International Journal of Hospitality Manage

llac

H

Ad

iete

yun

ng

nt i

asu

inuencing customer satisfaction. Additionally, overall quick-casual restaurant image, perceived value, and customer satisfaction are

more value for their money, the quick-casual segment has on consumer loyalty (Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998) in

quality of dining service for customers, can have anenormous inuence on customers perceptions of customervalue and satisfaction, which, in turn, affects their

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1785 532 2213; fax: +1 785 532 5522.

behavioral intentions (Kandampully and Suhartanto,2000; Patterson and Spreng, 1997; Prendergast andMan, 2002).

0278-4319/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.11.001

E-mail addresses: kryu@uno.edu (K. Ryu), heesup@ksu.edu

(H. Han), thkim33@khu.ac.kr (T.-H. Kim).1Tel.: +1 504 280 5502; fax: +1 504 280 3189.become one of the biggest in the foodservice industry(Anderson, 2003; Sloan, 2002; Tillotson, 2003). This newcategory, which falls between the Quick Service andFull Service segments, is less likely to offer fried foodsand more likely to provide hand-held items such assandwiches and wraps. Quick-casual restaurants offermenus and decor more consistent with casual diningexperiences. These restaurants tend to have their highestsales volume during lunch and generate a higher averagecheckbetween $6 and $9than traditional quick

the service sectors. Specically, the intangible characteristicof the restaurant industry may enhance the crucial role ofimage in inuencing customers behavior because custo-mers heavily depend on tangible cues, such as restaurantbrand name (e.g., Panera Bread), decor and interior design(e.g., Chipotle), and price (e.g., Souplantation). Restau-rateurs should establish a distinctive image that differenti-ates them from competitors to communicate the productsmajor benets and positioning towards a target market.A restaurants image, which can directly indicate thebetween overall quick-casual restaurant image/perceived value and behavioral intentions. Furthermore, we discuss the theoretical and

managerial implications of the ndings and future research ideas.

r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Overall quick-casual restaurant image; Perceived value; Customer satisfaction; Behavioral intentions; Quick-casual restaurant

1. Introduction

With customers increasingly demanding higher qualityfood preparation and taste, healthier food choices, betterphysical eating conditions, superior customer service, and

service restaurants. The rapid growth in the number ofquick-casual restaurants (e.g., Panera Bread) has asignicant impact on the overall quick service sector.Many researchers have studied the impact of an

organizations image on consumer behavior, particularlysignicant predictors of customers behavioral intentions. Finally, customer satisfaction can act as a partial mediator in the relationshipThe relationships among overaperceived value, customer satisf

Kisang Ryua,1, HeesupaDepartment of Hotel, Restaurant and Tourism

bDepartment of Hotel, Restaurant, Institution Management and DcDepartment of Food Service Management, K

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to explain the relationships amo

satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in the quick-casual restaura

image signicantly inuences perceived value, and overall quick-cment 27 (2008) 459469

quick-casual restaurant image,tion, and behavioral intentions

anb,, Tae-Hee Kimc

ministration, University of New Orleans, USA

tics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-1404, USA

g Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

overall quick-casual restaurant image, perceived value, customer

ndustry. The ndings indicate that overall quick-casual restaurant

al restaurant image and perceived value had a signicant role in

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman

ARTICLE IN PRESSospEffective management of restaurant image is particularlyimportant in the quick-casual segment in generatingperceived value, customer satisfaction, and subsequentbehavioral intentions because of the rapidly growingnumber of quick-casual restaurants. In most quick-casualrestaurants, creating distinctive image may present chal-lenges for restaurant managers since the image of onerestaurant may inuence customers perception of otherrestaurants in the same chain. If the components of image(e.g., store location, waiting time for a meal, decor andinterior design, food quality, menu variety, professionalappearance of staff, price, and cleanliness) are in harmony,the image of chain restaurant is reinforced, but if they workin conict, the positioning for the restaurant will be unclearto customers, resulting in confusion and disappointment.Effective image management brings in a competentmarketing strategy. If restaurateurs are doing this well,they should not have to worry about negative images.Hence it is crucial to maintain a consistent image forservice standards for most quick-casual restaurants in thesame chain.Despite the increasing importance of the quick-casual

segment in the hospitality industry, particularly in therestaurant industry, it has not gained much attention inresearch. Moreover, there has been no investigation ofwhether customers in this segment are primarily driven byoverall quick-casual restaurant image (OQRI), perceivedvalue, or satisfaction. In addition, little research has beenconducted to explain the relationships among OQRI,perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioralintentions in the hospitality and tourism academic eld.For example, one question that has been left unansweredconcerns whether there is a direct inuence from OQRIand/or perceived value on customer behavioral intention oran indirect relationship via customer satisfaction. Thus,this paper aims to ll these gaps. Our purpose, therefore, isto explore the relationships among OQRI, perceived value,customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in a quick-casual segment. The specic objectives of this study wereto: (1) examine the causal relationship from OQRI toperceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioralintentions; (2) discover the causal relationship fromperceived value to customer satisfaction and behavioralintentions; (3) investigate the causal relationship fromcustomer satisfaction to behavioral intentions; and(4) explore the mediating role of customer satisfaction inthe relationship between OQRI and behavioral intentionsand in the relationship between perceived value andbehavioral intentions.The ndings may help restaurateurs determine the

impact of restaurant image on perceived value, customersatisfaction, and behavioral intentions in quick-casualrestaurants. Findings also provide evidence of the relation-ships among restaurant image, value, satisfaction, andbehavioral intentions so that quick-casual restaurateurs

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of H460may understand more fully how to meet or even exceedcustomer needs.2. Literature review

