Content uploaded by Amila Buddhika Sirisena
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Amila Buddhika Sirisena on May 01, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Received 29th August 2021 Revised 20th December 2021 Accepted 11th January 2022
Corresponding Author: P.A.P.S. Kumara, Department of Marketing Management, Faculty of
Management and Finance, University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka, Email: samanthak@badm.ruh.ac.lk
Asian Journal of Marketing Management (AJMM)
2022, Vol (01), Issue (01), 115-137
Copyright© University of Sri Jayewardenepura
ISSN: 2820-2031 (Printed)
ISSN: 2820-2082 (Online)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31357/ajmm.v1i01.5470
Reprints and Permission: ajmm@sjp.ac.lk
Measuring consumer experience at the retail context: development of
ConEx scale
P.A.P.S. Kumara
University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka
A.B. Sirisena
University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka
T.R. Wijesundara
University of Ruhuna, Sri Lanka
ABSTRACT
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to conceptualize and develop a scale to measure consumer
experience at the retail context.
Design/methodology/approach: A questionnaire survey was conducted with a sample of
164 undergraduates of one of the state universities in Sri Lanka. Five dimensions of the consumer
experience were identified by the exploratory factor analysis conducted with 21 measurement
indicators. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted with the five-factor measurement model and
resulted in a five-dimensional structure for consumer experience with 14 measurement indicators.
Findings: The study concluded that the consumer experience was a multidimensional construct,
comprising the dimensions of virtue, equanimous, amusement, rapture, and strange. The
multidimensional nature of consumer experience which was explored will help marketers to focus
on the areas in which consumer experience enhancement is required and consumer experience
strategies also can be designed according to the multidimensional aspects of consumer experience.
Originality: The study developed a Consumer Experience scale (ConEx scale) which can be used
to examine the consumer experience in the retail context. The multidimensional structure of ConEx
also concerns the hedonistic perspective of consumer experience.
Implications: The customer experience in retail sector can be addressed through customer
emotions. The explored dimensions of customer experience provide important implications for
practitioners by offering new ways to explore customer emotions in retail setting.
Keywords: Consumer emotions, consumer experience, experience marketing, retailing, ConEx
Scale
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
116
INTRODUCTION
The marketing landscape is changing (Homburg, Jozić and Kuehnl, 2017).
Since the beginning of the concept of marketing, it has been broadening its
perspective on the exchange of ‘market offering’. The term ‘market offerings’ is
used in marketing with a wide-ranging meaning of ‘products’. Market offers are
usually consumed in many ways by groups of users (Holt, 1995). Thus, over the past
years, marketing has been a typical issue as it has been postulated to understand
consumer behavior (Tynan and McKechnie, 2009). The sub-disciplines of service
marketing and experience marketing have emerged to address much of this
broadened perspective. Gilmore and Pine (2002) argue that, in an experience
economy, business organizations need to create memories and a platform for
generating better economic value, instead of just creating goods and delivering
services. Much value on customer experience has been given in contemporary
businesses as the consumer experience (management) can be used to differentiate
their offering from those of competition. Moreover, the service industry can be seen
as a sector where consumer experience is at the center of its being (Kim et al.,
2011).
‘The customer experience’ has become one of the key concerns in marketing
(Lemon and Verhoef, 2016). The experience plays a significant role in determining
the quality of a firm’s offering (Gentile, Spiller and Noci, 2007). The retail sector is
being widely expanded throughout the world and has experienced significant growth
over the last decades. Infrastructure development projects in the rural areas of the
countries and fast-growing middle and upper-class consumer bases are the keys to
the success of retail chains. Retailers have embraced the idea of customer
experience management (Verhoef et al., 2009). In the present competitive
environment, the success of retailing has become the foundation of effective
customer experience management. They are required to be concerned about the
concepts like ‘customer experience’ that converts the company’s efforts into
customer value (Garg, Rahman and Kumar, 2011). Moreover, the retail sector is
adapting the new state-of-art technology in its distribution, warehousing,
communication and all other customer services. Despite a few significant attempts
made for examining the consumer experience and consumer satisfaction, there is a
lack of significant studies conducted on developing a measurement of consumer
experience in the retail context. Future researchers can develop the measuring scales
of consumer experience and, items related to consumer experience can be generated,
purified, and validated (Garg, Rahman and Kumar, 2011). The development and
validation of consumer experience measurement will reflect and urge the retail
marketing practitioners and academics to better understand the managerial
consequences of the expanded theoretical scope of the retail marketing applications.
This study attempts to address the gap of the consumer experience measurement by
developing and validating a consumer experience scale. A robust measurement scale
of consumer experience will lead to better measurement of consumer experience and
thereby monitor and increase consumer satisfaction. Perhaps due to the lack of
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
117
development of a sound measurement of customer experience, there is also a dearth
of research on how customer experience can be influenced (Lemon and Verhoef,
2016). The motivation of this study is to contribute to establishing a
conceptualization and a scale of consumer experience which will lead to the
development of more advanced approaches and theories in marketing.
No common understanding exists regarding what customer experience entails
(Becker and Jaakkola, 2020). As such, the objective of the study is to develop and
validate a consumer experience scale from a customer emotion perspective. The
study then particularly will facilitate marketing scholars to identify the customer
experience to manage the customer emotions. This paper is structured into three
sections: first, the expansion of product logic of marketing into experience logic of
marketing is reviewed; second, the study design and the methods of the study are
detailed; third, the multidimensional nature of consumer experience and
development and validation of the consumer experience scale is presented.
LITERATURE REVIEW
From the product logic to the experience logic of marketing
Marketing has evolved through a series of transformations from products
to services and customer experiences (Maklan and Klaus, 2011). According to the
product logic, products have been viewed as bundles of attributes that yield
particular benefits. The term ‘traditional marketing’ is used in the marketing
literature to the conception of the use of marketing principles and tools, from the
commodity perspective (Schmit,t 1999). The domain of this perspective is that the
customers buy products with the highest overall utility of the products. The services
logic does not concern products in terms of their functional features and benefits.
Services marketing is a sub-discipline of marketing has contributed to the
development of positive and normative theory to address market offerings that did
not fit the traditional goods-based, manufacturing model (Vargo and Lusch, 2004).
