See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331997551

Student Satisfaction with Hostel in International Campus: A Literature Review

Conference Paper · March 2019

CITATION READS

1 8,100

4 authors:

Syarifah Hasanah Syed Arabi Idid

4 PUBLICATIONS 13 CITATIONS
International Islamic University Malaysia
110 PUBLICATIONS 221 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Aizul Harun Mohammad Ali Tareq

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT)
48 PUBLICATIONS 349 CITATIONS 51 PUBLICATIONS 351 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Syarifah Hasanah on 26 March 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

·250· Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management

Student Satisfaction with Hostel in International Campus:

A Literature Review
Syarifah Hasanah1, Syed Arabi Idid2, Aizul Nahar Harun1, Mohammad Ali Tareq1
1 Malaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology, University Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
2 Department of Communication, International Islamic University Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
(E-mail: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected])

Abstract: This paper adopts conceptual approach to understand on how uncertainty avoidance culture
effects student satisfaction in the context of university housing. Most researchers postulate that
Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory is the most suitable for assessing customer satisfaction. Paying
attention to the issue of student accommodation satisfaction is the main concern to improve the
performance of the services provided by student housing. Cultural value of the students is one of the
contributing factors to their satisfaction. The present study only assesses the literature on Expectancy
Disconfirmation Theory, customer satisfaction, student housing satisfaction, and link between
uncertainty avoidance and customer satisfaction. This study significantly broadens the university‘s
understanding of dealing with hostel residents from different cultures and helping provide quality
services. This study is based on the Expextancy Disconfirmation Theory whereby the model has been
reviewed in the context of international student accommodation with the findings that culture plays role
in assessing the student satisfaction.
Key words: Disconfirmation; Student satisfaction; Student accommodation; Uncertainty avoidance
culture

1 Introduction
Customer satisfaction has been recognized as an important topic for both academic and management
research. It is believed to be an essential variable to study. Higher institutions like universities have also
included customer satisfaction as the primary organizational objective. The issue of student‘s satisfaction
towards accommodation has become a discussion of scholars, families, societies, and universities.
Improving university accommodation and services for students alike are a major concern for universities
as it is the determining factor to improve the campus experience.
It is important to evaluate students‘ hostel satisfaction. In order to assess student housing, many ideas
or concepts have been suggested throughout the years (Amole, 2009). The satisfaction concept is most
widely used to evaluate student residence. Many studies reveal that friends made on campus contribute to
students‘ satisfaction of campus residence (Holahan, Wilcox, 1978). Moreover, it is believed that students
can perform better in academic programs if they stay on campus and feel satisfied with the services
offered by campus hostel (Ajayi, Nwosu, Ajani, 2015; Araujo, Murray, 2010; Mohd Suki, Chowdhury,
2015).
Housing satisfaction has been discussed in various types of residential situations (Potter, Chicoine,
Speicher, 2001). Majority of studies on residential satisfaction have been conducted in Western countries.
There are few attempts to conduct studies on basic satisfaction theory in non-western cultures
(Spreng,Chiou, 2002). Due to globalization, the need to assess customer satisfaction in the paradigm of
culture is essential, to understand customers from different cultures.
Residential satisfaction studies examine physical and social aspects of the environment (Amole,
2009). Thus far, no study investigates the impact of culture, especially the uncertainty avoidance
dimension on customers in respect to hostel satisfaction. In an educational context, it is imperative for
universities to better understand customers in the light of their cultural background, to improve
accommodation services provided to them.
The most applicable technique to measure satisfaction is by comparing expectation and performance
of the product or service offered which is known as disconfirmation. Positive disconfirmation occurs
when the performance of the product or service exceeds the expectation of customers, while negative
disconfirmation occurs when performance of the product or service offered falls short of the customer‘s
expectation. Meanwhile, when the performance meets the expectation, confirmation occurs. It is found
that the concept of disconfirmation has significant impact on satisfaction. Therefore, it is interesting to see
how culture affects customer satisfaction.
 Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management ·251·

