MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998185727 · doi:10.1177/1094670505279340

Reassessing the Foundations of Customer Delight

2005· article· en· W1998185727 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Finn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Service Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTicketMarketingCustomer satisfactionAdvertisingCustomer delightEntertainmentBusinessCustomer retentionValue (mathematics)Theme (computing)Sample (material)Customer valueSociologyService qualityService (business)EconomicsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1990s saw a questioning of the value of merely satisfying customers and instead focused attention on the importance of customer delight. In a key contribution, Oliver, Rust, and Varki (1997) developed a structural model of the antecedents and consequences of customer delight, acting in parallel with satisfaction, that was generally supported for two entertainment services. However, the effect of delight on intention was significant for symphony ticket purchasers but not for theme park patrons. This article first replicates their path analysis for more mundane visits to consumer Web sites. Then it takes advantage of a larger sample and additional measures to address construct measurement issues and to determine whether customer delight is something more than a nonlinear effect of satisfaction on intention.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.033
Scholarly communication0.0090.025
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations294
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Service ResearchSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207