Restaurant Selection

Restaurant Selection in Dublin

Dr. Frank Cullen

School of Culinary Arts and Food Technology
Dublin Institute of Technology
 Restaurant Selection

Factors Influencing Restaurant Selection in Dublin

Key words: Restaurant Selection, Evoked Set, Service Quality, Attitude.
Abstract
The primary objective of this research was to investigate the selection process used by consumers
when choosing a restaurant to dine. This study examined literature on consumer behavior,
restaurant selection, and decision-making, underpinning the contention that service quality is
linked to the consumer’s selection of a restaurant. It supports the utility theories that consumers
buy bundles of attributes that simultaneously combined represent a certain level of service quality
at a certain price. The findings of the research displayed a preference by Dublin consumers for
Italian and Chinese styled restaurants and identified quality of the food, type of food, cleanliness
of the restaurant, location and the reputation of the restaurant as the key decision
variables/attributes used by consumers to select restaurants. The study also established that the
importance of the attributes changed, depending on the consumer’s age, prior experience, their
mood and the occasion involved.
 Restaurant Selection

Contents
Related Studies ............................................................................................................................. 4
Method ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Research Framework .................................................................................................................... 7
Primary Research ......................................................................................................................... 7
Achieving Precision ..................................................................................................................... 7
Pilot Questionnaire ....................................................................................................................... 8
Questionnaire Description and Explanation of Terminology ...................................................... 8
Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................... 10
Analytical Approach ................................................................................................................... 10
Travel Descriptive Statistics....................................................................................................... 10
The Influence of Travel Experience on Restaurant Selection .................................................... 10
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 14
Research Contribution ................................................................................................................ 16
Evaluation and Suggestions for Further Research ..................................................................... 16
References .................................................................................................................................. 18
 Restaurant Selection

Restaurant Selection in Dublin Introduction

Over the past decade the restaurant industry in Dublin has flourished, increasing from 22 percent
of the total restaurants Ireland in 1996 to 27 percent in 2000, (CHL Consulting, 2003). These
restaurants provide consumers with many choices of internationally styled restaurants, locations,
price and value with varying levels of quality. It is this increasingly competitive environment that
has stimulated this study to investigate the behavioral patterns and the decision making process
used by consumers to select restaurants for dining.

Researchers such as, Kivela, Inbakaran, & Reece (1999), Clark & Wood (1998), Koo, Fredrick,
& Yeung (1999) and Johns & Howard (1998) have examined the complex issues involved in
selecting a restaurant. They have identified salient decision variables used by consumers to select
restaurants, and have provided a framework for the decision making process. These studies
suggest that the decision to dine in a particular restaurant will follow a process of elimination
based on, each of the restaurants facilities, quality, location and acceptable attributes.

Related Studies

Koo et al. (1999) suggests that consumers’ buy bundles of attributes that simultaneously
combined represent a certain level of service quality offered at a certain price. The study
conducted by Koo et al. (1999) focused on the use of conjoint analysis when determining the
utility values of restaurant attributes in an attempt to understand how consumers in Hong Kong
make favorable and unfavorable buying decisions. Using a focus group of six persons Koo et al.
(1999) established an evoked set of important attributes that restaurant diners’ used in deciding
where to dine for a family meal, business entertainment or as a tourist in Hong Kong.

Clark & Wood (1998) suggests that generic reasons for restaurant choice exist. In this study
respondents were asked to select five factors and rank them from 1-5 in terms of their general
importance when choosing a restaurant. Clark & Wood (1998) study had a sample size n = 31,
with only 20 respondents providing usable responses to the questions, of who 19 ranked food
quality as the most important variable in restaurant selection. The five factors most commonly
included in respondents’ ranking, in order of importance, were: the range of the food; quality of
 Restaurant Selection