2 Literature Review
2.1 Expectancy disconfirmation theory
The concept of customer satisfaction is mainly derived from management and satisfaction theory in
psychology. The study of satisfaction has been researched in industrial psychology and consumer
behavior in the marketing sector. Okanmentions that the study started early as the 1970s, when customers‘
complaints, behavior, and service recovery were being studied. Among the popular and widely accepted
theories that examine customer satisfaction is Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory (EDT).
Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory (EDT) was proposed by Oliver in 1977. He further explains that
customers set expectation, standard and perception before purchasing the product or service. After buying
the product or service, the customers will compare it with the performance they received.
Most studies on customer satisfaction are dominated by the Expectancy Disconfirmation
model(Ladhari, 2007). Moreover, Oliverstresses that expectation disconfirmation is the most appropriate
approach to identify the complex emotional response of product or service consumption(Hede, Jago,
Deery, 2002). The expectation disconfirmation model is widely accepted to view the process of customers
in developing feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Mukankusi, Celimene, Michel, Lawson-Body,
2008).
According to Oliver, satisfaction is the size and direction of the disconfirmation experience that
happens as an outcome of comparing the perceived performance of the service with customers‘
expectations. Later, Oliver added, by implying three broad level of satisfaction; underfulfilment, mere
fulfilment and overfulfilment, to the definition of the theory.
The Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory explains satisfaction and dissatisfaction is the consequence
of confirmation or disconfirmation of the expected product or service with the perceived performance.
Confirmation means that the product or service performance meets the customers‘ expectation. Positive
disconfirmation means if the product or service performance exceeds the customers‘ expectation, the
customers will be satisfied. Negative disconfirmation means if the product or service is lower than the
customers‘ expectation, the customer will be dissatisfied.
Most researchers postulate that Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory is the most suitable for
assessing customer satisfaction since it plays a very affective role in the process of customer satisfaction
by recognizing the multifaceted emotional response of customers towards product and service. Regarding
student housing satisfaction study, the researcher use Expectancy Disconfirmation Theory as theoretical
base in guiding this conceptual paper.
2.2 Customer satisfaction
Customer satisfaction study is applied in various disciplines like marketing, education, landscape
architecture, the health and medical fields, and housing (Potter et al., 2001). Customer satisfaction
contains three parts of interaction between customers and organization; transaction, functional, and
reliability (Vavra, 1997).
Transaction part is the first stage where the organization puts a lot of effort to attract people to buy its
products or services. The functional part is the second stage where the customers perceive the benefit and
whether they are satisfied or dissatisfied with the product and service. Reliability is the function of the last
stage, and measures the durability of the product along with the consistency of services over time(Vavra,
1997).
Kotler et al. defined customer satisfaction as ―how well the product meets the customer expectations‖
(Voss, 2006). Fonsecadefines customer satisfaction as an ―overall assessment of the performance of
various attributes that constitute a service‖. Satisfaction is also defined as a customer‘s overall assessment
of the purchase and consumption experience with a product, service, or provider. Moreover, Prof. Oliver
also gives explanation as following:
―satisfaction is the consumer‘s fulfillment response. It is a judgment that a product or servicefeature,
or the product of service itself, provided (or is providing) a pleasurable level of consumption-related
fulfillment, including levels of under-or over-fullfilment…‖.
Ross, Broyles and Leingpibul mentioned that customer satisfaction consists of two perspectives:
meets expectations and feeling state. The first perspective is meeting expectations, explains that customer
―compares the perception of product or service‘s actual performance with their expected performance‖
(Ross et al., 2008).
Likewise, Galsterdefined satisfaction as ―a measure of the gap between consumers‘ actual and
aspired needs‖. Ogikubo and Enkawaconceptualized customer satisfaction as ―by the degree to which the
actual performance fulfills or falls short of the level of consumers‘ expectations‖. Flott defines customer
·252· Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management

