MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375930696 · doi:10.46568/gjmas.v3i3.90

SERVICE QUALITY IMPACTS CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND CUSTOMER LOYALTY (EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FROM APPAREL INDUSTRY OF PAKISTAN)

2022· article· en· W4375930696 on OpenAlexaff
Reema Frooghi, Samina Qasim, Kashif Mehmood

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal for Management and Administrative Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessCustomer satisfactionLoyalty business modelMarketingCustomer delightCustomer retentionCustomer advocacyService qualityCustomer to customerClothingCustomer equityCustomer intelligenceLoyaltyService (business)Advertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As customers are getting prone to technology and have easy access to information, creating loyal customers is becoming a challenge for service providers. Therefore, it becomes important for companies to take corresponding actions proactively. The study has been conducted within the apparel industry of Karachi. Data has been collected from the young Apparel Brand users within Karachi and analyzed through SPSS and PLS-SEM. It has been analyzed that customer satisfaction and rapport have a significant impact on customer loyalty and the repurchase intention of the customer. The quality of the service offered to the customer plays a significant role in achieving customer satisfaction and enhancing their loyalty which helps in achieving the repurchase intention of the customer. The present study highlights the measures that managers need to take for strengthening customer loyalty which results in repurchase behavior and positive word of mouth. It will develop an understanding of how the better allocation of the available organizational resources can be carried out which will help in increasing the repurchase intention of the customer. For the success of any organization, a greater proportion of satisfied customers is required and the organization needs to enhance its satisfaction and loyalty level.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal for Management and Administrative SciencesSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207