LITERATURE REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this section is to present literatures relevant to this

research and to provide a theoretical framework. The chapter
begins with a review of definitions and some measurements of
customer satisfaction and service quality, and then follows by the
relationship between customer satisfaction and service quality
which leads to the conceptual frame work of the study.
Identification of variables and formulation

2.2 CONCEPTUAL REVIEW

2.2.1 SERVICE QUALITY

Service quality is a critical concept in marketing and

management, often viewed as a key factor influencing customer
satisfaction and loyalty. It has been defined in various ways by
recent scholars. According to Alananzeh et al. (2023), service
quality refers to the overall evaluation of a service’s performance
compared to customer expectations. Garg and Kumar (2023)
define it as the ability of a service provider to consistently meet or
exceed customer expectations through effective service delivery.
Ahmed and Chowdhury (2022) describe service quality as the
perceived value derived from the interaction between the service
provider and the customer, especially in terms of responsiveness
and reliability. Meanwhile, Zhou and Wang (2023) emphasize
service quality as the customer’s judgment of the excellence of a
service, particularly in digital and technology-driven
environments. These definitions collectively highlight the
dynamic, expectation-based, and perception-driven nature of
service quality in today’s competitive landscape.

Service quality refers to consumer evaluation of the excellence

and superiority of the services encountered, Khoo (2020).
Customers who experience positive feelings and attitudes towards
services during the service consumption process are likely to have
positive perceptions of the service provider, which in turn leads to
customer loyalty. Patmasari et al. (2022) states that service is an
effort to help take care of what other people need. In other words,
service is a series of activities or processes that satisfy other
people's needs in the form of service products (Jumawan et al.,
2023).

DIMENSION OF SERVICE QUALITY

Service quality is a multidimensional construct that reflects how

well a service meets or exceeds customer expectations. The most
widely used framework for evaluating service quality is the
SERVQUAL model, which identifies five core dimensions:
tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy
(Parasuraman et al., 1988). These dimensions have been
consistently validated across various service industries, although
recent studies have proposed refinements and context-specific
aptations.
2.1.1 TANGIBILITY

The tangibility dimension of service quality refers to the physical

aspects that customers observe and evaluate when interacting
with a service provider. This includes the appearance of physical
facilities, equipment, personnel, and communication materials.
Recent studies continue to affirm the importance of tangibility as
a key driver in shaping customers’ first impressions and overall
perceptions of service quality. For instance, in competitive
industries where multiple providers offer similar core services,
tangibles often become the differentiating factor. Eateries, for
instance, may offer comparable menus and pricing, but the
quality of interior design, table presentation, staff appearance,
and even menu layout can influence customer preference toward
one establishment over another. In such cases, tangibility
enhances perceived uniqueness and competitive advantage
(Rahman & Hassan, 2024).

2.1.2 RESPONSIVENESS

Responsiveness, as a dimension of service quality, is

fundamentally concerned with the willingness and readiness of
service providers to assist customers and provide prompt service.
It reflects the speed and efficiency with which service staff
respond to customer requests, inquiries, or complaints, and is
often viewed as a direct indicator of how much a company values
its customers. Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988), For
example, a customer browsing for a handbag may visit mall
having several stalls offering similar products. If one seller
immediately greets the customer, offers personalized assistance,
and promptly provides details on available designs, prices, and
promotions, this responsiveness creates a favorable impression.
In contrast, a vendor who ignores or delays in attending to the
customer risks losing the sale. According to Setiono and Hidayat
(2022), in competitive retail environments, responsiveness
significantly impacts customer satisfaction, as customers are
more likely to buy from sellers who acknowledge and serve them
quickly.

2.1.3 EMPATHY

Empathy, as a key dimension of service quality in the SERVQUAL

model developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988),
involves providing caring and individualized attention to
customers. It goes beyond simply offering services—it focuses on
understanding customers' unique needs, showing sensitivity to
their situations, and delivering personalized experiences. This
emotional connection is vital in cultivating trust and fostering
long-term customer relationships. Taylor (2024) also notes that
empathy significantly influences perceived service quality,
especially when customers are in distress or face dissatisfaction.
In these moments, empathetic service recovery efforts—such as
attentive listening, apologizing sincerely, and offering
personalized solutions—can transform a negative experience into
a positive one.

Furthermore, research by Sugianto and Amini (2023) highlights

that in service encounters where customer expectations are not
met, the presence of empathy significantly buffers dissatisfaction.
Overall, empathy is not just a complementary trait in service
delivery—it is a fundamental requirement in achieving service
excellence. Organizations that invest in training their employees
to be empathetic communicators, both in-person and digitally, are
more likely to see improvements in customer satisfaction, loyalty,
and overall brand perception.