According to the perspective of Service-Dominant (S-D) logic, the consumers are
not identified as objects (i.e. operand resources), but as possessors of operant
resources (i.e. skills, capabilities, knowledge, initiative, imagination) where they are
utilized to establish both experiences and value (Baron et al. 2010). Scholars in the
area of service marketing recently started to think customer satisfaction from
customer experience perspective (Nasution, Sembada, Miliani, Resti, and Prawono,
2014).
The Experience- Dominant logic tends to see consumption as a psychological
phenomenon from a phenomenological viewpoint, stressing the emotional
conditions throughout the consumption process (Holt, 1995). Experience delivers a
motivation for the user. The value is not included to products, or generated by
services, but is embedded in the actual personalized experiences created through
active participation (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004). The secret to a good
experience is not the multiplicity of features of the offer (Meyer and Schwager,
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
118
2007), but the way the consumer emotionally reacts to the multiplicity of features of
the offering.
The logics of Product, Services and Experience marketing are conceptualized as in
Figure 1, to delineate the broadening of the marketing offering perspective. Product
marketing was not “dead”; it was still necessary, but no longer sufficient to remain
competitive (Maklan and Klaus, 2011). The same is applied to services marketing as
well. “This changing context, where marketing practitioners need an innovative
solution to obtain a competitive advantage, customers increasingly seek pleasure
over functional benefits, and a relatively cheap, enabling technology has become
widely available, that has promoted the widespread practitioner interest in the
experience marketing approach” (Tynan and McKechnie, 2009 p. 503). Products are
no longer bundles of functional characteristics, but rather are means to provide and
enhance the customer experiences (Schmitt, 1999). Thus, the paradigm regarding
the primary tool to provide value in marketing has undergone major shifts in the last
few decades shifting from creating brands (i.e., product) to building excellent
services to creating compelling customer experiences (Nasution et al., 2014).
Figure 1. The evolution of experience dominant logic
Source- Author Conceptualization
This paper concerns two basic underpinnings of the revised S-D logic of Vargo and
Lusch (2008) that are directly linked to customer experience; first, the customer is
always a co-creator of value (value creation is interactional); and second, value is
always uniquely and phenomenologically determined by the beneficiary (value is
experiential). The service consumption experience per se can be regarded as the
major output of service organizations (Bitner, 1990). Some scholars have identified
the experiential nature of services and therefore the affective state of consumers
during consumption is important (Wirtz and Bateson, 1999). The consumer
experience encompasses every aspect of an offering (Meyer and Schwager, 2007).
Lemon and Verhoef (2016), address what customer experience is sufficient, through
definitions and roots of customer experience, and emphasize that it is useful to
differentiate customer experience construct from other customer-focused constructs,
for further understanding of the customer experience construct. The field is vast and
still, there is a lack of a generalized framework to measure the consumer experience
(Garg, Rahman and Kumar, 2011). S-D logic can continue to advance over the next
Product
logic
Services
logic
Experience
logic
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
119
decade by moving towards further development of a general theory of value co-
creation i.e., consumer experience management (Vargo and Lusch, 2017).
Customer experience marketing
Nord and Peter (1980) elaborate how behaviour modification perspective
can be used to facilitate the development of a comprehensive set of strategies and
tactics which encompass those environmental and situational factors which directly
influence customer behaviour. It has been advanced that services are experiential
(Wirtz and Bateson, 1999). In today’s competitive environment, it is no longer
enough to satisfy customers. Though offering high quality products and services is
expected in today’s competitive world, it is no longer sufficient to establish a
competitive advantage (Kim et al., 2011). The trend is to create engaging and lasting
experiences for customers (Mascarenhas, Kesavan and Bernacchi, 2006). Figure 1
illustrates how strategic differentiation attempts have changed over time. It proposes
that in the contemporary experience-based economy, the Experience-Dominant
logic is more powerful than the previous product and service dominant logic.
Marketing practitioners have realized that understanding how consumers experience
brands and, in turn, how to provide appealing brand experiences for them, is critical
for differentiating their offerings in a competitive marketplace (Schmitt, 2011). In
addition, a number of organizations have recognized customer experience
management as a successor to customer relationship management (Palmer, 2010).
Holt (1995) derives three distinct metaphors for consuming, each attending to a
particular dimension of how people consume: consuming as experience, consuming
as integration, and consuming as classification. According to Holt (1995),
consuming as an experience metaphor underlies research examining consumers'
subjective, emotional reactions to the consumption of objects. Experience marketing
has been widely discussed by marketing academicians and practitioners with S-D
logic of services marketing (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). However, this approach
requires working with customers and members of an extended value creation
network as partners, over a long time to co-create complex value sources and not
merely to deliver an offer to them (Tynan and McKechnie, 2009).
Service-dominant logic (S-D) is a paradigmatic lens to see services in complex
context (Ostrom, Parasuraman, Bowen, Patrício, and Voss, 2015) and it re-examines
the nature of a service in the process of value creation and exchange (Wilden et al.,
2017) which was based on traditional Good Dominant (G-D) logic. The main
orientation of S-D logic is the “identification of service—the application of
resources for the benefit of others—as the common denominator of economic (and
non-economic) exchange (Vargo and Lusch, 2017, p 48). This perspective further
explains that service has a more influencing role in society than what is generally
accepted (Vargo, Koskela-Huotari and Vink, 2020). To put it simply S-D identifies
the significance of service as the foundation of all exchange and value creation
(Wilden, Akaka, Karpen and Hohberger, 2017). The evaluation of the concept can
be categorized into three periods as formative (2004- 2007), refinement (2008-
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
120
2011) and, advancement (2012 onwards) (Brodie, Löbler, & Fehrer, 2019). In the
formative period, traditional Good Dominant (G-D) logic was confronted. S-D logic
was enhanced, and more academic orientation was given in the refinement period.
Now, it is further broadening, and empirical justifications are immerging to support
the experience dominant logic.
