<%BANNER%>

Does Better Event Quality Means More Fans?

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0041800/00001

Material Information

Title: Does Better Event Quality Means More Fans? Moderating Effect of Perceived Value, Trust, and Commitment on the Link Between Event Quality Factors and Behavioral Intention.
Physical Description: 1 online resource (71 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Kim, Taeho
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: behavior, commitment, consumer, event, perceived, quality, trust, value
Tourism, Recreation, and Sport Management -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sport Management thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Event quality (EQ) is one of the most popular research areas to increase sport consumer behavior. However, the limited research has shown that how the relationship between EQ and behavioral intention is influenced by other factors (e.g. perceived value, trust, commitment). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to empirically test the potential moderating effect of perceived value, trust, and commitment on the relationship between EQ and behavioral intention in the spectator sport context. Data were collected from a large Southeastern university at home women's intercollegiate basketball games. The results of the structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS 18.0 revealed that in collegiate women?s basketball, among the event quality factors, game performance (?=.45), entertainment (?=.34), and interaction with staff (?=.17) positively influenced sport consumption behavior. On the other hand, physical surrounding was not found to influence sport consumer behavior. Furthermore, to formally test if there was a significant structural difference between the high level of perceived value, trust, and commitment group and general level of perceived value, trust, and commitment group samples, multiple-group SEM was conducted using AMOS. Unfortunately, current study could not attempt to analyze the moderating effect of perceived value and trust. However commitment has a chance to examine 10 the moderating effect. For the highly committed group, only the performance-attendance path (?=.46) turned out to be significant. Otherwise, for the general group, three among four paths: game performance (?=.52), in-game entertainment (?=.46), and interaction with the staff (?=.27), turned out to be significant. This study indicated that to attract the general commitment customers, sport managers need to focus on those three factors. This study will benefit the spectator sport industry by contributing to the development of a knowledge base regarding event quality and commitment of sport spectators. The findings of this study can be used as valuable information for market segmentation within the spectator sport industry and for developing targeted event quality marketing strategies.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Taeho Kim.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Ko, Yong Jae.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0041800:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0041800/00001

Material Information

Title: Does Better Event Quality Means More Fans? Moderating Effect of Perceived Value, Trust, and Commitment on the Link Between Event Quality Factors and Behavioral Intention.
Physical Description: 1 online resource (71 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Kim, Taeho
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2010

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: behavior, commitment, consumer, event, perceived, quality, trust, value
Tourism, Recreation, and Sport Management -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Sport Management thesis, M.S.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Event quality (EQ) is one of the most popular research areas to increase sport consumer behavior. However, the limited research has shown that how the relationship between EQ and behavioral intention is influenced by other factors (e.g. perceived value, trust, commitment). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to empirically test the potential moderating effect of perceived value, trust, and commitment on the relationship between EQ and behavioral intention in the spectator sport context. Data were collected from a large Southeastern university at home women's intercollegiate basketball games. The results of the structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS 18.0 revealed that in collegiate women?s basketball, among the event quality factors, game performance (?=.45), entertainment (?=.34), and interaction with staff (?=.17) positively influenced sport consumption behavior. On the other hand, physical surrounding was not found to influence sport consumer behavior. Furthermore, to formally test if there was a significant structural difference between the high level of perceived value, trust, and commitment group and general level of perceived value, trust, and commitment group samples, multiple-group SEM was conducted using AMOS. Unfortunately, current study could not attempt to analyze the moderating effect of perceived value and trust. However commitment has a chance to examine 10 the moderating effect. For the highly committed group, only the performance-attendance path (?=.46) turned out to be significant. Otherwise, for the general group, three among four paths: game performance (?=.52), in-game entertainment (?=.46), and interaction with the staff (?=.27), turned out to be significant. This study indicated that to attract the general commitment customers, sport managers need to focus on those three factors. This study will benefit the spectator sport industry by contributing to the development of a knowledge base regarding event quality and commitment of sport spectators. The findings of this study can be used as valuable information for market segmentation within the spectator sport industry and for developing targeted event quality marketing strategies.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Taeho Kim.
Thesis: Thesis (M.S.)--University of Florida, 2010.
Local: Adviser: Ko, Yong Jae.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2010
System ID: UFE0041800:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 DOES BETTER EVENT QUALITY MEANS MORE FANS? MODERATING EFFECT OF PERCEIVED VALUE, TRUST, AND COMMITMENT ON THE LINK BETWEEN EVENT QUALITY FACTORS AND BEHAVIORAL INTENTION. By TAE HO KIM A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOO L OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010

PAGE 2

2 2010 T ae H o K im

PAGE 3

3 To my wife and daughter

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank God. I would like to acknowledge my committee members for their guidance, mentorship, and support during the past two years. Each contributed valuable expertise to this research. I would like to thank Dr. J a mes Zhang and Dr. Kyriaki Kaplanidou for their en couraging and support. I would especially like to thank my advisor Dr. Yong Jae K o for his patiently sticking with me through the many iterations of this project, offering guidance when needed, and tempering my anxiety with realism. His mentorship helped me to push through when things seemed not to make sense. I would also like to thank my friends. I am very grateful that I have worked with the best colleagues at the University of Florida Sport Management Specially thanks Dr. Yu Kyoum Kim and Dr. Yong C hae Rhee. W hen I spent struggling time, you helped and cared me not only study but also my life. I will not forget your helping and repay you someday. Finally, I offer my sincere thanks to my family who never doubted that I could do this S pecially thanks my wife Sung Yee and my daughter Taey. Y our existence itself is encouraging me. I love you!!

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................ 7 LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................. 8 ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................................... 9 CH A P T ER 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 11 Statement of Problems ................................................................................................................ 11 Purpose of Study ......................................................................................................................... 13 Contribution of t he Study ........................................................................................................... 14 Limitations of the Study ............................................................................................................. 14 Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................................... 15 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 17 Service Quality ............................................................................................................................ 17 Spectator Sport Event Quality ............................................................................................ 18 The Third Factors Influencing Perception of Service Quality .......................................... 20 Moderators ................................................................................................................................... 21 Perceived Value ................................................................................................................... 21 Trust ...................................................................................................................................... 23 Commitment ......................................................................................................................... 24 Sport Consumption Behavior ..................................................................................................... 26 Behavior Intention ............................................................................................................... 26 Attendance ............................................................................................................................ 27 Hypothesis Development ............................................................................................................ 28 Game Performance .............................................................................................................. 29 Interaction with Staff ........................................................................................................... 30 Facility Design ..................................................................................................................... 30 Perceived Value ................................................................................................................... 31 Trust ...................................................................................................................................... 31 Commitment ......................................................................................................................... 32 3 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 34 Participants and Procedures ........................................................................................................ 34 Instrumentation ............................................................................................................................ 35 Scale Development in Service Quality Research. ............................................................. 35 Event Q uality ....................................................................................................................... 36

PAGE 6

6 Moderators ........................................................................................................................... 37 Behavioral Intention ............................................................................................................ 38 Demographics ...................................................................................................................... 38 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 38 Descriptive Statistics ........................................................................................................... 39 Measurement Model ............................................................................................................ 39 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Test ........................................................................ 40 Multi -group Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis ........................................... 40 4 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................... 42 Descriptive Statistics ................................................................................................................... 42 Demographics ...................................................................................................................... 42 Event Quality ....................................................................................................................... 42 Moderators ........................................................................................................................... 42 Behavioral Intention ............................................................................................................ 42 Measurement model .................................................................................................................... 43 Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Test ........................................................................ 43 Multi Group Structural Equation Modeling (S EM) Analysis .......................................... 44 5 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................................. 53 Direct Effect of Event Quality Factors to Behavioral Intention ............................................... 53 Game Performance and Behavioral Intention .................................................................... 53 In -game Entertainment and Behavioral Intention .............................................................. 53 Interaction with Staff and Behavioral Intention ................................................................ 54 Facility Design and Behavioral Intention ........................................................................... 55 The Moderatin g Effect of Perceived Value, Trust, and Commitment ..................................... 56 Commitment ......................................................................................................................... 56 Game Performance .............................................................................................................. 57 In -game Entertainment ........................................................................................................ 57 Interaction with Staff ........................................................................................................... 58 Facility Design ..................................................................................................................... 58 Limitation and Future Research ................................................................................................. 59 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 60 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............................................................................................................. 71

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4 1 Description of Participants (N = 282) ................................................................................... 45 4 2 Summary result for measurement model test ....................................................................... 46 4 3 Means, SD, Correlations and Squared Correlations Matrix ................................................ 47 4 4 Path coefficient and statistical significance .......................................................................... 48 4 5 Description of Participants for moderating effect (N = 228) .............................................. 49 4 6 Structural invariance analysis Perceived Value for each individual structural path ....... 49 4 7 Structural invariance analysis Trust for each individual structural path .......................... 50 4 8 Structural invariance analysis Commitment for each individual structural path ............. 51

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 1 A proposed research model ................................................................................................... 33 4 1 Result of hypothesis test (H1 ~ H4) ...................................................................................... 49 4 2 Moderating effect of Commitment (H7). .............................................................................. 52

PAGE 9

9 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science DOES BETTER EVENT QUALITY MEANS MORE FANS? : MODERATING EFFECT OF PERCEIVED VALUE, TRUST, AND COMMITMENT ON THE LINK BETWEEN EVENT QUALITY FACTORS AND BEHAVIORAL INTENTION. By Tae Ho Kim May 2010 Ch air: Yong Jae Ko Major: Sport Management Event quality (EQ) is one of the most popular research areas to increase sport consumer behavior. H owever, the limited research has shown that how the relationship between EQ and behavioral intention is influenced by other factors (e.g. perceived value, trust, commitment). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to empirically test the potential moderating effect of perceived value, trust, and commitment on the relationship between EQ and behavior al intention in th e spectator sport context. Data were collected from a large Southeastern university at home women's intercollegiate basketball games. T he results of the structural equation modeling (SEM) with AMOS 18.0 revealed that in collegiate womens basketball, among the event quality positively influenced sport consumption behavior. O n the other hand, physical surrounding was not found to influence sport consumer behavior. F u rthermore, t o formally test if there was a significant structural difference between the high level of perceived value, trust, and commitment group and general level of perceived value, trust, and commitment group samples, multi group SEM was conducted usi ng A MOS. U nfortunately, current study could not attempt to analyze the moderating effect of perceived value and trust H owever commitment has a chance to examine

PAGE 10

10 the moderating effect. For the highly committed group, only the performance attendance path turned out to be significant. O therwise, f or the general group, three among four paths: game performance -game entertainment turned out to be significant. T his study indicated that to attr act the general commitment customers, sport manager s need to focus on those three factors. T his study will benefit the spectator sport industry by contributing to the development of a knowledge base regarding event quality and commitment of sport spectator s. T he findings of this study can be used as valuable information for market segmentation within the spectator sport industry and for developing targeted event quality marketing strategies.

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The spectator sport is one of the largest a nd fastest growing industries in the United States. In 1999, the sport industry was valued at $213 billion well over twice the size of the U.S. auto industry (Broughton, Lee, & Netheny, 1999). It has grown sharply in recent years to $410 billion in 2007 (P lunkett Research, 2007). Furthermore, sports are the most popular leisure activity in North America (Higgs & McKinley, 2005). In the respective 2006 2007 seasons, approximately 150 million spectators attended games of the four major professional sport leag ues, which include Major League Baseball (MLB), National Football League (NFL), National Basketball League (NBA), National Hockey League (NHL) (Sport Business Research Network, 2008). These figures indicate the great importance of sports in United States. Statement of Problems Although sport industries have received substantial benefits from the success of the spectator sport segment, sports organizations are recently experiencing a number of significant challenges in the business environment (Howard & Crom pton, 2005). Howard and Crompton (2005) emphasized that both professional and collegiate sport organizations should manage serious problems such as spiraling operating costs, a saturated marketplace, economic disconnect, and the emergence of new technology. First, the cost of operating sports teams has escalated much faster than revenue in the last few years. For example, during the 20072008 seasons, NBA average salary was $5.36 million per year and the new Yankee Stadium cost $1.3 billion At the same tim e, competition for spectators discretionary dollars is becoming even more severe. Over 600 professional sports teams and 1,000 collegiate athletic programs compete to attract spectators in North America. Furthermore, workingclass and middle -class spectat ors cannot afford the quickly increasing cost of stadium events. For example, during 20032009

PAGE 12

12 seasons, MLB average fan cost index was increased 32.4 % Finally, the emergence and development of new technology could be both threats and opportunities. The c ompetition created by v ideo games, movies, and TV shows has become more severe. On the other hand, thee technologies allow spectators to enjoy the game more comfortably and frequently. Also, the fan can get information about sports in more places. Facing these serious challenges, sport marketers have attempted a variety of ways to overcome these problems. Many scholars tried to find the solution in service quality (Ko & Pastore, 2004; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985; Reichheld & Sasser, 1990; Zeithaml Berry, & Parasuraman, 1996). In a saturated marketplace, increasing customer satisfaction with service quality is key factor for success in sport organization. A considerable amount of research has found that high -quality service is a significant factor to increase customer satisfaction (Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994; Dagger & Sweeney, 2007). Satisfied customers are more likely to purchase, become more associated with the organization, and do not defect when prices increase (Anderson et al., 1994; Cr onin, Brady, & Hult, 2000). Theoretically, service quality should be linked to repurchase behavior. However, several studies found that service quality was not applicable to all contexts (Dagger & Sweeney, 2007; Greenwell, Fink, & Pastore, 2002; Mittal & K amakura, 2000; McDonald, Milne, & Cimperman, 1997). The service experience could be affected by the third variable such as customer character (Grove, Fisk, & Dorsch, 1998; Mittal & Kamakura, 2001), team identification (Greenwell et al., 2002; McDonald et a l., 1997), length of relationship (Dagger & Sweeney, 2007), and demographics (Greenwell et al., 2002). Based on these studies, the researcher believes that service quality is influenced by the third variable. To better understand how sport consumers develo p quality perceptions, in -depth analysis using these moderating variables is necessary.