2.1.4 RELIABILITY

Reliability, as one of the foundational dimensions of the

SERVQUAL model introduced by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and
Berry (1988), refers to an organization’s ability to perform
promised services dependably and accurately. It is often viewed
by customers as a measure of a company’s integrity and
professionalism. In the context of service delivery, reliability is not
just about doing things right once—it is about consistency over
time. Customers rely on predictable, error-free interactions, which
form the basis for trust and long-term loyalty.
Recent studies confirm the pivotal role of reliability in shaping
customer satisfaction across industries. For example, in the food
and hospitality sector, eateries that consistently deliver delicious
meals, serve food on time, and maintain a clean, welcoming
environment are perceived as reliable, which significantly
enhances customer satisfaction. According to Shahid and Azam
(2023),

In the marketing and retail business sector, reliability is equally

critical. Customers expect accurate product availability, timely
promotions, and consistent messaging across marketing
channels. For instance, if a retail company promotes a discount in
its advertisements but fails to apply the discount at checkout, this
breach in reliability can frustrate customers and damage the
brand's credibility. According to Rakhmawati and Kusuma (2023),
consistent and dependable service—ranging from honoring
promotional promises to ensuring that customer queries are
resolved accurately—is a key driver of consumer trust in
marketing-focused businesses.

2.1.5 ASSURANCE

Assurance, play a critical dimension of the SERVQUAL model

developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988), pertains
to the knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to
inspire trust and confidence in customers. This dimension is
particularly vital in service industries where customers often rely
on the expertise and professionalism of service providers to make
informed decisions. Assurance encompasses elements such as
employee competence, politeness, credibility, and the sense of
security customers feel when engaging with service ppersonnel

In the context of a business center—where services such as

photocopying, printing, typing, and document scanning are
offered—assurance plays a crucial role in influencing customer
choice. When customers perceive that a particular business
center operates with professionalism, accuracy, and courteous
staff, they are more likely to return and recommend it. For
example, if a customer needs confidential academic or legal
documents handled, they are more inclined to choose a center
where staff demonstrate discretion, technical skill, and confidence
in handling such tasks. According to Tijjang (2023), assurance in
such environments increases customer trust and loyalty,
especially when service providers communicate effectively and
perform tasks without errors.

IMPORTANCE OF SERVICE QUALITY

Service quality is a vital element in marketing, significantly

influencing customer perceptions, satisfaction, and loyalty. It is
not just an operational concern but a strategic asset that
enhances marketing effectiveness and business performance
(Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988; Zeithaml, Bitner, &
Gremler, 2020). Defined by dimensions like reliability,
responsiveness, assurance, empathy, and tangibles, service
quality shapes customer evaluations of their experiences, which
impacts their intentions to return and recommend the service
(Wahab et al., 2022; Tangkuman & Hierey, 2022). Consistently
high service quality builds strong brand associations, supporting
customer retention and long-term profitability (Chien & Chi,
2019).

The importance of service quality in marketing can be outlined as

follows:

1. Enhances customer satisfaction by ensuring consistent and

positive service experiences that meet or exceed
expectations, which strengthens emotional connections with
the brand.
2. Builds competitive advantage, particularly in markets with
similar or commoditized products, where exceptional
service becomes a key differentiator that attracts and
retains customers.
3. Supports brand positioning by creating a distinct and
reliable brand image, helping businesses establish a
reputation for excellence in the minds of consumers.
 4. Improves corporate image, contributing to better public
perception and trust, which can influence customer
decisions and boost brand credibility.
5. Aligns with evolving consumer expectations, ensuring
relevance in a dynamic market by adapting services to
meet changing preferences and technological trends.
6. Drives sustainable business growth through customer
loyalty, increased retention rates, and positive word-of-
mouth, all of which contribute to long-term profitability and
success.

CHARACTERISTICS OF SERVICE QUALITY

Service quality is increasingly recognized in recent research as a

dynamic, customer-centered construct shaped by the entire
service experience rather than just the outcome. It reflects a
customer’s overall judgment of a service and is influenced by
both tangible and intangible factors. Scholars stress that service
quality is fundamentally perceptual—formed by comparing
customer expectations with actual service performance—and
varies across different industries and cultural contexts (Yuen &
Thai, 2017). Rather than being a fixed standard, it is an evolving
measure that depends on interaction quality, consistency, and the
emotional engagement experienced during service delivery.
Hoque et al. (2023) point out that organizations must continually
adapt to shifting consumer expectations, making service quality a
fluid benchmark that requires ongoing attention.

