Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) of Service Quality for Virtual Reality Golf Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was examine service quality of virtual reality golf center using Importance and Performance Analysis (IPA), from September to November 2017, adult participants who participated in virtual reality golf center in Korea were selected as subjects. The collected data were analyzed and interpreted using SPSS program, frequency analysis, exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis, and Importance-Performance Analysis. The results of this study were as follows. First, quadrant 1 included six items: convenient facilities provide the latest equipment, customized response, understanding the needs of customer, interior atmosphere, and modernized facilities. Second, quadrant 2 included five items: kindness of employees, employees’ expertise, resolve immediately if a problem occurs, quickly respond to customer needs, and employee credibility. Third, quadrant 3 included six items: customer individual interest, notice of service, employees’ dress and appearance, employees’ positive attitude, provide voluntary help, and promised time and service. Fourth, quadrant 4 included 3 items: provide safe service, thinking in terms of customer, and voluntary response.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".