the food; price of the food; atmosphere and the speed of the service. Studies conducted by Kivela
et al. (1999; 2000), and Johns & Howard (1998), provide greater insight into the decision
variables used by consumers, when selecting restaurants. Kivela et al. (2000) focused on dining
satisfaction and return patronage using twenty-eight attribute variables with an alpha coefficient
ranging from .85 to .95 based on closed-ended questionnaires. Kivela et al. (2000) sampled
fifteen theme restaurants in Tsim Sha Tsui Kowloon, Sha Tin and Hong Kong Island with a
sample size n = 1,028 and a usable completion rate of 83.8 percent. The respondents in the study
were asked to rate the restaurant attribute on a five-point scale. Kivela et al. (2000) used
regression analysis and cross-tabulation to reveal the relationship between dining out frequency
and the consumer’s intention to return to the restaurant. The findings identified a strong
relationship between the consumer’s selection of a restaurant, the quality standards, and value for
money provided by the restaurant. Kivela et al. (2000) ranked the top five attributes as feel
comfortable to eat there, cleanliness, freshness of the food, staff appearance and the room
temperature.

Johns & Howard (1998) examined the separate measurement of expectation and perception of
service attributes using open-ended questions, and a seven point rating scale in two different
pizza restaurants, N=100. Johns & Howard (1998) found that the consumers’ expectations and
performance perceptions were based on an almost identical list of aspects; food, price and value.
They also found that the attributes associated with these aspects are qualitatively comparable.
Johns & Howard (1998) findings support the notion that consumers have a mental “checklist” of
expectations against which they tick off items quality, see table 1 for attributes used in related
studies. Kivela et al. (2000), Koo et al. (1999), Clark & Wood (1998), and Johns & Howard
(1998) indicated that the consumers’ selection of a restaurant is influenced by different variables
encapsulated within three quite distinct concepts that are often used interchangeably; service
quality, consumer satisfaction and value. Although these researchers provide excellent models of
the decision variables used to select restaurants, their work is based on the American, Australian,
Hong Kong and UK markets.

In this research I analysis factors that influence Dublin consumers’ choice of restaurant such as;
travel experience, occupation, income, age, attitude and attributes. The purpose of this study was
to establish the dine-out restaurant preferences of Dublin consumers and rank their attributes
 Restaurant Selection

based on the mean values used by them when selecting a restaurant to dine out for a social
occasion and eat out as substitute for cooking at home. I also identify a consumer age profile of
preferred restaurants. The separate measurement of consumer age profile provides a new
approach to restaurant selection dynamics. This information will facilitate target-marketing
decisions by restaurateurs in Ireland.

Method

The design of the survey was initially based on the studies conducted by Johns and Howard
(1998), Kivela et al (1999;2000), and Koo et al (1999). However, as this research was intended to
provide comparable analysis on a number of objectives, it required a much greater depth of
investigation into consumer attitude, preference and perception, see questionnaire in Appendix A.
A mix qualitative and quantitative research was used in this study. The qualitative research was
conducted following indications from the pilot questionnaires that some problems existed with
the attributes used in the study. Casual research was also conducted to clarify the selection of a
fish and chip shop as dine out experience for a social occasion see results and discussion. The
research question was formulated based on the findings of the secondary research: How do
consumers select restaurants to dine / eat out in Dublin?

The focus of this research was to determine the main factors that influence the consumer’s
decision to select a restaurant at which to dine / eat out in Dublin. The primary research
objectives were:
To identify a range of decision attributes used to select a restaurant in Dublin;
To rank the five most important attributes used by consumers when selecting a restaurant
to dine or eat out in Dublin;
Develop a consumer age profile for selecting a restaurant.
 Restaurant Selection

Research Framework

Dublin accounts for 27 percent of restaurants in Ireland and has the highest level of disposable
income, 16 percent above the national average, (CHL Consulting, 2003). Fáilte Ireland defines a
restaurant as establishments where “on-site provision of food represents the main business
activity, as distinct from public houses where food may be provided; but where the on-site sale of
liquor represents the main business activity,” (CHL Consulting, 2003, p.27).