satisfaction as ―a state of mind set that customers have about their expectations over the lifetime of a
product or service‖ (Normazalila Abu Bakar, Nor Mazlina Abu Bakar, 2008). All of these definitions
relate to meeting expectation of customer towards product or service offered.
The second perspective on customer satisfaction is the feeling state. Bei and Chiaodefines feeling
state as emotion whether positive or negative after consuming the product or service. Similarly, Franklin
and Nitecki define customer satisfaction as ―consumer experiences‖ (Dulawat, Rai, 2005). The definition
of customer satisfaction by Oliver implies three broad levels of fulfillment. First level is underfulfillment
which means dissatisfaction. Second level is fulfillment which means mere satisfaction. Then third level
is overfulfilment which means oversatisfaction or delight. Prof. Oliver views satisfaction as fulfillment
which is related to reinforcement and arousal. These all definitions go to the second perspective of feeling
state which means that satisfaction is the consumers‘ contentment reaction after consuming products or
services.
Most researchers agree customer satisfaction is a postpurchase experience. Johnson has
conceptualized the post purchase experience of the customer satisfaction into two; as transaction-specific
satisfaction and cumulative satisfaction(Johnson, Herrmann, Gustafsson, 2002). Transaction-specific
satisfaction is conceptualized as the assessment over a specific product or service that the customers come
across. Cumulative satisfaction is conceptualized as the overall experience towards circumstance or
moment being passed by customer when consuming product and service. Hence, the process of
satisfaction can be determined at the time assessing occurs and afterwards.
Although there is no consensus about the type of assessment to evaluate customer satisfaction, most
research on customer housing satisfaction study conceptualize satisfaction by using purposive and
aspiration-gap approach. The purposive approach conceptualizes satisfaction as ―a measure of the degree
to which the environment facilitates or inhibits the goal of the user‖. Whereas, the aspiration-gap approach
conceptualizes satisfaction as ―a measure of the gap between consumers actual and aspired needs‖.
Further, researchers explain that purposive approach emphasizes satisfaction of physical environments or
material or tangible attribute while the aspiration-gap approach emphasizes on psychological and
emotional factors or social surroundings.
The concept of customer satisfaction is relative since it depends on what customer expects at the
beginning. It is also subjective as appraisals depend on comparison standard. In order to measure customer
satisfaction, the expectation and the performance need to be examined. This is the basis of the Expectation
Disconfirmation Theory proposed by Oliver who posits satisfaction or dissatisfaction as the result of
confirmation or disconfirmation of the expected product or service with the product or service perceived
performance.
Previous researches show that expectation could increase satisfaction through positive
disconfirmation. However, some researchers argue that instead of measuring satisfaction, it is the
disconfirmation should be measured. Other researchers consent that disconfirmation has significant
impact on customer satisfaction; it is found that disconfirmation has positive relationship to customer
satisfaction. Disconfirmation is better predictor of customer satisfaction (Baird, Ouschan, and Phau,
2005).
2.3 Student housing satisfaction
Thomsen and Eikemostate that it is the different phases of life, social and cultural background,
financial situation, expectations, and architectural characteristics of a building in general which influence
the housing satisfaction of residents. Francescatoand Wiedemann and Andersonassert that most residence
models of satisfaction, appraise satisfaction by using two approaches; objective and subjective
measurements. Objective measurement views the presence and the lack of object itself. While, subjective
measurement views perception, emotion, attitudes, and behaviours of the residents towards housing
satisfaction. Francescato et al. and Wiedemann and Andersonpoint out that the objective measure is the
weaker predictor of the housing satisfactionwhile according to Smith and Clay, subjective is the best
approach. For this reason, Smith and Clayfurther suggest integrating both approaches in the
measurements considering they are important to better understand customers.
Likewise, Amoleconceptualizes residential satisfaction as the influence of objective and subjective
measures of housing attributes, and the demographic characteristics of the students. The objective
variables assess physical features like the number of persons in the bedroom, presence or absence of
reading room, common room, kitchenette and a balcony, whereas, subjective variables assess physical,
social/psychological and management attributes like comfort, privacy, security, rules and regulations, fees,
maintenance, and management staff. In Amole‘sstudy, the results confirm physical, social, place,
management, maintenance, and level of environment as dimensions of residence satisfaction.
 Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management ·253·