“Experience-Dominant Logic is a totally different approach in terms of working
with the customer as a partner to configure the offer including an extended range of
value from sensory, emotional, functional/utilitarian, relational, social,
informational, novelty and utopian sources; communicating and developing that
offer, co-creating the negotiated experience, and understanding and evaluating
the experience post-purchase” (Tynan and McKechnie, 2009, p. 512). In marketing,
it is identified that customer satisfaction is the key to customer loyalty and
repurchase behavior. Thus, the focus on competitive differentiation between
companies has evolved (Palmer 2010). Businesses must focus on the customer’s
shopping experience to compete effectively (Grewal, Levy and Kumar, 2009).
Offering products or services alone is not enough these days (Berry, Carbone and
Haeckel, 2002).
An integrated view of co-creating value with the customer will shift the customer
value creating processes of contemporary businesses. According to Grewal, Levy
and Kumar (2009), customer experience management represents a business strategy
designed to manage the customer experience including several ways (i.e.,
promotion, price, merchandise, supply chain and location) for delivering a superior
customer experience which results in higher customer satisfaction.
In a recent survey of marketing professionals by Bigham in 2008, 70% of the
respondents indicated their intention to employ experience marketing more widely
in the future (as cited in Tynan and McKechnie, 2009). Organizations must provide
their customers with satisfactory experience-competing on that dimension means
orchestrating all the “clues” that people pick up in the buying process (Berry,
Carbone, and Haeckel, 2002). The Customer Experience Management (CEM)
framework suggested by Schmitt in 2003 (as cited by Schmitt 2011) enhanced the
adaptation of this new genre of marketing.
Role of customer emotions in customer experience
The customers’ emotional bonding with the service provider is strongly
attached to their purchase intentions (Mattila, 2001). Consumer emotions play a
significant role in the selection of a service provider, evaluation of service (or
product); return intent, loyalty enhancement, word-of-mouth generation, and overall
assessment of the service organization (Han, Back, and Barrett, 2010). Thus, this
paper posits that the customer experience logic of marketing is the result of more
customer emotional experience orientations of the marketing practitioners and
researchers. Schmitt (1999) discussed emotional experience as “the moods and
emotions generating during the shopping trip. Emotions provide the motivational
force for what is best and worst in human behaviour and exert a powerful influence
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
121
on reason (Dolan, 2002). Emotions act as a source of information, which is used to
evaluate a stimulus and lead to the formation of an attitude (Palmer, 2010). As such,
the emotional logic of experience marketing seems vital. An offering can generate
an emotional experience in order to create an effective relationship with the
company (Gentile, Spiller and Noci, 2007). Customer emotions experience plays a
major role in customer purchasing, evaluation, and decision-making processes
(Mattila and Ro, 2008; Mattila and Enz, 2002). Consumer emotional experiences
affect consumer satisfaction and loyalty (Yu and Dean, 2001; Mattila and Ro, 2008;
Wu and Tseng, 2015).
Customer experience is complex, dynamic, and difficult to capture (Zolkiewski, et
al., 2017). Palmer (2010) noticeably underpins how the experience marketing
construct has been coined differently by scholars with its long history. Customer
experience is a multi-dimensional construct (Lemon and Verhoef, 2016) as
capturing customer touchpoints is complex and difficult. Experience has several
different meanings, and thus, has been defined in many different ways (Godovykh
and Tasci, 2020).
The present study considers the way Lemon and Verhoef’s (2016), has defined
customer experience as a multidimensional construct focusing on a customer’s
cognitive, emotional, behavioral, sensorial, and social responses to a firm’s offerings
during the customer’s entire purchase journey (p. 71). As such, it attempted to
separate and derive a measurement for customers’ emotional response in retail
context. Addressing the measurement of customer experience, from different
perspectives is important as it represents a shift in our understanding from the
managerial control of some ‘thing’ (e.g., retailing strategy) (Zolkiewski, et al.,
2017).
The consumer experience scale is constructed to cover the domain of consumer
experience in a retail setting. For this study, the emotional domain of experience is
considered as a component that involves one’s affective system with the generation
of moods, feelings, and emotions as identified by Gentile, Spiller and Noci (2007).
The experiential perspective explores the symbolic meanings of more subjective
characteristics i.e., cheerfulness (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). Moreover,
consumption refers to the set of emotional responses elicited during product usage
or consumption experience (Westbrook, and Oliver, 1991). As such, to examine the
dimensionality of consumption emotions, the structural dimension approach (Oh,
2005) is used.
Consumer experience has interactive touchpoints to provide multiple opportunities
for the consumers to be engaged in the buying process. Therefore, the consumer
touchpoints are considered in the development of consumer experience scale.
Customer engagement is a component of customer experience that involves
interactional touchpoints, such as social communities and interactions with service
employees or other customers (Lemon and Verhoef, 2016).
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
122
However, the extent of the contribution of emotions to the total experience
marketing approach is not well established yet in marketing literature. This study
endeavors to fill the gap by examining the contribution of the emotional logic of
experience marketing to the co-creation of value in a service system. The challenge
faced by the researchers is to determine how the richness of the customer experience
construct can be measured succinctly and accurately across multiple touchpoints
(Lemon and Verhoef, 2016). This facilitates the understanding of the need for
differentiation of offerings which drives much of experience marketing.
Experience marketing and customer satisfaction in the retail context
In today’s competitive retail environment customer experience has been
identified as one of the key sources of competitive advantage (Gerea, Gonzalez-
Lopez & Herskovic, 2021). Significant growth of e-commerce sector where total
revenue exceeding $4.28 trillion in 2020 (Mao, 2021), has also made the context
even more challenging to traditional retailers and at the same time has further
elevated the importance of experience management. Sri Lankan retailing sector also
has grown significantly over the last decade where modern trade has been able to
position itself as the mainstream player in the industry mostly thanks to rapid
urbanization and other related factors (Ekanayake & Karunarathne, 2021). Sri
Lankan retailing industry is dominated by three main industry players; Cargills plc.,
Kelles & Arpico, and together they maintain more than 500 outlets island wide
(Dailymirror, 2018; Keells shelves plan to double number of stores, 2020). More
importantly, Sri Lankan spending patterns resemble more towards what is seen in
developed economies where consumer preference for lifestyle products and luxury
goods (Oxford Business Group, 2019), in high demand, making consumer shopping
experience vital in Sri Lankan retailing context (Keells shelves plan to double
number of stores, 2020,2020). Accordingly, a multitude of factors influences Sri
Lankan consumers’ shopping experience including, convenience, variety and
assortment, product quality, price, store image, store atmosphere, and service quality
(Karunaratna, 2021).