PAGE 13

13 One potential factor that influences the relationship between service quality and consumer behavior is perceived value. Prior research indicated that perceived value was the most important factor in customers decisions to make a purchase (Buzzell & Gale, 1987; Cronin et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2007; Oh, 2000) and has both direct and indirect effects on consumer behavior (Cronin et al., 2000; Oh, 2000; Zeithaml, 1998). Tr ust and commitment were also found to have an effect on consumer behavior (Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Trust could decrease perceived risk and increase behavior intention (Berry, 1995; Luo, 2002). Additionally, commitment helps to prevent customer detachment (Cr osby & Taylor, 1984; Prichard, Havtiz, & Howard, 1999), and positively affects customer loyalty (Prichard et al., 1999; Palmatier et al., 2006). As previous literature suggested, perceived value, trust, and commitment positively influence consumer behavio r. However, limited research was conducted regarding how perceived value, trust, and commitment effect the relationship between service quality and consumer behavior. Specifically, this issue has not been investigated in the sports context. It is the inten tion of this research to find how perceived value, trust, and commitment influences the relationship between service quality and consumer behavior in spectator sports. Purpose of Study The general aim of this study is to expand our understanding of consume r behavior in the sports industry by examining several salient consumer variables: event quality, perceived value, trust, and commitment. Specifically, the purposes of this study were (a) to identify which specific factors of event quality positively influ ence on spectators behavioral intention and (b) to empirically test the potential moderating effect of perceived value, trust, and commitment on the relationship between event quality and behavioral intention in the spectator sports context.

PAGE 14

14 Contribution of the Study T his research examine the effective event quality factors among game performance, in game entertainment, interaction with staff, and facility design to increase sport consumer behavioral intention. This study helps sport managers to develop m ore effective service marketing strategy. Based on these results, sport managers could focus on more affective event quality factors. Moreover, this study examined the moderating effect between event quality and behavioral intention. Although prior resear ch examined the various moderating effects, limited studies have been identified the moderating effect of perceived value, trust, and commitment on the relationship between event quality and behavioral intention, especially in the sport context. This resul ts could be the theoretical background of future research that trying to find the moderating effect of the relationship between event quality and behavioral intention not only sport context but also business context. Practically, the sport marketer can use the results in developing effective segmentation based on the level of perceived value, trust and commitment. Based on this segmentation, sport marketer could establish more effective event marketing strategies. Limitations of the Study This study has s ome limitations that should be considered for future research. First limitation is event quality factors. Previous studies found the various event quality factors (e.g. parking, concession, information, cleanness) that positively influence increasing behavioral intention However, this research only focused on four factors (game performance, in game entertainment, interaction with staff, and facility design). This limited factors caused the limitation of event quality research findings. Therefore, future re search may need to incorporate different event quality factors to develop a better understanding of the relationship between event quality and behavioral intention.

PAGE 15

15 Second limitation is behavioral intention factors. Similar with event quality factors limitation current study only focused on a ttendance behavioral intention. Although increasing attendance intention is one of the most important behavioral intentions in the spectator sport industry, p revious research revealed the importance of other behaviora l intentions such as word of -mouth, merchandised products consumption, and media consumption. Thus, future study may need to include different consumer behavior to increase a better understanding of the spectators behavioral intention. Third limitation is participants of this research. The majority of the participants were college students. The sample of college students might limit the generalizability of the research findings. In addition, the context of this study, a womens collegiate basketball game, might also limit the generalizability of the findings. Therefore, future research need to broad sample and context such as the customers who visit the mens basketball or professional sport games. Definitions of Terms 1 Event Quality comparison of a consum ers evaluation of the service performance to their pre expectation of the service (Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman 1988) a Game performance spectators perceptions regarding the quality of athletic performance through which spectators experience aesthetics, excitement, and drama in sport events (Ko, Zhang, & Pastore, in review p 4 ) b In Game Entertainment variety of entertainment offered during the event to keep fans entertained and to maximize their interests (e.g. cheerleader performance, half -court sh ots for prizes, and half -time events) (Ko et al., in review) c Interaction with Staff the customers subjective perception of how the service is delivered during the service encounter in which the attitude, behavior, and expertise of service personnel are highlighted (Ko & Pastore, 2004, p. 164 ) d Facility Design Functional and aesthetic facilitys layout or architecture (Bitner, 1992) 2 Perceived Value consumers overall assessment of the utility of a product (or service) based on perceptions of what is re ceived and what is given (Zeithaml, 1988, p 14)

PAGE 16

16 3 Trust the perception of confidence in the exchange partners reliability and integrity (Morgan & Hunt, 1994 p. 23 ) 4 Commitment an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship (Moorman, Zaltman & Des hpande, 1992, p. 316 ) 5 Spectator Sport Behavioral Intention a predict actual attend in the stadium (Grewal, Krishnan, Baker, & Robin, 1998)

PAGE 17

17 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Service Quality S ervice quality constructs stem from manufacturing research con ducted in 1920 (Kandampully, 2002). S ervice quality has received great attention from service marketing researchers over the past two decades. Because service quality has been researched for a long time, various definitions have been created. Zeithaml et a l., (1988) defined service quality as the comparison of a consumers evaluation of the service performance to their pre -expectation of the service. Bitner and Hubbert (1994) defined service quality as the consumers overall impression of the relative infe riority/superiority of the organization and its services (p. 77). Since service quality became a focus of research, its importance has been identified as it applies to a variety of industries, such as telecommunication (Bolton & Drew, 1991), aircraft (An derson, Pearo & Widener, 2008), insurance (Crosby & Stephens, 1987), tourism (Petrick & Backman, 2001; Shonk & Chelladurai, 2008), banking (Schneider, White, & Paul, 1998), health care (Dagger & Sweeney, 2007; Mittal, Ross, & Baldasare 1998), restaurant (S teven, Knutson, & Patton, 1995; Bojanic & Rosen, 1994), hotel (Mei, Dean, & White, 1999), online consumption (Cai & Jun, 2003; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Malhotra, 2005). Relative to sports, numerous studies exist, such as fitness programs (Alexandris, Zahar iadis, Tsorbatzoudis, & Grouios, 2004; Kim & Kim 1995), golf courses (Crilley, Murray, Howat, March, & Adamson, 2002), recreation and leisure (Crompton, MacKay, & Fesenmaier 1991; MacKay & Crompton 1988; Howat, Absher, Crilley, & Milne, 1996; Ko & Pastore 2004, 2005; ), sport tourism ( Shonk & Chelladurai, 2008; Solberg & Preuss, 2007), sport events (Ko et al., in press; Solberg & Preuss, 2007; Tsuji, Bennett, & Zhang, 2007)

PAGE 18

18 Spectator Sport Event Quality The study about service have been researched variou s industry (Parasuraman et al., 1985; Reichheld & Sasser, 1990; Zeithaml et al 1996). However, service perception about business and spectator sport is different (Ko et al., in review). In the spectator sport context, customer establish their perception of overall event such as game performance (Hansen & Gauthier, 1989; Shofield, 1983), service delivery system (Getz, 2005), amenities and additional services (Hansen & Gauthier, 1989). Therefore, this study used the terms of event quality instead of service quality. Previous research has examined the effect of event quality, which is an important factor in improving consumer behavior. Wakefield and Blodgett (1994) identified the importance of servicescape by videotape simulation method in a major league baseball stadium. Although videotape simulation method could not examine the ambient features such as music, aromas, temperature, or weather, it could produce valid consumer responses and control over other factors such as win/lose record, teams playing, time of the baseball season, and manipulation of involvement levels. They found that the satisfaction levels and future intentions are strongly influenced by perceptions of the servicescape. When customers perceived a high quality of servicescape, they were mor e satisfied and had more repatronage intention. Wakefie l d and Sloan (1995) examined the importance of the stadium service experience in college spectator sports. They found that spectators desires to stay, and therefore, to attend games were directly inf luenced by comfortable parking, stadium cleanliness (especially restroom and concession area), variety and high quality of food service specially comparing with price quality, and providing safety from abusive or offensive fans. Perceived crowding and unco mfortable seats had a negative impact. Hill and Green (2000) examined the effects of

PAGE 19

19 sportscape in rugby leagues. They found that the sportscape enhanced future game attendance behavior of home team supporters. Kelly and Turley (2002) researched nine serv ice attributes that sport fans used in evaluating their service experience: employees, price, facility access, concessions, fan comfort, game experience, show time, convenience, and smoking. They found that every factor except for concessions significantly influenced fan service evaluating behavior. The most important factor was game experience. However, sport marketers cannot control the game experience. Therefore, it is suggested, sport marketers must focus on the variables that they can control. When gam e quality is poor, controllable factors can help to provide a better experience to customers. Leeuween, Quick, and Daniel (2002) support this conclusion. Although the core service is not a controllable factor, it is still important to understand how both c ore and peripheral service quality positively influence spectator sport satisfaction. Greenwell et al. (2002) suggested that all service experience variables such as core product, physical facility, and service personnel significantly influences customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction was moderately influenced by customers perceptions of the physical facility as a whole rather than specific factor. Also they found that, although both core product and service personnel are important, the perception of service personnel is slightly more important to customer satisfaction than core product. This result contrasts with Kelly and Turley (2002). In Kelly and Turley, study participants were the spectators of intercollegiate athletics, whereas Greenwell et al. study participants were spectators of a minor league ice hockey team. The finding that spectators are more concerned with components of the service personnel than the core product is consistent with other research on minor league hockey spectators (Zhang, Pease, Smith, Lee, Lam, & Jambor, 1997). Furthermore, this research highlights the

PAGE 20

20 effectiveness of evaluating the entire service experience rather than separating one or two attributes. They suggested that to satisfy customers and increase consumption be havior, managers should focus on all three interrelated variables. Tsuji et al. (2007) examined the relationships among core and peripheral service quality, satisfaction, and future intention in action sport events. They found both core and peripheral serv ice quality significantly influences satisfaction, and peripheral service quality positively affects future intention. Although core service quality did not significantly impact future intention directly, it had an indirect effect on future intentions. The Third Factors Influencing Perception of Service Q uality Since service quality was first introduced and researched, its agenda has changed. During the 1980s, scholars focused on finding what service quality meant to customers and developing strategies to meet customer expectations (Parasuraman et al., 1988). In the 1990s, researchers focused on how service quality generates profit and other financial outcomes for the organization (Rust, Zahorik, & Keiningham 1995). Today, some scholars are researching the third factors that influence the relationship between service quality and consumption behavior. Greenwell et al. (2002) investigated how demographic and psychographic factors influence customer perception of service quality. They found in psychographics t hat the customers who more identified with team were less critical about the core product and physical facility than less identified customers. This result is consistent with the finding of Sutton, McDonald, Milne, and Cimperman (1997) who found that the h ighly identified fan has less sensitivity about team performance levels. Furthermore, the study revealed several interesting findings about demographic characteristics. First, there was no difference, depending on gender, in evaluations of the physical fac ility or service personnel. However, women were less critical about the core product than men. This result indicated that women evaluate service based on the physical

