Serbian

Serbian Journal of Management 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230 Journal

of
Management
www.sjm06.com

THE MEASUREMENT OF SERVICE QUALITY WITH SERVQUAL

FOR DIFFERENT DOMESTIC AIRLINE FIRMS IN TURKEY

Kenan Aydina* and Seda Yildirimb

aYildiz Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Boulevard of

Barbaros, Yildiz Campus, Yildiz-Besiktas (post code: 34349), Turkey
bKocaeli University, Department of Business Administration, Umuttepe Campus ,
Kocaeli (post code:41380), Turkey

(Received 26 December 2011; accepted 29 August 2012)

Abstract

The primary purpose of this research is to determine whether there is a significant difference
between the passengers’ service quality expectations and service quality perceptions in different
airline firms. The collateral purpose is to find out whether there is a significant difference between
service quality expectation and service quality perception of the passengers who have different
socio-demographic characteristics. To achieve these purposes, the 5 - dimensional scale, suggested
by Parasuraman et.al (1988) was applied to the airline travel sector. The questionnaire was used in
interviewing the passengers at Sabiha Gökçen Airport in Istanbul in Turkey with a “face to face”
method. The data was analysed in SPSS 16 program after questionnnaires were collected. Firstly, the
demographic characteristics of passengers were presented for different airline firms. Then the highest
and the lowest gaps for the each statement was determined. Lastly it was compared if there was a
significant difference between the service quality expectation and perception for different domestic
airline firms.

Keywords: Service Quality, Airlines, SERVQUAL

1. INTRODUCTION Because they seperate the quality of services,

“competing service businesses may look
In the competing world, all businesses can alike, but they do not feel alike” (Berry et al.,
provide “the same types of service-airline 1988). Delivering high-quality service to
transportation, tax-return preparation, customers is the key strategy to survive in
shampoo and blow dry services” but the today’s competitive service industries such
difference can be provided by customers. as airline transportation services (Zeithaml et
* Corresponding author: [email protected]