Retailers are supposed to manage all the activities in the process of selling products
and providing all the services to meet individual consumer needs. The retail
environment is being transformed with multichannel operations designed to offer a
spectrum of retail experiences for the consumers to choose (De Farias, Aguiar and
Melo, 2014). Companies stage an experience whenever they engage the customers
in a personal, and memorable way (Pine, and Gilmore, 1998). As such, this applies
to the retail sector as well. Negative emotions are expected to lead to increased
dissatisfaction, whereas positive emotions are expected to result in high satisfaction
levels (Mattila and Ro, 2008). Customer satisfaction is regarded as a primary
determining factor of repeat shopping and purchasing behavior (Burns and Neisner,
2006).
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
123
The retailers have institutionalized the concept of customer satisfaction in operations
primarily through customer service departments. Over the years, retail stores have
grown larger, and their one-stop convenience has been expanded to include service
outlets and entertainment providers (Bloch, Ridgway and Dawson, 1994). The
experiences provided by the retailers are inherently service-centric (Burns and
Neisner, 2006). The satisfaction judgment is originated in comparison of the level of
product performance or other outcomes (i.e., experience) perceived by the consumer
with an evaluative standard (Westbrook and Oliver, 1991). The store experience
significantly influences consumer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction may best be
understood as an evaluation of the surprise inherent in a consumption experience
(Oliver, 1981). In the modern context, the components of the store environment
include music, display designs, lighting and smell etc. These elements are also
called ‘atmospherics’ (Burns and Neisner, 2006).
METHODOLOGY
Procedure for developing a measurement suggested by Churchill (1979) is
followed in developing the consumer experience scale: first, the domain of
consumer experience is specified; second, generated a sample of measurement
indicators of consumer emotions; third, purified the measurement of consumer
experience; and finally assessed the reliability and validity of the proposed scale.
Exploratory Factor Analysis was used to purify the measurement of consumer
experience measurement while Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to assess the
reliability and validity of the factor structure of the proposed measurement model.
Consumer experience measurement indicators
A pilot study was conducted with 54 undergraduates of one of the state
universities in Sri Lanka in order to explore possible measurement indicators of
examining consumer experience. Emotion variables synthesized by Fehr and
Russell (1984); Boyle (1986); Allen, Machleit and Marine (1988); Bradley and Lang
(1994); Burns and Neisner (2006) were screened in line with the consumer
experience in a retail setting and selected 29 measurement indicators for the pilot
study and followed the procedure adapted by Han, Back and Barrett (2010) to refine
the experience measurement in the present study. In-depth discussions were held
with the students in order to identify the most appropriate variables of consumer
experience emotions in retail settings resulted with 24 measurement indicators.
Next, a formal discussion was held with one of the academic staff in marketing at
the same university, to reflect the best suitable measurement indicators of consumer
experience, and accordingly, the construct of ‘consumer experience’ is assumed to
be defined by 21 measurement indicators (Table 1).
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
124
Table1: Measurement Indicators of Consumer Experience
Source- Synthesis from the literature review
Sample, questionnaire design and data collection
Marketing undergraduates from the same university were used as the sample
of this study. The sample consisted of a total of 164 undergraduates. The
undergraduates are generally involved in consumption activities in retail settings.
This young generation i.e., Generation Y, is the emerging generation with powerful
aggregate spending (Cui et al., 2003). In addition, this young generation is highly
active in the marketplace (Noble, Haytko and Phillips, 2009). Thus, it is possible to
use undergraduates as the sample of studies, examining consumer experience at
retail settings. The total sample of 164 undergraduates consisted of 82 females and
82 males. The average age of the sample respondents was 22 years.
As given in Table 1, the consumer experience was examined by using 21 emotional
experience indicators. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure the emotional
experience indicators; (1) representing “do not experience at all”, and (5)
representing “experience very much”. The questionnaire was administered to the
university undergraduates after a general discussion about their very recent shopping
Consumer experience measurement indicators
1. Delighted
2. Scared
3. Charmed
4. Joyful
5. Admiring
6. Respectful
7. Sane
8. Fearful
9. Surprised
10. Extroverted
11. Amazed
12. Moral
13. Calm
14. Encouraged
15. Enjoyable
16. Excited
17. Curious
18. Passionate
19. Entertained
20. Relaxed
21. Enthusiastic
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
125
trip. The questionnaire was initially developed in English and then translated into
Sinhala (the mother tongue of Sri Lanka). The Sinhala version of the questionnaire
was back translated into English by one of the academics, to validate the translation.
FINDINGS
The study endeavors to develop a consumer experience scale to measure
consumer experience. The conceptualization of the study hypothesis that the
consumer experience is multidimensional. The factor analysis in marketing
research has been around since the 1940s (Green and Wind, 1975). Most marketers
model the relationship between the observable measures and the underlying latent
construct, by using common factor models (Singh, Howell, and Rhoads, 1990). In
the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), attributes are rated, and it is assumed that
there are a few basic perceptual dimensions (Hauser, and Koppelman, 1979). Thus,
factor analysis can be used to examine relationships among sets of many
interrelated variables and represent in terms of a few underlying factors (Malhotra,
1999) and to reduce a large number of indicators to a more manageable set
(Gerbing, and Anderson, 1988).
The Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) provides overall goodness-of-fit tests of
the match between the theoretical factor structure and the data (Kahn, 2006).
Confirmatory analyses must be performed to test the appropriateness of a
hypothesized model (Heeler, Whipple, and Hustad, 1977). Accordingly, the EFA
was conducted initially to examine the underlying factor dimensions of the variables
considered in this study. Next, the CFA was conducted to test the appropriateness of
the hypothesized multidimensional structure of the customer experience scale.