2.1. Explication of constructs

2.1.1. Overall quick-casual restaurant image

The important aspect of image has received increasingattention in the marketing literature, since it affects theindividuals subjective perception and consequent behavior(Castro et al., 2007; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Gallarza et al.,2002; Hartman and Spiro, 2005; Tasci et al., 2007). Due tothe complex nature of the image, there are numerousdenitions of image. For instance, Baloglu and Brinberg(1997) dened it as the sum of beliefs, ideas, andimpressions that people have of a place or destination(p. 11). Similarly, OQRI is dened as the complex ofcustomers perceptions of quick-casual restaurants ondifferent (salient) attributes for the purpose of this study(Bloemer and Ruyter, 1998). In other words, OQRI isdescribed as a function of the attributes of quick-casualrestaurants that are salient for evaluation. Numerousstudies in marketing have placed emphasis on customersperceptions of a stores image in terms of functionalattributes, such as waiting time for service, location, andother qualities (Bloemer and Ruyter, 1998). Consistentwith this, in this study, OQRI is a customers perception ofthe functional attributes of quick-casual restaurants(e.g., restaurant location, waiting time for a meal, decorand interior design, food quality, menu variety, andcleanliness).

2.1.2. Perceived value

The role of value is becoming an increasing concern toconsumers and marketers (Dodds, 1991) because it is oneof the most powerful forces in todays marketplace(Albrecht, 1992). In marketing, value is typically describedfrom the consumers perspective. The most widely acceptedconceptualization of value in marketing is dening it interms of performance/quality and price (Patterson andSpreng, 1997). Thus, in this study, value can be describedas the customers overall appraisal of the net worth of theservice, based on the customers assessment of what isreceived (benets provided by the service), and what isgiven (costs or sacrice in acquiring and utilizing theservice) (Hellier et al., 2003, p. 1765).

2.1.3. Customer satisfaction

Customer satisfaction has long been considered afundamental determinant of long-term customer behavior(Oliver, 1980; Yi, 1990), so service rms increasinglydedicate substantial energies to tracking customer satisfac-tion. Hunt (1977) dened satisfaction as an evaluationrendered that the (product) experience was at least as goodas it was supposed to be (p. 459). Similarly, based on thetheoretical empirical evidence to date, Oliver (1997)described it as the consumers fulllment response. It is

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469a judgment that a product or service feature, or the productor service itself, provided (or is providing) a pleasurable

ARTICLE IN PRESSosplevel of consumption-related fulllment, including levels ofunder- or overfulllment (p. 13). Although researchersstruggle to clearly dene the concept of customer satisfac-tion, an essential aspect of customer satisfaction is anevaluation process (Back, 2005). This evaluative process-oriented approach has been regarded as the most effectiveway to measure the level of customer satisfaction (Oliver,1997; Yi, 1990).

2.1.4. Behavioral intentions

Customers frequently develop an attitude toward pur-chasing based on a prior service experience. They alsoundergo a cognitive decision-making process aboutwhether to stay or leave a service rm (Colgate and Lang,2001). Oliver (1997) described this attitude as the develop-ment of a fairly stable like/dislike of a product based onprevious experience. He also indicated that customers candevelop an attitude based on prior information withoutactual experience, so they frequently increase biases for oragainst providers based on the providers images in themarketplace. This attitude is strongly related to thecustomers intentions to repatronize the service/productand to be engaged in word-of-mouth behaviors. In thissense, Oliver (1997) dened behavioral intentions as anafrmed likelihood to engage in a certain behavior. Basedon this denition, behavioral intention in this study may bedescribed as a stated likelihood to return to the restaurantand to recommend the restaurant to family, friends, andothers in the future.

2.2. Hypotheses development

2.2.1. Influence of OQRI on study variables

While a number of studies address the signicant role ofstore image in determining consumer perception andconsequent behavior (Bigne et al., 2001; Bloemer andRuyter, 1998; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Lee et al., 2005;Osman, 1993; Prendergast and Man, 2002), there is littleempirical evidence to support the explicit relationshipbetween OQRI and perceive value. Specically, in thetourism industry, Andreassen and Lindestad (1998) positedand empirically tested the linkage between store/corporateimage and the customers perception of value. Theirndings indicated that while corporate image has animpact on other outcome variables, such as perceivedquality and satisfaction, there was no signicant relation-ship between image and value. However, although imagehas no direct effect on value, it has an indirect effectthrough perceived quality. Further, Ferrand and Pages(1999) found that image creates value for sport organiza-tions. Additionally, Aaker (1991) stated the contribution ofimage to the value of brand. Image can assist in thecustomers assessment of what is received and what issacriced, and price paid, and overall assessment. Chenand Tsai (2007) recently investigated tourist behaviors by

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of Hconstructing a comprehensive model including destinationimage and perceived value into the quality-satisfaction-behavioral intentions paradigm. The structural relation-ship analysis showed no signicant inuence of destinationimage on perceived value and satisfaction.The relationship between image and customer satisfac-

tion has gained little attention in hospitality literature. Thisis because they are typically analyzed with other con-structssuch as perceived value, perceived quality, andcustomer loyalty (Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2000).Many previous studies have shown that the image can be acritical factor in inuencing customer satisfaction andsubsequent behavioral intentions (Andreassen and Lindes-tad, 1998; Bloemer and Ruyter, 1998; Cai et al., 2003;Kandampully and Suhartanto, 2000; OLeary and Deegan,2005; Osman, 1993; Prendergast and Man, 2002). OQRI islikely to be established in customers minds through mediacommunication or previous experience. Andreassen andLindestad (1998) claimed that store image is believed togenerate a halo effect on satisfaction judgments andattitudes toward the service rm. That is, once customersfavorably have OQRI, they are likely to be satised withthe services provided, improving their overall attitudetoward the quick-casual restaurant.There is a general consensus that the image affects the