It is also found that Francescato et al. developed more precise and robust appraisal on housing
satisfaction. The researchers conceptualized satisfaction as an attitude by using an index which has
affective, cognitive and conative dimensions. The researchers develop an index to measure residence
satisfaction based on four questions:
How satisfied are you with living here?
How long do you want to live in this housing development?
If you move again would you like to live in another place like this?
Would you recommend this place to one of your friends if they were looking for a place to live?
Francescatolater came up with dimensions of satisfaction of residential environment, which are
design/facilities/physical provided, social, and management issues. These dimensions of housing
satisfaction are used by scholars who carried out study on student housing satisfaction like Amole, and
Khozaei et al. Amole in her study adapted the dimensions proposed by Francescato and added other
dimensions. Design, facilities, social, place, maintenance, and management are dimensions of student
housing satisfaction used in Amole‘s study.
NurulUlyaniMohdNajib et al. carried out a study elaborating on Hassanain‘s model. Instead of
focusing on the level of satisfaction of the model proposed by Hassanain, this study suggested to research
on the factors that influence satisfaction of student housing. The researchers used both physical and social
variables to measure the level of student satisfaction with university accommodation. The findings
showed that in general, students were satisfied with the services provided by housing facilities.
Numerous studies have been carried out to investigate students‘ satisfaction of their hostel. Ajayi,
Nwosu, Ajani in their study on student hostel, they agreed that factors like physical, social, and
management were related to housing satisfaction. Furthermore, their findings revealed that students were
not satisfied with hostel facilities in hostels in the Federal University of Technology, Nigeria.
In the same way, in a study by Amoleon residential satisfaction in students‘ housing in Nigeria, the
data contained objective and subjective measures of the physical, social and management dimensions of
the students‘ housing. However, the results of Amole‘s research indicate that more than half (53%) of the
respondents were dissatisfied with their residences. The findings demonstrated that the living conditions
of the students were poor. Moreover, Amolestated that in Nigeria, the high level of housing satisfaction
has not been common. The findings imply that due to designers and developers little understanding of
factors that contribute towards housing satisfaction, the student residence cannot meet the expectation of
students.
Araujo and Murrayconducted a study on the effect of dormitory living on student performance and
found out that requiring students to live on campus lead to improvement in academic performance.
Khozaei et al. conducted a qualitative research through interview on female graduate students‘ perception
of the relationships between the residence hall and the home. The findings indicated that the satisfaction of
students towards hostel would increase if the university could provide a homelike hostel in terms of
privacy, security, warmth and friendly environment, physical facilities, and comfort.
Foubert et al.found that the physical environment and social factors were factors that influence
student satisfaction in university residence. Furthermore, the researchers concluded that the quality of
physical facilities and relationship with roommate as the first and second significant factor of students‘
satisfaction of hostels(NurulUlyaniMohdNajib et al., 2010). Moreover, Mohd Suki and
Chowdhurydiscovered that quality of hostel affected students‘ satisfaction living in the hostel in
Malaysia), meanwhile hostel location and facilities were not affecting student satisfaction.
While other researchers focus on one approach of either physical or social aspect, most of the studies
measure the student housing satisfaction using both physical and social approaches as conducted by
Alkandari, Amoleand Khozaei et al. Similarly, Foubert, Tepper, and Morrisonconceptualize student
housing satisfaction as appraisal of physical environment and social factors. Moreover, the researchers
emphasize that physical environment and social factor have substantial impact on student satisfaction
towards their hostel. In fact, these two dimensions are considered as the most important aspects that the
university has to give attention to in order to increase the satisfaction of its students.
2.4 Link between uncertainty avoidance and customer satisfaction
Rokeachposits culture as direction for peoples‘ manners and fundamental motivators in life
(Tsoukatos, Rand, 2007). Hofstede defines culture as ―the collective programming of the mind which
distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another‖. Oetzeldefines culture ―as a
learned system of meanings that fosters a particular sense of shared identity-hood and community-hood
among its group members‖.
Hofstede‘s research was conducted on workers of Multinational Corporation IBM from fifty
·254· Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management