Exploratory factor analysis
The original EFA used 21 measurement indicators to identify the
multidimensional structure of the consumer experience and resulted in five factor
structure for the consumer experience. However, the results of the EFA
encapsulated the ‘consumer experience’ into 14 measurement indicators (Table 2).
Subsequently, second EFA was conducted and found that the consumer experience
in the retail setting is determined by five factors (Table 2). The adequacy of the
sample and the appropriateness of the use of a second EFA for the study were
ensured with KMO (.823). A significant Bartlett test value (x2 =1529.5, p = .000),
indicates that the correlation matrix is significantly different from identity matrix.
The principal component analysis with Varimax rotation was used for the EFA.
Factors with an eigenvalue of 1 or more are retained.
The factor loadings generated a five-factor structure of the customer experience.
The initial loadings of the items on the factors were further analyzed based on the
results of the CFA and accordingly some indicators were removed from the first
factor structure. The measurement indicator ‘extroverted’ was removed from the
first factor; two measurement indicators were removed from the factor two i.e.
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
126
‘encouraged’ and ‘curios’; one measurement indicator from the factor three i.e.
‘delighted’ and three measurement indicators from the factor five i.e. ‘passionate’,
‘scared’ and ‘fearful’.
Nor can a domain be studied without employing a set of descriptive concepts;
deciding how to categorize consumer experience (Fehr and Russell, 1984).
Accordingly, the factors were interpreted based on the items loaded on the factors
and labeled; accordingly, virtue, amusement, equanimity, rapture and strange.
Factor 1 was labeled as ‘virtue’ since this was encapsulated by the extent to which
the respondents’ virtue perspective of the consumer experience. Factor 2 was
labeled as ‘amusement’ since this reflects the amusement perspective of the
consumer experience. Factor 3 uncovers the ‘equanimity’ perspective of the
consumer experience. Factor 4 consists of the indicators related to the ‘rapture’
perspective of the consumer experience while factor 5 consists of indicators related
to ‘strange’ perspective of the consumer experience.
Table 2. Rotated component matrix of customer experience a
Variable
Factor
Virtue
Amusement
Equanimity
Rapture
Strange
Sane
.834
Respectful
.761
Moral
.753
Calm
.675
Excited
.782
Enjoyable
.675
Entertained
.811
Relaxed
.799
Enthusiastic
.593
Joyful
.723
Charmed
.696
Admiring
.587
Surprised
.627
Amazed
.597
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 10 iterations.
Confirmatory factor analysis
The measurement model of the study represents the constructs associated with the
consumer experience, indicator variables and the relationships among the variables.
Based on the results of the EFA, first-order measurement model of the consumer
experience is conceptualized as in Figure 2. Accordingly, the results of the
exploratory factor analysis show the multidimensionality aspect of the construct of
the consumer experience as it consists of five-factor structure of the consumer
experience. The five-factor measurement model was developed to validate the
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
127
consumer experience scale and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test
the five-factor measurement model.
Figure 2: First-order factor model of consumer experience
The model fit was evaluated with Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index
(TLI), Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) and Root Mean-Squared Error of
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
128
Approximation (RMSEA). The cutoff values are close to 0.95 for CFI and TLI; the
cutoff value close to 0.06 for RMSEA can be used to conclude that there is a
relatively good fit between the hypothesized model and the observed data (Hu and
Bentler, 1999). Values equal to or greater than 0.9 for AGFI suggest meaningful
models (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). A value of lesser than 2.0 is preferred for x2/df
(Mishra 2015).
The x2 statistic of the model is 112.2 with 67 degrees of freedom, which is
statistically significant (p = .000); x2/df is 1.67. AGFI is .87. Thus, the results show a
comparatively better fit for the 14-item consumer experience scale; TLI= 0.94, CFI
= 0.96 and RMSEA = 0.06 which are close to the cutoff for a good model fit (See
Table 3).
Table 3. Overall fit indices of 14 items of ConEx scale
Model (n=164)
X2
df
x2/df
AGFI
TLI
CFI
RMSEA
Suggested Cutoff
Values
-
-
2-5
>0.9
>0.95
>0.95
<0.06
14 item ConEx scale
112.23
67
1.67
.87
0.94
0.96
0.06
Validity and reliability of the measurement model
Validity and reliability have to be examined before testing the relationship
in the hypothesized measurement model (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Standardized
factor loadings of 0.7 or above were maintained (except the loading for excitement
of 0.63), to ensure initially the convergent validity of the constructs of the
measurement model. In addition, the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) is
examined to establish the convergent validity of the constructs: an AVE of each
construct is greater than 0.5 establishes the convergent validity of the study
constructs (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). In addition, Composite Reliability (CR) and
Cronbach’s Alpha were used to examine the internal consistency reliability of the
constructs. CR and Cronbach’s of each construct is above 0.7, showing the
reliability of the constructs of the measurement model (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). See
Table 4 for the reliability statistics of the constructs.
Table IV. Reliability of the constructs
Construct
AVE
CR
Cronbach’s Alpha
Virtue
.56
.85
.84
Equanimity
.60
.82
.82
Amusement
.67
.82
.76
Rapture
.65
.88
.84
Strange
.60
.73
.74
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
129
The discriminant validity of the measurement model is examined with the Fornell-
Larcker criterion. Table 5 shows that each construct’s AVE is higher than its
squared correlation with any other construct (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
Table 4. Discriminant validity of the constructs
Construct
Virtue
Equanimity
Amusement
Rapture
Strange
Virtue
0.56
Equanimity
0.33
0.60
Amusement
0.13
0.36
0.67
Rapture
0.52
0.46
0.24
0.65
Strange
0.04
0.05
0.13
0.04
0.60
DISCUSSIONS
The result of the study conducted by Garg, Rahman, and Kumar (2011) have
explored that organizations are concentrating more on the experiences of their
customer and the researchers require more empirical support for consumer
experience management. The consumer experience should be measured while taking
into account its rich, multidimensional nature (Lemon and Verhoef, 2016). This
study endeavored to examine the multidimensional nature of the customer
experience in the retail setting and develop a customer experience scale.