PAGE 21

21 facility or service personnel rather than the core product. Trail et al. (2002) found sim ilar results: aspects of the physical facility such as cleanliness, restroom, audio experience, and service personnel are more important to women than men. Second, although perception of core product was not different depending on age, younger customers we re more critical about the physical facility or service personnel than older customers. Third, income level was not correlated with perception of core product or physical facility, however perception of service personnel was significantly different. Lower income customers were more critical about service personnel than higher income customers. Dagger and Sweeney (2007) clarified in studies of health care services that the perception of service quality depends on how long the consumer has been with the organ ization. They found that tangible and operation service quality perception was significantly more salient to novice customers, while expertise, outcome, and atmosphere were significantly important to longer -term customers. Interaction and timeline were equ ally significant to both groups. These findings suggest that service firms should treat newly acquired customers and loyal customers differently. Although numerous scholars researched and proved the effectiveness of service quality to improve consumer beha vior, research about factors that influence the relationship between service quality and consumer behavior in the sports industry is still limited. In particular, the spectator sport industry needs more study. To better understand spectator sport consumer behavior and make more effective service marketing strategies, factors that influence the relationship between service quality and consumer behavior were conducted in this study. Moderators Perceived Value A significant amount of research has emphasized th e importance of perceived value as a critical variable in predicting consumption behavior (Cronin, Brady, & Hult, 2000; Murray &

PAGE 22

22 Howat, 2002; Zeithaml, 1988). Zeithamal defined perceived value as the consumers overall assessment of the utility of a product (or service) based on perceptions of what is received and what is given (p. 14). Similarly, McDougall and Levesque (2000) defined perceived value as the results or benefits customers receive in relation to total costs which include the price paid plus other costs associated with the purchase (p. 394). Bojanic (1996) indicated that perceived value results in three possible values: 1) offering comparable quality at a comparable price, 2) offering superior quality at a premium price, and 3) offering infe rior quality at a discounted price. Thus, perceived value changes depending on the service providers pricing strategy, the pricing strategy of their competitors, or consumers needs and/or preferences (Petrick, 2004). Research has revealed the effectiveness of perceived value that increases consumer behavior. Oh (1999) indicated that when customers choose a hotel, perceived value is directly related to repurchase intentions. Cronin et al. (2000) revealed that, across six industries (spectator sports, parti cipation sports, entertainment, health care, long -distance carriers, and fast food), perceived value was not only a direct predictor of behavioral intentions, but also played a mediating role between service quality and behavioral intention. Baker, Parasuraman, Grewal, and Voss (2002) studied merchandise products and patronage intention; they found that high levels of perceived value result in both future purchase intentions and actual behavior. Lee et al. (2007) investigated festival attendees future beha vioral intentions and determined that perceived value was the best predictor of behavioral intentions. In sports industries, Murray and Howat (2002) identified that perceived service positively affects satisfaction, which affects consumption intention within a sports and leisure context. Furthermore, perceived value significantly played a mediating role in the formation of satisfaction. Kwon, Trail, and James (2007) found a mediating role of perceived value between team identification and licensed products purchasing behavior.

PAGE 23

23 In their study, team identification alone did not effectively drive purchasing behavior, but that perceived value did. Although various scholars have identified the important role of perceived value in consumption behavior, perceived value has received far less attention than service quality and satisfaction (Tam, 2000). In addition, perceived value has not been studied in the field of sports management. Furthermore, prior studies have focused on the mediating role of perceived value; however, this study attempts to find its moderating effect and to create a better understanding of consumption behavior for sports managers. Trust Many researchers have revealed that trust is the key to establishing successful relationships between custome rs and organizations (Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Berry, 1995; Farrelly & Quester, 2005; Palmatier et al., 2006). Morgan and Hunt (1994, p. 23) defined trust as the perception of confidence in the exchange partners reliability and integrity. Anderson and Weitz (1989) defined it as one partys belief that its needs will be fulfilled by actions undertaken by the other party (p. 312). When people evaluate trust, emphasis is placed on confidence and reliability. Morgan and Hunt (1994) stated that trust could redu ce opportunistic behavior, and Berry (1995) identified trust as a critical factor in service marketing because of the intangible nature of service. Most services are difficult to evaluate before customers purchase or experience them, and some services even remain difficult to evaluate after they have been experienced. However, customers who have built trust in a service based on their experience reduce their uncertainty and vulnerability. Therefore, trust creates good relationships between service provide rs and customers. Berry (1995) suggested three ways of building trust: 1) opening lines of communication, 2) guaranteeing the service, and 3) providing a higher standard of conduct. First, opening lines of

PAGE 24

24 communication could reduce customers mistrust and p rovide more opportunities to build a relationship with the company. Second, guaranteeing the service could represent the organizations commitment to fair play with customers and facilitate competitive discrimination. And finally, a higher standard of conduct means that if organizations operate with such a high standard, rather than simply a standard of legality, they can bu ild trust with their customers. Gwinner, Gremler, and Bitner (1998) identified that the psychological advantage generated from trust is more critical than special treatment or social advantage from consumer relationships with a service firm. Garbino and Johnson (1999) found that customers were influenced by different factors depending on the level of relationship with a New York off Broad way repertory theater. In their study, highly related customers were more influenced by trust than overall satisfaction. This result implies that marketing programs that focus on maintaining and building trust will be more effective for high relational c us tomers consumption behavior. Luo (2002) indicated that trust plays a key role in online markets where uncertainty and the lack of legal protection prevail. Therefore, by increasing trust, customers privacy concerns decrease and purchasing behaviors incre ase. Based on these research findings, trust is important to study in order to identify effective ways to increase customers consumption behavior. Commitment Commitment has been identified as a key component of successful consumer relationships (Gundlach, Achrol, & Mentzer, 1995; Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Palmatier, Dant, Grewal & Evans, 2006). Commitment is not only a good indicator of long-term relationships (Morgan, & Hunt, 1994; Shamdasani, & Sheth, 1995), but is also thought to represent the peak in relational bonding (Dwyer, Schurr, & Oh, 1987). Dwyer et al. (1987, p. 19) defined commitment as an implicit or explicit pledge of relational continuity between exchange partners. Moorman et al (1992, p. 316) defined commitment as a n enduring desire to maintain

PAGE 25

25 a valued relationship. Commitment indicates a sacrifice of short -term advantages for long term benefits (Dwyer et al., 1987). Gundlach, Achrol, and Mentzer (1995) identified three elements of commitment: instrumental, attitud inal, and temporal elements. The instrumental element refers to a positive action that develops self interest related to the relationship. The attitudinal element indicates a lasting intention through a psychologically stable relationship. And the temporal element represents a consistent relationship with an organization over time. Various scholars have suggested there are two kinds of commitment: affective and calculative (Fullerton, 2003; Hansen, Sandvik, & Selnes, 2003; Johnson et al., 2001). Calculativ e commitment is more reasonable than affective commitment and an economic-based relationship. This relationship could develop through product benefits such as lack of choice or switching costs (Anderson & Weitz, 1992; Dwyer et al., 1987). On the other hand, affective commitment is a more emotional and psychological relationship; it could develop based on the degree of reciprocity or involvement with a company (Garbarino & Johnson, 1999; Morgan & Hunt, 1994). This study focused on the affective component of commitment that the psychological attachment. A number of studies have determined the importance of commitment. Moorman, Deshpande, and Zaltman (1993) suggested that customers who are committed to a relationship might have a greater propensity to act beca use of their need to remain consistent with their commitment. Kelly and Davis (1994) revealed that customer organizational commitment has a direct impact on customer service recovery expectations. Pritchard, Havitz, and Howard (1999) suggested that loyalty could be regarded as a latent outcome of resistance to change within the commitment process. Similar to those results, Garbino and Johnson (1999) identified that highly related customers are more influenced by commitment than overall satisfaction. Harriso n Walker

PAGE 26

26 (2001) examined the relationship between commitment and word-of -mouth activity in veterinarian and hair salon service. Their study found that affective commitment positively affects word of -mouth activity for both industries. Moreover, Verhoef (20 03) found that both customer retention and customer share development were positively influenced by affective commitment. Palmatier et al. (2006) revealed that commitment significantly affects customer loyalty to an organization. Today, there exist a vari ety of choices in sports teams and entertainment, which means that consumers can easily switch firms. Based on the conclusions of the research in this section, commitment is important to study in order to identify effective ways to increase consumption behavior. Sport Consumption Behavior A better understanding of the consumption behavior of sports spectators has been the most important goal for sports marketers (Stewart, Smith, & Nicholson, 2003). In the past few decades, interest in sports has increased a nd competition within the sports industry has become more intense than ever. As this study revealed, the sports industry was valued at $410 billion in 2007more than twice the size of the U.S. auto industry (Plunkett Research, 2007). In the 2006 2007 seasons, approximately 150 million spectators attended games of the four major professional leagues (Sports Business Research Network, 2008). Behavior Intention Behavior intention has been used generally to predict actual consumption behavior (Grewal et al. 1 998). Various researchers have found the effectiveness of behavior intentions that predict actual consumption behavior. Morwitz, Steckel, and Gupta, (2007) revealed that future actual intentions typically could be predicted by behavior intentions. In addit ion, Chandon, Morwitz, and Reinartz (2005) found that practitioners generally make predictions

PAGE 27

27 about consumers initial purchase of new products or the repeat purchase of existing products based on behavior intention data. In the sports field, companies al so examine behavior intentions. Trail et al. (2005) suggested that behavioral intention is a preferable predictor of actual sport consumption behavior. Numerous researchers have studied how to improve behavior intentions. Although there are various ways t o do so, this particular research focused on the service quality context. According to Cronin, Brady, Brand, Hightower, and Shemwell (1997) and Oh (1999), service quality was the most critical predictor of perceived value. Perception of the service quality significantly influences the customers satisfaction (Bolton & Drew, 1991; Cronin & Taylor, 1992; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1994) and customer satisfaction has been revealed to influence positively purchase intentions (Anderson & Sullivan, 1993; Cronin & Tayl or, 1992). Dodds, Monroe, and Grewal (1991) indicated that perceived service quality positively affects perceived value, which in turn positively influences purchase intention. In addition, Sivadas and Baker -Pruitt (2000) found that consumer satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) with core service influences future purchasing behavior across business contexts. Also, Cronin, Brady, and Hult (2000) supported the finding that the perceived service value directly influences satisfaction and behavioral intentions. A ttendance In spectator sports, increasing attendance is the principal purpose of sports marketers. Professional and collegiate sports teams game expenses (player and coach salaries, equipment, maintenance, new stadiums) have continually escalated. The rev enue from increasing attendance is not only from ticket sales, but other stadium purchases, including parking, concessions, and merchandising. The four major professional leagues ticket sales explained approximately 20 to 50 percent of total revenues (Badenhausen et al., 2007). Collegiate -level sports teams and

PAGE 28

28 various minor leagues rely more on ticket sales revenue (Howard & Crompton, 2005). Moreover, revenue from other stadium purchases, such as concessions, merchandising, and parking, was $8.84 billion a year in the U.S. (Broughton et al. 1999). Prior studies have investigated how to increase attendance and have found that service quality positively influences attendance. Wakefield, Blodgett, and Sloan (1996) revealed that perception of service quality increases satisfaction, and this satisfaction positively influences motivation to attend games and athletic events (Hill & Green, 2000; Tsuji et al. 2007). Cronin et al. (2000) indicated that core service quality perception increases attendees intention to revisit, a finding that supports prior studies results (Wakefield et al. 1996; Wakefield & Sloan, 1995). Other studies revealed that peripheral service quality and consumer satisfaction influence behavioral intentions of consumers (McDougall & Levesqu e, 2000; Murray & Howat, 2002; Tsuji et al., 2007). Moreover, minor league teams focused more on peripheral service quality to compensate for poor team performances (Lienert, 1998). Tsuji et al. (2007) also found that peripheral service quality and satisfa ction were more significantly related to future intentions than core services in action sports. Hypothesis Development Ko et al. (in review ) indicated that M EQSS consists of five primary dimensions, including quality of game, augment service quality, inter action quality, outcome quality, and physical environment quality, in addition to twelve sub -dimensions, including skill performance, game schedule, information, ingame entertainment, concession, interaction with staff, interaction among spectators, socia bility, valence, ambiance, design, and signage/scoreboard (Ko et al.). However, the current research is focused on four salient factors of event quality, which include game performance, in -game entertainment, interaction with staff, and physical surroundin gs, and examines the influence of each factor on behavioral intention.