future behavior of consumers among researchers (Bigne etal., 2001; Bloemer and Ruyter, 1998; Castro et al., 2007;Chen and Gursoy, 2001; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Osman,1993; Prendergast and Man, 2002). Osman (1993) arguedthat customers patronage behavior towards a particularstore relies on store image. In a quick service restaurantsetting, Prendergast and Mans (2002) ndings revealedthat both functional attributes (i.e., waiting time for a seat,store environment, and store location) and psychologicalattributes (emotion-eliciting qualities of environments) ofstore image are signicant predictors of store loyalty(the propensity to revisit the store and willingness torecommend the store). In their study, functional attributesof store image more precisely predict store loyalty thanpsychological attributes. Bloemer and Ruyter (1998) foundthat store image can only inuence store loyalty throughstore satisfaction with a particular department store. Storeloyalty was assessed using customers behavioral inten-tions. Further, Andreassen and Lindestad (1998) foundthat image signicantly inuences customer satisfaction,quality, and loyalty in a service context. In their empiricalinvestigation, behavioral intentions, such as repurchaseintentions and willingness to provide positive word-of-mouth, are used to indicate customer loyalty. In addition,Castro et al. (2007) found that a destinations image hadthe impact on the future behavior of tourists through twomediators: service quality and/or tourist satisfaction.Furthermore, Chen and Tsai (2007) proposed a touristbehavior model by considering destination image, evalua-tive factors (i.e., trip quality, perceived value, satisfaction)and behavioral intentions. The results showed that desti-nation image appeared to have the most important effect on

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469 461behavioral intentions (i.e., intention to revisit and willingnessto recommend). In accordance with Bigne et al. (2001),

ARTICLE IN PRESSospdestination image affected behavioral intentions both directlyand indirectly. Based on these ndings, the followinghypotheses were formulated:

Hypothesis 1. Restaurant image has a positive effect onperceived value.

Hypothesis 2. Restaurant image has a positive effect oncustomer satisfaction.

Hypothesis 3. Restaurant image has a positive effect onbehavioral intentions.

2.2.2. Relationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and

behavioral intentions

Although the relationships between perceived value andcustomer satisfaction or behavioral intentions has beendebated in service marketing (McDougall and Levesque,2000), in recent years perceived value has gained specialattention as a stable construct in predicting consumerbuying behavior (Hellier et al., 2003). Many researchersagree that value has a signicant inuence on customersatisfaction and behavioral intentions (Andreassen andLindestad, 1998; Chen and Tsai, 2007; Lee et al., 2007;McDougall and Levesque, 2000; Patterson and Spreng,1997; Pura, 2005). In their empirical examination of therole of perceived value in explaining consumer behavior ina service context, Patterson and Spreng (1997) found thatcustomers perceived value is a positive and directantecedent of customer satisfaction. Andreassen andLindestad (1998) found that value has a positive impacton customer satisfaction in developing a customer loyaltymodel in a complex service context. Additionally, ininvestigating the relationships among service quality,perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions,McDougall and Levesque (2000) found that perceivedservice quality and value were the most signicant driversof customer satisfaction across four service sectors, such asrestaurant, auto service, hairstylist, and dental services.Pura (2005) analyzed the direct effect of customerperceived value on attitudinal and behavioral componentsof loyalty, such as commitment and behavioral intentionsin a service context. His ndings suggested that behavioralintentions and commitment were signicantly inuenced bycustomer perceived value. Lee et al. (2007) examined themultiple dimensions of perceived value for tourism at theKorean demilitarized zone (DMZ), and to investigate howthat value affected visitors satisfaction and recommenda-tions to others. The results indicated that all of theunderlying dimensions of tourists DMZ-perceived value(functional, overall and emotional value) had a signicanteffect on DMZ tour satisfaction. The impact of DMZ toursatisfaction also signicantly inuenced the recommenda-tions of DMZ tours to others. Thus, based on these studyndings, the following hypotheses were developed:

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of H462Hypothesis 4. Perceived value has a positive effect oncustomer satisfaction.Hypothesis 5. Perceived value has a positive effect onbehavioral intentions.

2.2.3. Customer satisfaction as a predictor of behavioral

intentions

Many researchers have provided empirical evidence of apositive relationship between customer satisfaction andbehavioral intentions, such as repurchase and word-of-mouth intentions. Anderson and Sullivan (1993) found thathigh level of customer satisfaction decreases the perceivedbenets of service provider switches, thereby increasingcustomer repurchase intentions (Anderson and Sullivan,1993). Getty and Thompson (1994), in investigating therelationship among service quality, satisfaction, andbehavioral intentions, suggested that customer behavioralintentions to recommend and repurchase are positivefunctions of their perception of satisfaction and servicequality. In assessing the role of intentions as a link betweensatisfaction and repatronizing behavior in a restaurantsetting, Soderlund and Ohman (2005) also found thatcustomer satisfaction is signicantly related to two specicintention constructs: intentions as expectations and inten-tions as wants. Further, Kivela et al. (1999) found thatdining satisfaction signicantly inuences post-diningbehavioral intentions. These ndings all support thesignicant link between customer satisfaction and beha-vioral intentions in the restaurant industry. Thus, thefollowing hypothesis was developed:

Hypothesis 6. Customer satisfaction has a positive effecton behavioral intentions.

The proposed hypotheses are illustrated in the studymodel (Fig. 1).

