IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01821838.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing measurement tools to improve fluency and certainty: The case of online customer satisfaction evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Alice Audrezet

    (ISG - Institut supérieur de gestion - Université de Tunis)

  • Béatrice Parguel

    (DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris sciences et lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Online shopping development went hand in hand with online self-administered customer satisfaction evaluation requirement. However, the specific context of online rating, without any face-to-face clarification, raises the question of accuracy and appropriateness of the chosen tool for respondents. To address this issue, this research proposes the new concept of "response fluency" to qualify the ease with which a question is processed. Applied to the Evaluative Space Grid,a new grid that has been proposed in psychology to measure overall evaluation, this research shows how response fluency mediates the influence of measurement tool design on response certainty. More specifically, it tests the effects of two alternative tool design formats (i.e., a reduction of the grid's response cell number and the display of labels to the response cells) in terms of response fluency and certainty. Using a between-subjects experiment, we show that the display of labels in the cells actually increases response fluency and, in turn, response certainty. By contrast, reducing the response cell number does not produce any effect. We contend that well-designed measurement tools can make the process of responding more fluent and increase respondents' subjective confidence in their capability of conveying their true evaluations. In the end, this work advocates for new research to design measurement tools likely to engage respondents when answering surveys and prevent dropout rates, which is especially challenging within self-administered electronic settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Alice Audrezet & Béatrice Parguel, 2017. "Designing measurement tools to improve fluency and certainty: The case of online customer satisfaction evaluation," Post-Print hal-01821838, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01821838
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01821838
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01821838/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shahriar Akter & Samuel Fosso Wamba, 2016. "Big data analytics in E-commerce: a systematic review and agenda for future research," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(2), pages 173-194, May.
    2. Duane F. Alwin, 1997. "Feeling Thermometers Versus 7-Point Scales," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 25(3), pages 318-340, February.
    3. Ned Kock & Dorrie DeLuca, 2007. "Improving Business Processes Electronically: An Action Research Study in New Zealand and the US," Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 6-27, July.
    4. Heimbach, Irina & Gottschlich, Jörg & Hinz, Oliver, 2015. "The Value of User's Facebook Profile Data for Product Recommendation Generation," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 77135, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    5. Homburg, Christian & Allmann, Jan & Klarmann, Martin, 2014. "Internal and external price search in industrial buying: The moderating role of customer satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1581-1588.
    6. Elisabeth Deutskens & Ko de Ruyter & Martin Wetzels & Paul Oosterveld, 2004. "Response Rate and Response Quality of Internet-Based Surveys: An Experimental Study," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 21-36, February.
    7. Regier, Dean A. & Watson, Verity & Burnett, Heather & Ungar, Wendy J., 2014. "Task complexity and response certainty in discrete choice experiments: An application to drug treatments for juvenile idiopathic arthritis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 40-49.
    8. Eduardo B. Andrade & Joel B. Cohen, 2007. "On the Consumption of Negative Feelings," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(3), pages 283-300, June.
    9. Gjoko Stamenkov & Zamir Dika, 2016. "Bank employees’ internal and external perspectives on e-service quality, satisfaction and loyalty," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(3), pages 291-309, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Audrezet, Alice & Parguel, Béatrice, 2018. "Using the Evaluative Space Grid to better capture manifest ambivalence in customer satisfaction surveys," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 285-295.
    2. Nora Nahr & Marikka Heikkilä, 2022. "Uncovering the identity of Electronic Markets research through text mining techniques," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(3), pages 1257-1277, September.
    3. George R. Milne & Begum Kaplan & Kristen L. Walker & Larry Zacharias, 2021. "Connecting with the future: The role of science fiction movies in helping consumers understand privacy‐technology trade‐offs," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 737-762, September.
    4. de Camargo Fiorini, Paula & Roman Pais Seles, Bruno Michel & Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose & Barberio Mariano, Enzo & de Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz Lopes, 2018. "Management theory and big data literature: From a review to a research agenda," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 112-129.
    5. Srinivasan, V. Seenu & Netzer, Oded, 2007. "Adaptive Self-Explication of Multi-attribute Preferences," Research Papers 1979, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Tatsushi Fukaya & Masayuki Suzuki & Ikumi Ozawa & Takumi Nakagoshi, 2022. "An Examination of Related Factors of Mathematical Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Elementary School Teachers: Focusing on Conceptions of Teaching and Learning and Test Utilization Strategy," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, October.
    7. Hinterhuber, Andreas, 2017. "Value quantification capabilities in industrial markets," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 163-178.
    8. Fatao Wang & Lihui Ding & Hongxin Yu & Yuanjun Zhao, 0. "Big data analytics on enterprise credit risk evaluation of e-Business platform," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-40.
    9. Aaker, Jennifer L. & Drolet, Aimee L. & Griffin, Dale, 2008. "Recalling Mixed Emotions," Research Papers 1913, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    10. Leogrande, Angelo, 2021. "The Destruction of Price-Representativeness," MPRA Paper 111239, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Lusk, Jayson L., 2012. "The political ideology of food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 530-542.
    12. Rolf Becker, 2023. "Short- and long-term effects of reminders on panellists’ survey participation in a probability-based panel study with a sequential mixed-mode design," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(5), pages 4095-4119, October.
    13. Vahid Sobhani & Mohammadjavad Rostamizadeh & Seyed Morteza Hosseini & Seyed Ebrahim Hashemi & Ignacio Refoyo Román & Daniel Mon-López, 2022. "Anthropometric, Physiological, and Psychological Variables That Determine the Elite Pistol Performance of Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-10, January.
    14. Fraser, Iain & Balcombe, Kelvin & Williams, Louis & McSorley, Eugene, 2021. "Preference stability in discrete choice experiments. Some evidence using eye-tracking," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    15. Barbara Ryan & Rachel King, 2020. "How ready is ready? Measuring physical preparedness for severe storms," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 104(1), pages 171-199, October.
    16. Yang Liu & Jan Hannig & Abhishek Pal Majumder, 2019. "Second-Order Probability Matching Priors for the Person Parameter in Unidimensional IRT Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 84(3), pages 701-718, September.
    17. Nian, Yefan & Gao, Zhifeng, 2020. "Information Treatment, Cognitive Load, and Attribute Attendance in Choice Experiments," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304315, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Eric. W. K. See-To & Yang Yang, 2017. "Market sentiment dispersion and its effects on stock return and volatility," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(3), pages 283-296, August.
    19. Elisabeth Deutskens & Ad Jong & Ko Ruyter & Martin Wetzels, 2006. "Comparing the generalizability of online and mail surveys in cross-national service quality research," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 119-136, April.
    20. Sophie Cockcroft & Mark Russell, 2018. "Big Data Opportunities for Accounting and Finance Practice and Research," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(3), pages 323-333, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01821838. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.