PAGE 29

29 Game Performance First, game performance refers to spectators perceptions of the quality of game performance through which they experience aesthetics, excitement, and drama in sporting events (Ko, 2005). Numerous studies indicate that game performance positively influences fan satisfaction and attendance (Trail & James, 2001). For example, Trail, Anderson, and Fink (2002) identified that better team performances attract larger crowds. M atsuoka, Chelladurai, and Harada (2003) found that the performance of a favorite team is more critical than the actual result of the game (win or loss). Therefore, it is hypothesized that: H1 : Game performance would ha ve a direct and positive influence on the sport consumption behavior al intention In -game Entertainment Second, in game entertainment is one of the important augment services. Ko (2005) defined augment service quality as sport consumers perceptions of the quality of secondary products offere d in conjunction with events (p. 10). A variety of entertainment options or shows need to be offered during the event to keep fans entertained and to maximize their interest (Ko, 2005). In the case of the NBA, many teams offer a variety of in -game enterta inment, for example, half court shots for prizes, on -court activities during timeouts, cheerleading, and answering trivia questions, to keep fans entertained throughout an event to maximize their interest. The appropriate music at sporting events can also help to enhance fans recall memories (Zhang, Piatt, Ostroff, & Wright, 2005). Thus, this study hypothesizes that: H2 : Entertainment would ha ve a direct and positive influence on the sport consumption behavior al intention

PAGE 30

30 Interaction with Staff Third, int eraction quality refers to how the service is delivered to customers (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Gronroos, 1984). The quality of interaction between employees and clients can be defined by the customers perceptions about the employees attitude, behavior, and expertise of service personnel (Ko & Pastore, 2004). Services differ from manufactured goods in that services are intangible, heterogeneous, and are produced and consumed simultaneously. These attributes underscore the idea that the interactions between th e customer and employee are critical to the production and consumption of a service. Therefore, the current study hypothesizes that: H3 : Interaction with staff would ha ve a direct and positive influence on the sport consumption behavior al intention Facility Design Fourth, facility design represents the service facilitys layout or architecture, which includes functional and aesthetic components of the environment (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Ko & Pastore, 2004). Numerous studies posit that the physical surroundi ng is one of the important factors positively associated with sport consumption behavior (Wakefield & Blodgett, 1994; Wakefield & Sloan, 1995; Wakefield et al. 1996). Perceptions of the facility significantly influence excitement and satisfaction with the encounter (Wakefield & Blodgett), spectators desire to stay in the environment (Wakefield & Sloan; Wakefield et al ), and their likelihood of re -patronizing games at the servicescape (Wakefield et al. ). Sporting facilities are of great importance because each experience that a sport consumer has occurs in the facility. Greenwell et al. (2002) indicated that facility design was more influential than game performance in minor league ice hockey. Based on these research findings, this study hypothesizes that: H4 : Facility Design would ha ve a direct and positive influence on the sport consumption behavior al intention

PAGE 31

31 Perceived Value Perceived value is an important topic in predicting consumer behavior (Cronin, Brady, & Hult, 2000; Netemeyer et al., 2004; Oh, 1999; Petrick & Backman, 2002). Prior studies found that perceived value is an antecedent of purchase intention (Al -Sabbahy, Ekinci, & Riley, 2004; Netemeyer et al., 2004; Petrick & Backman, 2002) and directly affects behavior intention (Cronin et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2007; Oh, 1999). Several studies identified that high levels of perceived value increase customer satisfaction and satisfied customers have a greater chance of becoming loyal customers ( Baker, Parasuraman, Grewal, & Voss, 2002; Murray & Howat, 2002; Oh, 1999). Furthermore, the mediating role of perceived value between service quality and behavior intention are revealed (Cronin et al., 2000). Thus, sports marketers need to make every effort to increase consumers perception of product value through improved service quality. Thus, this study hypothesizes that: H5 : Perceived value would have moderating effect on the relationship between event quality factors and behavioral (attendance) intention Trust Trust reduces opportunistic behavior (Morgan & Hunt, 1994), increases willingness to maintain relationships (Berry, 1995), and increases purchase intentions (Luo, 2002). T rust is the key to establishing successful relationships between customers and organizations (Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Berry, 1995; Palm atier et al., 2006). Trust reduces opportunistic behavior (Morgan & Hunt, 1994), increases willingness to maintain relationships (Berry, 1995), and increases purchase intentions (Luo, 2002). Berry (1995) identified trust as a critical factor in service mar keting because of the intangible nature of service. However, customers who have built trust in a service based on their experience reduce their uncertainty and vulnerability. For these reasons, H6 was formulated:

PAGE 32

32 H6 : Trust would have moderating effect on t he relationship between event quality factors and behavioral (attendance) intention Commitment Commitment has been identified as a key component of successful consumer relationships (Gundlach et al., 1995; Morgan & Hunt, 1994; Hansen et al. 2001; Palmatie r et al., 2006). Commitment is not only a good indicator of longterm relationships (Morgan, & Hunt, 1994; Shamdasani, & Sheth, 1995), but is also thought to represent the peak in relational bonding (Dwyer, Schurr, & Oh, 1987). Previous research indicated that c ommitment increases customer loyalty (Palmatier, Dant, Grewal, & Evan, 2006), positive word-of -mouth, repeat purchasing (Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman 1996) and decreases the likelihood of changing products because of conflicting information (Crosby & Taylor, 1983). Therefore, the current study hypothesizes that: H 7 : Trust would have moderating effect on the relationship between event quality factors and behavioral (attendance) intention

PAGE 33

33 Figure 2 1. A proposed research model Consumption Behavior Moderators Event Quality In Game Entertainmen t Behavioral Intention Perceived Value Trust Commit ment Game Performance Facility Design Interaction w ith Staff

PAGE 34

34 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Both online and face to -face surveys were conducted to obtain empirical data on event quality, perceived value, trust, commitment, behavioral intention, and demographics. Data analysis was performed using various statistical te chniques ; descriptive statistics, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) test and Multi Group SEM analysis This methodology chapter of this study presents in the following order: 1) Participants and Procedures, 2) Instrume ntation, and 3) Data Analysis. Participants and Procedure s The target population of the study was adults who are 18 years of age or older, are literate, have agreed to participate in the survey, and live in the Southeastern United States. According to Mittal and Kamakura (2001), consumer characteristics (e.g., demographic or situational) greatly influence the level of consumer behavior. In the current study, participants were spectators who recently visited a stadium or have experienced visiting a stadium i n the past one year at a large Southeastern university for intercollegiate women's basketball home games. The data were collected combining two major survey modes: face -to -face self administered and online self administered. Participants in face -to -face su rveys were recruited via visiting one womens basketball game, and undergraduate and graduate classes. The researcher asked the participants to take part in this survey. After obtaining agreement to participate in the survey, the researcher gave a brief ex planation of the purpose of this research and how to fill out this survey. To comply with Institutional Review Boards (IRB) protocol, the informed consent process was ensured. This process involved providing information on planned procedure in language appropriate to the level of understanding of the participants and then requesting voluntary participation in

PAGE 35

35 accordance with the Code of Federal Regulation. Total number of face -to -face self administrated surveys was 176, of which 18 were unusable, resulting in 158 useable responses. Online survey participants were collected by sending an email containing an invitation to participate in the online survey and a link to an Internet website on which the survey questionnaire was posted. Email lists were obtained through various major undergraduate and graduate classes (e.g., sport management, journalism, chemistry, and statistics). In the first part of the questionnaire, the survey requested voluntary participation in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulation and outlined brief instructions for completion of the survey. Total data from online surveys were 135, of which nine were unusable, resulting in 124 useable responses. Therefore, a total of 282 were useable across both face -to -face and Web surveys. Instr umentation The questionnaire consisted of the following three parts: 1) Event Quality, 2) Moderators, 3) Behavioral Intention, and 4) Demographics. Scale Development in Service Quality Research. Since its introduction in 1920s, service quality has receive d tremendous attention by researchers. Various research scales have been developed and modified to evaluate for more suitable service quality. For example, Gronroos (1984) developed a two-dimensional model which consists of technical quality and functional quality. Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1985) developed the SERVQUAL model. Following the development of SERVQUAL, various researchers and various industries used and modified this scale (Browne et al., 1993; Carman, 1990; MacKay & Crompton, 1988; McDo nald et al., 1995; Wright, Duray, & Goodale, 1992). In addition, some scholars modified SERVQUAL to evaluate their own industries. For instance, to evaluate the recreational industry, Crompton, MacKay, and Fesenmaier (1991) developed RECQUAL. McDonald, Sut ton, and Milne (1995) developed TEAMQUAL to investigate

PAGE 36

36 professional sports. Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Malhotra (2005) developed E -S QUAL to investigate online consumer service quality. Although SERVQUAL enjoyed popularity in the last two decades, limitations associated with the validity of the scale were pointed out by several scholars. For instance, Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1991) found that the expectation factors could not be practically used. Ko et al. (in review) mentioned that this scale was more appropriate for measuring satisfaction than service quality. In an effort to overcome SERVQUALs limitations, a number of scales were developed by scholars. Kim and Kim (1995) developed the Quality Excellence of Sport Centers (QUESC) to measure fitn ess center service quality in South Korea. Ko and Pastore (2004, 2005) developed Scale of Service Quality in Recreational Sport (SSQRS) to examine recreational sport service quality. And Ko et al., (in review) developed the scale of sca l e of event quality for spectator sport ( S EQSS) to evaluate the perception of spectator sport service quality. Event Quality The first part measuring event quality consisted of four subscales (game performance, ingame entertainment, interaction with staff, and physical surr ounding) represented by a total of 15 items. To measure the sport consumers perceived level of event quality, this study adopted and modified the SEQSS developed by Ko et al. (in review). Example items included: game performance: My perceptions of the pl ayers skills make me excited; in -game entertainment: Pre and post game show is entertaining; interaction with staff: You can count on the employees at this event to be friendly; and facility design: I am impressed with the design of the facility. S EQSS ranged from .76 (game performance) to .90 (interaction with staff) and AVE values ranged from .53 (game

PAGE 37

37 values wer e greater than standard suggested thresholds (Hair Black, Babin, & Anderson 2009 ). Results indicated that this scale has good internal consistency and construct reliability. The S EQSS consists of four constructs (game performance, in-game entertainment, interaction with staff, and facility design) represented by a total of 15 items with a 7 point Likert type scale. Moderators The second section measuring mediator and moderator variables included three subscales (perceived value, trust, and commitment) wi th 12 items. These construct scales utilized in the current study were formed through a comprehensive literature review. However, items used to measure the constructs varied considerably across studies. Therefore, the items that were considered to be most appropriate for the purpose of this study were selected and modified. Spectators perceived economic value of a sporting event was measured by four items developed by Grewal, Monroe, and Krishnan (1998) that have been used in the golf travelers perceived value (e.g., Petrick & Backman, 2002). Example items included: I feel that I got my moneys worth for the money spent on my game attendance and I feel I received good quality for the price paid for my game attendance. Grewal et al. found that the reli ability coefficient for this scale exceeded .90, and thus deemed it acceptable To measure the level of consumers trust in a sports team, the author selected and modified items of Crosby, Evans, and Cowless (1990) scale and Palmatier, Dant, and Grewals (2007) scale. Example items included: Gators football team is trustworthy and I trust Gators football team. Crosby et al. (1990) found that the reliability coefficient exceeded .80, and Palmatier et al. (2007) found that the reliability coefficient exc eeded .67, and thus deemed it acceptable. Palmatier et al. (2007) used this scale to examine the level of trust between sellers and customers. Therefore, the scales were modified to examine the level of trust between spectator and team.

PAGE 38

38 The author adopted the Psychological Commitment to Team (PCT) scale developed by Mahony, Madrigal, and Howard (2000) to measure spectators level of commitment toward a team. The original PCT consisted of 14 items. However, Kwon and Trail (2003) found that the factor loadin g of seven items was below .707, making those items inadequate to represent the psychological commitment to the team because more error and unique variance than common variance were found. Among the seven finalized items, this study used four items to me asure commitment. Example items included: I am a committed fan of the Gators football team and It would be difficult to change my beliefs about the team. Behavioral Intention To measure the impact of the various relationships on attendance, this study selected one item from Fink et al. (2002) and three items from Kim (2008). Example items included: I am more likely to attend future Gators football game(s) and I intend to attend the Gators football game(s). Prior literature identified that the reliab ility coefficient for these items exceeded 0.95 and were thus deemed acceptable. The scale of consumer behavior is represented by a total of four items and uses a 7 -point Likert -t ype scale. Demographics The questionnaire included demographic characteristi cs of participants. These questions consisted of gender, age, and ethnicity. Data Analysis The data was analyzed using SPSS 18.0 and Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) 18.0. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics, measurement models for all constructs, SEM and multi group SEM. To evaluate the measurement models for event quality constructs and behavioral intention, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted using AMOS 18.0.