countries. Each country was assigned an index to be placed in five cultural dimensions; individualism,
uncertainty avoidance, power distance, masculinity-feminity, and long term/short term orientation.
Majority of prior research on culture used this model and consider it as the most appropriate scientific
model to measure cultural differences.
Hofstededefines uncertainty avoidance as the extent to which the members of a culture feel
threatened by uncertain, unknown, unclear, unstructured, and unpredictable situations.
Walczuchcategorizes uncertainty avoidance into two subconcepts: ―risk aversion‖, the degree to which
individuals feel uncomfortable with taking risks, and ―intolerance of ambiguity‖, the degree to which
individuals feel uncomfortable when confronted with ambiguity‖). Hofstede also mentions that in order
to avoid these situations, people need strict codes of behavior.
Uncertainty avoidance has two levels: low and high. People from low uncertainty avoidance, tend to
be less in tension, worried, and emotional. They are more tolerant and can accept differences. People from
low uncertainty avoidance culture are more tolerant when they encounter problems regarding services
delivered. Meanwhile, people from high level uncertainty avoidance culture do not like to be exposed to
uncertain conditions. They thus prefer well-defined or structured administrative procedureand will not
tolerate problems.
Many researchers urge to investigate the cohesion between cultural values and customer satisfaction.
Tsoukatos and Rand state that culture is related to customer satisfaction. Thomsen and Eikemoassert that
different social groups with different culture background have different satisfaction towards their housing,
even though people stay in the same housing condition. Chongstudy shows cultural factors affect
satisfaction of resident in publicly funded care home in Hong Kong. Studying the relationship between
satisfaction and culture in depth, Tsoukatos and Randpoint out studies on relationship satisfaction and
culture are still inconclusive and significant gaps exist in the literature.
Among Hofstede‘s five culture dimensions, uncertainty avoidance is the most important cultural
dimension as it has significant impact on customer satisfaction(Reimann, Lünemann, Chase, 2008).
Uncertainty avoidance is defined as ―the degree to which societal or organizational members attempt to
avoid ambiguity and anxiety by depending on rituals, societal norms, behavioral codes, and beliefs‖. A
study conducted by Reimann, Lunemann, Chasereveals that there is a significant association between
uncertainty avoidance and customer satisfaction. Hofstedefinds that there is negative relationship between
satisfaction and uncertainty avoidance in his research of job satisfaction of people from different countries,
working in IBM.
Liu et al. found in bank industry where the consumers are from higher uncertainty avoidance cultures;
tend to complain when they are dissatisfied with the services while consumers from lower uncertainty
avoidance cultures tend not to complain(Jin, Park, Kim, 2008). This is in line with the literature stated by
Hofstede that people from lower uncertainty avoidance tend not to complain if they encounter unsatisfied
service while people from higher uncertainty avoidance cultures tend to complain. Apart from that, the
prior literatures indicate that there is relationship between culture and satisfaction.
Based on the study conducted by Reimann et al., the findings reveal that there is significant
relationship between uncertainty avoidance and customer satisfaction. Researchers discover that
respondents from high degree of uncertainty avoidance culture are not satisfied because of their
intolerance with defective delivered service, yet those from low uncertainty avoidance culture are satisfied
because of their tolerance even though the service is flawed, like the washing machine in the hostel block
has problem, the staff at the counter is unfriendly treating the students, and so forth. Additionally,
researchers highlight that the lower the uncertainty avoidance level of a person, the higher his or her
tolerance level is, the higher his or her satisfaction would be.
Ogikubo and Enkawa research the impact of uncertainty avoidance as one of the dimensions of
national culture on customer satisfaction. By using national customer satisfaction index of Denmark,
Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, USA, and survey data in Japan, the
results show that customer satisfaction is significantly influenced by uncertainty avoidance culture. In
detail, the customer satisfaction is negatively correlated with uncertainty avoidance. The findings
demonstrate that customer satisfaction is relatively lower in high uncertainty avoidance society because
customers from this society tend to assess their satisfaction more strictly.
Looking at the differences stated here, customers from high uncertainty avoidance culture do not
easily accept any unclear things which lead to a tendency of being worried and stressed. There is a big
possibility of them showing aggressive and offensive behavior when being challenged. Meanwhile,
customers from low uncertainty avoidance culture will show less emotion, greater tolerant, less anxious,
and never show aggressive behavior, even though they are being exposed to uncertain situations.
 Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management ·255·

Furthermore, Furrer, Liu and Sudharsanmention that in order to reduce the uncertainty, quick solution to
the problem faced by customers is needed. In summary, uncertainty avoidance is the extent of showing
emotion, stress, aggressive behavior, and difficulty in being tolerant when dealing with unclear or
unstructured matters, leading to the need for rules and regulations to avoid the unclear situation.
Overall, the evidence in the literature suggests that, undoubtedly, uncertainty avoidance and
customer satisfaction are two significant research topics due to their importance in understanding
customers as the asset of the organization. In customer satisfaction literatures, it is stated that
disconfirmation has significant effect on satisfaction as it impacts customer satisfaction and the difference
between expectation and perceived performance. Customers who possess high uncertainty avoidance
have higher expectation compared to customers who possess low uncertainty avoidance (Sigala,
Sakellaridis, 2004). Andreassenutters that in expectation disconfirmation paradigm, low expectation of
customer will lead to a positive disconfirmation and high expectation of customer will lead to a negative
disconfirmation. However, since the findings are inconclusive, further study in a different setting is
necessary.

3 Conclusion
In conclusion, previous studies on student housing use physical and social approach to measure the
satisfaction of students as residents of the hostel. This in line with the conceptual definition of most
scholars on the study of customer satisfaction, who conceptualize satisfaction by using two approaches;
purposive approach and aspiration-gap approach. Based on previous studies on relationship between
satisfaction and culture, it found that uncertainty avoidance culture influences the customer satisfaction.
As well as it influences the disconfirmation of customer towards product and services. Customers, in this
context the students, who are from high uncertainty avoidance culture tend to have high expectation that
lead to negative disconfirmation meanwhile those from low uncertainty avoidance culture tend to have
low expectation which lead to positive disconfirmation. The disconfirmation towards service of student
hostel comprises of two elements; physical environments and social surrounding.

