Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jretconser

The influence of brand experience and service quality on customer T

engagement
Catherine Prenticea,∗, Xuequn Wangb, Sandra Maria Correia Loureiroc
a
Griffith Business School, Griffith Institute for Tourism Studies, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
b
School of Engineering and Information Technology, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia, 6150
c
Business Research Unit (BRU/UNIDE), Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Portugal

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The study draws upon an existing conceptual model of customer engagement and examines how customer and
Branding firm based factors are related to customer engagement with a focus on the airline industry. Customer-based
Service quality factors included in this study are brand experience and brand love; whereas firm-based factors are inflight
Customer engagement service quality. The data were collected in one of European airports. The results show that customer-based
Airlines
factors are significantly related to customer engagement. In particular brand experience exerts significant direct
and indirect effects on customer engagement. Whilst it does enhance passengers' brand experience, particularly
the service by flight attendants, inflight service quality has a minimal effect on customer engagement. The
implications of the findings are offered for researchers and practitioners to conclude the paper.

Over the last decade customer engagement research has been po-
pularising the marketing literature. The relative nascence has prompted
researchers to delve into its conceptualisation and operationalisation of
this concept (e.g. Brodie et al., 2011; Van Doorn et al., 2010; Verhoef
et al., 2010). However, its popularity is mostly attributed to the sup-
posedly outcomes for business organizations such as buyer-seller re-
lationships (Sashi, 2012), customer purchase and loyalty behaviours
(e.g. Prentice et al., 2018; Vivek et al., 2012). In addition to organi-
zational outcomes, customer engagement likely produces positive cus-
tomer-related and other social consequences (Van Doorn et al., 2010).
These outcomes form impetus to investigate the drivers or antecedents
of customer engagement.
Van Doorn et al. (2010) proposed three broad categories of ante-
cedents: customer, firm, and context-based factors. Exiting empirical
research in this area is rather limited. Recently Prentice and colleagues
(Prentice and Loureiro, 2017; Prentice et al., 2018) approached from
customers' perspective and examined how customers' psychological
desire, perceived benefits and social values influence their engagement
with the brand and the organization. Prentice et al. (2018) contend that
customer-based antecedents are more reflective of their genuine and
volitional engagement, which leads to positive organizational outcomes
(e.g. purchase and loyalty). On the other hand, to enhance and warrant
customer engagement with a brand, it is also imperative for the brand
organization to make deliberate marketing efforts such as providing
quality services. Research to date has not provided empirical evidence
on how customer and firm-based factors affect customer engagement
respectively and conjunctively. Understanding this relationship would
facilitate firms identifying more appropriate means to engage custo-
mers for optimal business outcomes for the brand organization. This
study sheds light on this and approaches from both customers' and
firms' perspective to understand their respective influence on customer
engagement with a brand.
Van Doorn et al. (2010) were the first to provide a most compre-
hensive conceptual customer engagement framework from different
perspectives. The customer-based antecedents in their framework are
fairly diversified including attitudinal factors (brand commitment,
brand attachment), customer goals, traits, predispositions, affective
states and resources (e.g. time, effort and money availability). The firm-
based antecedents include the brand's characteristics, customer support,
and incentives and rewards for customers. Attitudinal antecedents that
are indicative of customers' affective connection with a brand (e.g.
brand experience and love) are more reflective of customer loyalty and
hence have implications of customer brand engagement (Batra et al.,
2012; Brakus et al., 2009; Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006; Iglesia, Singh and
Batista-Foquet, 2011). A wide range of offerings from the firm can
motivate customers to engage with a brand and the organization. Nu-
merous studies have provided empirical evidence that a firm's service
quality influences customer attitudes and behaviours which ultimately
leads to business profitability (Prentice, 2013; Sivadas and Baker-
Prewitt, 2000; Yee et al., 2010; Zeithaml, 2000). These attitudinal and