3. Methodology

Based on previous studies (Baker et al., 1994; Birtwistleet al., 1999; Bloemer and Ruyter, 1998; Kandampully andSuhartanto, 2000; Osman, 1993; Prendergast and Man,2002), two focus groups, and a pilot test, a questionnairewas developed and rened to assess OQRI, perceivedvalue, customer satisfaction, behavioral intention, anddemographic variables. The questionnaire is presented inTable 1. Part I of the questionnaire consisted of 8 semanticdifferential items (i.e., 3 very bad, 3 very good) tomeasure OQRI: Cleanliness was very bad (3)very good(+3). Part II consisted of measurement of perceivedvalue, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. Allitems were assessed via a 7-point Likert-scale, ranging fromextremely disagree (1) to extremely agree (7). Perceivedvalue was measured by three items (e.g., The restaurantoffered good value for the price). Customer satisfactionwas assessed by four items. For example, I have reallyenjoyed myself at this restaurant. Behavioral intentionswere assessed by asking respondents to answer to the three

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469statements: I would like to come back to this restaurant inthe future.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

tomfact

age

ospRestaurantImage

Perceived Value

CusSatis

H1

H2

H3

H4

H5

Fig. 1. Proposed model showing relationships among restaurant im

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of HTwo focus groups were conducted. The populations wereundergraduate and graduate students. To qualify for thefocus group, a participant had to be a customer of a quick-casual restaurant within the past 3 months. Responsesfrom the focus groups helped to construct and rene thequestionnaire. Participants freely discussed their criteriafor choosing a quick-casual restaurant. In addition, a pilottest was conducted with actual customers at quick-casualrestaurants to ensure that the items selected had acceptablepsychometric qualities with respect to the salient storeimage most frequently associated with experiencing thequick-casual dining segment.A visitors survey was conducted at franchised quick-

casual restaurants with a different brand name in aMidwestern state. These restaurants do not offer full tableservice, but promises higher quality of food, service, and

Table 1

Measures of variables for the proposed model

Variables Measures

Restaurant image (RI) Very badvery good

SI1: Food quality wasUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSI2: Menu variety wasUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSI3: Cleanliness wasUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSI4: Price wasUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSI5: Interior design and decor wasUUUUUUUUUUUUSI6: Professional appearance of staff wasUUUUUUSI7: Store location wasUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUSI8: Waiting time for a meal wasUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Perceived value (PV) Strongly disagreestrongly agree

PV1: The restaurant offered good value for the

PV2: The overall value of dining at the restaur

PV3: The dining experience was worth the mon

Customer satisfaction (CS) Strongly disagreestrongly agree

CS1: I was pleased to dine in at the restaurant

CS2: The overall feeling I got from the restaur

CS3: The overall feeling I got from the restaur

CS4: I really enjoyed myself at the restaurant

Behavioral intentions (BI) Strongly disagreestrongly agree

BI1: I would like to come back to the restaura

BI2: I would recommend the restaurant to my

BI3: I would more frequently visit the restauraer ion

Behavioral Intentions

H6

, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions.

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469 463atmosphere than quick service restaurants. Customers atthese restaurants were selected as the samples because theywere in a position where they could spend some time toexperience core store image attributes (e.g., characteristicsof menu items, food quality, level of service, and physicalsurroundings). In the areas where the restaurants arelocated in, customers are easy to nd an alternative eachtime if they wish. Further, since selected restaurants a bitdiffer in terms of their service attributes, customers in eachselected restaurant may experience different features of theservice. Thus, there was good potential to generalize thendings from the samples to the quick-casual restaurantindustry. Managers of the restaurants described they havehigher sales volume during lunch than dinner, andcustomers average check is about seven dollars. The menuof these restaurants includes more health-conscious items

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

price

ant was high

ey

ant was satised

ant put me in a good mood

nt in the future

friends or others

nt

containing high quality ingredients (e.g., free range chickenand freshly made salsas). A total of 360 questionnaireswere distributed to visitors of these restaurants. Aftereliminating unusable responses among the completedquestionnaires, 341 responses were coded for data analysis.Descriptive statistics were calculated to ascertain the

characteristics of the sample and to compare means andstandard deviations for each multi-item scale. Among thesurvey participants, 44.40% were male, and 55.60% werefemale. Approximately 71.60% of respondents indicatedthat they had visited the restaurant more than 5 times overthe past 3 months, 46.00% had visited more than 10 times,and only 4.10% indicated that this had been their rst visit.The average age of the respondents was 30.50 years. Mostrespondents were between 26 and 35 years of age (43.20%).About 22.31% of survey participants were less than 25years of age, and 34.49% were over 36 years. Approxi-mately 36.15% of the respondents described the house holdincome level is between $20,000 and $59,999, and 31.20%indicated their house hold income is between $60,000and $99,999. Most respondents were Caucasian/White(63.20%) and Hispanic (17.65%). Asian (9.40%), African

4. Results

4.1. Reliability and validity testing

A reliability test was performed to assess the internalconsistency of the result measurements. The coefcientalpha is the most popular measure of reliability for a multi-item scale (Sekaran, 1992). It was used to assess theinternal homogeneity among the items scale in this study.Values were all above the suggested cut-off of .70(store image .81; perceived value .85; customersatisfaction .92; behavioral intentions .89), thus indi-cating internal consistency (Nunnally, 1978). The resultsrevealed that these multiple measures are highly reliable formeasuring each construct. Construct validity assesses thedegree to which a measurement represents and logicallyconnects, via the underlying theory, the observed phenom-enon to the construct (McDaniel and Gates, 1993).Convergent and discriminant validity are both consideredsubcategories or subtypes of construct validity. Convergentand discriminant validity checks were conducted using thecorrelation matrix because the correlation patterns can

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Ryu et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 459469464American (6.10%), and other (3.65%) composed less than20% of the respondents. The mean value of store imagewas 1.57 (Semantic differential Scale; 3 very bad,3 very good) with a standard error of .69. The averageperceived value was high, with a mean of 5.22 and standarderror of .95. The average respondents satisfaction was 5.31with a standard error of 1.01. Finally, behavioral intentionhad a mean value of 5.60 with a standard error of 1.08.Overall, survey participants offered somewhat positiveevaluations of the quick-casual restaurants.