PAGE 39

39 Descriptive Statistics To explain the basic characteristics of t he data in this study, various descriptive statistics were conducted using SPSS 18.0, such as central tendency (e.g., mean, mode, median, etc.) and measures of variability (e.g., range, variance, standard deviation, etc.). Measurement Model A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using AMOS 18.0 (Arbuckle, 2006) to clarify the data and estimate how well the items represented the proposed latent constructs. According to Hair et al. (200 9 ) and Tabachnick and Fidell (2007), executing a CFA must foll ow five steps: 1) model specification, 2) identification, 3) model estimation, 4) testing model fit, and 5) model re -specification. To examine the goodness of fit indices, Hu and Bentler (1999) suggested chi -square statistics, as well as a comparative fit index (CFI) in conjunction with standard root -mean squared residual (SRMR). Additionally, Brown and Cudeck (1992) suggested the root -mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) to reduce problems with incremental fit indices (e.g., CFI). When the CFI value is close to .95 or higher in combination with an SRMR value less than .08, Hu and Bentler (1999) recommend a cutoff value. In addition, less than .06 of RMSEA value suggests a good fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999), between .06 and .08 indicates an acceptable fit, and higher than .10 implies an unacceptable fit (Brown & Cudeck, 1992). To measure the internal consistency and construct reliability respectively, Cronbachs alpha value and average variance extracted (AVE) were examined. Cronbachs alpha coefficients wer e examined for internal consistency and construct reliability, and to see how well the items measuring a specific subscale were correlated with each other (Fornell & Lorcker, 1981). When Cronbachs alpha value is greater than .70, the reliability is indica ted as adequate (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). In addition, AVE examined how well the items on a specific subscale

PAGE 40

40 collectively explained the underlying constructs variance When AVE value is greater than .50, the composite reliability of the construct is indicated as adequate (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). To establish convergent and discriminant validity, this study employed three methods: 1) tested item loading, 2) examination of each factor correlation and 3 ) comparison of squared correlation of any two lat ent constructs with AVE value (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) indicated that convergent validity is established when item loading is equal to or greater than .40. Kline (2005) suggested that if correlations among constructs are les s than .85, discriminant validity can be established. Fornell and Larcker (1981) also stated that a squared correlation between two constructs should be lower than the AVE for each construct. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Test A SEM test was conducted using the AMOS program to examine the structural relationships among the game performance, in-game entertainment, interaction with staff, facility design, and behavioral intentions factors. The same fit index criteria were employed to examine the structur al model as with the measurement model. Path coefficients were used to determine the direct relationships among the sets of factors. The SEM analysis provides the basis for accepting or rejecting the hypothesized relationships among the constructs (Kline, 2005). Multi -group Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis The Multi Group SEM was tested to examine whether the proposed model was moderated by the level of perceived value, trust, and commitment. B efore the Multi G roup SEM analyses measurement invar iance test was conducted. T his test measured the chi -squared difference test as well as the change or difference in the named alternative fit indices (CFI and RMSEA). The object of measurement invariance test is to ensure that measurement models conducted under different conditions yield equivalent representations of the same construct (Hair et al., 2009) Evaluation of model fit was completed using standard fit criteria that included the chi -square fit

PAGE 41

41 statistic and the CFI (Bentler & Dudgeon, 1996), as we ll as RMSEA (Browne & Cudeck, 1992; Loehlin, 1992). C ombine with evaluation of model fit test, this research tested a model that examined change scores to determine whether findings remained robust.

PAGE 42

42 CHAPTER 4 RESULT S The results of the study are presented in the following order: 1) Descriptive Statistics, 2) Measurement Models, 3) Structural Models, and 4) Multi -Group Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis. Descriptive Statistics Demographics Demographic characteristics of total participants (N = 282) are depicted in Table 1 Total sample consisted of 156 (55.3%) males and 126 (44.7%) females. The majority of the participants were 18 to 23 years old (74.1%) and Caucasian (White: 55.5%). Event Quality The means of the event quality items ranged from 4.62 to 5.67. Standard deviations ranged from 1.09 to 1.56. The items for physical surrounding factor had the highest means on the 7 point Likert -type scale ( M = 5.55; SD = 1.127). The items for in-game entertainment had the lowest means ( M = 4.82; SD = 1.4 2). Moderators The means of the perceived value items ranged from 5.29 to 5.40. Standard deviations ranged from 1.41 to 1.48 ( M = 5.35; SD = 1.34). The means of the trust items ranged from 5.25 to 5.31. Standard deviations ranged from 1.27 to 1.38 ( M = 5.2 9; SD = 1.23). The means of the commitment items ranged from 4.33 to 5.47. Standard deviations ranged from 1.44 to 1.77 ( M = 4.87; SD = 1.35). Behavioral Intention The means of the consumer behavior items ranged from 4.95 to 5.10. Standard deviations range d from 1.89 to 1.81 ( M = 5.05; SD = 1.76).

PAGE 43

43 Measurement model Cronbachs alpha estimates ranged from .85 (commitment) to .98 (behavioral intention). The average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from .65 (commitment) to .92 (behavioral intention; see T able 4 2 ). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to examine the psychometric properties of the measures. The measurement model yielded an acceptable model fit ( 2 = 950.11, df = 406; RMSEA = .069; CFI = .947). Convergent validity was established by high factor loadings in the present study. Each measurement scale items loading was greater than the suggested value of .70 and critical ratios of indicators of the constructs ranged from 5.76 to 9.66, which were greater than the significant value o f 1.96 at p < .05 (Hair et al., 2009 see Table 4 2 ). To examine discriminant validity, an analysis of correlation between measured constructs was conducted. Correlations between constructs ranged from .39 (facility design and behavioral intention) to .83 (game performance and in -game entertainment). Although the correlation between game performance and in game entertainment was high (.83), it was acceptably high (e.g., < .85; Kline, 2005, see Table 4 3 ). In addition, each squared correlation should be smal ler than the average variance extracted (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). All AVE estimates were found to be greater than the squared correlations (see T able 4 3 ). Therefore, it was concluded that the research constructs were sufficiently distinct from each other Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Test Structural e quation analysis was conducted to test the relationships between event quality factors and behavioral intention. Figure 2 includes the direct effect of event quality (game performance, in -game entertain ment, interaction with staff, and facility design) on sport consumption behavior. The result suggested that the model has a good fit to the data (X2 = 363.90 (df = 142), X2/df = 2.56; SRMR = 0.04; RMSEA = 0.07; NFI = 0.96; CFI = 0.97). Furthermore, all of the hypothesized paths except physical surrounding were significant in the

PAGE 44

44 hypothesized direction. Table 4 shows the path coefficients and statistical significance using Structural Equation Modeling. From the path coefficients, we could ascertain that the following hypotheses were supported: Game performance Entertainment T able 4 4). Multi Group St ructural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis To test if there was a significant structural difference between the high level of perceived value, trust, and commitment groups and general spectator samples, Multi Group SEM was conducted using AMOS 18.0. To sepa rate the high level group and general group, this study used mean scores of perceived value, trust, and commitment items. The high level groups mean scores of perceived value trust and commitment items were between 5.5 and 7.0 in 7-point Likert -type scale. The general groups mean scores of perceived value, trust, and commitment items were between 1.0 and 4.5. The authors discarded the cases with 4.5 to 5.5 mean scores in order to differentiate the two groups (see T able 4 5 ). A preliminary stage involved testing for an invariant factor structure. All moderators factor loadings were constrained to be equal for both groups. However, the difference in the chi square statistic was different. The difference between the chi -square statistics of perceived value and trust were significant (perceived value: X2[14] = 30.66; trust: X2[14] = 24. 43, see T able 4 6 4 7 ); therefore, the factor structure between the customers who had high levels of both perceived value and trust groups, and generally perceived value and trust groups sample can not be assumed to be invariant. This means that both perceived value and trust could not evaluate the moderating effect. On the other hand, the difference in the chi -square statistic of commitment was insignificant ( X2[14] = 18.448, see Table 4 8 ); therefore, the factor structure between the highly committed group and general group sample can be assumed to be invariant. To test for

PAGE 45

45 structural invariance, we first allowed a free estimation of the structural coefficients in both the hi ghly committed group and general group samples. Relaxing all equality on the structural coefficients resulted in a chi -square statistic of 544.317 (df = 284). To test whether the structural coefficients between the constructs in the highly committed group were similar to those in the general group sample, constraints on structure weights were added. The more we added constraints, the worse the fit became and the greater the chi -square statistic grew. This time, the difference in the chi -square statistic was significant ( X2[18] = 47.883, p = .000), showing that the causal links in the structural model differed significantly between the two samples (see Table 4 8) Finally, the structural invariance for each individual structural path was tested to identify wh ich of the links caused the structural difference. Significant differences in the chi -square statistics were found for four of the four individual paths: performance/attendance (p = .000), entertainment/attendance (p = .001), interaction/attendance (p = .0 00), and physical surrounding/attendance (p = .000). The multi -group analysis confirmed that there were structural differences in the model, in particular in the way the highly committed group and the general group samples perceived the links between all o f the sub-dimensions of event quality and attendance. Table 6 7 8 summarizes the results of the Multi Group SEM analysis. Table 4 1. Description of Participants (N = 282) Variables Description Frequency Percent Gender Men 152 55.3 Women 126 44.7 Age 18 19 107 37.9 20 23 102 36.1 > 23 73 24.9 Missing 0 0.0 Ethnicity Caucasian (White) 156 55.3 Hispanic 69 24.4

PAGE 46

46 Table 4 1. Continued Variables Description Frequency Percent African American 35 12.4 Asian American 12 4.3 Others 10 3.6 M issing 0 0 Attended this season 0 63 22.3 1 75 26.6 2 52 18.4 3 24 8.5 4 5 29 10.3 > 5 39 14.0 Table 4 2 Summary result for measurement model test Factor Item AVE Game P erformance My perceptions of the Gator Womens Basketball players skills make me excited. .90 .95 .86 The Gator Womens Basketball team provides high quality performance to me. .96 Skill performance of Gator Womens Basketball teams players is excellent. .91 In -game Entertain ment The show combined with the ga me is entertaining. .96 .87 .67 The show was just as exciting as the game. .80 Pre and post game show is entertaining. .68 Interaction with Staff The employees seem very knowledgeable about their jobs. .82 .94 .76 You can count on the employees at this event to be friendly. .88 The employees handle problems promptly and satisfactorily. .89 Employees in the event deal effectively with the special needs of each customer. .90 The demeanor of the staff is pleasant. .87 Facility Design I am impressed with the design of the facility. .81 .93 .78 The facility is safe. .88 I can move freely in this facility (layout accessibility). .95 It is easy to get in and out of the facility (facility accessibility). .90

PAGE 47

47 Table 4 2. Continu ed Perceived Value I feel that I got my moneys worth for the money spent on my game attendance. .87 .95 .81 I feel I received good quality for the price paid for my game attendance. .93 After evaluating my game attendance, I am confident that I rece ived quality for the price paid on my game attendance. .93 I feel that the purchase of my game attendance met both my high quality and low price requirements. .88 Trust Gators football team is trustworthy .87 .95 .80 I trust Gators football team. .93 I have trust in the Gators football team. .93 The organization is known to be trustworthy .89 Commitment Being a fan of the Gator Womens Basketball team is important to me. .84 .85 .65 I am a committed fan of the Gator Womens Basketb all team. .86 It would be unlikely for me to change my allegiance from the Gator Womens Basketball team to another team. .62 It would be difficult to change my beliefs about the Gator Womens Basketball team. .72 Behavioral Intention I am more likely to attend future Gator Womens Basketball game(s). .95 .98 .92 I intend to attend the Gator Womens Basketball game(s). .97 The likelihood that I will attend the Gator Womens Basketball game(s) in the future is high. .97 I will attend the Gator Womens Basketball game(s) in the future. .95 Table 4 3 Means, SD, Correlations and Squared Correlations Matrix Mean SD GP ENT IWS FD PV TRU COM BI Game Performance 4.93 1.46 85 a .69 .37 .22 .59 .52 .62 .61 In -game Entertainment 4.89 1.29 .83* .67 a .36 .24 .49 .45 .55 .56 Interaction with Staff 5.43 1.06 .62 .60 .76 a .52 .49 .49 .36 .32