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: cathyjournalarticles@gmail.com (C. Prentice), xuequnwang1600@gmail.com (X. Wang), sandramloureiro@netcabo.pt (S.M.C. Loureiro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.020
Received 2 February 2019; Received in revised form 15 April 2019; Accepted 25 April 2019
0969-6989/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C. Prentice, et al.
behavioural outcomes are reflective of customer engagement.
Consistent with the foregoing discussion, this study examines how
customers' brand connection (brand experience and brand love) and a
firm's service offerings affect customer engagement with the brand and
its associated organization with a focus on the airline industry.
Competition in this industry is intense among legacy airlines, between
legacy airlines and low-cost air carriers (The economist, 2018). The
traditional marketing promotions centring on price cut and loyalty
programs are less effective as the competitors easily mimic and exceed
the offerings. Fostering brand connection with the airlines and unique
service attributes can be more promising as customers' emotional at-
tachment to the airline companies and preference to the service attri-
butes are not replaceable. Consequently, this study examines how
customers' brand experience with the airlines and their perception of
the service quality offered by the airlines affect their love with the
airline brand and engagement behaviours. This investigation offers
potential contributions to customer engagement research by providing
insights into how customers and firm-based factors drive customers to
engage with a brand. This research also has important practical im-
plications for the airline industry by promoting the most effective
means to attract customer engagement.
The following section presents the relevant literature review and
forms hypotheses for testing. Methodology of testing the hypotheses is
outlined followed by presenting results. Discussion and implications for
the literature and practitioners are provided to conclude this paper.
1. Literature review
1.1. Brand experience and love
A brand provides both functional and experiential values which are
often resulted from brand experience (Cleff et al., 2014). Brand ex-
perience refers to consumers' purchase and consumption experiences
with the brand and the organization, as well as to the brand influence
on non-consumers (Khan and Rahman, 2015). Customers today not
only seek the tangible benefits provided by the brand organization but
also the experience associated with the brand (Ong et al., 2018). Ex-
periences can be felt in different realms, depending on how the con-
sumer is connected with the environment per se (aesthetic), with the
joy (entertainment), acquire knowledge/expertise (educational) and
fully involved in the experience (escapism) (Pine and Gilmore, 1998;
Suntikul and Jachna, 2016). Different components of experiences can
emerge in a service encounter such as sensory (related to the experi-
ences felt though our senses), affective (related to sentimental inter-
actions), behavioural (related to actions taken by consumers who enjoy
the experience) and intellectual (the rational thoughts emerged by the
experience, Brakus et al., 2009). Brand experience is therefore defined
as “subjective, internal consumer responses” (Brakus et al., 2009: 53) that
can be experienced in “sensory, affective, intellectual, behavioural and
social terms” (Brakus et al., 2009, p 53).
Brand love is defined as a consumer's emotional attachment to and
identification with a particular trade name or a brand (Aro et al., 2018;
Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006). Brand love encompasses an individual
consumer's passion and excitement with a brand. Emotional attachment
to a brand indicates an individual's emotional bond with the specific
object, and separation from the brand can result in distress (Thomson
et al., 2005).
Brand love results from the long-term relationship with a brand,
with a focus on affective component integrated with consumers' brand
identity (Carroll and Ahuvia, 2006; Huber et al., 2015). Affection is
composed by positive and strong emotions experienced by consumers
when using a brand (Long-Tolbert and Gammoh, 2012; Langner et al.,
2015). The relationship between a brand and a consumer is analogous
to the relationship between romantic partners (Fournier, 1998). Such
relationship adds meaning to their lives and contributes to the in-
dividuals' self-concept (Bairrada et al., 2018).
51
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59
However, not every consumers fall in love with a brand at the first
sight, as in interpersonal relationships, there are different patterns of
consumers' brand love. Some consumers fall in love with the brand very
quickly, just like the love at the first sight, whilst it takes time for others
to experience everything before they develop affection toward the
brand (Langner et al., 2016). Positive experiences ultimately lead to
consumers' love of the brand (Langner et al., 2016). Batra et al. (2012)
attempt to present the prototype of brand love and explain how con-
sumers fall in love with brands including passionate desire (consumers
want to use the brand and invest their resources in it), identification
with the brand (whether actual or desired identity), positive affection,
anticipated separation distress, desire to maintain the relationship in
long-term attitude valence and strength. The strength of consumer-
brand relationship is largely dependent upon consumers' experience
with the brand. Consistent with the discussion, the following hypothesis
is offered:
H1. Brand experience has a positive influence on brand love.
1.2. Brand experience, brand love, and customer engagement
Engagement implies a connection between two parties (Vivek et al.,
2014; Dessart et al., 2016) and is based on interactivity (Brodie et al.,
2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014). The party can be an individual, an or-
ganization, or a community (Hollebeek, 2011; Vivek et al., 2014;
Dessart et al., 2016). The connection is not casual based, but a long-
lasting relationship and interdependence between parties (Resnick,
2001) in which both parties take an active role (Hollebeek, 2011).
Customer engagement has popularised in the marketing literature over
last decade as a precursor of customer purchase and brand loyalty
(Prentice and Loureiro, 2017). When individuals are engaged with a
brand, a strong psychological connection is nurtured (Hapsari et al.,
2016). This connection leads to repetitive purchases and a long-term
relationship with the brand (Hapsari et al., 2016a,b; Vivek et al., 2012).
Customer engagement is generally defined in the marketing literature
as customers' emotional, cognitive and behavioural involvements with
the brand (Hollebeek, 2011; Mollen and Wilson, 2010; Vivek et al.,
2012). Customer engagement are manifested in four different sources of
value obtained from consumers: lifetime value (purchases), incentivised
referrals, influence value and knowledge value (Kumar and Pansari,
2016).
The lifetime value represents the idea that a company is focused on
the consumers and their lifecycle rather the product lifecycle (Jain and
Singh, 2002). When purchasing a product, consumers take an active
process to learn about the brand which forms expectation of the brand
(Carvalho and Fernandes, 2018). This process leads consumers to be
more “informed, networked, empowered and active” (Kumar et al., 2010:
301). Referral value (incentivised) refers to the willingness of con-
sumers to become referrals. Referrals are often more effective in cap-
tivating consumers than other forms of communication (Villanueva
et al., 2008; Chandler and Lusch, 2015). Influence value represents the
value associated with the influence exerted by one consumer on another
toward a brand or the organization. With the advancement and popu-
larisation of social media, consumers could share their experiences with
the brand and services offered by the brand organization online in-
stantaneously (Thakur, 2018). Customers' reviews, in parallel with re-
ferrals or word of mouth communication, have become one of the most