Recent studies also highlight that modern service quality includes

new characteristics driven by technological advancement and
digitalization. Blut and Wang (2021) emphasize that attributes
such as real-time interaction, personalization, and system
reliability now define quality in digital services. Ighomereho et al.
(2022) argue that proactive support and user-centered
innovations have become essential in enhancing customer
perception, especially in e-service contexts. Service quality is no
longer just about operational efficiency; it is a strategic tool that
builds customer trust, strengthens brand loyalty, and creates a
competitive edge in the marketplace (Akhter et al., 2023). These
insights suggest that the essence of service quality lies in its
ability to consistently deliver value through meaningful and
adaptable customer experiences.

MEASUREMENTS OF SERVICE QUALITY

The measurement of service quality continues to be a critical area

of interest in marketing and business research, primarily because
of its strong impact on customer satisfaction, loyalty, and
competitive positioning (Parasuraman et al., 1988; Zeithaml et al.,
1996). One of the most widely accepted models in this domain is
SERVQUAL, which compares customer expectations with their
perceptions of actual service received across five key dimensions:
tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. Its
adaptability has made it popular across various service-based
industries related to marketing, including retail, hospitality, and
digital platforms (YourCX, 2024; Siddiqi, 2020).

SERVPERF, developed by Cronin and Taylor (1992), focuses solely

on customers’ perceptions of service performance, offering a
more stable and efficient alternative. Henríquez et al. (2024)
Alongside these frameworks, marketing professionals increasingly
use real-time metrics such as the Net Promoter Score (NPS),
Customer Satisfaction Score (CSAT), and Customer Effort Score
(CES) to monitor service delivery and consumer sentiment (Ali &
Anwar, 2022; YourCX, 2024). These tools, often embedded in CRM
systems, provide actionable insights that inform marketing
strategies and enhance customer experience management
(Zhang et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2022). Despite the availability of
various models, scholars agree that service quality measurement
is inherently complex due to subjective perceptions, contextual
variability, and evolving customer expectations (Kim & Lee, 2021;
Martínez & Martínez, 2010).

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Customer satisfaction has remained a central construct in

marketing and consumer behavior literature due to its critical role
in influencing customer loyalty, business performance, and long-
term profitability. It is broadly defined as a psychological state
resulting from the evaluation of a product or service in terms of
whether that product or service has met or exceeded the
customer’s expectations (Nguyen et al., 2023). Agyapong et al.
(2023) describe it as “the feeling or attitude of a customer
towards a product or service after it has been used,” emphasizing
the emotional response involved. Lee and Chen (2024) define it as
“the customer’s overall contentment with a purchase decision,
based on all interactions and experiences with the company,”
highlighting the cumulative nature of satisfaction across the
customer journey.

Customer satisfaction is a perception-based judgment formed by

comparing expected and actual service performance,
encompassing emotional, cognitive, and experiential aspects.
Zhou and Wu (2023) highlight that, in digital contexts, it reflects
how well online services meet or exceed customer needs. Service
quality—measured through reliability, responsiveness, assurance,
empathy, and tangibles—is a key driver of satisfaction (Agyapong
et al., 2023), particularly in service settings like eateries, where
prompt service, food quality, cleanliness, and staff behavior are
crucial. Additionally, perceived value, or the balance between
what customers give and receive, significantly influences
satisfaction, especially in competitive markets (Lee & Chen,
2024).
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE QUALITY AND
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

The relationship between service quality and customer

satisfaction is foundational in modern service management, as it
determines customer perceptions, behaviors, and loyalty.
Grönroos (2007) defines this relationship as one in which service
quality shapes how customers evaluate their service experiences,
ultimately influencing their satisfaction levels. Parasuraman,
Zeithaml, and Berry (1988) assert that when perceived service
quality exceeds expectations, it results in high satisfaction,
reinforcing the view that service quality is a direct antecedent of
satisfaction. Lovelock and Wirtz (2016) describe the relationship
as a dynamic exchange where consistent delivery of reliable and
empathetic service enhances the emotional and cognitive
responses that form satisfaction. More recently, Agyapong et al.
(2023) emphasize that in highly competitive markets, service
quality is not just a predictor but a strategic driver of customer
satisfaction, particularly when personalized attention and
responsiveness are involved. These definitions collectively affirm
that improving service quality is a critical pathway to achieving
sustained customer satisfaction.

