply rely on
heuristic cues related to positive associations between ORBI
and overall restaurant loyalty based on previous experiences
and, as a result, will frequent the same CD restaurant again.
This finding is consistentwith prior heuristics research on
restaurantand food consumptiondecision-makingthat
supportscustomers’heuristic judgmentsof healthy menu
selection behavior and restaurant brand assessment based on
reliance on shortcut cues rather than elaborate information
processing (Irmak etal., 2011; Jeong and Jang, 2017).
Furthermore, expectancy theory and the theory of reasoned
action supplementthe heuristic information processing
theory by specifying how repeat customers use their existing
global attitudes to set their intentions to recommend and/or
revisit a brand.
Second, the presentconceptualframework extendsthefindingsand insightsfrom previousindependentresearch
studies (Ryu et al., 2008; Souiden and Pons, 2009) on overall
restaurant satisfaction and overall restaurant loyalty. Findings
confirm thatoverallrestaurantsatisfaction isimportantin
understanding repeatcustomers’behavioralintentions,but
these behavioralintentions can be further enhanced by also
studying customers’overallrestaurant loyalty in conjunction
with overall restaurantsatisfaction.The currentempirical
results show that for intentions to recommend a CD restaurant,
repeat customers rely on both overallrestaurantsatisfaction
and overallrestaurantloyalty to drive behavioralintentions.
However, the current research also shows that repeat customers
rely very little on overallrestaurant satisfaction when setting
their intentions to revisita CD restaurantand instead rely
primarily on overall restaurant loyalty. This finding aligns with
Oliver’s (1997) research findingthat satisfaction istime
dependent and strongest immediately after the consumption
experience.
Third, this research extendsthe previousfindings on
customers’ behavioral intentions (Ryu et al., 2008; Souiden and
Pons, 2009) by studying two types ofbehavioralintentions
separately.This methodologicalapproach deepens the
understanding of behavioral intentions by clarifying if similar or
differentpredictive pathwaysemerge from both behavioral
intentions.As previously discussed,differentpredictors and
mediational pathways for intentions to recommend and revisit
a CD restaurant are evident,highlighting the importance of
separatingdifferenttypes of behavioralintentionsduring
measurement.
Fourth, this study enhances the restaurant and
measurementliteraturesby closely matching the defined
target population to the collected sample. Expectancy theory
and the theory of reasoned action require first-hand,direct
experiencefor correct attitude formation (Ajzen and
Fishbein, 1980; Vroom, 1964). Brand image researchers
need to recognize thata perception toward an objectof
interestis significantly differentfrom experientially based
attitudes toward the object, and failing to acknowledge this
distinction within the sampling approach can negatively
affect the accuracy of the findings. The sample of the current
study adheres to these suggestions.
Managerial implications
CD restaurant managers looking to improve their
understanding of how customers reengage with their brand can
use the current findings to improve strategic actions. First, the
higher a customer’s behavioral intention towards a restaurant,
the more likely the customer will perform the actual behavior
(Ajzen and Fishbein,1980).Restaurantmanagers trying to
increase the number of recommendations or revisits made by
repeatcustomerscan take specificactionsto boost their
behavioral intentions. Based on current findings, managers can
accomplish this by enhancing ORBI, overall restaurant loyalty
or overallrestaurantsatisfaction individually.Specifically,if
intentionsto recommend isthe primary focusof the CD
restaurantmanager,then managers may decide to reinforce
customers’overall restaurantloyalty (e.g. introducinga
rewardssystem)only or try to enhance customers’ORBI,
overall restaurant loyalty and overall restaurant satisfaction in
combination (e.g.earn extra rewardswhen filling out a
customer satisfaction survey). In contrast, restaurant managers
aiming to increase foot traffic (i.e. revisits) need to boost repeat
customers’overallrestaurant loyalty. As the current research
highlights, unlike intentions to recommend, overall restaurant
loyalty carries twice the predictive power of ORBI for intentions
to revisit. Thus, managers looking to increase repeat customers’
intentions to revisitneed to focus first on increasing overall
restaurant loyalty, followed second by enhancing ORBI.