effective marketing tools. Such reviews across social media network not
only affect the brand users but likely impact on financial performance
of the brand organization (Pansari and Kumar, 2017). Knowledge value
refers to customers' feedback (Sasha and Theingi, 2009). The brand
users tend to provide feedback and act like consultants for the brand.
Their feedback can help the brand organization identify what has or has
not been working from customers' perspective (Eisingerich and Merlo,
2014; Hollebeek et al., 2016; Pansari and Kumar, 2017).
Customer experience with a brand creates emotional connections
C. Prentice, et al.
(Cleff et al., 2018) and enhances the emotional attachment (love)
(Albert and Merunka, 2013; Bairrada et al., 2018). This affective tie is
only possible if a consumer does experience a psychological connection
with the brand which is a key element of brand love (Albert and
Merunka, 2013). Such connection is key to creating intense consumers'
responses (Long-Tolbert and Gammoh, 2012), which are manifested in
continuing purchase, recommending the brand and developing a re-
lationship with the brand organization by providing constructive
feedback and becoming a loyalty member. Such responses are reflective
of customer engagement (Kumar et al. (2017). This discussion informs
the following hypotheses:
H2. Brand experience influences customer engagement through the
mediation of brand love.
1.3. The role of service quality
In service marketing literature, service quality often reflects custo-
mers' perceptions and value-judgment of a product or service
(Parasuraman et al., 1995). Service quality is widely acknowledged as
an antecedent of customer satisfaction and behavioural intention which
in turn leads to an organization's profitability (Alexandris et al., 2002;
Kim et al., 2016; Prentice, 2013; Shi et al., 2014; Zeithaml et al., 1996).
Some researchers (e.g. Parasuraman et al., 1995) assert that service
quality should be assessed by a comparison between perceptions and
expectations. Others (Cronin et al., 2000) argue that customers' per-
ceptions of service performance over each service encounter determines
quality of the firm's service. This approach has been widely cited in the
literature. Resonating with this view, this study argues that service
quality facilitates the influence of brand experience and brand love on
customer engagement, rather directly affect the outcome variable.
Unlike service quality that can be judged on the basis of a single
encounter experience, brand experience is not limited to a single ex-
perience in one touch point, rather it involves the cumulative experi-
ences of different touch points in different phases of the consumption
journey either pre (e.g. consumers evaluate different alternatives and
anticipates the experience with the brand organization), during (e.g.
encompassing the sensations felt) and post consumption (the memory
of the experience) (e.g., Carù and Cova, 2003; Laming and Mason,
2014). Brand experience is a result of a series of interactions occurred
between the brand and the consumers over the service encounter (Jiang
et al., 2018). Quality service over each encounter enhances customers'
experience with the brand which ultimately lead to emotional attach-
ment (i.e. brand love) to the brand and subsequent engagement beha-
viours manifested in purchase, referring and spreading word-of-mouth
communication. Consistent with this view, the following hypotheses are
offered:
H3. Service quality moderates the relationship between brand
experience and brand love
H4. Service quality moderates the relationship between brand love and
customer engagement.
Fig. 1 shows the model of this study.
2. Method
2.1. Sample and data collection procedure
To understand the proposed relationships, the current study was
undertaken in the airline settings. This option was determined on the
fact that service quality seems to be a less significant factor in pas-
sengers' choice of air carriers as low-cost airlines (with inferior service
quality, in comparison to that of flagship airlines) appear to be more
competitive (The economist, 2018). The competition between the two
types of air carriers is intense. In view of this status quo, this study was
52
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59
intended to understand how brand involvement (brand experience and
love) and airline services contribute to customers' engagement with the
choice of their airlines.
Data were collected from both Portuguese and non-Portuguese
passengers who have air travel experience in Europe with both low-cost
carriers and legacy airlines. Lisbon airport agreed to help with the
survey and collecting the data during October 2017. The questionnaire
was first written in English, then translated to Portuguese, and back
translated to English to ensure consistency of the sentences in both
languages expressing the same ideas. Before distributing the ques-
tionnaire, a pilot test was conducted with 10 passengers to ensure that
the wording of the questionnaires were clear and well understood. As a
result, a few minor changes were made to improve the clarity.
A random sampling was employed in this study. Passengers who
were in the waiting areas near the department gates were approached
to participate in this study. Those who indicated their prior experiences
with both lost-cost and flagship airlines were invited to complete the
survey. The survey was undertaken in different periods of the day
(mornings, afternoons, and evenings) throughout one week to capture
different cohorts of passengers. Of 300 questionnaires distributed, a
total of 225 fully completed and useable questionnaires (after excluding
those with missing values, inconsistent responses or extreme multi-
variate outliers) were generated. Outliers were deleted by using the
graphic method, with a residual scatter plot in the range of ± 3 stan-
dard deviation (Hair et al., 2010). As shown in Table 1, of the parti-
cipants, over half of the respondents (55%) were female. Most re-
spondents had university degrees. The age groups were rather evenly
distributed.
2.2. Measures
The items that were used to measure the study constructs were
adapted from previous studies. A few procedures were undertaken to
minimise common method bias: (i) the items and questions are care-
fully worded to avoid ambiguity, and kept simple and concise, without
unfamiliar terms and complex syntax; (ii) the physical distance between
measures of the same construct is also taken into consideration, that is,
not to have all items of the same construct right next to each other.
The items used to measure brand experience were adapted from
Brakus et al. (2009). Brand love is measured by adapting items from
Bagozzi et al. (2017). Customer engagement were measured by
adapting the scale developed in Kumar and Pansari (2016). Brand love
was measured on a 5-likert-scale from “very much” to “not at all”.
Other constructs were measured on a 5-likert-scale from “strongly dis-
agree” to “strongly agree”.
Assessing service quality in the airline context is rather complex as it
includes pre-flight, inflight and after-flight services. The pre and after-
flight services involve other stakeholders such as airports and travel
agencies. To understand customer engagement with the airlines, we
selected the inflight service quality that is reflective of level of the
services directly associated with the airlines. Consistent with the find-
ings from Prentice and Loureiro (2017) that only certain inflight ser-
vices significantly affect passengers' relationship with the airline, the
layout, crew, ambience including odour and temperature were included
in the assessment of airline service quality. The items that were used to
assess the inflight services (layout, ambience) were adapted from Bitner
(1992), d'Astous (2000), Han and Ryu (2009) and Ryu and Jang (2007).
The items measuring the service provided by flight attendants were
taken from Hightower et al. (2002) and Bitner (1992). The Cronbach's
alpha values are provided in the next section.
3. Data analysis and results
3.1. Confirmatory factor analysis
Brand experience, brand love and customer engagement are
C. Prentice, et al. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59