Recent research strongly supports the direct and influential

relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction
across various industries and digital platforms. Studies such as
Situmeang and Sugiyanto (2024) have shown that service quality
dimensions—especially responsiveness and assurance—are
significant predictors of satisfaction in physical service settings
like eateries. Alshammari et al. (2022) further confirm that in
post-pandemic service sectors, reliability and empathy are vital in
fostering positive customer experiences. In the digital context,
Blut et al. (2015) and Lee and Chen (2024) emphasize that
elements like website efficiency, system availability, and user
trust are essential for satisfaction in online services. Additionally,
customer satisfaction plays a crucial mediating role between
service quality and customer loyalty, as shown in the works of
Yum and Yoo (2023) and Ali and Raza (2017), highlighting that
improvements in service quality lead not only to satisfaction but
also to stronger emotional connections and brand loyalty. Cultural
influences also play a role, as Furrer et al. (2000) found that
service expectations vary by region, making it essential for
businesses to adapt quality strategies to customer demographics
and cultural norms

THE SERVQUAL MODEL

The SERVQUAL model, originally developed by Parasuraman,

Zeithaml, and Berry (1988), remains a widely accepted framework
for measuring service quality by evaluating the gap between
customer expectations and perceptions across five key
dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and
empathy. Recent studies affirm its relevance across diverse
sectors, including education, healthcare, banking, and digital
services. Researchers have found that these dimensions continue
to strongly influence customer satisfaction, with reliability and
assurance (Hoque et al., 2023; Faris, Yılmaz, & Wider, 2024).

Contemporary research also highlights the model’s adaptability,

as many studies have modified or extended SERVQUAL to better
fit specific contexts. In sectors like businesses and e-government
services, researchers have introduced new variables such as
environmental responsibility, safety awareness, and technological
efficiency to reflect evolving customer expectations (Sedkaoui,
2024; Santoso & Nugroho, 2023). These extensions demonstrate
that while the original dimensions remain foundational, contextual
and cultural factors often necessitate refinement of the model to
maintain its effectiveness in measuring service quality accurately
(Chen & Wang, 2023; Utkirov, 2025).

EMPIRICAL REVIEWS

Recent empirical research consistently shows that service quality

plays a crucial role in determining customer satisfaction across
different sectors. For example, Guan et al. (2024) conducted a
study in the logistics industry and found that logistics service
quality (LSQ) significantly impacts both customer satisfaction and
their intention to repurchase. Key factors such as timeliness, order
accuracy, and effective information sharing were especially
important in enhancing customer satisfaction.

In the airline sector, the 2024 North America Airline Satisfaction

Study by J.D. Power highlighted the importance of service quality
in shaping customer satisfaction. The study found that Delta Air
Lines ranked highest in customer satisfaction in the first/business
class segment, while JetBlue Airways came in second. This
emphasizes how high-quality service delivery is essential in
influencing customer perceptions and loyalty in the aviation
industry (J.D. Power, 2024).

The banking industry also demonstrates a strong connection

between service quality and customer satisfaction. Islam (2023)
examined the e-service quality dimensions in the banking sector
and concluded that reliability, assurance, and empathy are
significant predictors of customer satisfaction. His study stresses
the need for public sector banks to improve these dimensions to
maintain high levels of customer satisfaction.

In the healthcare field, Zarei et al. (2015) carried out a study in

private hospitals in Tehran, revealing that perceived service
quality is a critical determinant of patient satisfaction. The results
suggest that hospitals should focus on improving specific service
quality elements such as responsiveness, assurance, and
empathy to enhance patient experiences and outcomes.

In the tourism industry, an empirical study using the Taiwan

Customer Satisfaction Index (TCSI) model found that perceived
service quality had the most significant effect on customer
satisfaction and loyalty. Huang and Shih (2016) concluded that
improving service performance at every level is necessary for
maintaining a competitive edge and ensuring repeat visits and
recommendations.