PAGE 48

48 Table 4 3 Continued a = Average Variance Extracted High correlation be tween factors Figures below the AVE line are the correlations between the constructs Figures above the AVE line represent squared correlations between the constructs Table 4 4. Path coefficient and statistical significance Path Unstandardized estimates ( B) Standardized Standard Error Critical Ratio Significance Probability Performance Behavioral intention .56 ** .45 ** .10 5.56 .000 Entertainment Behavioral intention .63 ** .34 ** .15 4.10 .000 Interaction Behavioral intention .28 ** .17 .11 2.56 .001 Surrounding Behavioral intention .16 .11 .09 1.906 .057 ** Significant at 0.05 Mean SD GP ENT IWS FD PV TRU COM BI Facility Design 5.35 1.34 .47 .49 .72 .78 a .28 .27 .21 .15 Perceived Value 5.29 1.23 .77 .7 0 .70 .53 .82 a .56 .53 .53 Trust 5.35 1.34 .72 .67 .70 .52 .75 .82 a .52 .36 Commitment 4.87 1.35 .79 .74 .60 .46 .73 .72 .65 a .82* Behavioral Intention 5.11 1.70 .78 .75 .57 .39 .73 .60 .82* .92 a

PAGE 49

49 Figure 4 1 Result of hypothesis test (H1 ~ H4) ** Significant at 0.05 Table 4 5. Description of Participants for moderating effect (N = 228) Variables Description Frequency Percent Perceived value High 85 30.1 Average 97 34.4 Eliminated 100 35.5 Trust High 92 32.6 Average 102 36.2 Eliminated 88 31.2 Commitment High 115 40.8 Average 112 3 9.2 Eliminated 55 19.5 Table 4 6 Structural invariance analysis Perceived Value for each individual structural path Model Model fit indices Invariance test M0 Unconstrained model X2(284)= 488.98, p=.00 RMSEA=. 063, CFI=.9 4 Performance Entertainme n t Interaction Facility Design Behavioral Intention .45 ** .34 .17 ** .11

PAGE 50

50 Table 4 6 Continued Model Model fit indices Invariance test M1 Measurement weight X2(298)= 519.64, p=.00 RMSEA=. 064, CFI=.93 M1 -M0: (14)= 30.66, p=. 000 M2 Structural Weights X2(302)=592.19, p=.00 RMSEA=. 066, CFI=.9 3 M2 -M1: (28)= 72.55, p=.000 df (14) = 23.69 (p = .05) Table 4 7 Structural invariance analysis Trust for each individual struc tural path Model Model fit indices Invariance test M0 Unconstrained model X2(284)= 581.63, p=.00 RMSEA=. 074, CFI=.9 2 M1 Measurement weight X2(298)= 606 0 6, p= .00 RMSEA=. 073, CFI=.9 2 M1 -M0: (14)= 24.43, p=. 000 M2 Structural Weights X2(302)= 611.20.19, p=.00 RMSEA=. 073, CFI=.92 M2 -M1: (28)= 5.14, p=.000 df (14) = 23.69 (p = .05)

PAGE 51

51 Table 4 8 Structural invariance analysis Commitment for e ach individual structural path Model Model fit indices Invariance test M0 Unconstrained model X 2 (284)=544.31, p=.00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.93 M1 Measurement weight X2(298)=562.76, p=.00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.93 M1 -M0: (14)=18.44, p=.187 M2 Structural Weights X2(302)=592.19, p=.00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.92 M2 -M1: (28)=47.88, p=.000 M3 Performance Behavioral intention X 2 (307)=611.81, p=.00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.91 M3 M1: (23)=67.49, p=.000 M4 Entertainment Behavioral intention X2(307)=596.17, p=.00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.92 M4 -M1: (23)=51.86, p=.001 M5 Interaction Behavioral intention X2(307)=606.54, p=.00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.92 M5 M1: (23)=62.23, p=.000 M6 Facility design Behavioral intention X2(307)=615.14, p= .00 RMSEA=.65, CFI=.91 M6 M1: (23)=70.83, p=.000 Standardized total effect Group Outcome Performance Entertainment Interaction Surrounding High ly Committed fans Attendance .46** .05 .08 .17 General spectators .52** .42** .27** .00 Significant at 0.05

PAGE 52

52 Figure 4 2 Mode rating effect of Commitment (H7). ** Significant at 0.05 General committed customers ( Numbers in the parenthesis represent h ighly committed customers) Performance Interaction Facility Design Behavioral Intention Commitment .42** (.05) .27 ** ( .08) .00 ( .17) .52** (.46**) Entertainmen t

PAGE 53

53 CHAPT E R 5 DISCUSSION D irect Effe ct of Event Q uality F actors to Behavioral I ntention The results of this research provide meaningful implications that further our knowledge of service evaluations in the context of non-major spectator sporting events (i.e., collegiate womens basketball). Our findings suggest that game performance ( ), entertainment ( ), and interaction with staff ( ) positively influence sport consumption behavior. These findings support the previous research that the core pr oduct (e.g., game performance) and peripheral products (e.g., entertainment and staff) positively influence sport consumer behavior (Getz, ONeill, & Carlsen, 2001; King, 2006; Madrigal, 1995; Trail, et al., 2002). Game Performance and B ehavioral I ntention The result ( ) indicates that game performance has a stronger effect on behavioral intention than the other factors (i.e., in -game entertainment and interaction with staff). This result is consistent with the findings of McDougall and Levesques (2000) study in which the core service is the most important predictor of behavioral intention. Since game performance is not under the control of marketers at the collegiate sports level (Mullin, Hardy, & Sutton, 2000; Trail et al., 2002), it is much more diffi cult for sports marketers to ensure that customers have a positive service encounter. Additionally, sports marketers should probably be even more vigilant in managing the variables they can control in order to ensure that fans have positive experiences whe n games are not exciting and/or when the home team does not win. In -game E ntertainment and Behavioral I ntention In game entertainment was hypothesized to have a positive influence on behavioral intention. The result ( ) confirmed this hypo thesis. The in -game entertainment is

PAGE 54

54 one of the readily controllable factors for sports marketers. Our results suggest that entertainment plays a significant role in attracting sports consumers to the sporting events. DeSchriver and Jensen (2002) found tha t entertainment value has significance and is positively related to attendance. When there were special events (e.g., home coming events), attendance would increase to as much as twice that of a normal sporting event. It is suggested that in-game entertain ment is one of the most important event products that can maximize a fans game experience. The Turnkey Sports Poll (King, 2006), a survey of more than 600 senior -level sports industry executives in professional and collegiate sports, revealed that 49 perc ent chose event presentation (e.g., music and video) as the most important element in enhancing guest experiences beyond the game itself. As sporting events have evolved into entertainment events, many NBA franchises now offer in-game entertainment to keep fans excited and energized throughout an event to maximize their interest, particularly when the actual game itself may not be interesting. Examples may include incorporating appropriate music, half -court shots for prizes, on court activities during timeo uts, and asking the audience trivia questions. Of the various in -game activities, music is most often used to entertain the audience and enhance the game experience. Thus, sports marketers should understand the importance and value of promotional and enter tainment features. Interaction with S taff and Behavioral I ntention Interaction with staff had a significant effect on behavioral intention ( ). Staff and volunteers are a key component in shaping the customer experience at any event (Getz et al., 2001). They represent an important factor that is focused on how service is delivered (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Gronroos, 1984). The reason for the relatively small R2 value is that the target game was a collegiate womens basketball event and the ex pected service quality based on interaction with staff was low. Because the spectators typically do not pay for tickets for these

PAGE 55

55 non -major sporting events, the expected service outcome could also be low. Additionally, in collegiate womens basketball game s, there are few chances to interact with the staff. Several reasons for this lack of interaction include a lack of open concession stands on site, few staff members on site (based on traditionally low attendance figures), and few questions to ask (the venue is not crowded or complex). However, marketers should understand that interaction with the staff does have a significant effect on sport consumption behavior (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Getz et al., 2001). Facility D esign and Behavioral I ntention Numerous studies posit that the physical surrounding is one of the most important factors that are positively associated with behavioral intention (Mullin et al., 2007; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1994; Wakefield & Sloan, 1995). Perceptions of the facility significantly i nfluence excitement and satisfaction with the encounter, spectators desire to stay in the environment, and their likelihood of re -patronizing games at the servicescape (Wakefield & Sloan, 1995). In the sporting context, sport facilities have great importa nce because spectators experience sporting events in the facility. In the current study, however, the facility design did not have a significant influence on sport consumption behavior ( .11, p = .06 ). This might be related to the expected value of the sports event. Because spectators do not pay or very low attending cost for admission, their expectation levels for physical surroundings may be low. Future research can compare the role of physical surroundings in professional sports game experiences with those of collegiate sporting events. This could shed more light on the role of physical surroundings in predicting behavioral intention.

PAGE 56

56 The M oderating Effect of P erceived V alue, Trust, and C ommitment In order to examine the group difference between the high level group and general group, a multi -group analysis was conducted. Unfortunately, this study could not attempt to analyze the moderating effect of perceived value and trust. Because the current study could not find the measurement invariance both pe rceived value and trust. This means the factor structure between the customers who had a high level of perceived value and trust group and general group can not be assumed to be invariant. Therefore, the current study has no chance to test the H5 and H6 hy potheses. The main reason could be the sample. Matthew et al. (2003) found that perceived value is a more important consideration for minor league than collegiate fans. Minor league fans were more influenced by ticket price and the overall cost of attendin g a game, while those fans who generally attended collegiate games did not consider this factor when deciding to attend a game. Collegiate sports, especially non -major sports (e.g., womens basketball and womens soccer) have no entrance fee and very low attending cost. Thus, perceived value could not explain the difference in this study. However, trust was an unexpected result. This also may be caused by the sample. Womens basketball fans have a commitment to the team but have no trust with the team. Alth ough the current study could not find the measurement invariance in trust, the difference in the chi -square statistic value was very close (trust: 24.43; requir ed less than 23.69). Therefore, if the sample were changed, both perceived value and trust could attempt to examine the moderating effect. Commitment T his study only could measure the moderating effect of commitment on the relationship between event quality and behavioral intention. The results suggested that among the four paths (game performance, i n game entertainment, interaction with the staff, and physical surrounding) of event quality, three paths (game performance, in -game entertainment, and interaction with the

PAGE 57

57 staff) showed significant differences between the two groups. For the highly commit ted group, only the performance/attendance path was found to be significant. For the general spectator group, all three paths (game performance, in -game entertainment, and interaction with the staff) were found to be significant. These findings were suppor ted by prior research (Greenwell et al., 2002; Hill & Green, 2000; Theodorakis et al., 2009). Hill and Green (2000) indicated that highly involved fans were very little affected by service attributes, while low level of involvement fans were more influence d by service attributes. In a similar vein, Greenwell et al. (2002) found that the customers who had a low level of identification were more critical of core products and the facility. Also, Theodorakis et al. (2009) found that highly identified customers were not influenced by higher levels of service quality. Game P erformance In terms of game performance, the general spectator group ( ) was slightly more influenced by game performance than the highly committed group of spectators ( ) to engage in sport consumption behavior. This is consistent with prior research that found that customers with lower levels of identification were more critical of core products than highly identified fans (Greenwell et al., 2002). However, the difference between the highly committed group and the general committed group was slight and game performance was important to both groups. This result i mpl ies that to attract the general spectator group and retain highly committed fans as loyal customers, sports managers need to provide them with the highest level of game performance. In -game E ntertainment Entertainment used to prompt sport consumption b ehavior was found to be important only for the general spectator ( ). This result illustrates that highly committed fans were not influenced by entertainment; however, general spectators were influenced by entertainment.