Fig. 1. Research model.

Table 1 and Pansari, 2016).

Demographic information of participants. Next, CFA was performed for the proposed model in this study. The
Variable N Percentage results show that the model had acceptable fit indices: χ2 = 453.23,
d.f. = 231; CFI = 0.94; TLI = 0.93. All items have significant loadings
Male 101 44.9% on their corresponding constructs (Table 2). The composite reliabilities
Female 124 55.1%
for all factors were acceptable, and the average variance extracted
Between 18 and 20 32 14.2%
Between 21 and 30 66 29.3%
(AVE) for each factor was over 0.50, indicative of adequate con-
Between 31 and 40 65 28.9% vergence (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). The results of standardized re-
Between 41 and 50 42 18.7% siduals and modification indices show no conspicuously significant
Between 51 and 60 17 7.6% changes to the model. Table 3 shows the correlations among variables.
More than 60 3 1.3%
The square root of average variance extracted for each construct ex-
High School or less 39 17.3%
Bachelor degree 108 48.0% ceeds the correlation between constructs, indicating discriminant va-
Graduate degree 75 33.3% lidity.

3.2. Hypotheses testing

multidimensional constructs and were treated as second-order factors in
the current study. First, we assess the validity following the procedures
described in Kumar and Pansari (2016). Brand experience has four di-
mensions. The second-order CFA model fit for this construct was ac-
ceptable: χ2 = 110.921, d.f. = 51; CFI = 0.95; TLI = 0.94. The path
coefficients between the indicators and their respective first-order fac-
tors were significant at the 0.05 level. The model fit for the second-
order factor structure by conducting a one-factor CFA on the average
scores of the four first-order constructs (e.g., Jayachandran et al., 2005)
was χ2 = 21.34, d.f. = 2; CFI = 0.95; TLI = 0.90. All the path coeffi-
cients were significant at the 0.05 level.
Brand love was measured as a multidimensional construct (self-
brand integration, passion-driven behaviour, and positive emotional
connection). Following the same procedure described above, the results
show that the second-order CFA model fit was acceptable: χ2 = 61.10,
d.f. = 25; CFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.96. The path coefficients between the
indicators and their respective first-order factors were significant at the
0.05 level. All the path coefficients between the second-order construct
and its dimensions were significant at the 0.05 level.
Customer engagement was measured as a four-dimensions construct
(purchases engagement, referrals engagement, influence value en-
gagement, and knowledge engagement). The results from the above
described procedure show that the second-order CFA model fit was
reasonable: χ2 = 292.85, d.f. = 88; CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.91. The path
coefficients between the indicators and their respective first-order fac-
tors as well as between the second-order construct and its three di-
mensions were significant at the 0.05 level. The model fit the second-
order factor structure was χ2 = 18.38, d.f. = 2; CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.95.
All the path coefficients were significant at the 0.05 level. The study
used the aggregated scale consisting of the average scores of the di-
mensions of brand experience, brand love, and customer engagement as
their indicators for further analyses (Jayachandran et al., 2005; Kumar
Path modelling was performed to test H1 and H2. Our results show
that brand experience has a positive effect on brand love (ß = 0.75,
p < .001), which in turn impact customer engagement (ß = 0.71,
p < .001). Therefore, H1 and H2 are supported. Brand experience has
a direct effect on customer engagement (ß = 0.69, p < .001), sup-
porting H3. Further, this effect decreases (ß = 0.36, p < .001) after
including brand love. Therefore, brand love partially mediates the re-
lationship between brand experience and customer engagement.
We further examined how different dimensions of brand experience
influence brand love and customer engagement, as well as how brand
experience and brand love impact different dimensions of customer
engagement. The results in Table 4 show that behavioural and in-
tellectual brand experience impact both brand love and customer en-
gagement. On the other hand, sensory experience only had a significant
influence on customer engagement, whereas affective only on brand
love. Further, the results from Table 5 show that brand experience and
brand love are significantly related to all four dimensions of customer
engagement.
H3 and H4 propose the moderation effects of in-flight service
quality on the relationships between brand experience, brand love, and
customer engagement. Among the selected service quality components
offered on the plane, the results show that only the service provided by
flight attendants significantly moderates the relationship between
brand experience and brand love (ß = 0.10, p < .05) but not the re-
lationship between brand love and customer engagement. Specifically,
brand experience has a stronger effect on brand love when the level of
the service is high. In other words, flight attendants play a role in en-
hancing passengers' experience with the airlines which leads them to
love the airlines more. However, other service components such as
ambience factors have no significant moderating effects. Accordingly,
H3 is partially supported, H4 is rejected. The moderation effect exerted

53
C. Prentice, et al. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59

Table 2
Confirmatory factor analyses results.
Item FL Alpha CR AVE

Brand experiences
Sensory .78 .87 .70
This airline makes a strong impression on my visual sense or other senses. .70
I find the airline interesting in a sensory way. .90
This airline does not appeal to my senses (r). .89
Affective .79 .88 .71
I do not have a strong emotion for this airline (r). .75
This airline induces feelings and sentiments. .88
This airline brand is an emotional brand. .89
Behavioural .68 .86 .67
I engage in physical actions and behaviours when I use this airline. .90
This airline results in bodily experiences. .92
This airline is not action oriented (r). .60
Intellectual .66 .81 .59
I engage a lot of thinking when I encounter this airline. .60
This airline brand stimulates my curiosity and problem solving. .82
This airline does not make me think (r). .86
Brand love
Self-brand integration .85 .85 .59
Flying with this airline says something “true” and “deep” about whom you are as a person. .81
Is this airline able to make you look like you want to look? .82
Is this airline able to do something that makes your life more meaningful? .63
Do you find yourself thinking about that airline? .80
Passion-driven behaviours .70 .71 .55
Are you willing to spend a lot of money improving and fine-turning a product from this airline after you buy it? .73
Do you feel yourself desiring to flight with that airline? .75
Positive emotional connection .86 .87 .68
Do you feel that there is a natural fit between you and that airline? .85
You feel emotionally connected to this airline. .88
Do you feel that this airline is fun? .75
Consumer engagement
Purchases engagement .86 .87 .70
I will continue buying products/services of that airline in the near future. .80
My purchases with that airline make me content. .90
Owning the products/services of this airline makes me happy. .80
Referrals engagement .93 .93 .78
I promote this airline because of the monetary referral benefits provided by the brand. .82
In addition to the value derived from the product, the monetary referral incentives also encourage me to refer this airline to my friends and relatives. .85
I enjoy referring this airline, I refer to my friends and relatives because of the monetary referral incentives. .92
Given that I use this airline, I refer my friends and relatives to this brand because of the monetary referral incentives. .93
Influence value engagement .74 .76 .51
I love talking about my brand experience. .72
I discuss the benefits that I get from this airline with others. .72
I am part of this airline and mention it in my conversations. .67
Knowledge engagement .93 .93 .78
I provide feedback about my experiences with the airline to the firm. .65
I provide suggestions/feedback for improving the performance of the airline. .89
I provide suggestions/feedback about new products/services of that airline. .98
I provide suggestions/feedback for developing new products/services for this airline. .98
Temperature .83 .85 .67
The temperature during the flight is comfortable. .89
It is not very cold/hot in this plane. .92
It is not too dry in this plane. .60
Layout .89 .90 .75
The seat and tray for eating and reading are comfortable. .91
The seating layout in this plane in comfortably arranged. .93
Overall, the layout in this plane made it easy for me to move around. .75
Flight attendants .90 .90 .70
The staff was knowledgeable and helpful in this flight. .95
The staff was courteous and professional in this flight. .91
There was enough staff in this flight. .64
The staff demonstrated interest and enthusiasm in this flight. .81
Odour .82 .83 .62
The flight odour is not strange/unfamiliar. .66
The odour during the flight is acceptable. .86
The odour on this flight is fine. .83

by flight attendant service is graphed in Fig. 2.
Lastly, bootstrapping was conducted to test the moderated med-
iating effect presented in our model. We implemented bootstrapping
using the Process macro from Hayes (2017). The indirect effects are
significantly different from zero (i.e., the mediating effects are sig-
nificant) when zero is not in the confidence intervals. According to
Table 6, bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals were computed, and
zero was not contained in these intervals. Such results further con-
firmed findings that brand love mediated the relationships between
brand experience and customer engagement under different levels of
service quality.