DOI: 10.5937/sjm7-1317
220 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230
al., 1996). Service quality conditions domestic airline firms. This study differs
influences a firm’s competitive advantage by from earlier service quality studies in Turkey
retaining customer patronage, and with this because in this study, it’s tried to find out the
comes market share, and ultimately service quality of both THY and other
profitability (Park et al., 2004). Because of domestic airline firms. With SERVQUAL,
that, airlines need to understand passengers’ passengers’expectations and perceptions in
needs and expectations. In practice, most airline services was assesed. Also the survey
airlines measure passenger perceptions of includes some demographics of passengers
their service offerings to understand the that can effect the expectations and
company’s performance levels, without perception of airline service quality.
having clear knowledge of passenger
expectations for service.
Lack of understanding or 2. AIRLINE SERVICE QUALITY
misunderstanding of such expectations could
pose serious problems in resource allocation Service quality is a composite of various
decisions. Therefore, it is an imperative for interactions between customers and airlines,
airline management to determine what their with employees seeking to influence
customers want and do not want (Chen & customers’ perceptions and the image of the
Chang, 2005). carriers (Gursoy et al., 2005; Ishaq, 2012).
The expectations construct has been Service quality is a measure of how well the
viewed as playing a key role in consumer service level delivered matches customer
evaluation of service quality Its meaning in expectations. Delivering quality service
the service quality literature is similar to the means conforming to customer expectations
ideal standard in the consumer on a consistent basis (Parasuraman et al.,
satisfaction/dissatisfaction literature (Gilbert 1985). In 1988 Parasuraman, Zeithaml and
& Wong, 2003). Passengers’ expectations are Berry developed a generic instrument called
among the factors influencing the service SERVQUAL to measure service quality
decisions of airlines. Empirical evidence has based on input from focus groups. It consists
indicated that success in customer-focused of five factors (tangibles, reliability,
service development requires a deep responsiveness, assurance and empathy) and
understanding of customer needs, contains a two-part, 22 scale items regarding
expectations, and preferences and that expectations and performance. These five
marketing strategies implemented by airlines factors have been tested through numerous
to expand internationally must take into empirical studies in so various industries by
account the different expectations and many researchers (An & Noh, 2009) that it
perceptions of passengers (Aksoy et al., is also used in a variety of organizational
2003). settings, including libraries and information
A number of studies in Turkey have centers (Landrum et al., 2009).
reported results of service quality The SERVQUAL has been one of the
measurement of THY (Turkish Air Lines) most widely used and applied scales for the
(Aksoy et al., 2003; Pakdil & Aydın, 2007). measurement of perceived service quality in
There is not enough useful information or recent years (Bigne et al., 2003). Gronroos
reseach about service quality of other (1993) suggested that measuring passenger
 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230 221
experiences in airline service quality is a 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
theoretically valid way of measuring
perceived quality. This led to the use of Questionnaire which was based on the
survey questionnaires to collect data for previous literature research, makes it much
analysis (Liou et al., 2010). A number of more practical to be answered by
studies have addressed service quality issues. participants, was developed. Firstly, the
The mainstream research has been based demographics as gender (sex), age, income,
on the notion that quality of service is educational level, marital status, purpose of
perceived and evaluated by customers (Liou airline trip and flying frequency were
& Tzeng, 2007). Measuring expectations and determined. Then, the service quality
perceptions separately also leads to better dimensions (SERVQUAL) were taken into
understanding of the Dynamics of consideration under the inspiration of the
customers’ assesment of service quality over previous studies. Even though SERVQUAL
time. For example, if SERVQUAL scores for presents general quality dimensions for
certain items have declined significantly service industries, it does not include
form one period to another, managers can specific dimensions for each service sector.
assess whether this is due to higher Questions aiming to address expectations
expectations, lower perceptions, or both. and perceptions were rated using 5-point
This information is not available when Likert scale. The scale in both cases was
perceptions relative to expectations are from 1- strongly unimportant to 5- strongly
measured on the same scale (Parasuraman & important. The most useful SERVQUAL’s
Berry, 1993). service quality dimensions which includes
Most of the previous SERVQUAL-based 22-items, weere used. These items are as
empirical studies of airline service quality follows:
were performed on the basis of the
respondents’ mean scores built on Likert • Tangibles
scaling. The categories in ordinal scales are
ranked through their properties. As it is a - Q1: Modern looking equipment
ranking, frequencies or percentages are more - Q2: Physical facilities
appropriate statistics than means and - Q3: Employees good-looking
standard deviations for meaningful - Q4: Materials
interpretations. If means or standard
deviations are preferred, passengers’ raw • Reliability
scores should be transformed into
quantitative intervalscores. To perform this - Q5: Promise to do something by a
transformation, factor loadings produced certain time
through factor analysis might be used as an - Q6: A sincere interest in solving
alternative tool. In factor analysis, “a factor customer’s problem
load on an observed variable is - Q7: Perform the service right the first
conceptualized as a properly weighted and time
summed combination of the scores on factors - Q8: Provide the service at the time of
that underlie it” (Pakdil & Aydın, 2007). promised
- Q9: Insist on error free records
222 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230

• Responsiveness was not possible to reach the population. In

total 140 passengers were interviewed but 29
- Q10: Employees tells customers of them were not suitable for analysis. The
exactly when services will be performed questionnaires were handed to passengers
- Q11: Employees will give prompt waiting at the boarding gates and the exit
service to customer point of the airport. We included both the
- Q12: Employees will always be incoming and outgoing passengers for the
willing to help customers sample. Upon completion, the forms were
- Q13: Employees will never be too collected. Then collected data were analyzed
busy to respond to customers’ requests. by SPSS 16.0 and THY and other domestic
airlines (Onurair, Atlasjet, Pegasus air,
• Assurance Sunexpress air) were compared in the terms
of SERVQUAL scores.
- Q14: The behavior of employees will
instill confidence in customers
- Q15: Customers will feel safe in 4. RESULTS
transactions
- Q16: Employees will consistently 4.1. Demographic Results
courteous with customers
- Q17: Employees will have the Passengers were classified according to
knowledge to answer customers’ questions their gender (sex), age, marital status,
education, income, travel purpose, travel
• Empathy frequency and flight counts. Also it was tried
to find out which factors were more crucial
- Q18: Give customers individual for choosing an airline firm (Table 1). THY
attention and other domestic airline firms were
- Q19: Operating hours convenient to presented seperately to see the demograpic
all their customers differences.
- Q20: Employees give customers As presented in Table 1, 63.5% of THY’s
personal attention passengers were female and 62.5% of other
- Q21: Have customer’s best interests domestic airlines’ passengers were male. The
at heart age group of 18-24 preferred both THY and
- Q22: Understand the specific needs other domestic airlines nearly in a same
of customers percent of their total size. 69.8 percent of
THZY passengers had an university degree
This study was conducted on a sample of and 63.5% traveled for holiday. Passengers
travellers at Sabiha Gökçen Airport on 5th from other domestic airlines used air
March 2010 from 13:00 pm to 15:00 pm at . transport largely for holiday purposes as
The Sabiha Gökçen Airport in Istanbul, THY passengers and most of them were
Turkey was chosen because as a developing single (64.6%). Also, the age group (35-44)
company, by the year of 2009 it had over 6 mostly preferred THY. Besides that, young
million passengers. We used the ages’ (18-24) preferences were not different
“convenience sampling method” because it for different airline firms, almostly they were
 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230 223
Table 1. Demographics of Passengers (N = 111)
224 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230