Primary Research

Eleven research assistants were engaged to disseminate questionnaires. The assistants were
briefed on the requirements of the study. A convenience sampling approach was used, and
appreciation samples were also taken from the: Garda Síochána (Dublin Metropolitan police
force), Department of Transport, Department of Finance, Department of Defense, Building and
Trades Institute, Catering Institute and random street interviews in Dublin City. 850
questionnaires were disseminated and a return rate of 39 percent or 330 was achieved, 28
questionnaires had a completion rate below 75 percent and were not included in the study leaving
N = 185 female and 117 male usable questionnaires. Random number tables were used to
eliminate 68 female respondents when analyzing questions two and five to ensure equal variance
for comparing attitude statement results. Although this was not necessary the researcher wanted
to provide unbiased results, the total number of responses were included for analyzes in the
remaining questions. In Table 2, I present the respondents profile.

Achieving Precision

To achieve reliability and validity the following criteria was set: that respondents’ lived in Ireland
and dined in Dublin restaurants. This eliminated tourist and business travelers and reduced the
probability of bias effect on the investigation. The research was restricted to people that are aged
fifteen or over. The age restriction is the primary classification used for the Quarterly National
Household Survey (QNHS) (Office, 2001). The level of desired precision, D = .05.
 Restaurant Selection

Pilot Questionnaire

Friends, work colleagues, and interviewers randomly selected people in Dublin city center and
work places to administer pilot questionnaires. Respondents were asked to comment on the
design of the questionnaire. The pilot testing was repeated until the questionnaire was
unambiguous and addressed the research question. As a result of the pilot testing, the range of
attributes used in the study was adjusted. The initial attributes used was based on Kivela et at.
(2000), pilot respondents indicated that a number of the attributes were similar in nature and
made some suggested changes. In addition to the pilot feedback, twenty commuters using public
transport were randomly selected and asked what attributes they would consider when selecting a
restaurant. A number of additional questions were added to the questionnaire, the question
sequence was changed using the funnel technique, see Chisnall (1997) and a cover letter
explaining the difference between, dine-out and eat-out was provided. The restaurant choice was
expanded to represent the more popular styles of restaurant in Dublin, and a section was provided
to allow respondents the opportunity to include any restaurant(s) not included in the
questionnaire.

Questionnaire Description and Explanation of Terminology

The first section, of the questionnaire, question 1a to 1c, was designed to identify if the
respondents fit the required criteria for a valid sample. Using questions 1d to 1g I extracted
information about the respondents’ travel life style dimensions in terms of their travel experience,
duration and travel activities. This information facilitated the correlation analysis required to
establish if a relationship existed between the respondents travel experience and their restaurant
selection. Product – moment correlation coefficient was used to provide a description of the
magnitude between the two variables. For example, visiting Spain for a holiday and selecting a
seafood restaurant to dine; traveling to Italy and selecting a Pizza house or Italian style restaurant
to dine and so forth. Sections two and three make the distinction between dining-out for a
relaxing meal and eating-out as a substitute for cooking at home. This distinction was deemed
necessary because the secondary research suggested that consumers’ used different decision
variables to select restaurants for different functions.
 Restaurant Selection

Question 2a and 2b provided psychographics of respondents dinning patterns and when used in
conjunction with the demographics, it provided valuable feedback in relation to the respondents
psychological / life style characteristics.

Question 2c addressed conflict resolution and was included in this section of the questionnaire to
avoid conditioning the respondents in their response to later questions, see (Chisnall, 1997). This
question provided information that facilitated a psychological analysis of the respondent’s
attitude towards selecting a restaurant. The analytical process was based on statistical means
using a five-point scale; Independent-sample t-test was conducted to compare attitudes of male
and females.

Section three was designed to support the psychological and socio-economic analysis of the
respondent’s preference for different styles of restaurant and their attitude towards factors that
influence their choice. The socio-economic analysis was conducted using correlation coefficients
between section three and section eight of the questionnaire. It examined the relationships
between: household income, education, occupation, age and restaurant choice.

Section four provided feedback on the media that most influences the respondent’s choice of
restaurant. However when conducting the analysis of this question, it became apparent that better
feedback could have been achieved, if the respondents had have been asked, to rank the media in
order of its influence on the selection of a restaurant. Many of the respondents marked more then
one answer thus making it difficult to select any one mode as the most influential when selecting
a restaurant. Consequently some additional qualitative research was undertaken to more clearly
identify the media ranking order.