54
C. Prentice, et al. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59

Table 3 Table 6
Correlations and square root of AVE (diagonal). Moderated mediation analysis with bootstrap.
BE BL CE AAT AAL AAC AAO Temperature Layout

BE .77 Indirect Effect Bias-corrected Indirect Effect Bias-corrected

BL .75a .89
CEN .69a .71a .72 Lower Upper Lower Upper
T .28a .29a .28a .82
L .51a .45a .30a .32a .84 Low .24 .14 .34 .26 .15 .37
FA .50a .45a .45a .22a .34a .87 Medium .33 .22 .43 .31 .21 .41
O .27a .17a .24a .45a .31a .29a .79 High .37 .24 .50 .37 .26 .49
Flight attendants Odour
Note: BE = Brand Experience, BL = Brand Love, CEN = Customer Indirect Effect Bias-corrected Indirect Effect Bias-corrected
Engagement, T = Temperature, L = Layout, FA = Flight Attendants, O = Lower Upper Lower Upper
Odour.
a Low .28 .15 .40 .27 .14 .39
Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).
Medium .30 .20 .39 .33 .22 .42
High .32 .20 .43 .39 .26 .52
Table 4
The effects of dimensions of brand experience on brand love and customer
engagement. 3.3. Post-hoc analysis I
Brand Love Customer Engagement
Since service quality has been widely modelled as an antecedent to
Sensory .08 .23** customer engagement behaviours, we conducted post hoc analysis to
Affective 42*** .03
examine whether the inflight services provided by the airlines influence
Behavioural .21** .35***
Intellectual .14* .21** passenger engagement with the airline. Among the four selected service
R2 .56 .51 components, only temperature (ß = 0.15, p < .05) on the plane and
services from flight attendants (ß = 0.37, p < .001) had significant
*p < .05, ***p < .001. effects on customer engagement. Passengers seem to be indifferent to
the ambience factors - layout (ß = 0.11, p > .05) and odour (ß = 0.03,
Table 5 p > .05).
The effects of brand experience and brand love on dimensions of customer To understand how the proposed relationships differ between pas-
engagement.
sengers of low-cost and flagship airlines, further analyses were per-
Purchases Referrals Influence Knowledge formed by separating the data into two groups: lost-cost (LC) versus
engagement engagement value engagement flagship (FS) airlines. A multi-group analysis was conducted in ac-
engagement
cordance with Wulf et al. (2001) approach. The results show that the
Brand Experience .62*** .42*** .66*** .44*** chi-square of the model with all parameters constrained for the two
R2 .38*** .17*** .43*** .19*** groups significantly differs from that of the unconstrained model (Δχ2
Brand Love .60*** .43*** .67*** .48*** (56) = 129.08, p < .01), indicating LC and FS customers are different
R2 .36*** .19*** .45*** .23***
in their perceptions and engagements. Specifically, for LC customers,
brand experience has a positive effect on brand love (ß = 0.72,
***p < .001.
p < .001), which in turn positively influences customer engagement
(ß = 0.63, p < .001). Further, odour moderates the relationship be-
tween brand experience and brand love (ß = 0.26, p < .05) (Fig. 3).
Layout moderates the relationship between brand love and customer

Fig. 2. The moderation effect of crew.

55
C. Prentice, et al. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59

Fig. 3. The moderation effect of odour (low-cost airlines).

Fig. 4. The moderation effect of layout (low-cost airlines).

Table 7 engagement (ß = 0.57, p < .01) (Fig. 4). Lastly, the moderated med-
Moderated mediation analysis with Bootstrap. iating effects are examined using bootstrap. The results in Table 7 show
Temperature Layout that brand love mediates the relationship between brand experience
and customer engagement under different levels of customer engage-
Indirect Effect Bias-corrected Indirect Effect Bias-corrected ment.
For FS customers, brand experience has a positive effect on brand
Lower Upper Lower Upper
love (ß = 0.73, p < .001), which influences customer engagement
Low .26 .13 .40 .29 .12 .49 (ß = 0.77, p < .001). Further, service by flight attendants moderates
Medium .28 .14 .42 .28 .14 .43 the relationship between brand experience and brand love (ß = 0.22,
High .30 .11 .48 .28 .11 .46 p < .05) (Fig. 5). Lastly, the moderated mediating testing shows that
Flight attendants Odour
brand love mediates the relationship between brand experience and
Indirect Effect Bias-corrected Indirect Effect Bias-corrected
Lower Upper Lower Upper customer engagement under different levels of customer engagement
(Table 8).
Low .32 .13 .50 .28 .12 .46
Medium .29 .15 .44 .31 .17 .46
High .26 .10 .43 .33 .14 .54
4. Discussion

The current study draws upon Van Doorn et al. (2010) conceptual
model of customer engagement and examines how customer and firm-
based factors influence customer engagement with a focus on the airline

56
C. Prentice, et al. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59

Fig. 5. The moderation effect of flight attendants (flagship airlines).

Table 8 engagement. The result indicates that passengers' experiences with the
Moderated mediation analysis with bootstrap. airlines not only affect their emotional attachment and attitudes toward
Temperature Layout their chosen airlines but also their behavioural engagement with the
airlines and ultimately loyalty behaviours. This finding is consistent
Indirect Effect Bias-corrected Indirect Effect Bias-corrected with that in Roberts and Alpert (2010), Kumar and Pansari (2016), and
Pansari and Kumar (2017), although in different industries and study
Lower Upper Lower Upper
settings. Such consistent finding indicates that customer experience
Low .27 .12 .40 .30 .14 .47 with the brand and its associated organization is critical to actively
Medium .33 .19 .44 .34 .20 .47 engage customers and achieve their loyalty behaviours.
High .39 .21 .56 .37 .21 .53 The partial mediation effect exerted by brand love shows the se-
Flight attendants Odour
Indirect Effect Bias-corrected Indirect Effect Bias-corrected
quential effects of passengers' brand experience on affective attachment
Lower Upper Lower Upper to the airline, and on their subsequent engagement behaviours. In
particular, confirmation of a significant moderated mediation effect
Low .20 .07 .35 .30 .10 .46 reinforces the mediating role of brand love. Customers' emotional at-
Medium .28 .15 .41 .36 .20 .47
tachment (brand love) does play a role in their engagement with the
High .35 .19 .50 .41 .21 .58
brand organization. This finding conforms to that in Albert and
Merunka (2013) and Bairrada et al. (2018). Brand love in the current
industry. On the basis of their model, brand experience and brand love study is reflective of passengers' passion and attitude toward, brand
are opted for as customer-based factors; whereas the inflight services integration and emotional connection with their chosen airlines. Given
provided by respective airlines are as firm-based factors. Brand ex- the intense competition among airlines, endeavours to engage custo-
perience and love are reflective of customers' subjective attitude toward mers should not only be focused on enriching customer experience, but
and affective connection with the airlines. The inflight services are also enhancing their positive attitudes. Admittedly brand experience is
reflective of cognitive assessment of the airline's quality. Building on imperative. The significant hierarchical effect also indicates that cus-
Prentice et al.’s (2017; 2018) studies, this study proposes customer- tomers'/passengers' attitudes are equally important.
based factors as predictors, whereas firm-based factors as moderators of
customer engagement. The results confirm the predicting effects. Al- 4.2. The moderating role of inflight service quality
though only one inflight service component exerts a significant mod-
erating effect, this result does not support the linear effect of service Unlike most service research that models service quality as a pre-
quality on customer engagement based on the post hoc analysis. Details dictor of customers' attitudinal and behavioural outcomes, this study
of these findings are as follows. proposes the quality of inflight services that are assessed by passengers
plays a moderating role in the chain relationship of brand experience,
4.1. Brand experience, brand love, customer engagement brand love and customer engagement. This proposition is based on
Prentice et al.’s (2017; 2018) contention that customer-based factors
The study shows that brand experience has a significant hierarchical are more reflective of customers' volition to engage with a brand. Ser-
effect on brand love and customer engagement. Brand experience is vice quality is reflective of cognitive assessment of the services pro-
manifested in different connections with the brand (the airlines in this vided by the brand organization. From customers' perspective, the firm
study), including sensory, affective, behavioural and intellectual ex- should provide quality service in order to be competitive. Particularly
periences with the airline. These experiences collectively contribute to in the airline industry, there are many alternative airlines or routes that
passengers' emotional connection with the airline, which subsequently would take passengers to their planned destinations. The services pro-
leads to their engagement behaviours: flying with the airline (pur- vided by the airlines are complex with multiple stakeholders (e.g. air-
chase), becoming referral and providing feedback. In particular, brand ports, travel agencies), nevertheless not unpredictable. The complexity
experience has significant direct and indirect effects on customer of services directs customers to opt for an airline that they have positive

