Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
intentions is still not clear (Zeithaml et al., 1996).
In addition, service is not the only factor that a
company sells to customers; additional conceptual
and empirical research addressing these issues can
develop our understanding of the behavioral con-
sequences of quality features.
customers. The researcher conducted the survey at
five selected mid-scale Malay restaurants in Shah
Alam area in the month of April 2013 during
lunch and dinner time. Restaurant patrons were
approached and requested to complete the survey
and were informed that their individual responses
were anonymous and confidential.
A total of 400 questionnaires were distributed.
However, after performing data screening and
cleaning procedures, only 330 usable question-
naires were obtained for further data analyses.
2 METHOD
2.1
Instrument development
A questionnaire was developed based on customer
perceptions of food quality attributes and behav-
ioral intentions in relation to the restaurant experi-
ence. The six selected food quality attributes were
presentation, menu item variety, healthy options,
taste, freshness, and temperature. The perceived
quality of food attributes and behavioral intentions
was measured on a 7-point scale ranging from 1
(extremely disagree) to 7 (extremely agree).
Before the questionnaire was finalized, two
restaurant managers in full-service restaurants
and two academic professionals in the hospitality
industry reviewed the questionnaire to ensure con-
tent validity. Subsequently, a pilot study was con-
ducted to ensure the reliability of each construct.
The reliability of measurements during pilot study
was well above the recommended cutoff of 0.70,
indicating internal consistency (Nunnally, 1978).
Care was taken to rephrase terms used in the
questions to suit common usage in Malaysia. Feed-
backs from respondents were considered and some
changes were made before arriving at the final ver-
sion of the instrument.
3 RESULTS
3.1
Sample profile
Among the respondents, 77.3% (
n
255) of them
were in the range of 20 - 29 years old, 21.2% (
n
=
=
70) were 30 - 39 years old, while the remaining
1.5% (
n
5) was 40-49 years old. In regards to gen-
der, there were a slightly high proportion of male
customers with 56.4% (
n
=
186) as compared to
female customers with 43.6% (
n
=
144). Based on
respondents' ethnicity, a large proportion of 89.4%
(
n
=
295) of the total respondents were Malay, fol-
lowed by 9.1% (
n
=
=
30) was Chinese, and 1.5% (
n
=
5) was Indian. In terms of respondents' educa-
tion level, a large proportion with 88.8% (
n
293)
undergoes college or university education. This is
followed by 7.9% (
n
=
26) from secondary school
education, and the remaining 3.3% (
n
=
11) did not
undergo any formal education. For respondents'
reported monthly income, approximately 80.3%
(
n
= 265) of respondents were having monthly
income of RM3,000 and below, and the remaining
respondents (19.7%,
n
= 65) were having monthly
income of RM3,000 and above.
=
2.2
Data gathering procedure
The type of sampling was non-probability sam-
pling. Data were collected based on convenience
sampling since the respondents were selected
mainly from Malay restaurants' customers in
Shah Alam, Selangor. The selected Malay restau-
rants for the survey were chosen based on several
characteristics, which are (1) offers Malay cuisines
on the menu, (2) medium price range of RM10 -
RM20 per person, and (3) offer full-service to the
3.2
The effect of food quality on behavioral
intentions
The relationship between food quality and behav-
ioral intentions found to be significant with stand-
ardized coefficient of 0.81 (
p
< .001).
In addition, 65.4% of the variation for behav-
ioral intention was explained by food quality,
indicating the substantial effect of food quality on
behavioral intentions.
Table 1. Reliability coefficient for each section of the
questionnaire.
Table 2.
The effect of food quality on satisfaction.
Sections
No. of Items
Cron Alpha
Sections
B
SE B
β
Section A: Food Quality
18
0.96
Constant
−
0.300
0.203
Section B: Behavioral
Intentions
6
0.96
Food Quality
1.007
0.040
0.808***
*
Note
: No. of respondents
=
30.
*
Note
:
R
2
=
0.654, ***
p
.001.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search