References
[1] Amole, D.Residential Satisfaction in Students‘ Housing[J]. Journal of Environmental Psychology,
2009,(29):76–85
[2] Holahan, C.J., Wilcox B.L. Residential Satisfaction and Friendship Formation in High and Low Rise
Student Housing: An Interactional Analysis[J]. Journal Educational Psychology, 1978,70:237-241
[3] AjayiM., NwosuA., AjaniY. Student‘s Satisfaction with Hostel Facilities in Federal University of
Technology, Akure, Nigeria[J]. European Scientific Journal, 2015,11(34):402-415
[4] Araujo de P., Murray, J. Estimating the Effects of Dormitory Living on Student Performance[R].
Paper Presented at the 2009 Southern Economics Conference, 2010
[5] Mohd Suki, N., Chowdhury, I. A. Students‘ Attitude and Satisfaction Living in Sustainable
On-campus Hostels[J]. Malaysian Journal of Business and Economics, 2015,2(1):35–47
[6] Potter, J. J., Chicoine, J. L., Speicher, K. E. Predicting Residential Satisfaction: A Comparative Case
Study[M]. Architecture Program: Faculty Scholarly and Creative Activity, EDRA 32 Proceedings,
2001
[7] Spreng, R. A.,Chiou, J. A. Cross-cultural Assessment of the Satisfaction Formation Process[J].
European Journal of Marketing, 2002,36(7/8):829-839
[8] Ladhari, R.The Movie Experience: A Revised Approach to Determinants of Satisfaction[J]. Journal
of Business Research, 2007,60:454-462
[9] Hede, A. M., Jago, L.,Deery, M. Recommending Behavior at Special Events: The Roles of Attribute
Satisfaction, Expectancy Disconfirmation and Overall Satisfaction[R]. ANZMAC Conference
Proceedings,2002
[10] Mukankusi, L., Celimene, F., Michel, L., Lawson-Body, A. A Qualitative Study of Customer
Satisfaction from an Electronic Commerce Perspective[J]. Issues in Information Systems,
2008,9(2):25-36
[11] Vavra, T. G. Improving your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction[M]. Milwaukee, Wisconsin:
ASQ Quality Press, 1997
[12] Voss, L.C. The Importance of Customer Satisfaction and Cultural Influences in the European
Hospitality Industry. A Case Study of a Four Star Hotel in Spain, Germany and England.
Unpublished Master Thesis. MA European Tourism Management[M]. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
 ·256· Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Innovation & Management

and Hogskolan Dalarna, 2006

[13] Ross, R.H., Broyles, S.A., Leingpibul, T.Alternative Measures of Satisfaction in Cross-cultural
Settings[J]. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 2008,17(2):82-91
[14] Normazalila Abu Bakar, Nor Mazlina Abu Bakar, N. Students‘ Satisfaction Towards the University
Accommodation and Public Amenities[R]. International Conference on Construction and Building
Technology (ICCBT 2008) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2008
[15] Dulawat, M.S., Rai, R.S. Satisfaction Level of Students as a Tool for Performance Measurement[R].
Paper Presented and Published in International Seminar on ―Strategic Role of HRM in New
Millennium‖ on 8-10 January, at IPS Academy, Indore, 2005:1-10
[16] Johnson, M.D., Herrmann, A., Gustafsson, A. Comparing Customer Satisfaction across Industries
and Countries[J]. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2002,23:749-769
[17] NurulUlyaniMohdNajib, Nor AiniYusof, and Zulkifli Osman Measuring Satisfaction with Student
Housing Facilities[J]. American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2010,4(1):52-60
[18] Tsoukatos, E., Rand, G.K. Cultural Influences on Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction:
Evidence from Greek Insurance[J]. Managing Service Quality, Emerald Group Publishing Limited,
2007,17(4):467-485
[19] Reimann, M., Lünemann, U.F., Chase, R.B. Uncertainty Avoidance as a Moderator of the
Relationship Between Perceived Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction[J]. Journal of Service
Research, 2008,11(1):63-73
[20] Jin, B., Park, J.Y., Kim, J. Cross-cultural Examination of the Relationships among Firm Reputation,
E-satisfaction, E-trust, and E-loyalty[J]. International Marketing Review, Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, 2008,25(3):324-337
[21] Sigala, M. Sakellaridis, O. The Impact of User‘s Cultural Characteristics on E-service Quality:
Implications for Globalising Tourism and Hospitality Websites[M]. Springer Vienna,
2004,46(4):197-202

View publication stats