57
C. Prentice, et al.
experiences with.
However, service provision does affect customer experience with
the airline. In particular, as shown in this study, the services provided
by flight attendants significantly enhances customers' experience and
affective attachment to the airline. The human component of service
quality differs between competitors as each service employee has dif-
ferent traits and personalities which affect their service delivery and
interactions with customers (Prentice and King, 2011; Prentice et al.,
2013). Accordingly, different flight attendants differ in their services
and interactions with passengers on board. Flight attendants are their
first and, in most cases, the only contact point for passengers on the
plane. Although the ambience of the plane may contribute to the level
of passengers' physical comfort, from passengers' perspective, they
perceive it as an issue that is likely resolved by flight attendants or a
hardware matter that is not subject to resolution.
Interestingly inflight services have no significant moderation effects
on customer engagement. This finding indicates that flight attendants'
interaction with passengers contribute to their experience with and
emotional attachment to the airlines. To engage customers, the focus
should be on enhancing customer experience. However, the post-hoc
result shows that the service by flight attendant has a direct effect on
customer engagement. Some elements of flight service also demonstrate
significant moderation effects across different airlines. This finding
confirms that the human service is critical in engaging customers and
improving customer loyalty, consistent with that in Prentice and Wong
(2015).
5. Implications
The study builds on Van Doorn et al. (2010) model and tests the
relationships between customer, firm-based factors and customer en-
gagement. Unlike the original model, this study proposes that customer-
based factors play a dominant role in engaging customers; and firm-
based factors serve as moderators. The study has implications for the
relevant literature as well as for the airline industry. First, the study
contributes to customer engagement research by empirically testing the
association of customer and firm-based factors with customer engage-
ment. The results challenge Van Doon et al.'s proposition of parallel
effects of the customer and firm factors on customer engagement.
Customer-based factors play a more prominent role in engaging cus-
tomers.
Second, the study contributes to service quality research by pro-
posing it as a moderator rather a predictor in customer-based outcomes.
Service quality has been almost unanimously modelled and confirmed
as a predictor of customer engagement and loyalty behaviours in the
literature (e.g. Bell et al., 2005; Caruana, 2002; Ostrowski, O'Brien, and
Gordon, 1993; Prentice, 2013, 2014). The current study conceptualises
it as a firm-based factor and tests it as a moderator between customer-
based antecedents and outcomes. The results from the moderated
mediation and post-hoc testings (direct effect) show that service quality
plays a less significant role in customer engagement. This testing pro-
vides insights into service quality research. This finding cautions service
marketing researchers to reassess the dominant effect of service quality
and to take the study context into account. For instance, airline pas-
sengers play less attention to the inflight services. However, interac-
tions with the flight attendant can enhance customer experience with
the airline (shown in H3) and contributes to customer engagement (in
post-hoc analysis).
Equally, findings of this study have important implications for the
airline industry and operators. Despite the level of services offered to
passengers, the marketing endeavour to engage customers should be
focused on enhancing customer experience. Over last four decades,
service marketing researchers extensively promote the role of service
quality in customer satisfaction and loyalty. This study shows that
service quality plays a minor effect on customer-based outcomes.
Delivering quality service is important, but also costly. Flagship airlines
58
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59
tend to focus on premium service offerings. However, low-cost carriers
appear to be more competitive. Instead of offering a high level of ser-
vices (premium food and beverage, business lounges), these airlines
focus on factors that enhance customer experience such as frequency of
flights and timely schedules. The finding of this study may direct
flagship airlines to shift their focus on premium service offerings in
order to improve customer engagement behaviours. Since customer
experience has a significant hierarchical effect on affective attachment
(brand love) and behavioural outcome (customer engagement), the
airline operators and marketers should seek factors that enhance cus-
tomer experience. The study shows that interactions with flight atten-
dants contribute to such experience and engagement. Staff training in
relation to their encounter behaviours with customers should be pro-
vided to flight attendants. Knowingly these employees perform emo-
tional labour (Hochschild, 1983). Emotional labour performance in
most service organizations is a mandatory job description for frontline
employees. Emotional labour entails acting strategies (deep acting or
surface acting). Research has shown that either acting can be detri-
mental to the individual, although beneficial to the organization (see
Prentice et al., 2013). The management should attend to the remedies
for detrimental effects so that flight attendants can optimise their ser-
vice encounter performance which enhances customer experience and
contributes to customer engagement.
6. Limitations and future research
Although various effort has been taken to ensure rigorousness of this
research, some limitations arise for attention and caution. First, the
data were collected in one European airport and most participants were
Europeans. Therefore, the results may not be generalized to other
contexts. The customer-based factors are limited to brand experience.
Future research should explore other customer-related variables. The
components consisting of inflight service quality are rather limited.
Other service elements should be included for testing to gain insights
into the influence of airline service quality on customer engagement.
Finally, the study was based on Van Doorn et al. (2010) conceptual
model. Admittedly this model is rather comprehensive in terms of its
scope. However, other customer engagement models (e.g. Pansari and
Kumar, 2017) should be taken into consideration in future studies.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.020.