Table 2

Correlation matrix of variables (N 341)Note: RI: restaurant Image, PV: perceived value, CS: customer satisfaction, Bsuggest whether the measures have good convergent anddiscriminant validity (Campbell and Fiske, 1959; Churchill,1979). Table 2 presents the correlation matrix amongmeasurement items for study constructs. While correlationsamong items for store image (A) are weakly correlated,showing insufcient convergent validity and discriminatingthis construct weakly from others, Table 2 provides generalevidence for construct validity.Information presented in this table suggests that

acceptable convergent and discriminant validity existI: behavioral intentions.

because the within-construct item correlations (BD) aregenerally greater than the between-construct item correla-tions (EJ). Specically, correlation patterns within con-structs (BD) differ from the correlation patterns amongconstructs (EJ), suggesting the measures have acceptablelevel of convergent and discriminant validity.

4.2. Multiple regression analysis

A series of regression analyses were performed toinvestigate the proposed relationships among store image,

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Ryu et al. / International Journal of Hospperceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioralintentions. One of the clearest ways to test the mediatingrole of a construct is using a series of multiple regressionanalyses based on Baron and Kennys (1986) suggestion(Oh, 2000). Thus, mediation analysis using regressionmodels was considered an appropriate approach in thisstudy. A series of regression analyses assessed the mediat-ing role of customer satisfaction in the relationshipbetween store image and behavioral intentions and in therelationship between perceived value and behavioralintentions. While Baron and Kenny (1986) illustratedmediation analysis using a case of single measures of theindependent, mediator, and dependent variables, Oh (2000)insisted that their procedure may be generalized, withoutlosing information, to multivariate data analysis.Accordingly, the four following regression equations

were estimated: (1) regressing perceived value on storeimage; (2) regressing customer satisfaction (the mediator)on store image and perceived value; (3) regressingbehavioral intentions (the dependent variable) on storeimage and perceived value; and (4) regressing behavioralintentions (the dependent variable) on both store image/perceived value and customer satisfaction. A separatecoefcient for each equation was estimated and tested.Table 3 shows the multiple regression equations con-

ducted in this study. The rst regression equation was fortesting Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 1 suggests that parameterb1 should be statistically signicant and positive. The otherthree regression equations were for testing the other vehypotheses as well as mediating role of customer satisfac-tion in forming behavioral intentions. In Eq. (2), Hypoth-eses 2 and 3 propose that b1 and b2 are signicant and

Table 3

Multiple regression equations

PV b0 b1RI (1)

CS b0 b1RI b2PV (2)

BI b0 b1RI b2PV (3)

BI b0 b1RI b2PV b3CS (4)Note: RI: restaurant image; PV: perceived value; CS: customer satisfac-

tion; BI: behavioral intentions; b: regression coefcients; and e: error term.positive. In Eq. (3), Hypotheses 4 and 5 suggest that b1 andb2 should be statistically signicant and positive. Finally, inthe last equation, Hypothesis 6 proposes that b3 issignicant. It was also expected that b1 and b2 would beweaker in the last equation while b3 would be signicant.

4.3. Relationships among study constructs

Equation results are presented in Table 4. As predictedin Hypothesis 1, these result show that store image wassignicantly associated with perceived value (po.01).The coefcient value was .50. The independent variable(store image) explained approximately 24% of variance inperceived value. Little research has investigated therelationship between store image and perceived value,especially in the hospitality industry. The results for Eq. (1)clearly show that store image is a signicant predictor ofperceived value in the fast-casual restaurant industry.In Eq. (2), the effects of store image and perceived value

were also found to exert a signicant impact on customersatisfaction (po.01). Thus, Hypotheses 2 and 3 weresupported. The model explained about 58% of the variancein customer satisfaction. Additionally, the results forEq. (3) indicated that store image and perceived value aresignicant predictors of customers behavioral intentions(po.01), supporting Hypotheses 4 and 5. Both variables inEq. (3) explain 59% of the total variance in behavioralintentions. This result was consistent with those fromprevious studies which showed that store image is asignicant predictor of customer satisfaction and behavior-al intentions (Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998; Bloemerand Ruyter, 1998; Osman, 1993). This result also supportsthe previous ndings that perceived value has a signicantrole in forming customer satisfaction and behavioralintentions (Anderson et al., 1994; McDougall andLevesque, 2000; Patterson and Spreng, 1997; Ravald andGronroos, 1996). In Eqs. (2) and (3), it was also found thatthe coefcient (standardized: .64) of perceived value wasgreater than the coefcient (standardized: .20) of storeimage in the relationship between store image/perceivedvalue and customer satisfaction.In addition, the coefcient (standardized: .64) of

perceived value was also greater than the coefcient(standardized: .21) of store image in the relationshipbetween store image/perceived value and behavioral inten-tions. This suggests that perceived value has a greaterinuence on customer satisfaction and behavioral inten-tions than store image. In both Eqs. (2) and (3), thetolerance level of each variable was greater than .10, andvariance ination factor (VIF) value was less than theproblematic level of 10.00.Eq. (4) showed a signicant effect of customer satisfac-

tion on behavioral intentions (po.01), supporting Hypoth-esis 6. This result was consistent with the previous ndingthat customer behavioral intentions are a positive function

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469 465of customer satisfaction (Anderson and Sullivan, 1993;Getty and Thompson, 1994). The results for Eq. (3)