Section five provided a measure of the respondent’s attitude towards restaurant quality. These
statements provided data for assessing the consumer’s attitude when selecting a restaurant: for
example, the frequencies and scale of the answers were analyzed in conjunction with sections
seven and eight to establish if a relationship existed between the respondents’ socio-economic
status and their attitude towards the price and quality.
 Restaurant Selection

Section six related to the impact children have on the decision process when selecting a
restaurant. The questions provided a means of assessing the parent – child interactions in the
decision making process used to select restaurants.

Section seven explores the price consumers would consider spending on the meal and section
eight obtained information about the respondents, household income, education, occupation, and
age.

Results and Discussion

Analytical Approach
The analytical tools applied in this study, were: Chi square, frequency distribution and cross-
tabulation techniques. Independent sample tests are applied to compare attitudes between male
and female respondents and the “eta squared” was calculated to establish the magnitude of the
2
t
difference in the means using the formula: Eta squared = 2
t ( N1 N 2 2)

Travel Descriptive Statistics

Sixteen percent of the population sample lived outside of Ireland for six months or longer; four
percent have never traveled outside of Ireland, 43 percent traveled outside of Ireland at least
every six months, 28 percent travel at least once per year and 9 percent traveled less then once
per year. Holidays were the biggest factor for traveling, representing 57 percent of respondents,
followed by visiting friends at 23 percent and business at 20 percent.

The Influence of Travel Experience on Restaurant Selection

The relationship between the country visited and restaurant choice, was investigated using
Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure
no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity. There is no conclusive evidence to
suggest that traveling to a particular country will greatly influence the choice of restaurant.
Appendix (B), provides the results of the correlation. Some influence was found to exist in the
 Restaurant Selection

correlation between variables visiting Asian lands and selecting a Japanese restaurant [r = .041, n
= 292, p = .481], Spain and seafood restaurant indicated [r = .031, n = 294, p = .593].

Visiting Spain and selecting a wine bar indicated [r = .032, n = 293, p = .586]. Whereas, visiting
Asian lands and selecting a Chinese/Thai restaurant indicated [r = .176, n = 293, p= .002] and
visiting Asian lands and seafood restaurant [r = .205, n = 294, p = .001] these results suggest that
further research is required in this area. Eleven respondents indicated that they never traveled
outside of Ireland. The results generated for these respondents were negative for all but the
cheaper styles of restaurant, such as Fast food [r = .129, n = 11, p = .027], Pub carvey [r = .196, n
= 11, p = .001], Café [r = .02, n = 11, p = .739]. The economic profile of these respondents fell
into the low-income bracket, with an age profile ranging between 16 and 60+. This group
indicated that they would not consider the more expensive styles of restaurants, 70% of the
respondents suggested that price was a factor in their selection of a restaurant.

Factors Influencing Restaurant Choice

The respondents were asked to indicate the factors they would consider when selecting a
restaurant, and table 3 provides results based on the probabilities of event. Respondents were then
asked to rank on a scale of one to five the attributes they considered most important for a social
dine out and eat out occasion. The mean values of the five attributes indicated by respondents
were calculated and are presented in Table 4. The results indicated that the importance of these
attributes change based on the consumers’ salient beliefs about the restaurant, a prior visit and
their meal experience. Analysis was conducted using cross-tabulation, regression and
Independent-sample t-tests of hypothesized questions that support these findings. Tttttables 5 &
5a present the hypothesized questions and results. This analysis formed the development of a
restaurant behavioural age profile.

Behavioural Profile

Age twenty to twenty-nine. This group can be subdivided into those who live with their family
and those who are independent, most possibly between the age of twenty-five and thirty, who do
not have children and are most likely married or living with a partner and have two incomes
 Restaurant Selection

(CSO, 2001). These groups have limited responsibilities and lead an active social life, and have a
high price acceptance indicating that they would consider spending (M=$81.66, SD=$13.61) and
(M=24.45%, SD=4.50%) indicated that they are likely to dine once per week for a social
occasion and are the most likely group eat out as a substitute to eating at home, (M=43.75%,
SD=8.17%) indicated this factor. The sixteen to under-thirty group prefer Italian, Chinese, French
styled, mixed ethnic and Bistros restaurants in that order.