same percent of their total. First time flyers As shown in Table 3, THY’s passengers
and more than 4 times flyers preferred THY prefered airline firm according to its safety
(27% and 36.5%). In other domestic airlines, degree at first and other airline firms’
2 times flyers and more than 4 times flyers passengers prefered their airline firm
preferred (27.1% and 41.7%). There was no according to its price. In table 4, the
significant difference in passengers’income relationship between airline services
and education for both of THY and other preference and airline firm preference
domestic airlines. But in choosing airline, according to Pearson Chi-Square values.
there were some differences in the factors First preference of travel purpose of
that were decisive. Especially, the most passengers was found to be with significant p
important factor for choosing airline was value (p = 0.001<0.01) and it can be said that
safety (66.7%) in THY, on the other side the there was a significant relationship between
the most important factorfor choosing airline travel purpose and airline firm preference.
was price (62.5%) in other domestic airlines. Also third preference gave a result with a
The second one was flight time (31.7%) in significant p value (p = 0.007<0.01). Second
THY and in other domestic firms it was preference didn’t give a significant result (p
safety (35.4%). Thirdly, the fligth services = 0.171>0.01). THY’s passengers preferred
were found important for THY’s passengers safety as their first preference while
(33.3%) and the flight time was important for passengers of other domestic airline firms’
other domestic airlines (43.8%).To find out preferred price.
whether there was a relationship between
passengers’ demographics and airline firm 4.2. Reliability Results
preference, Chi-Square test was used in this
study. In table 2 Pearson Chi-Square results In this study, Cronbach’s Alpha values
of demographics were given. were used to determine both of passengers’
There wasn’t significant relationship exceptions and perceptions about airline
between demographics and airline firm services. Firstly, for expectation-related
preference. Some of the limitations of this items’ Cronbach’s Alpha value was 0.835
study were that the the sample size was small and for perception-related items’ Cronbach’s
and the implementation time was short. The Alpha value was 0.880 (Table 5). The
results can be varied in different airline firm internal consistency of both expectations and
preferences. perceptions were analyzed with Cronbach’s
Alpha and the results were satisfactorily.
Table 2. Chi-Square Results of Also, 5 main dimensions of service quality’s
Demographics and Airline Firm Preference Cronbach Alpha values were analyzed. For
expectations part of the questionnaire,
Demographic Variables Value df Asymp.
Sig.(2-sided)
Cronbach’s Alpha was found to be 0.728 for
Marital Status 6.118 4 0.191 Tangibles, 0.837 for Reliability, 0.684 for
Sex 9.877 4 0.43 Responsiveness, 0.540 for Assurance and
Age 16.120 16 0.445 0.666 for Empathy. For perceptions part of
Income 16.205 16 0.439
Education 8.158 12 0.773 the questionnaire, Cronbach’s Alpha was
(*Indicates significance level<0,01)
found to be 0.800 for Tangibles, 0.844 for
Reliability, 0.384 for Responsiveness, 0.814
 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230 225
for Assurance and 0.760 for Empathy (Table perceptions have similar results in general.
6). But in other domestic airline firms, there is a
4.3. Results of Expectations and different result. “Reliability”,
Perceptions “Responsiveness” and “Assurance”
dimensions have a big gap between
It was preferred to present THY’s and expectations and perceptions in other
other domestic airline firms’ SERVQUAL domestic airline firms. “Tangibles” and
results seperately, in this study,. because “Empathy” dimesions have less differences
there was a great difference between between expectations and perceptions.
obtained results. Table 7 shows that the gap Descriptive Statistics was not enough to
between perceptions and expectations of say that there was a significant gap between
service quality dimensions is smaller in expectations and perceptions. That’s why
Turkish Airlines than the other domestic one-way ANOVA test was used to determine
airline firms. the significance in differences. Table 8
In THY, passengers’ expectations and shows that there is a significant gap between
Table 3. Crosstabulation of Airline firm Preferences and Airline Service Preferences
Airline Firm Airline Service Preferences
In-Flight Flight Safety of On time Employee Price Total
services time Flight
THY 2 7 42 1 0 11 63
%1.8 %6.3 %37.8 %0.9 %0 %9.9 %56.8
Onurair 1 0 9 1 0 13 24
%0.9 %0 %8.1 %0.9 %0 %11.7 %21.6
Atlas 0 0 2 0 1 6 9
%0 %0 %1.8 %0 %0.9 %5.4 %8.1
Pegasus 0 0 1 0 0 5 6
%0 %0 %0.9 %0 %0 %4.5 %5.4
Others 0 0 2 1 0 6 9
%0 %0 %1.8 %0.9 %0 %5.4 %8.1
Total 3 7 56 3 1 41 111
%2.7 %6.3 %50.5 %2.7 %0.9 %36.9 %100.0