2.4 MEASURE OF SERVICE QUALITY

Parasuraman et al (I 985, 1988)' set out with the objective of

producing a general instrument with the objective of producing a
general instrument for measuring perception of service quality.
The instrument produced SERVQUAL was based on the contract
identified in the earlier work from which a number of dimension
attributes of service quality discussed earlier in the chapter. An
impottant advantage of the SERVQUAL instrument is that it as
been proved valid and reliable across a large range of global
services the SERVQUAL instruments need considerable adoption
(Abholkar et al, l 996)it still seems the best alternative for cross
sectional and industrial benchmarking (Fitzsimmons and
Fitssimmons, 1994) Dotchin and Oakland (1994) observed that
the full list provides the most complete expression yet available of
issues, which influence consumers in their assessment of service
quality. It is observed that the first category ensuring performance
of service quality. Right first time service customers are despised
in the hotel. The second category requires hotel serv~ce
providers to win customers hearts by doing what they want.
Pauline et al (2000) indicates that customer's perceptions of how
customer oriented the firm is, will be more critical for the
successful business performance than the seller's perception.
Since the service quality involves comparisons of the expectations
with performance (Atkins,2000) customer who perceive high
service quality believe that the service excellent is the one
strategy a mission that is both impottant to many custorners and
hard for competitors to duplicate (Berry, 1998) service quality
remains difficult to measure because it is often under what the
customer expect yet the service is a matter of meeting
customer's expectation(Terpestra and Sarahy,2000).They argue
that this observation is further complicated on the fact that not
every customer experiences the same level o0f service quality
even though the services they receive are identical. The company
must consistently give the best solution to his or her

2.3 THEORICAL ANALYSIS

SERVICE QUALITY MODEL

As stated earlier service quality has been defined differently by

different people and there is no consensus as to what the actual
definition is. We have adopted the definition by Parasuraman et
al., (1988, p.5), which defines service quality as the discrepancy
between a customers’ expectation of a service and the
customers’
perception of the service offering. Measuring service quality has
been one of the most recurrent topics in management literature,
Parasuraman et al., (1988), Gronroos, (1984), Cronin et al.,
(1992). This is because of the need to develop valid instruments
for the systematic evaluation of firms’ performance from the
customer point of view; and the association between perceived
service quality and other key organizational outcomes, Cronin et
al., (2010, p.93), which has led to the development of models for
measuring service quality. Gilbert et al., (2004, p.372-273)
reviewed the various ways service quality can be measured. They
include;

i. The expectancy-disconfirmation approach which is associated

with the identifying of customer expectation versus what they
actually experienced. It focuses on the comparison of the service
perfor,mance with the customer’s expectations. The customer’s
expectations could be assessed after the service encounter by
asking him/her to recall them.

ii. Performance-only approach merely assesses service quality by

merely asking customers about their level of satisfaction with
various service features following a service encounter.

iii. Technical and functional dichotomy approaches identify two

service components that lead to customer satisfaction namely,
the technical quality of the product which is based on product
characteristics such as durability, security, physical features while
functional quality is concerned with the relationships between
service provider and customer such as courtesy, speed of
delivery, helpfulness.

2.3.2 The Development and Evolution of the SERVQUAL

Model

“Parasuraman et al. (1985) identified 97 attributes which were

found to have an impact on service quality. These 97 attributes
were the criteria that are important in assessing customer’s
expectations and perceptions on delivered service” (Kumar et al.,
2009, p.214). These attributes were categorized into ten
dimensions (Parasuraman et al., 1985) and later subjected the
proposed 97 item instruments for assessing service quality
through two stages in order to purify the instruments and select
those with significant influences (Parasuraman et al., 1988, p.13).
The first purification stage came up with ten dimensions for
assessing service quality which were; tangibles, reliability,
responsiveness, communication, credibility, security, competence,
courtesy, understanding, knowing, customers, and access. They
went into the second purification stage and in this stage they
concentrated on condensing scale dimensionality and reliability.
They further reduced the ten dimensions to five which were;

I. Tangibility: physical facilities, equipment, and appearance

of personnel.
 II. Reliability: ability to perform the promised service
dependably and accurately.
III. Responsiveness: willingness to help customers and
provide prompt service.
IV. Assurance: knowledge and courtesy of employees and
their ability to inspire trust and confidence.
V. Empathy: caring individualized attention the firm provides
to its customers

2.3.3 FUNCTION OF THE SERVQUAL

SERVQUAL represents service quality as the discrepancy between

a customer's expectations for a service offering and the
customer's perceptions of the service received, requiring
respondents to answer questions about both their expectations
and their perceptions Parasuraman et al., (1988). The use of
perceived as opposed to actual service received makes the
SERVQUAL measure an attitude measure that is related to, but
not the same as, satisfaction (Parasuraman et. al., 1988). The
difference between expectations and perceptions is called the gap
which is the
determinant of customers’ perception of service quality as shown
on Figure 2.1.