Second, restaurant managers need to be aware of differences
in how diverse types of customers think about and utilize their
ORBI, overall restaurantloyalty and overall restaurant
satisfaction information.The theory ofreasoned action and
expectancy theory suggest first-time customers may rely mainly
on subjective norms and perceptions of restaurant loyalty and
satisfaction acquired from initialconsumption experiences to
build their ORBI (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Vroom, 1964).
Repeat customers instead use their ORBI,overallrestaurant
loyalty and overall restaurantsatisfactionas heuristic
information processingmechanismsto drive behavioral
intentions. Therefore, strategic actions taken by CD restaurant
managers to expand behavioral intentions of repeat customers
will not translate into the same effectsfor other typesof
customers. Instead, restaurant managers need to individualize
marketing tactics to target repeat customers differently thanfirst-time customers.For example,existing research suggests
that first-time customers may benefit from story-based appeals
in print advertisements about a restaurant brand more so than
other customers (Kent and Allen, 1994; Mattila, 2000). Repeat
customers require information compatible with their existing
knowledge due to their reliance on heuristics and may often
reject new information because they tend to trust their own
expertise more, regardless of the form of the appeal(Mattila,
2000; Ratneshwarand Chaiken, 1991; Thompson and
Hamilton, 2006).
Limitations and future research
The current research takes an important step into
understanding repeatrestaurantcustomers’usage ofORBI,
ORL and overall restaurant satisfaction to influence intentions
to recommend and/or revisit a CD restaurant brand. As with
any research,this study haslimitationsresearchersshould
considerbefore generalizing the findingsto other typesof
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
608
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)

restaurant customers or other categories of restaurants. These
limitations provide opportunitiesfor future researchto
investigate.
First, the current sample includes only repeat customers
who have established ORBIs.While the theory of reasoned
action and expectancy theory suggest first-hand experience as
a pre-requisite to strong attitude formation,understanding
the differencesin first-time customers’perceptionsand
repeat customers’attitudes ofa CD restaurant remains an
importantdirection for future research.How do ORBIs
formed based upon indirect experience (e.g. advertisements,
social media posts) differ from those formed based on direct
consumption experience?What is the best surrogate
information source for a first-time customer to use to build
their ORBI? Future research can investigate iffirst-time
customers are able to use specific sources of information (e.g.
socialmedia videos) or emotions (e.g.curiosity,trust) as a
heuristic mechanism when processing information abouta
CD restaurant brand in place of ORBI. In addition to ORBI
formation, future researchshould also investigatehow
negative service encounters and service failures impact repeat
customers vs. first-time customers differently. Specifically, do
repeat customers express a higher levelof forgiveness for a
single negativetransgression bythe restaurantprovider
because of the established relationship? How many
transgressionsmust occur to permanentlydamage the
relationship between the repeatcustomerand restaurant?
Also, how do service recovery strategies, such as apologies or
compensation influence repeat customers? The extension of
the current research into the service recovery literature is an
interesting avenue for future research.
Second, consistent with other researchers (Jalilvand et al.,
2017;Jin et al., 2012),this study defines overallrestaurant
loyalty and overallrestaurantsatisfaction as attitudes and
measures them separately from intentions to recommend and
revisit a restaurant. Other researchers often define the overall
restaurant loyalty and satisfaction constructs as behaviors and
would use behavioralintentions or actual behaviorsto
measure loyalty behavior. Research comparing one-
dimensional(i.e. defining overallrestaurantloyalty asan
attitude) and two-dimensional (i.e. defining overall
restaurant loyalty as a behavior) approaches to
conceptualizingoverall restaurant loyalty and overall
restaurant satisfaction will benefit brand image researchers by
revealing the consistencyof results between the two
approaches. Further, the current research measures
functionalaspects ofORBI, not psychosocialaspects (e.g.
how meeting up with friends during happy hour influences
repeat customers).Future research can providedeeper
insight on how psychosocial aspects are integrated into ORBI
and influence repeat customers’ information processing.