Table 4. Chi-Square Results of Airline Services Preference and Airline Firm Preference
Preferences Value df Asymp.
Sig.(2-sided)
First Prefer 45.282 20 0.001*
Second Prefer 32.428 24 0.171
Third Prefer 44.105 24 0.007*
(*Indicates significance level< 0,01)

Table 5. Reliability Test Results of Expectations and Perceptions

N N of Cronbach’s
Items Alpha
Expectations of passengers 111 22 0.835
Perceptions of passengers 111 22 0.880

226 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230

Table 6. Reliability Results for Service Quality Dimensions

Dimensions N N of Items Cronbach’s Alpha Cronbach’s Alpha
(Expectation) (Perception)
Tangibles 111 5 0.728 0.800
Reliability 111 4 0.837 0.844
Responsiveness 111 4 0.684 0.384
Assurance 111 4 0.540 0.814
Empathy 111 5 0.666 0.760

perceptions and expectations in both THY and Q4 were found to be with significant p
and other domestic airline firms. value (p = 0.000<0.05). For Q5 (p =
Q1 (Modern looking equipment) has the 0.004<0.05), Q6 (p = 0.004<0.05), Q7 (p =
significant difference between perception 0.000<0.05) , Q8 (p = 0.000<0.05) and Q9 (p
and expectation in THY. In other domestic = 0.000<0.05) were found to be significant
airline firms, all of tangibles’dimensions with the level (<0.05). For THY and other
have the significant difference between domestic airline firms all of the p values
perceptions and expectations. Q1, Q2, Q3 were found as a significant (p = 0.000<0.05).

Table 7. Descriptive Statistics

 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230 227

Table 8. One-Way ANOVA Test Results

TANGIBLES F Sig. F Sig.
Q1: Modern looking 20.944 0.000* 58.264 0.000*
equipment
Q2:Physical Facilities 2.460 0.119 25.758 0.000*
Q3:Employees good-looking 0.569 0.452 17.729 0.000*
Q4:Materials 0.335 0.564 16.314 0.000*
RELIABILITY
Q5: Promise to do something 8.513 0.004* 38.968 0.000*
by a certain time
Q6: A sincere interest in 8.735 0.004* 33.668 0.000*
solving customer’s problem
Q7: Perform the service right 17.358 0.000* 45.174 0.000*
the first time
Q8: Provide the service at the 16.297 0.000* 51.294 0.000*
time of promised
Q9: Insist on error free 17.051 0.000* 35.693 0.000*
records
RESPONSIVENESS
THY OTHER
Q10: Employees tells 2.473 0.118 18.348 0.000*
DOMESTøC
customers exactly when
AIRLINE
services will be performed
FIRMS
Q11: Employees will give 9.777 0.002* 39.694 0.000*
prompt service to customer
Q12: Employees will always 0.045 0.832 36.502 0.000*
be willing to help customers
Q13: Employees will never be 0.095 0.758 3.798 0.054
too busy to respond to
customers’ requests.
ASSURANCE
Q14: The behavior of 10.600 0.001* 29.901 0.000*
employees will instill
confidence in customers
Q15: Customers will feel safe 10.882 0.001* 45.768 0.000*
in transactions
Q16: Employees will 11.066 0.001* 48.699 0.000*
consistently courteous with
customers
Q17: Employees will have the 17.375 0.000* 30.982 0.000*
knowledge to answer
customers’ questions
EMPATHY
Q18: Give customers 0.438 0.509 5.051 0.027*
individual attention
Q19: Operating hours 0.458 0.500 2.470 0.119
convenient to all their
customers
Q20: Employees give 0.365 0.547 1.944 0.167
customers personal attention
Q21: Have customer’s best 0.006 0.937 0.435 0.511
interests at heart
Q22: Understand the specific 0.300 0.585 5.482 0.021*
needs of customers
(*Indicates significance level<0.05)