ARTICLE IN PRESS

n

n

s

s

s

s

s

ospindicated that when regressed directly on behavioralintentions, store image and perceived value showedrelatively high coefcient values (store image: .21 andperceived value: .64), and statistical signicance (po.01).However, in Eq. (4), the effect of store image and perceivedvalue on behavioral intentions showed relatively lowcoefcient value (store image: .10 and perceived value:.29) That is, although it is still statistically signicant(customer satisfaction is not a complete mediator), theinuence of store image and perceived value on behavioralintentions was a lot less when the mediator (customersatisfaction) was included in the model. These ndings areconsistent with Baron and Kennys (1986) partial media-tional conditions. Thus, in this study, customer satisfactioncan be described as a partial mediator in the relationship

Table 4

Regression estimates of equations

Independent variable Dependent variable

Eq. (1) Restaurant image Perceived value

R2 (adjusted R2) .25 (.24)Eq. (2) Restaurant image Customer satisfactio

Perceived value Customer satisfactio

R2 (adjusted R2) .58 (.58)Eq. (3) Restaurant image Behavioral intention

Perceived value Behavioral intention

R2 (adjusted R2) .59 (.59)Eq. (4) Restaurant image Behavioral intention

Perceived value Behavioral intention

Customer satisfaction Behavioral intention

R2 (adjusted R2) .72 (.71)

**po.01.

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of H466between store image/perceived value and behavioral inten-tions. In Eq. (4), the three variables accounted for 71% ofthe total variance in behavioral intentions (po.01).Tolerance values ranged from .43 to .71, which weregreater than the problematic level of .10, and VIF valuesfor variables were between 1.41 and 2.34. Accordingly, thevariables in Eq. (4) were free from multicollinearityproblem. To test signicance of the overall model for eachregression equation, the overall F-ratio was used. Since thevalues ranged from 112.05 to 281.53 at a signicancelevel of .01 (Eq. (1) 112.05; Eq. (2) 225.65;Eq. (3) 243.89; Eq. (4) 281.53), the overall modelsfor all four regression equations were signicant.The literature suggests that customer satisfaction is a key

mediating construct in the relationship between storeimage/perceived value and behavioral intentions (Bloemerand Ruyter, 1998; Patterson and Spreng, 1997). Bloemerand Ruyter (1998), in a service context, investigated thedirect positive effect and indirect positive effect (i.e., amediator-effect) of store image on customer loyalty, whichis similar to the feature of behavioral intentions (Oliver,1997; Yi, 1990). Their ndings indicated that store imagecould only inuence customer loyalty through customersatisfaction, verifying the complete mediating role ofcustomer satisfaction in the relationship between storeimage and customer loyalty. Customer satisfaction alsomediates the effect of perceived value on behavioralintentions. In modeling the relationship among perceivedvalue, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in a servicecontext, Patterson and Spreng (1997) found that perceivedvalue was completely mediated via satisfaction and onlyindirectly inuenced repurchase intentions. Although ourresults did not fully support the belief that satisfaction is acomplete mediator in the relationship between store image/perceive value and behavioral intentions as revealed in theprevious literature, we still showed that customer satisfac-tion has a signicant partial mediating role in forming

Regression coefcients t value

Unstandardized Standardized

.67 .50 10.52**

.27 .20 4.87**

.68 .64 15.77**

.31 .21 5.28**

.73 .64 15.98**

.16 .10 3.00**

.34 .29 6.58**

.58 .55 12.25**

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry.

5. Discussion

Our aim was to examine the relationships among overallrestaurant image, perceived value, customer satisfaction,and behavioral intentions in the quick-casual segment. Theresults clearly showed a signicant role of overall restau-rant image on perceived value and crucial impact of overallrestaurant image and perceived value on customer satisfac-tion. Overall restaurant image, perceived value, andcustomer satisfaction were also found to be signicantpredictors of customers behavioral intentions. In addition,customer satisfaction is a partial mediator in the relation-ship between overall restaurant image/perceived valueand behavioral intentions in the quick-casual restaurantsegment.The ndings have several theoretical and managerial

implications. From a theoretical perspective, this studymakes important contributions to the hospitality andtourism literature on restaurant image. While the impor-tance of service quality and customer satisfaction has been

ARTICLE IN PRESSospwidely discussed in the marketing literature, little researchhas emphasized the signicant role of image and value askey strategic variables in explaining customer postpurchase behaviors (Patterson and Spreng, 1997). Thisstudy showed that the inclusion of image and value inaddition to customer satisfaction in one model not onlyhighlights the importance of restaurant image and value,but also provides a more comprehensive understanding oftheir effect on both customer satisfaction and behavioralintentions. This also suggests that restaurant image, value,and customer satisfaction should be included whenmeasuring customers behavioral intentions in the quick-casual segment.The exact relationship among restaurant image, value,

satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in a restaurantsetting is still unclear. For example, one unansweredquestion is whether there is a direct relationship betweenrestaurant image and customers behavioral intentions, oran indirect relationship via perceived value or customersatisfaction. In this article we attempted to address thisquestion. The ndings showed that the restaurants imageis not only an indicator of behavioral intentions, but alsoinuences the perception of value and customer satisfac-tion. Thus the restaurants image has not only a direct butalso an indirect effect on value and customer satisfaction,which leads to a higher overall effect on behavioralintentions.For restaurateurs, the study results suggest that devel-

oping positive indicators of customer behavioral intentionsrelies not only on the restaurants ability to increasecustomer satisfaction, but also to establish a favorableimage and perceived value. Hence, the relationship betweenrestaurant image, perceived value, and customer satisfac-tion is something that restaurateurs are keen to strengthenin pursuit of customer approach behavior (i.e., intention torevisit, willingness to recommend, intention to visit morefrequently). Particularly, the eight marketing activities(i.e., store location, waiting time for a meal, decor andinterior design, food quality, menu variety, professionalappearance of staff, price, and cleanliness) found in thisstudy may directly affect the image of quick-casualrestaurants. Therefore, favorable image building by mana-ging and marketing these eight services marketing variablesin accordance with the restaurants image is crucial.In todays competitive restaurant environment, where

customers have a diversity of options for food and anextensive range of food within the restaurant, where theactual food being offered is generally of comparablestandard to many other restaurants food, the image thata restaurant conveys may be a key determining factor inthe decision to choose one restaurant over another.Restaurateurs need to work very hard to keep their imagefavorable in the mind of the customer; and although theformation of an image incorporates many more compo-nents than purely physical ones, decor and interior design