Accordingly, the study identified five dimensions of customer experience as
follows:
• Virtue- this represents the behavior showing high moral standards. This
aspect of the consumer experience consists of the extent to which the
consumers’ concern for sanity, respectfulness, morality and calmness of the
experience that consumers receive from a retail setting.
• Equanimous - the extent to which the experience of consumer temper is
addressed is explained in this aspect. Entertainment, relaxation and
enthusiasm are characteristics of the experience that facilitate consumers to
receive equanimous of the experience.
• Amusement- this is the aspect in which the consumers expect excitement
and enjoyability. The retail environment has to be amusement generating
and pleasant to be excited and enjoyed. This will lead consumers to expect
to provide amusement for consumers by singing, acting and performing.
• Rapture- this experience aspect is about the feeling of pleasure and
happiness. This aspect of experience is concerned about the joyfulness,
charm, and admiring concern of the consumers.
• Strange- this dimension represents the consumers’ unusual and unexpected
experiences. The strangest things like surprising and amazing experiences
cover this experience aspect.
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
130
This shows that the cues comprising a retail environment are viewed holistically by
consumers rather than individual cues (Babin, Chebat and Michon, 2004). The study
revealed that the consumers search for the experiences of virtue, equanimous,
amusement, rapture and strange. Retail marketing practitioners may concentrate on
these aspects in consumer experience management in retail settings. This will
address the need for the development of a customer experience construct, integrating
a diverse array of stimuli in order to assess the trade-offs that are entailed in creating
value for consumers (Palmer, 2010).
Development of better measures of the marketing-related constructs is critical for
the evolution of the marketing knowledge and for improved marketing practice
(Churchill, 1979). The present study developed consumer experience scale (ConEx
scale) which can be used to examine the consumer experience in the retail context.
The multidimensional structure of ConEx also concerns the hedonistic perspective
of consumer experience. Future studies on the hedonistic perspective of the
consumer experience may address the attitudinal outcomes of the retail experience.
The retail sector is one of the prominent concerns of marketers, which need a robust
measurement scale to measure and thereby to monitor the quality of consumer
experience and customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction is the emotional
reaction following a disconfirmation experience and is consumption specific
(Oliver, 1981). The main consequences of consumer experience are customer
satisfaction (Garg, Rahman, and Kumar, 2011). Ensuring consumer satisfaction
through the consumer experience will facilitate marketers to gain competitive
advantages.
THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTIONS
The ConEx scale can be used for marketers in their quest for continuous
improvement of consumer experience. The multidimensional nature which was
explored also helps marketers to focus on the areas in which consumer experience
enhancement is required. Priority setting of the consumer experience strategies also
can be designed according to the multidimensional aspects of consumer experience.
Exploration in potential customer touchpoints and the reduced control of the
experience requires firms to integrate multiple business functions (Lemon and
Verhoef, 2016). Focusing on the generation of real-time insights into how customers
perceive touchpoints will facilitate the exploratory identification of new market
opportunities (Homburg, Jozić and Kuehnl, 2017).
Only a few studies have focused on the measurement issues of consumer experience
(Garg, Rahman and Kumar, 2011). Since the present study attempted to address the
need for a robust scale to measure consumer experience in the retail setting, an
undergraduate sample was used. Marketing scholars can enhance the validity and
reliability of the ConEx scale across different cultures and industries as well, with
representative samples. The present study focused on examining the
multidimensional structure of the consumer experience. Marketers are much better
served with multi-item than single-item measures of the marketing constructs
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
131
(Churchill, 1979). It is better to have at least three to five indicators per factor, but
two indicators per factor is the minimum required for CFA models with multiple
factors (Kline, 2004). Two dimensions of the consumer experience consist of only
two indicators: amusement and strange. Subsequently, it is suggested to develop
studies to include a few more indicators into these two dimensions. It is useful to
bring together what we know on customer experience to provide a solid theoretical
perspective on this topic (Lemon and Verhoef, 2016).
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
The concept of customer experience has received increasing attention for
gaining competitive advantage over price, product, or quality (Godovykh and Tasci,
2020). We identified that customer experience can be addressed through customer
emotions. Thus, the study findings provide important implications for practitioners
by offering new ways to explore customer emotions in a retail setting. Particularly,
the dimensions derived by the present study will enable the retailers to approach
their retailing environment. The stimuli of ‘Amusement’ (e.g., excitement and
enjoyability); ‘Virtue’ (e.g., sanity, respectfulness, morality, and calmness of the
experience); ‘Equanimous’ (e.g., entertainment, relaxation and enthusiasm);
‘Rapture’ (e.g., joyfulness, charm, and admiring) and ‘Strange’ (e.g., surprising, and
amazing experiences).
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
The study sample is undergraduates of one of the state universities. They are
being considered, as the study endeavored to derive a scale to encapsulate consumer
experience in a retailing context. Thus, validation of the scale derived is suggested
with a representative sampling unit. It is suggested to research further on whether
derived customer experience dimensions can be identified in the same way in cross-
cultural contexts. This might be facilitated with a replication of the study in another
cultural context. In addition, a study on whether interconnections of the derived
dimensions affect total customer experience would provide insights on how the
identified five customer experience dimensions would be managed.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge the constructive comments provided by the reviewers, to
improve the quality of the manuscript.
COMPETING INTERESTS
The authors declared no competing interests.
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
132
REFERENCES
Allen, C. T., Machleit, K. A. and Marine, S. S. (1988), “On assessing the
emotionality of advertising via Izard's differential emotions scale”, Advances in
Consumer Research, 15, 226-231.
Babin, B. J., Chebat, J. C. and Michon, R. (2004), “Perceived appropriateness and
its effect on quality, affect and behavior”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 11 (5), 287-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2003.09.002
Bagozzi, R. P. and Yi, Y. (1988), “On the evaluation of Structural equation models.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science”, 16 (1), 74-94.
Baron, S., Patterson, A., Warnaby, G. and Harris, K. (2010), “Service-dominant
logic: marketing research implications and opportunities”, Journal of Customer
Behaviour, 9 (3), 253-264. https://doi.org/10.1362/147539210X533179
Becker, L., and Jaakkola, E. (2020). Customer experience: fundamental premises
and implications for research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
48(4), 630-648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00718-x
Berry, L. L., Carbone, L. P. and Haeckel, S. H. (2002), “Managing the total
customer experience” MIT Sloan Management Review, 43 (3), 85-90.