In responsiveness dimension, Q11 (p = significant in both THY and other domestic

0.002<0.05) was found as a significant in airline firms. Finally, only in other domestic
THY. Q10, Q11 and Q12 were found airline firms, there a significant p value for
significant in other domestic airline firms. Q18 (p = 0.027<0.05) and Q22 (p =
Q14, Q15, Q16 and Q17 were found to be 0.021<0.05) was found. According to these
228 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230
results it can be said that there was a THY passengers, “safety” factor was found
significant differences between passengers’ to be the most important to prefer this airline
expectations and perceptions in other company. For other domestic airline firms,
domestic airline firms for tangibles, “price” was found to be the most important
reliability, responsiveness, assurance and factor to prefer those airline companies.
empathy dimension. Reliability of theobtained results was
tested using the Cronbach’s Alpha values for
5. CONCLUSIONS both the passengers’ expectations and
perceptions. The results revealed high
In Turkey, the airline service industry is a enoung Cronbach’s Alpha values to claim
developing sector since the year 2000. that the scale was reliable. Also all of the
Profile of passengers has been changed into SERVQUAL dimension were tested
varied demographics, meaning that all seperately and It was seen that “Tangibles,
classes of passengers and not only ones with Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance and
high income can use airline services. Empathy” dimension had high Cronbach
According to these changes, airline services Alpha’s value in both expectations and
sector has increasex competition and this perceptions. Only “Responsiveness”
competition is forcing the representatives of dimension gave lower Cronbach’s Alpha
the airline businesses to understand value in perception.
passengers’ expectations and perceptions With descriptive statistics It was
better. presented passengers’ perceptions and
In this study, findings are based on data expectations in airline services for THY and
collected from THY and other domestic other domestic airline firms. The results of
airline firms (such are Onur air, Atlasjet, THY and other domestic airline firms were
Pegasus, etc). The existance of any presented seperatelybecause THY’s
significant differences between expectations expectations’ and perceptions’ results were
and perceptions in airline services of much more different than other domestic
different airline firms was investigated. The airline firms. So the differenece between
study included 5 service quality dimensions: them could be seen there. One-Way ANOVA
Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, test was used to calcualte the significance of
Assurance and Empathy. the difference between expectations and
There wasn’t found any significant perceptions. THY’s passengers’ expectations
relationship between demographics and and perceptions were found to be close. On
airline firm preferences. Airline firms the other hand, for the other airline firms’
preferences were found to be varied in passengers’ expectations and perceptions had
different groups. The passengers were asked a great gap. With exception of “Empathy”
to rate their first “three airline preferences”. dimension, it was detected that passengers’
According to Pearson Chi-Square test expectations and perceptions had a
results, a significant relationship between significant gap in all other domestic airline
airline firms preference and airline services firms. The most important dimension in
preference was found. Especially, first SERVQUAL scale was found to be
airline service preference among the “Reliability”. Both in THY and other
passengers had important difference. For domestic airline firms it gave a significant
 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230 229
difference between expectations and References
perceptions.
The demographics of the sample can be Aksoy, Ş., Atılgan, E., & Akıncı, S. (2003).
varied for the further research and with the Airline services marketing by domestic and
larger size of the sample. This will be the foreign firms: differences from the customers’
issue of our further researh, which can give viewpoint. Journal of Air Transport
different results. This study can give some Management, 9: 343-351.
contribution to existing literature, based on An, M., & Noh, Y. (2009). Airline
using different kinds of airline firms. In customer satisfaction and loyalty: impact of in
general THY’s passengers have been the –flight service quality. Service Business, 3:
sample for service quality researches in 293-307.
Turkey. The other domestic airline firms Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A., & Zeithmal,
need to be analised about their service V.A. (1988). The Service-Quality Puzzle.
quality. The aim is to motivate these Business Horizons, 31(5): 35-43.
companies to perform better service quality Bigne, J.E., Martinez, C., Miquel, M.J., &
and compete with THY. With this study the Andreu, L. (2003). Servqual Reliabilityand
SERVQUAL scales for airline firms was Validity in Travel Agencies. Annals of
presented. Usage of SERVQUAL in this kind Tourism Research, 30(1): 258-262.
Chen, F.-Y., & Chang, Y.-H. (2005).
of service gave also the differences between
Examining Airline Service Quality From A
THY and other domestic airline firms were
Process Perspective. Journal Of Air Transport
presented.
Management, 11: 79–87.
Gilbert, D., & Wong, R.K.C. (2003).
Passenger expectations and airline services: a