PAGE 58

58 Thus, if the manager of a wom ens basketball team provides fans with a high level of entertainment, womens basketball games will be more likely to attract the general spectator. Low attendance is a problem not only in collegiate womens basketball events, but also in many other non -m ajor sports. Therefore, it cannot be overemphasized that sports marketers should focus more on various and effective entertainment options. Interaction with S taff Similar to in game entertainment, interaction with staff was found to be important only for the general spectator group ( ). This finding shows that highly committed fans were not influenced by interactions with the staff, but general fans were slightly influenced by such interactions. This result may be interpreted to mean that whether the interaction level with the staff was high or low, highly committed fans will keep visiting the stadium. On the other hand, if the interaction level with staff is high, general committed fans will have a slightly greater chance of revisiting the stadium. T his finding is similar to that of Theodorakis et al. (2009), who found that low and medium identified fans were influenced by the human element (e.g., reliability and responsiveness) on behavioral intention. Although the effect of interaction with staff was not very significant, this is a controllable factor. Thus, sports marketers need to increase and improve the interactions that attendees have with the staff. Facility Design Facility design has been considered one of the most important event quality f actors to spectators (Mullin et al., 2007; Wakefield & Blodgett, 1994; Wakefield & Sloan, 1995). However, in this study, both highly committed fans and general spectators were not influenced by the facility design in collegiate womens basketball. There ar e some expected reasons. As we already mentioned, the collegiate sports fans expectation about the facility design is not very high because ticket prices are low and the stadium is not very large and/or complex. Although

PAGE 59

59 this study could not determine the effectiveness of the facility design if stadiums can provide better facility design services (e.g., clean restrooms and convenient parking), they could have a greater chance of attracting more fans to the stadium. Limitation and Future Research This stu dy has some limitations that should be considered for future research. First, the samples used in this study were spectators of only one collegiate womens basketball team and the majority of the participants were college students. This might limit the gen eralizability of the research findings. In addition, the context of this study, a collegiate womens basketball game, might also limit the generalizability of the findings. Moreover, this sample could not provide a chance to examine the moderating effect o f perceived value and trust. Therefore, to increase the generalizability of the findings, future research needs to use broader and wider samples (e.g., mens basketball and professional teams). Although a number of different event quality factors may exist a second limitation, this research focused on four salient factors. Therefore, future research may need to incorporate different event quality factors to develop a better understanding of the relationship between event quality and behavioral intention.

PAGE 60

60 LIST OF REFERENCE S Alexandris, K., Zahariadis, P., Tsorbatzoudis, C., & Grouios, G. (2004). An empirical investigation of the relationships among s ervice quality, customer satisfaction and psychological commitment in a health club context. European Sport M anagement Quarterly, 4 (1), 36 52. Al -Sabbahy, H.Z., Ekinci, Y., & Riley, M. (2004). An investigation of perceived value dimensions: Implications for hospitality research. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 226234. Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. (1994) Customer satisfaction, market share, and profitability: Findings from Sweden Journal of Marketing, 58, 53 66. Anderson, E., & Weitz, B. (1989). Determinants of continuity in conventional industrial dyads. Marketing Science, 8 310323. Anderson, E ., & Weitz, B. (1992). The u se of p ledges to b uild and s ustain c ommitment in d istribution c hannels. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(1), 18 34. Anderson, S., Pearo, L. K., & Widener, S. K. (2008). Drivers of s ervice s atisfaction: l inking c ustomer s atisfac tion to the s ervice c oncept and c ustomer c haracteristics. Journal of Service Research 10(4), 365381. Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). AMOS 7.0 users guide. Chicago, IL: SmallWalters Corporation. Badenhausen, K., Ozanian, M. K., & Settimi, C. (2007, January 25). The business of basketball. Forbes [Electronic version]. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/32/biz_06nba_NBA Team -Valuations_land.html Clarett v. NFL, 544 U.S. 961 (2005). Baker, D. A., & Crompton, J. L. (2000). Quality, sat isfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785804. Baker, J. (1986) The role of the environment in marketing services: The consumer perspective. In John A. Czepiel, Carole A. Congram, and Jim Shanahan (eds.) The Services Chal lenge: Integrating for competitive advantage, Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 79 84. Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., & Voss, G. B. (2002). The i nfluence of m ultiple s tore e nvironment c ues on p erceived m erchandise v alue and p atronage i n tentions. Journal of Marketing, 66(2), 120141. Bentler, P. M., & Dudgeon, P. (1996). Covariance s tructure a nalysis: S tatistical p ractice, t heory, and d irections. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 563592. Bernhardt, K. L., Donthu, N., & Kennett, P. A. (200 0). A l ongitudinal a nalysis of s atisfaction and p rofitability. Journal of Business Research, 47(2), 161171.

PAGE 61

61 Berry, L. L. (1995). Relationship marketing of services g rowing interest, emerging perspectives. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23, 236245. Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The i mpact of p hysical s urroundings on c ustomers and e mployees Journal of Marketing, 56, 57 71. Bitner, M. J., & Hubbert, A. R. (1994). Encounter satisfaction versus overall satisfaction versus quality. In R.T Rust & R.L. Oliver (Eds.) Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice (pp. 72 94), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Bojanic, D. C. (1996). Consumer p erceptions of p rice, v alue and s atisfaction in the h otel i ndustry: An e xploratory s tudy. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, 4(1), 5 22 Bojanic, D. C., & Rosen, L. D. (1994). Measuring s ervice q uality in restaurants: A n a pplication of the s ervqual i nstrument. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 18(1), 3 14. Bolton, R. N., & Dr ew, J. H. (1991). A multistage model of customers' assessments of service quality and value. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 375 84. Bolton, R. N., & Lemon, K. N. (1999). A d ynamic m odel of c ustomers u sage of s ervice: u sage as an a ntecedent and c onse quence of s atisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 171186. Brady, M. K., & Cronin, Jr., J. (2001). Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: A hierarchical approach. Journal of Marketing, 65(3), 34 49. Broughton, B., Lee, J., & Netheny, R. (1999, December 20 26). The question: How big is the U.S. sports industry? Sports Business Journal 23 29. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992) Alternative w ays of a ssessing m odel f it. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230258. Cai, S & Jun, M. J. (2003). Internet users perceptions of online service quality: a comparison of online buyers and information searchers. Managing Service Quality, 13(6), 504519. Chandon, P., Morwitz, V. G., & Reinartz, W. J. (2005). Do i ntentions r eally p re dict b ehavior? Self g enerated v alidity e ffects in s urvey r esearch. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 1 14. Crilley, G., Murray, D., Howat, G., March, H., & Adamson, D. (2002). Measuring performance in operational management and customer service quality: A surve y of financial and non financial metrics from the Australian golf industry. Journal of Leisure Property, 2, 369 380. Crompton, J. L., MacKay, K. J., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (1991), Identifying dimensions of service quality in public recreation. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 9(3), 15 27.

PAGE 62

62 Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., Brand, R. R., Hightower, R., & Shemwell, D. J. (1997). A cross sectional test of the effect and conceptualization of service value. The Journal of Services Marketing, 11(6), 375391. Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on customer behavioral intentions in service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76 (2), 193218. Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S.A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A re -examination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 56 68. Crosby, L. A., Evans, K. R., & Cowles, D. (1990). Relationship quality in service selling: An interpersonal influence perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 6881. Crosby, L. A., & Taylor, J. R. (1983). Psychological commitment and its effect on post -decision evaluation and preference stability among voters. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(4), 413431. Crosby, L. A., & Stephens, N. (1987). Effects of relations hip marketing on satisfaction, retention, and prices in the life insurance industry. Journal of Marketing Research, 26, 404411. Dabohlkar, P. A., Shepherd, C. D., & Thorpe, D. I. (2000). A comprehensive framework for service quality: an investigation of c ritical conceptual and measurement issues through a longitudinal study. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 139173. Dagger, T. S., & Sweeney, J. C. (2007). Service quality attribute weights: How do novice and longer -term customers construct service quality perf ormance? Journal of Service Research, 10(1), 22 42. David, S. (1994). Delivering quality service in professional sport. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 3 (1), 29 35. Deighton, J. (1992). The consumption of performance. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 362372. DeSchriver, T. D., & Jensen, P.E. (2002). Determinant of spectator attendance at NCAA Division football contests. Journal of Sport Management, 16(4), 311330. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). The effects of price, brand, and store inf ormation on buyers product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 30719. Dwyer, F. R., Schurr, P. H., & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer -seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 51, 11 27. Farrelly, F. J., & Qerster, P. G. (2005). Examinin g important relationship quality constructs of the focal sponsorship exchange. Industrial Marketing Management, 34, 211 219.

PAGE 63

63 Fink, J. S., Trail, G. T., & Anderson, D. F. (2002). Environmental factors associated with spectator attendance and sport consumpt ion behavior: Gender and team differences. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 11(1), 8 19. Fornell, C. (1992). A n ational c ustomer s atisfaction b arometer: The Swedish e xperience. Journal of Marketing, 56(1), 6 21. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating st ructural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39 50. Fullerton, G. (2003). When d oes c ommitment l ead to l oyalty? Journal of Service Research, 5 (4), 333344. Funk D. C., Mahony, D. F., & Ha vitz, M. E. (2003). Sport Consumer Behavior: Assessment and Direction. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), 200205. Furse, D. H., Punj, G. N., & Stewart, D. W. (1984). A typology of individual search strategies among purchasers of new automobiles. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 417 431. Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. (1999). The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. Journal of Marketing, 63, 70 87. Greenwell, T. C., Fink, J. S., & Pastore, D. L. (2002). Percepti ons of the s ervice e xperience: u sing d emographic and p sychographic v ariables to i dentify c ustomer s egments. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 11(4), 233241. Grewal, D., Krishnan, R., Baker, J., & Borin, N. (1998). The effect of store name, brand name and price discounts on consumers evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 74 (3), 331 372. Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B. & Krishnan, R. (1998). The e ffects of p rice -c omparison a dvertising on b uyers p erceptions of a cquisition v alue, t ransaction v alue a nd b ehavioral i ntentions. Journal of Marketing, 62, 46 59. Gronroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of Marketing 18(4), 36 44. Grove, S. J., Fisk, R. P., & Dorsch, M. J. (1998). Assessing the t heatrical c omponents of the s ervice e ncounter: A c luster a nalysis e xamination. The Service Industries Journal, 18(3), 116 134. Gundlach, G. T., Achrol, R. S., Mentzer, J. T. (1995). The s tructure of c ommitment in e xchange. Journal of Marketing, 59, 7892. Gwinner K. P., Gremler, D. D., & Bitner, M. J. (1998). Relational benefits in service industries: The customers perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), 101104.

PAGE 64

64 Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. ( 2009 ). Multivariate Data Analysis (7 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hansen, H., Sandvik, K., & Selnes, F. (2003). Direct and Indirect Effects of Commitment to a Service Employee on the Intention to Stay. Journal of Service Research, 5 (4), 3 56368. Harrison Walker, L. J. (2001). The Measurement of Word-of -Mouth Communication and an Investigation of Service Quality and Customer Commitment as Potential Antecedents. Journal of Service Research, 4 (1), 60 75 Heskett, J. L., Sasser, W. E., & Schles inger, L. A. (1997). The service profit chain Free Press New York. Higgs, C., & McKinley, B. (2005). Why sport management matters In A. Gillentine, & R. B. Crow (Eds.), Foundations of Sport Management (pp. 1120). Morgantown, WM: Fitness Information Tech nology. Hill, B., & Green, B. C. (2000). Repeat a ttendance as a f unction of i nvolvement, l oyalty, and the s portscape a cross t hree f ootball c ontexts. Sport Management Review, 3(2), 145 162. Howard, D. R., & Crompton, J. L. (2005). Financing Sport (2nd ed.). Morgan Town, WV: Fitness Information Technology. Howat, G., Absher, J., Crilley, G., & Milne, I., (1996). Measuring customer service quality in sports and leisure centers. Managing Leisure, 1(2), 77 89. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1 55. Kandampully, J. (2002). Services management: The new paradigm in hospitality Frenchs Forest, NSW, Australia: Pearson Ed ucation Australia. Kelly, S. W., & Davis, M. A. (1994). Antecedents to customer expectations for service recovery. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2(1), 52 61. Kelly, S. W., & Turley, L. W. (2001). Consumer perceptions of service quality attri butes at sporting events. Journal of Business Research, 54(2), 161166. Kim, D. S., & Kim, S. Y., (1995) QUESC: An instrument for assessing the service quality of sport centers in Korea Journal of Sport Management, 9, 208220. Kim, Y. K. (2008). Relationship Framework in Sport management: How Relationship Quality affects Sport Consumption Behaviors (Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 2008). Dissertation Abstracts International King, B. (2006) Hurry up and wait Sports Business Journal, 9(26), 1920, 25.