2.3.4 Criticisms of SERVQUAL Model

Notwithstanding its growing popularity and widespread

application, SERVQUAL has been subjected to a number of
theoretical and operational criticisms which are detailed below:

2.3.4.1Theoretical Criticisms
 i.Paradigmatic objections: SERVQUAL is based on a
disconfirmation paradigm rather than an attitudinal paradigm;
and SERVQUAL fails to draw on established economic, statistical
and psychological theory.

ii. Gaps model: there is little evidence that customers assess

service quality in terms of P – E gaps.

iii. Process orientation: SERVQUAL focuses on the process of

service delivery, not the outcomes of the service encounter.

iv. Dimensionality: SERVQUAL’s five dimensions are not universal;

the number of dimensions comprising service quality is
contextualized; items

2.3.4.2 Operational Criticisms

i. Expectations: the term expectation is polysemic meaning

it has different definitions; customers use standards other
than expectations to evaluate service quality; and
SERVQUAL fails to measure absolute service quality
expectations.
ii. Item composition: four or five items cannot capture the
variability within each service quality dimension.
iii. Moments of truth (MOT): customers’ assessments of
service quality may vary from MOT to MOT.
iv. Polarity: the reversed polarity of items in the scale causes
respondent error
 v.

2.3.5 Customers’ Expectations Compared to Perceptions

Gronroos, (1982); Parasuraman et al., (1985) have proposed that

customer’s perception of service quality is based on the
comparison of their expectations (what they feel service providers
should offer) with their perceptions of the performance of the
service provider. Parasuraman et al., (1988, p.17) point out that
expectation is viewed differently in both satisfaction literature and
service quality literature. In satisfaction literature, expectations
are considered as ‘predictions’ by customers about what is likely
to happen during a particular transaction while in service quality
literature, they are viewed as desires or wants of customers, that
is, what they feels a service provider ‘should’ offer rather than
‘would’ offer

For this study, expectations define as desires or wants of

customers because this allows us to know exactly what service
providers show offer and this is based on based past experience
and information received (Douglas & Connor, 2003, p.167). It is
important to understand and measure customer’s expectations in
order to identify any gaps in delivering services with quality that
could ensure satisfaction, Negi, (2009). Perceptions of customers
are based solely on what they receive from the service encounter
(Douglas & Connor, 2003, p.167)
2.3.6 Factors that Affect Customer Satisfaction

Matzler et al., (2002), classify factors that affect customers’

satisfaction into three factor structures;

i. Basic factors: these are the minimum requirements that

are required in a product to prevent the customer from
being dissatisfied. They do not necessarily cause
satisfaction but lead to dissatisfaction if absent. These are
those factors that lead to the fulfillment of the basic
requirement for which the product is produced. These
constitute the basic attributes of the product or service.
They thus have a low impact on satisfaction even though
they are a prerequisite for satisfaction. In a nutshell
competence and accessibility
ii. Performance factors: these are the factors that lead to
satisfaction if fulfilled and can lead to dissatisfaction if not
fulfilled. These include reliability and friendliness.
iii. Excitement factors: these are factors that increase
customers’ satisfaction if fulfilled but does not cause
dissatisfaction if not fulfilled which include project
management.
2.3.8 Customer Service Communication

Customer service is a large concept related to various areas such

as marketing, economy, management, psychology, and then
spreads to communication research (Ford, 1994). Though service
interactions are an integral part in our lives, they have not been
retained much attention in communication research (Ford, 2001).
Overall, many researchers on customer service encounter
attempted to propose various definitions to understand the con
concept of customer service communication. Customer service
encounter is “a communication process in which an organizational
representative presents products or professional assistance in
exchange for another individual’s money or cooperation” (Ford,
1999:p.341). Besides, communication of service encounters
between customers. (Solomon et al., 1995). Service encounter is
also defined as “a personal (and social) interaction between
service provider and service customer” in which human behavior
is assembled (John, 1996:61). He added, a service encounter is a
social encounter in which interactions create the chance for
customers and service providers to establish relationship or
assess the service quality (John, 1996). Thus, it is necessary to
have the mutual understanding of both individuals in the service
encounters context.
2.3.9 Feedback in Customer Service Communication

Feedback plays a crucial role in communication. Feedback makes

sense and effective for communication. In the context of service,
feedback is a channel where customers can express their needs,
perspectives or judgments about organizations’ activities and
performances. Thus, feedback allows organizations to assess the

effectiveness of their service quality and customers' satisfaction.

According to Crowell et al, "feedback may serve more as a
consequence than as an antecedent in the control of behavior"
(Crowell et al.,1988:66)

Feedback that organizations received can be positive or negative.