Age thirty and thirty-nine. Young married age between thirty and thirty-nine and have children.
Analysis showed that the addition of a child impacts on the salient attributes. The location of the
restaurant becomes more important-distance is now a greater factor. Results showed
(M=26.55%, SD=4.42%) the 20-29 age groups would not consider a restaurant more then ten
miles away, as apposed to, (M=32.69%, SD=5.45%) of the, 30-39 age group. This age group is
likely to have a first time mortgage with an average monthly repayment of $1,170 to $1,950
(Office, 2001). They have new purchases in the area of baby clothes, furniture, food and health
care products, and are becoming price conscious by the age of 35 years, (Melia, 2004). However
this group are still in the high spend bracket when dining out and would consider spending
(M=$72.02,SD=$12.00). The thirty and thirty-nine age group still prefer the same types of
restaurants as the twenty to twenty nine year olds, but are the more likely group to include
steakhouses into the evoked set of restaurants, see table 6 for preferred types of restaurant and
respondents age.

Age forty to forty-nine. Characterized as middle-aged, married with children (CSO, 2001). This
group are price conscious and reduce their dine out occasion (M=25.00, SD =10.42%) indicated
that they dine out at least once per week. By the age of 49 this group will have eased the burden
of the mortgage repayments and are beginning to increase their disposable income (CSO, 2001).
Preferences in the type of restaurant selected is beginning to change see table 6, however this
group still prefer Italian, Chinese, French styled and seafood restaurants when dining out. The
forty to forty-nine group, are more price conscious then the thirty and thirty-nine group when
dining out, and tend to select more moderately priced restaurants. Results showed this group
would consider spending (M=$60.79, SD=$10.13) when dining out for a social occasion.
 Restaurant Selection

Age fifty to fifty-nine. Characterized as empty nest one older married couple (Peter & Olson,
1994). The children are independent, but may be living at home (Office, 2001), thus contributing
to the household income and have little or no impact on decisions to dine out. Independent
sample t-test was conducted between the different age groups using attitudinal statements to
establish the magnitude of the impact children have on the decision to dine out. The 50+ group
indicated that children do not impact on the decision to dine by disagreeing with statement I
question six. Results showed (M=2.2, SD=1.15) dt (90) = 1.006, p = .319). The dine-out and eat
out frequency patterns remain similar to the forty to forty-nine group but the selection of the
style restaurant is changing. This group is less likely to consider mixed ethnic restaurants,
American diners and Pizza houses. These styles of restaurant are moving down the scale in
comparison to the younger age groups, see probabilities of event for restaurant selection in Table
6. The main choice of restaurant is Italian, Chinese, French styled and seafood restaurants.

The results indicated that the evoked set of restaurants is growing with the greater inclusion of
pub carvery and fish and chip styled restaurants. Casual research was conducted based on the
selection of fish and chip restaurant as a dine out social occasion and revealed that consumers are
likely to drive to a scenic area in Dublin, for example; Howth fishing village, buy a fish and chip
take-out, sit in the car or on a wall eating them before going for a walk and then a drink in the
local bar. This behavior is associated with a “emotional comfort” see Johns & Howard (1998,
p.5) rather then a dining experience for couples and would normally be dependent on the
weather. The fifty to fifty-nine age group, have a greater disposable income in comparison to the
other groups (Office, 2001) and would consider spending (M=$79.40, SD=$13.23).

Sixty plus empty nest aged, married with one partner still working but considering his or her
retirement or retired (Peter & Olson, 1994). Based on the probabilities of event this group prefers
hotel restaurants/carvery, pub carvery, pub restaurants, and fish and chip restaurants. They are
least likely group to consider Chinese/ Thai or French, Greek, Japanese, American diners,
Brasserie or Bistro restaurants among others see table 6. The preferred styles of restaurant
indicated in the survey are more modestly priced. However if this group were to consider a
higher priced restaurant to dine out it would most likely be seafood. This group indicated they
would consider spending (M=$61.32, SD=$10.22). Results showed that the true mean spending
 Restaurant Selection

considered for a meal is (M=$75.49,SD=$7.31), the exchange rate at the time of conversion was
US = $1.30 to one Euro.