PAGE 65

6 5 Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed). New York: Guilford. Ko, Y. J., & Pastore, D.L., (2004) Current issues and conceptualizations of service quality in the recreational sport industry. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 13 (3), 158168. Ko, Y. J., & Pastore, D.L., (2005) A hierarchical model of service quality for the recreational sport industry Sport Marketing Quarterly, 14 (2), 84 97. Ko, Y. J., Zhang, J. J., & Pastore, D. L. (In review ). Assessmen t of services in sport events: Development of a model and instrument. Sport Marketing Quarterly Kotler, P. (1994) Marketing Management Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control 8th ed., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Kwon, H. H., & Trail, G D. (2003). A reexamination of the construct and concurrent validity of the psychological commitment to team scale. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(2), 88 93. Kwon, H. H., Trail, G. D., & James, J. D. (2007). The mediating role of perceived value: Team iden tification and purchase intention of team licensed apparel. Journal of Sport Management, 21(4), 540554. Lee, S. Y., Petrick, J. F., & Crompton, J. (2007). The roles of q uality and i ntermediary c onstructs in d etermining festival a ttendees' b ehavioral i nten tion. Journal of Travel Research, 45(4), 402412. Leeuween, L. V., Quick, S., & Daniel, K. (2002). The s port s pectator s atisfaction m odel: A c onceptual f ramework for u nderstanding the s atisfaction of s pectators. Sport Management Review, 5 (2), 99 128. Liene rt, A. (1998). Managing in m inorville. Management Review, 87(7), 53 -57. Luo, X. (2002). Trust production and privacy concerns on the Internet: A framework based on relationship marketing and social exchange theory. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(2), 1 11118. MacKay, K. J., & Crompton, J. L. (1988) A conceptual model of consumer evaluation of recreation service quality Leisure Studies, 7, 41 49. MacMillan, K., Money, K., Money, A., & Downing, S. (2005). Relationship marketing in the not -for profit sec tor: An extension and application of the commitment trust theory. Journal of Business Research, 58, 806818. Madrigal, R. (1995). Cognitive and affective determinants of fan satisfaction with sporting event attendance. Journal of Leisure Research, 27(3), 2 05 227.

PAGE 66

66 Mahony, D. F., Madrigal, R., & Howard, D. (2000). Using the p sychological c ommitment to t eam (PCT) s cale to s egment s port c onsumers b ased on l oyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 9 (1), 15 25. Matsuoka, H., Chelladurai, P., & Harada, M. (2003). Direct and interaction effects of team identification and satisfaction on intention to attend games. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 12(4), 244 253. McDonald, M. A., Sutton, W. A., & Milne, G. R. (1995) TEAMQUAL: Measuring service quality in professional sports Sport Marketing Quarterly, 4 (2), 9 15. McDougall, G. H. G., & Levesque, T. (2000). Customer satisfaction with services: Putting perceived value into the equation: An empirical examination. Journal of Services Marketing, 14(5), 392410. Mei, A. W. O., Dean, A. M., & White, C. J. (1999). Analysing service quality in the hospitality industry. Managing Service Quality, 9(2), 136 143. Milne, G. R., & McDonald, M. A. (1999), Sport marketing: managing the exchange process Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett. Mittal, V. & Kamakura, W. A. (2001). Satisfaction, repurchase intent, and repurchase behavior: Investigating the moderating effect of customer characteristics. Journal of Marketing Research, 38 (1), 131 142. Mittal, V., Ross, W. T., & Baldasare, P.M. (1998). The a symm etric i mpact of n egative and p ositive a ttribute l evel p erformance on o verall s atisfaction and r epurchase i ntention. Journal of Marketing, 62(1), 33 47. Moorman, C., Desphande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993). Factors a ffecting t rust in m arket r esearch relationshi p Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 81 101. Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationship between providers and users of market research: The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(3), 314328. Mo rgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment -trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20 58. Morwitz, V. G., Steckel, J. H., & Gupta, A. (2007). When do purchase intentions predict sales? International Journal of Forecasting, 23(3), 347364. Murray, D., & Howat, G. (2002). The r elationships among s ervice q uality, v alue, s atisfaction, and f uture i ntentions of c ustomers at an Australian s ports and l eisure c entre. Sport Management Review, 5 (1), 25 43. Murray, K. B. (1991). A Te st of Services Marketing Theory: Consumer Information Acquisition Activities Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 10 25.

PAGE 67

67 Murray, K. B., & Schlacter, J. L. (1990). The impact of services versus goods on consumers assessment of perceived risk and variability. Jour nal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(1), 51 65. Netemeyer, R.G., Krishnana, B., Pullig, C., Wang, G., Yagci, M., Dean, D., Ricks, J., & Wirth, F. (2004). Developing and validating measures of facets of customer -based brand equity. Journal of Busines s Research, 57 (2), 209224. Nunnally, J.C., & Bernstein, I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory New York: McGraw -Hill. Oh, H. (1999). Service q uality, c ustomer s atisfaction, and c ustomer v alue: A h olistic p erspective. Hospitality Management, 18(1), 67 82. Olive r, R. L. (1980). A c ognitive m odel of the a ntecedents and c onsequences of s atisfaction d ecisions Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 460 469. Oliver, R. L. (1997). Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer New York: McGraw Hill. Oliver, R. L. & Swan, J. E. (1989). Equity and disconfirmation perceptions as influences on merchant and product satisfaction Journal of Consumer Research. 16(3), 372 383. Palmatier, R. W., Dant, R. P., & Grewal, D. (2007). A c omparative l ongitudinal a nalysis of t heo retical p erspectives of i nterorganizational r elationship p erformance. Journal of Marketing, 71(4), 172194. Palmatier, R. W., Dant, R. P., Grewal, D. & Evans, K. (2006). Factors influencing the effectiveness of relationship marketing: A meta analysis. Jour nal of Marketing, 70(4), 136153. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Perceived service quality as a customer -based performance measure: An empirical examination of organizational barriers using an extended service quality model. Human Resource Management, 30 (3), 335364. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 4150. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988) SERVQUAL: A m ultiple i tem s cale for m easuring c onsumer p erceptions of s ervice q uality Journal of Retailing, 64 (1), 12 40. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Malhotra, A. (2005). E -S QUAL: A m ultiple -i tem s cale for a ssessing e lectronic s ervice q uality. Journal of Service Research 7 213. Patterson, P. G., & Spreng, R. A. (1997). Modelling the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a business -to -business, services context: an empirical examination. Internat ional Journal of Service Industry Management, 8(5), 414434.

PAGE 68

68 Petrick, J. F. (2004). The roles of q uality, v alue, and s atisfaction in p redicting c ruise p assengers b ehavioral i ntentions. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 397407. Petrick, J. F., & Backman, S. J. (2001). An e xamination of the c onstruct of p erceived v alue for the p rediction of g olf t ravelers i ntentions to r evisit. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 38 45. Pritchard, M. P, Havtiz, M. E., & Howard, D. R. (1999). Analyzing the commitment loyalt y link in service contexts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27, 333348. Reichheld, F. F. (1996). Learning from customer defections. Harvard Business Review 74(2), 5669. Reichheld, F. F., & Sasser, W. E., (1990). Zero defections: Quality comes to services. Harvard Business Review 68, 105111. Rust, R.T., & Oliver, R.L. (1994). Service Quality: Insights and managerial implications from the frontier. In R.T. Rust & R.L. Oliver (Eds.), Service quality: New directions in theory and practice (pp. 1 19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rust, R. T., & Zahorik, A. J., & Keiningham, T. L. (1993). Return on q uality (ROQ): Making s ervice q uality f inancially a ccountable. Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 58 70. Schneider, B., White, S. S., & Paul, M. C. (1998). Lin king s ervice c limate and c ustomer p erceptions of s ervice q uality: Test of a c ausal m odel, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2 ), 150163. Seiders, K., Voss, G. B., Grewal, D., & Godfrey, A. L. (2005). Do Satisfied Customers Buy More? Examining Moderating In fluences in a Retailing Context. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 26 43. Shamdasani, P. N., & Sheth, J. N. (1995). An experimental approach to investigating satisfaction and continuity in marketing alliances. European Journal of Marketing, 29(4), 6 23. Shofiel d, J. A. (1983). Performance and attendance at professional team sports. Journal of Sport Behavior 6, 196206. Shonk, D. J., & Chelladurai, P. (2008). Service Quality, Satisfaction, and Intent to Return in Event Sport Tourism. Journal of Sport Management, 22(5), 587602. Sirdeshmukh, D., Singh, J., & Sabol, B. (2002). Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. Journal of Marketing, 66, 15 37. Sivadas, E., & Baker Pruitt, J.L. (2000). An examination of the relationship between service quali ty, customer satisfaction, and store loyalty. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 28(2), 73 82.

PAGE 69

69 Solberg, H. A. & Preuss, H. (2007). Major Sport Events and Long Term Tourism Impacts. Journal of Sport Management 21(2), 213234. Stew art, B., Smith, A. C. T., & Nicholson, M. (2003). Sport consumer typologies: A Critical Review. Sport Marketing Quarterly 12(4), 206216. Sutton, W. A., McDonald, M. A., Milne, G. R., & Cimperman, J. (1997). Creating and fostering fan identification in pr ofessional sports. Sport Marketing Quarterly 6, 15 22. Swansom, S. R., Gwinner, K., Larson, B. V., & Janda, S. (2003). Motivations of college student game attendance and word of mouth behavior: The impact of gender differences. Sport Marketing Quarterly 12(2 ), 151162. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Tam, J. L. M. (2008). Brand familiarity: its effects on satisfaction evaluations. Journal of S ervice M arketing 22(1), 312. Trail, G. T., & James, J. D. (2001). The motivation scale for sport consumption: Assessment of the scales psychometric properties Journal of Sport Behavior 24, 108127. Trail, G. T., Anderson, D. F., & Fink, J. S. (2005). Consumer satisfaction and identity theo ry: A model of sport spectator conative loyalty. Sport Marketing Quarterly 14, 98 112. Trail, G. T., Anderson, D. F., & Fink, J. S. (2002). Examination of gender differences in importance of and satisfaction with venue factors at intercollegiate basketball games. International Sport Journal winter, 51 64. Trail, G. T., Fink, J. S. & Anderson, D. F. (2003). Sport s pectator c onsumption b ehavior. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 10(3), 147155. Tsuji, Y., Bennett, G., & Zhang, J. J. (2007). Consumer satisfaction wi th action sports event. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 16(4), 199208. Verhoef, P. C. (2003). Understanding the effect of customer relationship management efforts on customer retention and customer share development. Journal of Marketing, 67(4), 30 45. Wakefie ld, K. L., & Blodgett, J. G. (1994). The i mportance of s ervicescapes in l eisure s ervice s ettings. Journal of Services Marketing, 8(3), 66 76. Wakefield, K. L., & Blodgett, J. G. (1999). Customer response to intangible and tangible service factors. Psycholo gy and Marketing, 16(1), 51 68. Wakefield, K. L., Blodgett, J. G., & Sloan, H. J. (1996). Measurement and management of the sportscape Journal of Sport Management, 10(1), 15 31.

PAGE 70

70 Wakefied, K. L., & Sloan, H. J. (1995). The effects of team loyalty and selec ted stadium factors on spectator attendance. Journal of Sport Management, 9(2), 153172 Westbrook, R.A., & Oliver, R.L. (1991). The dimensionality of consumption emotion patterns and consumer satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(1), 84 91. Wright B. A., Duray, N., & Goodale, T. L. (1992). Assessing perceptions of recreation center service quality: An application of recent advancements in service quality research. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 10(3), 33 47. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means end model and synthesis of evidence Journal of Marketing 52(3), 2 22. Zeithaml, V. A, Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1988). Communication and Control Processes in Delivery of Service Quality J ournal of Marketing, 55(2), 35 48. Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31 46. Zeithaml, V. A, Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determina nts of customer expectations of services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(1), 1 12. Zeithmal, V. A., & Bitner, M. J. (1996). Services Marketing. New York: McGrawHill. Zhang, J.J., Pease, D.G., Smith, D.W., Lee, J.T., Lam, E.T.C., & Jambor E.A. (1997). Factors affecting the decision making of spectators to attend minor league hockey games. International Sports Journal, 1(1), 39 53. Zhang, J. J., Piatt, D. M., Ostroff, D. H., & Wright, J. W. (2005). Importance of in -game entertainment ameni ties at professional sporting events: A case for NBA season ticket holders. Journal of Contemporary Athletics, 2(1), 1 24.

PAGE 71

71 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Tae Ho Kim earned his Master of Science degree in the College of Health and Human Performance (sport management) from the University of Florida in May 2010. He received his Bachelor of Science in sport and leisure studies from Yonsei University in February 2003. The goal of her research is to investigate both spectator sport event quality and sport consumer behavior and to reduce the gap between academia and sport industry. His accomplishments in the research areas above include 5 research presentations. The presentations have been presented at conferences for the North American Society for Sport Management (NASSM), Sport Marketing Association (SMA), Sport Entertainment & Venues Tomorrow (SEVT), Annual Scholarly Colloquium on Intercollegiate Athletics in Conjunction with the NCAA, American Marketing Association (AMA). He has taught various undergraduate courses such a s Swimming and Judo as teaching assistance at the Yonsei University. Beginning fall 2010, he will continuously study as doctoral student of Sport Management at the University of Florida.