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of Hplay a big part in the formation and maintenance of arestaurant image. The decor and interior design, which isthe main component of the restaurant image, may attract aparticular segment of customers. For instance, severaltrade journals indicated that consumers favorite sandwichshop/bakery is Panera Bread, where the best attribute isatmosphere, followed by food quality, menu variety,service, and cleanliness (Sloan, 2002; Tillotson, 2003).Here it is important to note that the decor and interiordesign plays a great role in creating atmosphere in thecustomer perception (Ryu and Jang, 2007). Consumersincreasingly expect a more entertaining atmosphere toenhance the entire dining experience, and more restau-rateurs are making efforts to meet that desire withinnovative and exciting interior design and decor (e.g.,Cosi Sandwich Bar). Hence service providers should givecareful consideration to their decor and interior design,which in turn inuence the overall restaurant image. As adifferentiation strategy, restaurant operators should devel-op a favorable restaurant image through effective restau-rant design and decor that will set them apart from thecompetition.Several limitations of the present study should be

mentioned. First, since data from this study were collectedfrom customers of fast-casual dining restaurants, resultsmay not be generalized to other segments of the restaurantindustry. In addition, the use of a convenience samplingapproach could decrease external validity. Thus, futurestudies should consider developing a systematic design tobetter represent the population. Third, the series ofmultiple regression analyses used in this study are notnecessarily superior to other methods of investigatingpotential higher-order and/or interactive effects. Structuralequation modeling is a prominent alternative method.Fourth, this study limited the concept of behavioralintentions to only favorable viewpoint (e.g., revisit, positiveword-of-mouth, increased revisiting volume) like most ofprevious studies to explain customers behavioral inten-tions. Unfavorable viewpoint of behavioral intentions(e.g., intention to complain) and price sensitivity were notconsidered when assessing restaurant customers behavior-al intentions in this study. Future study may consider amultidimensional construct formed by four major cate-gories (referrals, price sensitivity, repurchase, and com-plaining behavior) as suggested by Zeithaml et al. (1996) toprecisely assess customers stated likelihood to engage in acertain behavior. Finally, low within-construct correlationsfor store image were observed in this study. Accordingly,these correlations were not clearly discriminated frombetween-construct correlations related to store image(E, F, and H). For future study, it would be appropriateto use store image as several separate constructs that hashigh correlations among the indicators.Given the great diversity of service industries, it would

be helpful to replicate similar studies in other servicesettings. Additionally, especially with regard to restaurantimage, developing a reliable and valid scale of measure-

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469 467ment still remains a key issue facing the hospitality andtourism academy. Thus future studies should develop a

marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research 16, 6473.

ARTICLE IN PRESSospColgate, M., Lang, B., 2001. Switching barriers in consumer markets: an

investigation of the nancial services industry. Journal of Consumer

Marketing 18 (4), 332347.

Dodds, W.B., 1991. In search of value: how price and store name

information inuence buyers product perceptions. Journal of Services

Marketing 5, 2736.scale of restaurant image. Individual characteristics such asage, income, gender, and culture may be critical determi-nants of customers associations among restaurant image,perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions.

References

Aaker, D., 1991. Brand Equity. The Free Press, New York.

Albrecht, K., 1992. The Only Thing that Matters. Harper Business,

New York.

Anderson, J., 2003. Quick-casual avors. Retrieved January 2, 2007, from

/http://www.avor-online.com/2003/pdfs/anderson.pdfS.Anderson, E.W., Sullivan, M.W., 1993. The antecedents and consequences

of customer satisfaction for rms. Marketing Science 12, 125143.

Anderson, E.W., Fornell, C., Lehmann, D.R., 1994. Customer satisfac-

tion, market share, and protability: ndings from Sweden. Journal of

Marketing 58, 5366.

Andreassen, T.W., Lindestad, B., 1998. Customer loyalty and complex

services: the impact of corporate image on quality, customer

satisfaction and loyalty for customers with varying degrees of service

expertise. International Journal of Service Industry Management 9 (1),

723.

Back, K.J., 2005. The effects of image congruence on customers brand

loyalty in the upper middle-class hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality

& Tourism Research 29 (4), 448467.

Baker, J., Grewal, D., Parasuraman, A., 1994. The inuence of the store

environment on quality inferences and store image. Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science 22, 328339.

Baloglu, S., Brinberg, D., 1997. Affective images of tourism destinations.

Journal of Travel Research 35 (4), 1115.

Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderator-mediator variable

distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and

statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

51 (6), 11731182.

Bigne, J.E., Sanchez, M.I., Sanchez, J., 2001. Tourist image, evaluation

variables and after purchase behaviour: inter-relationship. Tourism

Management 22 (1), 110.

Birtwistle, G., Clarke, I., Freathy, P., 1999. Store image in the UK fashion

sector: consumer versus retailer perceptions. International Review of

Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 9 (1), 116.

Bloemer, J., Ruyter, K., 1998. On the relationship between store image,

store satisfaction and store loyalty. European Journal of Marketing 32

(5), 499513.

Cai, L.A., Wu, B., Bai, B., 2003. Destination image and loyalty. Cognizant

Communication Corporation 7, 153162.

Campbell, D.T., Fiske, D.W., 1959. Convergent and discriminant

validation by the multitraitmultimethod matrix. Psychological

Bulletin 56, 81105.