Supportive Research

The finding suggests that age disposable income is a factor when selecting a restaurant.
According to the Statistical yearbook of Ireland 2001, the most common age for marriage in
Ireland is between the twenty-five and twenty-nine age group. However the reference age for
rented accommodation is under thirty-five. This suggests that between the age of twenty five and
thirty four consumers are either married with two incomes or living at home with little no
overhead, thus this group spend more of their income, hence this age group had a greater
acceptance of higher priced restaurants when dining out. The greatest reference to home loan /
mortgage is between the age of thirty-five and fifty-four, indicating that by the age of thirty-five
the consumer is likely to have made a major investment in a home (Office, 2001). This affects the
type of restaurant selected i.e. price conscious consumers.

Conclusion

This research draws on techniques used by Johns & Howard (1998), Kivela et al., (1999; 2000),
Koo et al., (1999), and Clark & Wood (1998), to measure profiled attributes of Dublin consumers
and establish the salient factors that influence restaurant selection in Dublin. The study found that
attributes are associated with the characteristics, benefits or positive consequences of using the
restaurant and form the basis of the consumer’s salient beliefs. It supports Johns & Howard
(1998, p.7) suggestion that consumers have a “mental checklist” of attributes based on their
expectation of quality. This suggests that the formation of the consumers’ attitude towards a
restaurant transpires through a complex network of associations that link attributes with meanings
that are stored in the memory. For example if the consumer drove to the restaurant, but had
problems finding a parking spot then parking would move up the scale of attributes. The
consumer would associate parking with a meaning, thus parking becomes a salient belief when
thinking about the restaurant hence the attitude is formed. The study suggests that when selecting
a restaurant there are two factors that contribute to the choice, the strength of the consumer’s
salient beliefs towards the restaurant and their evaluation of these beliefs based on their
 Restaurant Selection

knowledge of the restaurant. Five key attributes associated with restaurant choice for “dine out
and eat out” were identified, the study also established that cleanliness rates in the consumer’s
expectations of the restaurant for both dine out and eat out occasions. This study supports Kivela
et al., (2000) identifying cleanliness as a salient factor when selecting the restaurant. Clark &
Wood (1998) suggested that generic reasons for restaurant choice exist. However these findings
suggest that generic reasons for restaurant choice are placed in the larger spectra of attributes
rather then the salient attribute, which differs from study to study. The findings for this study
suggest that a link exist between the age of the consumer in Dublin and the attributes used to
select a restaurant see table 7. A pattern was established between the consumers’ age and the
restaurant selection process. As the consumer moves through the life cycle their attitudes towards
restaurants is continually changing. Different ratings are placed on the various attributes used to
select restaurants in Dublin, all of which have a value of quality attached for different
consumers’. This supports the suggestion that consumers buy bundles of attributes that
simultaneously combined represent a certain level of service quality offered at a certain price or
value to the consumer. As consumers we develop impressions of particular restaurants in Dublin.
In our minds we categorize the restaurant as good, bad and indifferent basing our considerations
on assessments of the food quality, type of food, location, value, cleanliness, reputation and other
peoples’ comments or what we read about the restaurant.
Our perception of a restaurant will therefore influence our expectations of the overall service
quality received in that restaurant, thus predominating our selection in the future. The decision to
dine is based on the evaluation of a complex network of generic attributes that are reduced to a
few manageable salient beliefs unique to the individual or family unit making the decision. The
evoked set of Dublin restaurants considered is likely to include a number of the salient beliefs
identified in this study, which are compatible with the findings in related studies. The consumers
individuality is expressed when the value meaning of an attribute changes their salient belief
about the restaurant. The decision is made based on the changed attribute, which becomes the
more important salient belief at that time, for that occasion or mood.
 Restaurant Selection

Research Contribution

The most important implication of this study is the addition to the existing body of knowledge
available. The consumer behavior analyses will inform competitive marketing decisions in
Dublin. This theoretical framework will enable restaurant owners to better understand the effects
of changes in menus, service, price, and product quality in terms of the degree to which market
share is likely to shift. This study would enable restaurants marketers to “test” considered actions
using the statistical data gathered and the age profile developed as a guide to whether their
considered strategy is likely to work.