Bitner, M. J. (1990), “Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical
surroundings and employee responses”, The Journal of Marketing, 54 (2), 69-
82. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400206
Bloch, P. H., Ridgway, N. M. and Dawson, S. A. (1994), “The shopping mall as
consumer habitat”, Journal of Retailing, 70 (1), 23-42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4359(94)90026-4
Boyle, G. J. (1986), “Analysis of typological factors across the Eight State
Questionnaire and the Differential Emotions Scale”, Psychological Reports, 59
(2), 503-510. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1986.59.2.503
Brodie, R. J., Löbler, H., & Fehrer, J. A. (2019). Evolution of service-dominant
logic: Towards a paradigm and metatheory of the market and value
cocreation? Industrial Marketing Management, 79, 3-12.
Bradley, M. M. and Lang, P. J. (1994), “Measuring emotion: the self-assessment
manikin and the semantic differential”, Journal of behavior therapy and
experimental psychiatry, 25 (1), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-
7916(94)90063-9
Burns, D. J. and Neisner, L. (2006), “Customer satisfaction in a retail setting: The
contribution of emotion”, International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, 34 (1), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550610642819
Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of
marketing constructs”, Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (1), 64-73.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377901600110
Cui, Y., Trent, E. S., Sullivan, P. M. and Matiru, G. N. (2003), “Cause-related
marketing: How generation Y responds”, International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 31 (6), 310-320.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09590550310476012
de Farias, S. A., Aguiar, E. C. and Melo, F. V. S. (2014), “Store atmospherics and
experiential marketing: A conceptual framework and research propositions for
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
133
an extraordinary customer experience”, International Business Research, 7 (2),
pp. 87-98. doi: 10.5539/ibr. v7n2p87
Dolan, R. J. (2002), “Emotion, cognition, and behavior”, Science, 298, (5596),
1191-1194. DOI: 10.1126/science.1076358
Ekanayake, E. A. S. K., & Karunarathne, E. A. C. P. (2021), Consumers' Post-
Purchase Regret Determinants in Sri Lankan shopping malls. South Asian
Journal of Social Studies and Economics, 11(4), 47-60.
Fehr, B. and Russell, J. A. (1984), “Concept of emotion viewed from a prototype
perspective”, Journal of experimental psychology: General,113 (3), 464-486.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.113.3.464
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing
Research, 18 (1), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Garg, R., Rahman, Z. and Kumar, I. (2011), “Customer experience: a critical
literature review and research agenda”, International Journal of Services
Sciences, 4 (2), 146-173. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2011.045556
Gentile, C., Spiller, N. and Noci, G. (2007), “How to sustain the customer
experience: An overview of experience components that co-create value with
the customer”, European Management Journal, 25 (5), 395-410.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2007.08.005
Gerbing, D. W. and Anderson, J. C. (1988), “An updated paradigm for scale
development incorporating uni-dimensionality and its assessment”, Journal of
marketing research, 25 (2), 186-192.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378802500207
Gilmore, J.H. and Pine, B.J. (2002), "Customer experience places: the new offering
frontier", Strategy & Leadership, 30(4), 4-11.
https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570210435306
Godovykh, M., and Tasci, A. D. (2020), Customer experience in tourism: A review
of definitions, components, and measurements. Tourism Management
Perspectives, 351-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100694
Green, P. E. and Wind, Y. (1975),” New way to measure consumers’ judgments”,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 53 (4), pp. 107-117.
Grewal, D., Levy, M. and Kumar, V. (2009), “Customer experience management in
retailing: An organizing framework”, Journal of Retailing, 85 (1), 1-14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2009.01.001
Gerea, C., Gonzalez-Lopez, F., & Herskovic, V. (2021), Omnichannel customer
experience and management: An integrative review and research agenda.
Sustainability, 13(5), 2824.
Han, H., Back, K. J. and Barrett, B. (2010), “A consumption emotion measurement
development: a full-service restaurant setting”, The Service Industries Journal,
30 (2), 299-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060802123400
Hauser, J. R. and Koppelman, F. S. (1979), “Alternative perceptual mapping
techniques: Relative accuracy and usefulness”, Journal of Marketing Research,
16 (4), 495-506. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377901600406
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
134
Heeler, R. M., Whipple, T. W. and Hustad, T. P. (1977), “Maximum likelihood
factor analysis of attitude data”, Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (1), 42-51.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377701400105
Holbrook, M. B. and Hirschman, E. C. (1982), “The experiential aspects of
consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer
Research, 9 (2),132-140. https://doi.org/10.1086/208906
Holt, D. B. (1995), “How consumers consume: a typology of consumption
practices”, Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (1), 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.1086/209431
Homburg, C., Jozić, D. and Kuehnl, C. (2017), “Customer experience management:
toward implementing an evolving marketing concept”, Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 45 (3), 377-401.
Hu, L. and Bentler, P. M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance
structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives”, Structural
Equation Modeling, a multidisciplinary journal ,6 (1), 1-55.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Sakalsooriya, I. (2018, April 04), Will new entrant’s fire up SL’s modern retail
market? Daily Mirror Online, retrieved from
https://www.dailymirror.lk/business-news/Will-new-entrants-fire-up-SL-s-
modern-retail-market/273-148233
Keells shelves plan to double number of stores (2020, May 27), Daily Mirror
Online, retrieved from https://www.dailymirror.lk/Business-News/Keells-
shelves-plan-to-double-number-of-stores/273-189000
Kahn, J. H. (2006), “Factor analysis in counseling psychology research, training and
practice: Principle, advances and applications”, The Counseling Psychologist,
34 (5), 684-718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006286347
Kim, S., Cha, J., Knutson, B. J. and Beck, J. A. (2011), “Development and testing of
the Consumer Experience Index (CEI)”, Managing Service Quality, 21 (2), 112-
132. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604521111113429
Kline, R. B. (2004). Beyond Significance Testing: Reforming Data Analysis
Methods in Behavioral Research. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association
Karunaratna, A. C. (2021). Motives of Customer Loyalty in Supermarket Patronage
in Sri Lanka. Vidyodaya Journal of Management, 7(1),133-162
Lemon, K. N. and Verhoef, P. C. (2016), “Understanding customer experience
throughout the customer journey”, Journal of Marketing, 80 (6), 69-96.