Negative feedback is a sign of customers’ dissatisfaction and
indicates that organization’s service does not meet customer’s
needs. Meanwhile positive feedback confirms the good service
quality of organizations that allow them to reinforce relationship
with customers. Voss et al. believed that “customer feedback is
an often-overlooked factor in explaining the relationship between
service quality and customer satisfaction” (Voss et al., 2004:212)

2.5 Research Gap

After carefully analyzing various research studies conducted so far
using the SERVQUAL model, has been realized that many research
works have been carried in different service industries such as
education, restaurants, banking, health care, etc, but limited
empirical study has been conducted using the SERVQUAL model
to assess service quality in Eateries.

There are some of research which find out the relationship

between perceived service quality, customer satisfaction and
customer loyalty and it was proven that perceived service quality
had a positive relationship with customer satisfaction and this
supports the argument of linking service quality and customer
satisfaction. They did not use the SERVQUAL model but rather the
performance to assess service quality. Therefore using the
SERVQUAL model would be a contribution to existing research on
Eateries. This is the research gap and in order to fill the gap, try to
measure service quality and customer satisfaction using the
SERVQUAL model from the customer’s perspective in order to
know their perceptions.

2.6 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework (Figure 2.2) explains the underlying

process, which is applied to guide this study
2.7 Theoretical Framework

As shown in Figure 2.2, the SERVQUAL model is suitable for

measuring service quality and customer satisfaction in Eateries.
The same dimensions used to measure both service quality and
customer satisfaction because it assumed both are related
(Parasuraman et al., 1988) and customer satisfaction is an
antecedent of service quality (Negi, 2009). The SERVQUAL
approach integrates the two constructs and suggests that
perceived service quality is an antecedent to SATISFACTION (Negi,
2009, p.33). Therefore, in this research, the initial 20 items of
SERVQUAL model (in the attached appendix) are modified to
measure the perceived service quality and customer satisfaction
in Eateries The model is a summary for the 20-items and
researcher want to find out the overall service quality perceived
by customers and which dimensions customers are satisfied with.

REFERENCE

ALI, M.M. (2013) "Healthcare service quality: towards a broad

definition", International journal of health care quality assurance,
vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 203-19.

Fida, B. A., Shamim, A., & Rahman, M. M. (2023). The influence of

hospital tangibles on patient satisfaction. Healthcare, 11(2), 101-
112.

Mwanza, D., & Mutale, C. (2024). Tangible factors and student

satisfaction in higher education. MDPI Education Sciences, 14(1),
77-90.

Elnagar, A., Zhang, Y., & Alotaibi, M. (2024). Tangibility in digital

services: Visual impact on e-service quality perceptions. arXiv
preprint, arXiv:2408.06364.

Rahman, M. H., & Hassan, S. M. (2024). Tangible brand cues in

service environments: Enhancing trust through physical
consistency. The Service Industries Journal, 44(3-4), 215-234.
Ibrahim, M., & Rosman, M. Y. (2022). The influence of service
quality dimensions on customer satisfaction in casual dining
restaurants. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Environment
Management, 7(27), 100–114.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL:

A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of
service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Rakhmawati, N., & Kusuma, P. A. (2023). The effect of marketing

reliability and responsiveness on customer satisfaction in retail
business. Journal of Marketing Trends, 15(2), 88–95.

Setiono, B. A., & Hidayat, S. (2022). Influence of service quality

with the dimensions of reliability, responsiveness, assurance,
empathy, and tangibles on customer satisfaction. International
Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 6(9),
330–337.

Shahid, I., & Azam, S. M. F. (2023). Assessing service reliability in

fast food chains: A customer perspective. Journal of Foodservice
Business Research, 26(1), 33–49.
Al-Harbi, A. A., Al-Shehri, A. M., Al-Khaldi, Y. M., & Al-Dawood, K. M.
(2022). Responsiveness level and its effect on services quality
from the patients' perspective. Journal of Multidisciplinary
Healthcare, 15, 123–130.

Ighomereho, S. O., Ojo, A. A., Omoyele, S. O., & Olabode, S. O.

(2022). From service quality to e-service quality: Measurement,
dimensions and model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.00055.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL:

A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of
service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Setiono, B. A., & Hidayat, S. (2022). Influence of service quality

with the dimensions of reliability, responsiveness, assurance,
empathy, and tangibles on customer satisfaction. International
Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 6(9),
330–337.

Bungatang, B., & Reynel, R. (2022). The effect of service quality

elements on customer satisfaction. Golden Ratio of Marketing and
Applied Psychology of Business, 1(2), 107–118.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL:
A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of
service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Radius Global Market Research. (2022). Empathy in customer

service drives success and retention. Retrieved from
https://www.radiusgs.com/empathy-for-excellent-customer-
service/

Raval, A. (2025, March 17). AI won't fix the real issue with
customer service. Financial Times. Retrieved from
https://www.ft.com/content/a3753f62-1efc-4ca3-9934-
47ab9994fa87

Sugianto, T., & Amini, A. (2023). The mediating role of empathy in

service recovery and customer satisfaction: Evidence from the
hospitality sector. Journal of Business and Hotel Management,
9(1), 45–55.

