Relationship Value and Relationship Quality: An Exploration of Its Antecedents on Customer Loyalty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine relationship value and relationship quality, and its effect on customer loyalty in the context of relationship marketing. Four key relationship value variables of economic value, service value, relational value and social value are examined in this study. The study focuses on the Malaysian telecommunication industry and based on the business-to-customer environment. The structural equation modelling technique is used to empirically test the proposed hypotheses using a sample of 350 customers collected by a questionnaire survey. The results showed that three relationship value variables of economic value, service value, and social value have significantly influenced relationship quality. Customer loyalty is significantly affected by relationship quality. There is no significant effect of relational value and relationship quality. The contribution of this paper is twofold. From a theoretical perspective, the social exchange theory is used to explain and conceptualize relationship marketing paradigms. It offers both a conceptual foundation and empirical-based evaluation of customer loyalty through the context of relationship value and relationship quality. The relationship value dimensions of economic value, service value, and social value is the antecedent to relationship quality, which lead to customer loyalty. In the practical perspective, the findings proposed that the telecommunication service providers should focus on relationship value through providing better value for money packages, innovation of services and improve social interaction with customers to build stronger relationship quality and achieve customer loyalty.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".