References
Albert, N., Merunka, D., 2013. The role of brand love in consumer-brand relationships. J.
Consum. Mark. 30, 258–266.
Alexandris, K., Dimitriadis, N., Markata, D., 2002. Can perceptions of service quality
predict behavioral intentions? An exploratory study in the hotel sector in Greece.
Manag. Serv. Qual.: Int. J. 12 (4), 224–231.
Aro, K., Suomi, K., Saraniemi, S., 2018. Antecedents and consequences of destination
brand love- A study from Finnish Lapland. Tourism Manag. 67, 71–81.
Bagozzi, R.P., Batra, R., Ahuvia, A., 2017. Brand love: development and validation of a
practical scale. Market. Lett. 28, 1–14.
Bairrada, C.M., Coelho, F., Arnaldo, C., 2018. Antecedents and outcomes of brand love:
utilitarian and symbolic brand qualities. Eur. J. Market. 52, 656–682.
Batra, R., Ahuvia, A., Bagozzi, R.P., 2012. Brand love. J. Mark. 76 (2), 1–16.
Bell, S.J., Auh, S., Smalley, K., 2005. Customer relationship dynamics: service quality and
customer loyalty in the context of varying levels of customer expertise and switching
costs. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 33 (2), 169–183.
Bitner, M.J., 1992. Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and
employees. J. Mark. 56 (2), 57–71.
Brakus, J.J., Schmitt, B.H., Zarantonello, L., 2009. Brand experience: what is it? How is it
measured? Does it affect loyalty? J. Mark. 73 (3), 52–68.
Brodie, R.J., Hollebeek, L.D., Juric, B., Illic, A., 2011. Customer engagement: conceptual
domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. J. Serv. Res. 14,
252–271.
Carroll, B.A., Ahuvia, A.C., 2006. Some antecedents and outcomes of brand love. Market.
Lett. 17 (2), 79–89.
C. Prentice, et al.
Carù, A., Cova, B., 2003. Revisiting consumption experience: a more humble but complete
view of the concept. Market. Theor. 3, 267–286.
Caruana, A., 2002. Service loyalty: the effects of service quality and the mediating role of
customer satisfaction. Eur. J. Market. 36 (7/8), 811–828.
Carvalho, A., Fernandes, T., 2018. Understanding customer brand engagement with vir-
tual social communities: a comprehensive model of drivers, outcomes and mod-
erators. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 26, 23–37.
Chandler, J.D., Lusch, R.F., 2015. Service systems: a broadened framework and research
agenda on value propositions, engagement and service experience. J. Serv. Res. 18,
6–22.
Cleff, T., Lin, I.C., Walter, N., 2014. Can you feel it? – the effect of brand experience on
brand equity. The UIP Journal of brand management 2, 8–27.
Cleff, T., Walter, N., Xie, J., 2018. The effect of online brand experience on brand loyalty:
a web of emotions. The IUP Journal of brand management 1, 8–24.
Cronin Jr., J.J., Brady, M.K., Hult, G.T.M., 2000. Assessing the effects of quality, value,
and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service environ-
ments. J. Retail. 76 (2), 193–218.
d'Astous, A., 2000. Irritating aspects of the shopping environment. J. Bus. Res. 49 (2),
149–156.
Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., Morgan-Thomas, A., 2016. Capturing consumer engagement:
duality, dimensionality and measurement. J. Mark. Manag. 32, 399–426.
Eisingerich, A.B., Merlo, O., 2014. Acta non verba? The role of customer participation and
word of mouth in the relationship between service firms' customer satisfaction and
sales performance. J. Serv. Res. 17, 40–53.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Structural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error: algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Resarch 18,
382–388.
Fournier, S., 1998. Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in con-
sumer research. J. Consum. Res. 24, 343–373.
Hair Jr., J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., 2010. SEM: an
Introduction. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Pearson Education,
London, pp. 629–686.
Han, H., Ryu, K., 2009. The roles of the physical environment, price perception, and
customer satisfaction in determining customer loyalty in the restaurant industry. J.
Hosp. Tour. Res. 33 (4), 487–510.
Hapsari, R., Clemes, M., Dean, D., 2016a. The mediating role of perceived value on the
relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction: evidence from
Indonesian airline passengers. Procedia Economics and Finance 35, 388–395.
Hapsari, R., Clemes, M.D., Dean, D., 2016b. The impact of service quality, customer
engagement and selected marketing constructs on airline passenger loyalty.
International journal of quality and service sciences 9, 21–40.
Hayes, A.F., 2017. introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process ana-
lysis. In: A Regression-Based Approach (Methodology in the Social Sciences), second
ed. The Guilford Press, New York, NY.
Hightower, R., Brady, M., Baker, T., 2002. Investigating the role of the physical en-
vironment in hedonic service consumption. J. Bus. Res. 55, 697–707.
Hochschild, A., Irwin, N., Ptashne, M., 1983. Repressor structure and the mechanism of
positive control. Cell 32 (2), 319–325.
Hollebeek, L., 2011. Demistifying customer brand engagement: exploring the loyalty
nexus. J. Mark. Manag. 27, 785–807.
Hollebeek, L., Glynn, M., Brodie, R.J., 2014. Consumer brand engagement in social
media: conceptualization, scale development and validation. J. Interact. Mark. 28,
149–165.
Hollebeek, L.D., Srivastava, R.K., Chen, T., 2016. S-D logic-informed customer engage-
ment: integrative framework, revised fundamental propositions, and application to
CRM. Journal of the Academic Marketing Science 1, 1–25.
Huber, F., Meyer, F., Schmid, D.A., 2015. Brand love in progress – the interdependence of
brand love antecedents in consideration of relationship duration. J. Prod. Brand
Manag. 24, 567–579.
Iglesias, O., Singh, J.J., Batista-Foguet, J.M., 2011. The role of brand experience and
affective commitment in determining brand loyalty. J. Brand Manag. 18 (8),
570–582.
Jain, D., Singh, S., 2002. Customer lifetime value research in marketing: a review and
future directions. J. Interact. Mark. 16, 34–46.
Jayachandran, S., Sharma, S., Kaufman, P., Raman, P., 2005. The role of relational in-
formation processes and technology use in customer relationship management. J.
Mark. 69, 177–192.
Jiang, K., Luk, S.T.K., Cardinali, S., 2018. The role of pre-consumption experience in
perceived value of retailer brands: consumers' experience from emerging markets. J.
Bus. Res. 86, 374–385.
Khan, I., Rahman, Z., 2015. Brand experience anatomy in retailing: an interpretative
structural modelling approach. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 24, 60–69.
Kim, K.Y., Eisenberger, R., Baik, K., 2016. Perceived organizational support and affective