Furthermore, the present approach purposefully limits the
outcome constructsof the conceptualframework to keep
the analyses of a manageable and understandable size. The
reported adjusted R2s (ranging between 0.31 and 0.55,see
Table IV) of the tested relationshipssuggestthat future
research should include additional attitudinal, behavioral and
relational constructs to more fully explain customers’ overall
restaurantloyalty.Future research with otherconstructs,
such as dining value,brand identity,brand interest,brand
personality and perceived trust of the brand, may provide a
more comprehensive understanding of customer loyalty. For
example,some researchers provide empiricalevidence that
the amountof retailer interestheld by consumers directly
influencescustomerloyalty (Jones and Reynolds, 2006).
Another interesting question is how the consistency between
a brand’s identity and a customer’soverall brand image
influences overall restaurant loyalty.
Fourth, restaurantfinancialperformance metricsare not
included in the present research. Without financial
performance measures, it is impossible to directly assess how
relationshipsbetween repeatrestaurantcustomers’ORBI,
overallrestaurantloyalty,overallrestaurantsatisfaction and
behavioral intentions affect financial outcomes, such as brand
equity.Although brand equity falls beyond the scope of this
research,some branding researcherssuggestthat customer
satisfaction,intentions to recommendand repurchasing
behaviors are antecedents to brand equity (Brown et al., 2005;
Keller, 2003). Therefore, the conceptualization of ORL, ORS,
IREC and IREV as outcome consequences of ORBI can be
extended to study brand equity elements. Nevertheless, future
research should determine if repeat customers’ORBI, ORL,
ORS and behavioralintentions impact financialperformance
metrics.Currently, researcherssuggestthat brand image
(Keller, 1993),store image (Hartman and Spiro,2005) and
mallimage (ElHedhli and Chebat, 2009) directly influences
equity metrics.
Fifth, resultsare limited to two CD restaurantbrands.
Although these include randomly selected repeatrestaurant
customers,familiarwith the Applebee’s and Chili’s brands
from across the USA, more research is needed to generalize the
ORBI resultsto customersof other CD restaurants(e.g.
Cheesecake Factory) and differentcategories ofrestaurants
(e.g. fast food). Not only could the conceptual framework and
research design be generalized to differenttypesof eating
establishments (i.e. breakfast and lunch only restaurants, small
“mom and pop” restaurants), but also to other retail settings
(e.g. department stores, ordering food online). Another area of
research needed in the future is to evaluate how customers’
demographiccharacteristics(i.e. gender, age, income,
employmentstatus, marital status) might moderatethe
relationshipsbetween ORBI, ORL, ORS and behavioral
intentions to reengage with a brand.
Because of space constraints, another limitation is that the
current study includes only aggregate-levelmeasures and
analysis of the constructs under investigation, which limits
the diagnostic value ofthe reported results.There is a
continual need for developing more accurate measurements
of the constructs and more appropriate reflective indicators
for each construct. Constructs composed of multiple
reflective indicators can be analyzed using advanced
statistical procedures, such as structural equation modeling
(SEM), rather than multiple regression equations,which
will eliminate any potential measurementerror when
estimating the constructs and pathways (Hair et al., 2010).
SEM analysis would also allow for a more accurate study of
the temporal sequence ofoverall restaurantloyalty and
satisfaction, to determine if sequential mediation occurs in
the relationship between ORBI and intentions to
recommend a CD restaurant. On the other hand, the
I’ll have the usual
Jennifer A. Espinosa, David J. Ortinau, Nina Krey and Lisa Monahan
Journal of Product & Brand Management
Volume 27 · Number 6 · 2018 · 599–614
609
Downloaded by VICTORIA UNIVERSITY (Australia) At 20:47 08 April 2019 (PT)