Taylor, R. (2024). Unveiling customers' perceptions: A

comprehensive analysis of service quality dimensions. The
American Journal of Management and Economics Innovation, 1(1),
1–6.
Henríquez, S. D. M., Tito, E. R., Gomero, F. N. C., & Loo, J. F. I.
(2024). A new approach to measure the quality of university
services using the SERVPERF model and statistical techniques
implemented in a business intelligence solution. International
Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 72(2), 107–120.
https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V72I2P113

Kim, Y., & Lee, H. J. (2021). Service quality in digital platforms:

Conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Service Science
and Management, 24(3), 198–210.

Ladhari, R. (2009). A review of twenty years of SERVQUAL

research. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences,
1(2), 172–198.

Martínez, J. A., & Martínez, L. (2010). Some insights on

conceptualizing and measuring service quality. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(1), 29–42.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL:

A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of
service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Chien, C.-F., & Chi, C.-H. (2019). The nexus of service quality,
customer experience, and corporate image in the logistics
industry. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 917284.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.917284
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL:
A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of
service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Tangkuman, B., & Hierey, A. (2022). The effect of service quality

elements on customer satisfaction. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362041938

Wahab, S., et al. (2022). Service quality and customer satisfaction

in the post-pandemic world: Evidence from the auto care industry.
Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 842141.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.842141

References

Al-Msallam, S., & Alhaddad, A. (2023). The Role of Service Quality

Consistency in Building Trust and Customer Retention: A Study in
the Telecommunication Sector. Journal of Relationship Marketing,
22(1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332667.2023.2169142

Fang, Y. H., Ng, S. C. H., & Fang, J. (2022). Emotional Intelligence

and Service Quality Perception: A Moderated Mediation Model.
Service Business, 16(3), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-
021-00456-2
Khan, S., Ali, M., & Fatima, T. (2023). Emotional Experience as a
Mediator in the Relationship Between Service Quality and
Customer Loyalty. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 6(2),
123–137. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-11-2022-0211

Lim, X. J., Goh, Y. N., & Lee, S. T. (2021). E-service Quality and
Customer Satisfaction in the E-commerce Industry. Internet
Research, 31(6), 1721–1743. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-12-
2020-077

Nasution, R. A., Sembada, A. Y., & Prayogo, D. (2022). The Impact

of Trust and Transparency on Perceived Service Quality in Online
Services. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 34(6),
1234–1250. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-08-2021-0580

Pramudya, P. A., & Ardyan, E. (2022). E-Service Quality and

Customer Repurchase Intention in E-commerce: The Mediating
Role of Customer Satisfaction. International Journal of Data and
Network Science, 6(2), 497–508.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2021.10.011
Agyapong, G. K. Q., Mensah, H. K., & Afum, E. (2023). Service
quality and customer satisfaction in emerging markets: Evidence
from the Ghanaian retail sector. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 73, 103256.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103256

Kurniawan, R., & Hidayat, A. (2024). Measuring perceived service

quality and its impact on customer satisfaction in Indonesian
SMEs. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies, 31(1), 45–
59. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABES-08-2023-0085

Lee, J., & Chen, Y. (2024). Customer satisfaction in digital service

environments: The role of perceived value and service
experience. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(2),
203–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12985

Nguyen, T. H., Pham, H. T., & Tran, D. L. (2023). Understanding

customer satisfaction in the post-pandemic era: A service quality
perspective. Journal of Services Marketing, 37(5), 633–647.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2022-0402

Zhou, Y., & Wu, H. (2023). Digital reviews and customer

satisfaction: An empirical analysis of online service platforms.
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 56, 101245.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2023.101245

Agyapong, G. K. Q., Mensah, H. K., & Afum, E. (2023). Service

quality and customer satisfaction in emerging markets: Evidence
from the Ghanaian retail sector. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 73, 103256.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103256

Dick, A. S., & Basu, K. (1994). Customer loyalty: Toward an

integrated conceptual framework. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 22(2), 99–113.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070394222001

Gupta, S., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2006). Customer metrics and their

impact on financial performance. Marketing Science, 25(6), 718–
739. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1050.0153

Lee, J., & Chen, Y. (2024). Customer satisfaction in digital service

environments: The role of perceived value and service
experience. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(2),
203–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12985