Castro, C.B., Armario, M., Ruiz, M., 2007. The inuence of market

heterogeneity on the relationship between a destinations image and

tourists future behaviour. Tourism Management 28 (1), 175187.

Chen, J.S., Gursoy, D., 2001. An investigation of tourists destination

loyalty and preferences. International Journal of Contemporary

Hospitality management 13 (2), 7985.

Chen, C., Tsai, D.C., 2007. How destination image and evaluative factors

affect behavioral intentions? Tourism Management 28 (4), 11151122.

Churchill, G.A., 1979. A paradigm for developing better measures of

K. Ryu et al. / International Journal of H468Ferrand, A., Pages, M., 1999. Image management in sport organizations:

the creation of value. European Journal of Marketing 33, 387401.Gallarza, M.G., Saura, I.G., Garcia, H.C., 2002. Destination image

towards a conceptual framework. Annals of Tourism Research 29 (1),

5678.

Getty, J.M., Thompson, K.N., 1994. The relationship between quality,

satisfaction, and recommending behavior in lodging decision. Journal

of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 2 (3), 322.

Hartman, K.B., Spiro, R., 2005. Recapturing store image in customer-

based store equity: a construct conceptualization. Journal of Business

Research 58 (8), 11121120.

Hellier, P.K., Geursen, G.M., Carr, R.A., Rickard, J.A., 2003. Customer

repurchase intention: a general structural equation model. European

Journal of Marketing 37, 17621800.

Hunt, H.K., 1977. Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer

Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction. Marketing Science Institute, Cam-

bridge, MA.

Kandampully, J., Suhartanto, D., 2000. Customer loyalty in the

hotel industry: the role of customer satisfaction and image. Interna-

tional Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 12 (6),

346351.

Kivela, J., Inbakaran, R., Reece, J., 1999. Consumer research in the

restaurant environment, part 1: a conceptual model of dining

satisfaction and return patronage. International Journal of Contem-

porary Hospitality Management 11 (5), 2022.

Lee, C., Lee., Y., Lee, B., 2005. Koreas destination image formed by the

2002 world cup. Annals of Tourism Research 32 (4), 839858.

Lee, C.K., Yoon, Y.S., Lee, S.K., 2007. Investigating the relationships

among perceived value, satisfaction, and recommendations: the case of

the Korean DMZ. Tourism Management 28, 204214.

McDaniel, C.J., Gates, R., 1993. Marketing Research Essentials. West

Publishing, Wadsworth, WA.

McDougall, G.H.G., Levesque, T., 2000. Customer satisfaction with

services: putting perceived value into the equation. Journal of Services

Marketing 14, 392410.

Nunnally, J., 1978. Psychometric Theory, second ed. McGraw-Hill,

New York, NY.

Oh, H., 2000. The effect of brand class, brand awareness, and price on

customer value and behavioral intentions. Journal of Hospitality &

Tourism Research 24 (2), 136162.

OLeary, S., Deegan, J., 2005. Irelands image as a tourism destination in

France: attribute importance and performance. Journal of Travel

Research 43 (3), 247256.

Oliver, R.L., 1980. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences

of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing 17, 460469.

Oliver, R.L., 1997. Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the

Consumer. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Osman, M.Z., 1993. A conceptual model of retail image inuences on

loyalty patronage behavior. The International Review of Retail,

Distribution and Consumer Research 31, 149166.

Patterson, P.G., Spreng, R.A., 1997. Modeling the relationship bet-

ween perceived value, satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a

business-to-business, services context: an empirical examination.

International Journal of Service Industry Management 8 (5),

414434.

Prendergast, G., Man, H.W., 2002. The inuence of store image on store

loyalty in Hong Kongs quick service restaurant industry. Journal of

Foodservice Business Research 5 (1), 4559.

Pura, M., 2005. Linking perceived value and loyalty in location-based

mobile services. Managing Service Quality 15 (6), 509538.

Ravald, A., Gronroos, C., 1996. The value concept and relationship

marketing. European Journal of Marketing 30 (2), 1930.

Ryu, K., Jang, S., 2007. The effect of environmental perceptions on

behavioral intentions through emotions: the case of upscale restau-

rants. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 31 (1),

5672.

Sekaran, U., 1992. Research Methods for Business: A Skill-building

Approach. Wiley, New York, NY.

itality Management 27 (2008) 459469Sloan, E.A., 2002. Fast and casual: todays foodservice trends. Food

Technology 56 (9), 3451.

Soderlund, M., Ohman, N., 2005. Assessing behavior before it becomes

behavior: an examination of the role of intentions as a link between

satisfaction and repatronizing behavior. International Journal of

Service Industry Management 16 (2), 169185.

Tasci, A.D., Gartner, W.C., Cavusgil, S.T., 2007. Conceptualization and

operationalization of destination image. Journal of Hospitality

& Tourism Research 31 (2), 194223.

Tillotson, J.E., 2003. Fast-casual dining our next eating passion? (Business

and Nutrition). Nutrition Today 38 (3), 9195.

Yi, Y., 1990. A critical review of consumer satisfaction. In: Zeithaml, V.A.

(Ed.), Review of Marketing. American Marketing Association,

Chicago, pp. 68123.

Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A., 1996. The behavioral

consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing 60 (2), 3146.

ARTICLE IN PRESSK. Ryu et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 27 (2008) 459469 469

The relationships among overall quick-casual restaurant image, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentionsIntroductionLiterature reviewExplication of constructsOverall quick-casual restaurant imagePerceived valueCustomer satisfactionBehavioral intentions

Hypotheses developmentInfluence of OQRI on study variablesRelationships among perceived value, satisfaction, and behavioral intentionsCustomer satisfaction as a predictor of behavioral intentions

MethodologyResultsReliability and validity testingMultiple regression analysisRelationships among study constructs

DiscussionReferences