organizational commitment: Moderating influence of perceived organizational com-
petence. J. Organ. Behav. 37 (4), 558–583.
Kumar, V., Pansari, A., 2016. Competitive advantage through engagement. J. Mark. Res.
53, 497–514.
Kumar, V., Aksoy, L., Donkers, B., Venkatesan, R., Wiesel, T., Tillmanns, S., 2010.
Undervalued or overvalued customers: capturing total customer engagement value. J.
Serv. Res. 13, 297–310.
Kumar, V., Rajan, B., Gupta, S., Pozza, I.D., 2017. Customer engagement in service. J.
Acad. Mark. Sci. 47 (1), 138–160.
Laming, C., Mason, K., 2014. Customer experience – an analysis of the concept and its
performance in airline brands. Research in transportation business & management
59
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 50 (2019) 50–59
10, 15–25.
Langner, T., Bruns, D., Fischer, A., Rossiter, J., 2016. Falling in love with brands: a dy-
namic analysis of the trajectories of brand love. Market. Lett. 27, 15–26.
Langner, T., Schmidt, J., Fischer, A., 2015. Is it really love? A comparative investigation
of the emotional nature of brand and interpersonal love. Psychol. Market. 32,
624–634.
Long-Tolbert, S., Gammoh, B.S., 2012. In good and bad times: the interpersonal nature of
brand love in service relationships. J. Serv. Mark. 26, 391–402.
Mollen, A., Wilson, H., 2010. Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online con-
sumer experience: reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives. J. Bus. Res. 63
(9–10), 919–925.
Ong, C.H., Lee, H.W., Ramayah, T., 2018. Impact of brand experience on loyalty. J. Hosp.
Mark. Manag. 27, 755–774.
Ostrowski, P.L., O'Brien, T.V., Gordon, G.L., 1993. Service quality and customer loyalty in
the commercial airline industry. J. Travel Res. 32 (2), 16–24.
Pansari, A., Kumar, V., 2017. Customer engagement: the construct, antecedents and
consequences. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 45, 294–311.
Parasuraman, A.A., Zeithaml, V.L., Berry, L., 1995. A conceptual model of service quality
and its implications for future research. J. Mark. 49 (4), 41–50.
Pine, J., Gilmore, J., 1998. Welcome to the experience economy. Harv. Bus. Rev. 76 (4),
97–105.
Prentice, C., 2013. Attitudinal and behavioral loyalty amongst casino players in Macau.
Serv. Market. Q. 34 (4), 309–321.
Prentice, C., 2014. Who stays, who walks, and why in high-intensity service contexts. J.
Bus. Res. 67 (4), 608–614.
Prentice, C., King, B., 2011. The influence of emotional intelligence on the service per-
formance of casino frontline employees. Tourism Hospit. Res. 11 (1), 49–66.
Prentice, C., Loureiro, S.M.C., 2017. An asymmetrical approach to understanding con-
figurations of customer loyalty in the airline industry. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 38,
96–107.
Prentice, C., Wong, I.A., 2015. Casino marketing, problem gamblers or loyal customers? J.
Bus. Res. 68 (10), 2084–2092.
Prentice, C., Chen, P., King, B., 2013. Employee performance outcomes and burnout
following the presentation-of-self in customer-service contexts. Int. J. Hosp. Manag.
35, 225–236.
Prentice, C., Wang, X., Lin, X., 2018. An organic approach to customer engagement and
loyalty. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2018.
1485528. (published online on 22 Jun 2018).
Resnick, E., 2001. Defining engagement. J. Int. Aff. 54, 551–566.
Roberts, C., Alpert, F., 2010. Total customer engagement: designing and aligning key
strategic elements to achieve growth. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 19, 198–209.
Ryu, K., Jang, S.S., 2007. The effect of environmental perceptions on behavioral inten-
tions through emotions: the case of upscale restaurants. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 31 (1),
56–72.
Sasha, G.C., Theingi, 2009. Service quality, satisfaction, and behavioural intentions: a
study of low-cost airline carriers in Thailand. Manag. Serv. Qual.: Int. J. 19, 350–372.
Sashi, C.M., 2012. Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media.
Manag. Decis. 50 (2), 253–272.
Shi, Y., Prentice, C., He, W., 2014. Linking service quality, customer satisfaction and
loyalty in casinos, does membership matter? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 40, 81–91.
Sivadas, E., Baker-Prewitt, J.L., 2000. An examination of the relationship between service
quality, customer satisfaction, and store loyalty. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 28 (2),
73–82.
Suntikul, W., Jachna, T., 2016. The co-creation/place attachment nexus. Tourism Manag.
52, 276–286.
Thakur, R., 2018. Customer engagement and online reviews. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 41,
48–59.
The economist, 2018. Legacy Airlines Are Facing New Competitors on Transatlantic
Routes. Retrieved from. https://www.economist.com/gulliver/2018/01/18/legacy-
airlines-are-facing-new-competitors-on-transatlantic-routes, Accessed date: 20 July
2018.
Thomson, M., MacInnis, D.J., Park, C.W., 2005. The ties that bind: measuring the strength
of consumers' emotional attachments to brands. J. Consum. Psychol. 15, 77–91.
Van Doorn, J., Lemon, K.N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P., Verhoef, P.C., 2010.
Customer engagement behavior: theoretical foundations and research directions. J.
Serv. Res. 13, 253–266.
Verhoef, P.C., Reinartz, W.J., Kraft, M., 2010. Customer engagement as a new perspective
in customer management. J. Serv. Res. 13, 247–252.
Villanueva, J., Yoo, S., Hanssens, D., 2008. The impact of marketing-induced versus word-
of-mouth customer acquisition on customer equity growth. J. Mark. Res. 45, 48–59.
Vivek, S.D., Beatty, S.E., Morgan, R.M., 2012. Customer engagement: exploring customer
relationships beyond purchase. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 20 (2), 122–146.
Vivek, S.D., Beatty, S.E., Dalela, V., Morgan, M.R., 2014. A generalized multidimensional
scale for measuring customer engagement. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 22, 401–420.
Wulf, K.D., Odekerken-Schröder, G., Lacobucci, D., 2001. Investments in consumer re-
lationships: a cross-country and cross-industry exploration. J. Mark. 65 (4), 33–50.
Yee, R.W., Yeung, A.C., Cheng, T.E., 2010. An empirical study of employee loyalty, ser-
vice quality and firm performance in the service industry. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 124 (1),
109–120.
Zeithaml, V.A., 2000. Service quality, profitability, and the economic worth of customers:
what we know and what we need to learn. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 28 (1), 67–85.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A., 1996. The behavioral consequences of ser-
vice quality. J. Mark. 60 (2), 31–46.