https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0420
Maklan, S. and Klaus, P. (2011), “Customer experience: are we measuring the right
things?”, International Journal of Market Research, 53 (6), 771-792.
https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-53-6-771-792
Malhotra, N. K. 1999. Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation, Singapore:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Mascarenhas, O. A., Kesavan, R. and Bernacchi, M. (2006), “Lasting customer
loyalty: a total customer experience approach”, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
23 (7), 397-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610712939
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
135
Mattila, A. S. (2001), “Emotional bonding and restaurant loyalty”, Cornell
Hospitality Quarterly, 42 (6), 73-79.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010880401426009
Mattila, A. S. and Enz, C. A. (2002), “The role of emotions in service encounters”,
Journal of Service Research, 4 (4), 268-277.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670502004004004
Mattila, A. S. and Ro, H. (2008), “Discrete negative emotions and customer
dissatisfaction responses in a casual restaurant setting”, Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 32 (1), 89-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348007309570
Mao, L. L. (2021). Retail quality, market environment and business survival in the
retail Apocalypse: an investigation of the sporting goods retail industry.
International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, Vol. ahead-
of-print No. ahead-of-print.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSMS-06-2021-0115
Meyer, C. and Schwager, A. (2007), “Understanding customer experience”,
Harvard Business Review, 85 (2), 116-126.
Mishra, P. (2015), Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press, New
Delhi, India.
Nasution, R. A., Sembada, A. Y., Miliani, L., Resti, N. D., & Prawono, D. A.
(2014). The customer experience framework as baseline for strategy and
implementation in services marketing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 148, 254-261.
Noble, S. M., Haytko, D. L. and Phillips, J. (2009), “What drives college-age
Generation Y consumers?” Journal of Business Research, 62 (6), 617-628.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.020
Nord, W. R. and Peter, J. P. (1980), “A behaviour modification perspective on
marketing”, The Journal of Marketing, 44 (2), 36-47.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298004400205
Oh, H. (2005), “Measuring affective reactions to print apparel advertisements: A
scale development”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An
International Journal, 9 (3), 283-305.
https://doi.org/10.1108/13612020510610426
Oliver, R. L. (1981), “Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction processes in retail
settings”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 57 No.3, pp. 25-48.
Ostrom, A. L., Parasuraman, A., Bowen, D. E., Patrício, L., & Voss, C. A. (2015).
Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context. Journal of service
research, 18(2), 127-159.
Palmer, A. (2010), “Customer experience management: a critical review of an
emerging idea”, Journal of Services Marketing, 24 (3), 196-208.
https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041011040604
Pine, B. J. and Gilmore, J. H. (1998), “Welcome to the experience economy”,
Harvard Business Review, 76, 97-105.
Prahalad, C. K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), “Co-creation experiences: The next
practice in value creation” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18 (3), 5-14.
https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20015
P.A.P.S. KUMARA, A.B. SIRISENA, T.R. WIJESUNDARA
136
Schmitt, B. (1999), “Experiential marketing”, Journal of Marketing Management,15
(1-3), 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1362/026725799784870496
Schmitt, B. (2011), “Experience marketing: concepts, frameworks and consumer
insights”, Foundations and Trends in Marketing, 5 (2), 55-112.
Singh, J., Howell, R. D. and Rhoads, G. K. (1990), “Adaptive designs for Likert
type data: An approach for implementing marketing surveys”, Journal of
Marketing Research, 27 (3), 304-321.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379002700305
Tynan, C. and McKechnie, S. (2009), “Experience marketing: a review and
reassessment”, Journal of Marketing Management, 25(.5-6), 501-517.
https://doi.org/10.1362/026725709X461821
Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F. (2004), “The four service marketing myths remnants
of a goods-based, manufacturing model”, Journal of Service Research, 6 (4),
324-335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670503262946
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the
evolution. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science, 36(1), 1-10.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6
Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F. (2017), “Service-dominant logic 2025”, International
Journal of Research in Marketing, 34 (1), 46-67.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.001
Vargo, S. L., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vink, J. (2020). Service-dominant logic:
foundations and applications. The Routledge handbook of service research
insights and ideas, 3-23.
Verhoef, P. C., Lemon, K. N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M. and
Schlesinger, L. A. (2009), “Customer experience creation: Determinants,
dynamics and management strategies”, Journal of Retailing, 85 (1), 31-41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2008.11.001
Westbrook, R. A. and Oliver, R. L. (1991), “The dimensionality of consumption
emotion patterns and consumer satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research, 18
(1), 84-91. https://doi.org/10.1086/209243
Wirtz, J. and Bateson, J. E. (1999), “Consumer satisfaction with services:
Integrating the environment perspective in services marketing into the
traditional disconfirmation paradigm”, Journal of Business Research, 44 (1),55-
66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00178-1
Wilden, R., Akaka, M. A., Karpen, I. O., & Hohberger, J. (2017). The evolution and
prospects of service-dominant logic: an investigation of past, present, and future
research. Journal of service research, 20(4), 345-361.
Wu, M. Y. and Tseng, L. H. (2015), “Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty in an
Online Shop: An Experiential Marketing Perspective”, International Journal of
Business and Management, 10 (1), 104-114. doi:10.5539/ijbm. v10n1p104
Yu, Y. T. and Dean, A. (2001), “The contribution of emotional satisfaction to
consumer loyalty”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12
(3), 234-250. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564230110393239
Zolkiewski, J., Story, V., Burton, J., Chan, P., Gomes, A., Hunter-Jones, P.,
O’Malley, L., Peters, L.D., Raddats, C. and Robinson, W. (2017), "Strategic
B2B customer experience management: the importance of outcomes-based
MEASURING CONSUMER EXPERIENCE AT THE RETAIL CONTEXT: DEVELOPMENT OF CONEX
SCALE
137
measures", Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 172-184.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-10-2016-0350.