МЕРЕЊЕ КВАЛИТЕТА УСЛУГЕ АЛАТОМ “SERVQUAL” ЗА

РАЗЛИЧИТЕ ТУРСКЕ ВАЗДУХОПЛОВНЕ КОМПАНИЈЕ

Kenan Aydin, Seda Yildirim

Извод

Основни циљ овог истраживања је одредити да ли постоји значајна разлика између

очекивања путника о нивоу квалиттета услуге и постигнутог квалитета, за различите
ваздухопловне компаније. При томе разматрани су путници различтих социо демографских
карактеристика. Како би се извршило испитивање, коришћена је скала коју је предложио
Parasuraman et.al (1988), са 5 димензија и 22 изјаве. Потом је овакав упитник понуђен
путницима на “Sabiha Gökçen” аеродрому у Истамбулу (Турска), применом непосредног
метода анкетирања. Добијени подаци су анализирани применом SPSS 16 програма. Први
резултати се односе на демографске карактеристике путника у различитим ваздухопловним
компанијама. Потом је вршено упоређење евентуалних разлика између очекивања и страрно
постигнутог нивоа квалитета услуга.

Кључне речи: Квалитет услуга, Ваздухопловне компаније, SERVQUAL

230 K.Aydin / SJM 7 (2) (2012) 219 - 230
Hong Kong based study. Tourism 140-147.
Management, 24: 519-532. Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., &
Gürsoy, D., Chen, M.H., & Kim, H.Y. Parasuraman A. (1996). The Behavioral
(2005). The US airlines relativepositioning Consequences of Service Quality. Journal of
based on attributes of service quality. Tourism Marketing, 60(2): 31-46.
Management, 26: 57–67.
Ishaq, M., I. (2012). Perceived Value,
Service Quality, Corporate Image and
Customer Loyalty: Empirical Assessment
from Pakistan. Serbian Journal of
Management, 7(1): 25-36.
Landrum, H., Prybutok, V., Zhang, X., &
Peak, D. (2009). Measuring IS System
Service Quality With SERVQUAL Users’
Perceptions of Relative Importance of The
Five SERVPERF Dimensions. The
International Journal of an Emerging
Transdiscipline, 12: 17-35.
Liou, J.J.H., Yen, L., & Tzeng, G.-H.
(2010). Using decision rules to achieve mass
customization of airline services. European
Journal of Operational Research, 205(3): 680-
686.
Liou, J.J.H., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2007). A
non-additive model for evaluating airline
service quality. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 13: 131-138.
Pakdil, F., & Aydın, Ö. (2007).
Expectations And perceptions ın airline
services: An analysis using with weighted
SERVQUAL scores. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 13: 229-237.
Park, J.-W., Robertson, R., & Wu, C.-L.
(2004). The Effect of Airline Service Quality
Behavioural Intentions: A Korean Case Study.
Journal of Air Transport Management, 10:
435-439.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., & Berry,
L.L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service
Quality and Its Implications for Future
Research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4): 41-55.
Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L.L. (1993).
More On Improving Service Quality
Measurement. Journal of Retailing, 69(1):