Evaluation and Suggestions for Further Research

None of the research including this study has addressed "Second families" (children born through
re-marriage or co-habiting with new partner) which represent different consumption processes, as
the young child is very likely to be raised under conditions associated with greater material
wealth. The forty-something father will definitely be a different consumer from his same-aged
counterpart just entering the empty nest stage (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2000). A gap exists in
research aimed at presenting a robust and comprehensive classification of families based on
economic potential and the future impact of the new-age families (same sex parents) etc, on the
restaurant industry. Future research needs to consider all family member interactions and the
members’ explicit and implicit roles in the consumption processes. For example, it was not
apparent if sibling influence on purchase decisions that relate to restaurant selection exists,
despite the obvious modeling by younger children of their (especially same-sex) older siblings
(Atkin, 1978). With the advent of search cost reducing media such as the Internet, it is likely that
these in the family having more access to information may be changing, with new technologies
proliferating faster among the youth. Children may be bringing more information into the
restaurant selection process than in the past. The dynamics and implications of these shifts need
addressing, for instance how the restaurant industry design web sites. To date the researcher has
not come across any Irish restaurant websites identified as “dine out” in this study that would
appeal to children. Considering the above it is apparent that several useful directions for further
research exist. One possible extension would be to incorporate sibling power over a brother or
sister to further influence the selection process into the theoretical framework of selecting a
 Restaurant Selection

restaurant. Another avenue for further research is to investigate in more detail how family
members with travel experience influence the choice of restaurant. A similar parallel study could
be conducted with well-traveled consumers and consumers that have not traveled. This would
underpin the effects of travel into a hypothetical framework thus expanding the model proposed
in this study by separating the internal influences from the external influences on the restaurant
selection process. Cultural impact on restaurant selection requires exploring. For example parallel
studies of how the different ethnic groups select restaurants to dine needs investigating in terms
of the impact of religion and family influences.
 Restaurant Selection

References

Atkin, C. (1978). Observation of Parent-Child Interaction in Supermarket Decision-Making.

Journal of Marketing, 42(October), 41-45.
Chisnall, P. M. (1997). Marketing Research ( Fifth Edition ed.): McGraw-Hill Publishing
Company.
CHL Consulting. (2003). Tourism Business and Employment Survey (Restaurant Sector Vol. 4).
Dublin: Failte Ireland Report.
Clark, M., & Wood, R. C. (1998). Consumer Loyalty in the Restaurant Industry: A preliminary
exploration of the issues. Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
10(4), 139-144.
Goldstein, L. J., Lay, D. C., & Schneider, D. I. (1984). Mathematics for Management, Life and
Social Science (Second Edition ed., pp. 322-345): Prentice Hall, Inc.
Johns, N., & Howard, A. (1998). Customer Expectations Versus Perceptions of Service
Performance in the Foodservice Industry. International Journal of Service Industry
Management, 9(3), 248-265.
Kivela, J., Inbakaran, R., & Reece, J. (1999). Consumer Research in the Restaurant Environment,
Part 1: A conceptual model of dining satisfaction and return patronage. Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 11(5), 205-222.
Kivela, J., Inbakaran, R., & Reece, J. (2000). Consumer Research in the Restaurant Environment
Part 3: Analysis, Findings and Conclusions. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 12(1), 13 - 30.
Koo, L. C., Fredrick, K. C. T., & Yeung, J., H.C. (1999). Preferential Segmentation of Restaurant
Attributes Thought Conjoint Analysis. Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 11(5), 242 - 253.
Melia, P. (2004, November 27). Where the Spending power is in Ireland. Irish Independent, pp.6.
Office, C. S. (2001). Statistical Yearbook of Ireland. Dublin: Stationery Office Dublin Ireland.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1994). Reassessment of Expectations as a
Comparison Standard in Marketing Service Quality. Journal of Marketing(58), 121.
Peter, P., & Olson, P. (1994). Understanding Consumer Behavior. Sydney, Australia: Burr Ridge
Richard D. Irwin Inc.
 Restaurant Selection

Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2000). Consumer Behavior (7th ed., pp. 125-127, 145-150,
190-193, 228-256): Prentice Hall International.
 Restaurant Selection

Table 1. Attributes used for Restaurant Selection in Related Studies

Researchers Koo et al., Clark & Wood Kivela et al., Johns & Howard

Location Yes No No Yes

Quality of the food Yes Yes Yes Yes
Food portion size No No No Yes
Seafood Yes No No No
Taste of food Yes No Yes Yes
Quality of the service Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cleanliness No No Yes Yes
Price of food Yes Yes No No
Speed of the service No Yes No Yes
Parking facilities Yes Yes No Yes
New meal experience No No No No
Ambience/atmosphere No Yes No Yes
Restaurants décor Yes No Yes Yes
Menu item variety Yes Yes Yes Yes
Comfort level No No Yes Yes
Sells draft beer/ liquor No Yes No Yes
Competent waiting staff No No Yes Yes
Handling of complaints No No Yes No
Spacious restaurant No No No No
Friendliness of staff No Yes Yes Yes
Handling of reservations No No Yes No
Food temperature Yes No Yes No
Uniqueness Yes No No No
Opening hours No Yes No Yes
Value No Yes No No
Presentation of Food No No Yes Yes
Dining Privacy No No Yes No
Level of Noise No No Yes Yes
View from Restaurant No No No Yes
Nutritious food No No No Yes
 Restaurant Selection

Table 2.
Characteristics of
Occupation Frequency Valid Percent
Respondents in Dublin
Valid Self employed / farmer / freelance 10 4
Survey
Senior executive or senior civil servant 26 9
White collar worker, civil servant 51 18
Skilled worker 26 9
Other worker 16 6
Pensioner 7 3
Housewife / Househusband 6 2
Student / Pupil 48 17
Currently without work 4 1
Other 8 3
In full time employment 61 22
In part time employment 13 5
Total 276 100
Missing System 26
Total 302
Child carer or parent Frequency Valid Percent
Valid Yes 106 36
No 185 64
Total 291 100
Missing System 11
Total 302
Highest level of education Frequency Valid Percent
Valid Primary level 5 2
Second level 43 15
Post - secondary level certification 32 11
Apprenticeship or trade 20 7
Third level Diploma or Degree 101 36
Higher Degree 79 28
Total 280 100
Missing System 22
Total 302
 Restaurant Selection

Table 2.

Group Age Frequency Valid Percent

Valid 20 - 29 100 35
30 - 39 68 24
40 - 49 60 21
50+ 54 19
Total 282 100
Missing System 20
Total 302
Household income group Frequency Valid Percent
Valid €0 - €5,000 15 6
€5,001 - €10,000 11 4
€10,001 - €20,000 26 10
€20,001 - €30,000 52 20
€30,001 - €40,000 42 16
€40,001 - €50,000 30 11
€50,000 - €60,000 37 14
€60,000+ 50 19
Total 263 100
Missing System 39
Total 302
 Restaurant Selection

Table 3.
Attributes Considered when Selecting a Restaurant for a Social Occasion in Dublin
Attribute Response for Restaurant Selection

Quality of Food 94%

Type of Food 86%
Location 76%
Cleanliness Factor 75%
Ambience / atmosphere 74%
Good Reputation 71%
Quality of Service 67%
Cost of Food 64%
Friendliness of Staff 56%
Comfort Level of Restaurant 51%
Menu Item Variety 46%
New Meal Experience 44%
Competent Waiting Staff 35%
Speed of Service 34%
Restaurant Décor 30%
Food Portion Size 27%
Parking Facilities 26%
Handling of Reservations 20%
Restaurant is Spacious 14%
Prompt Handing of Complaints 13%
Sells Draft Beer 11%
Charcoal Grilled Steaks 9%
Other 2%
Table 3 presents the fundamental property 1 results =
Pr (E)= [number of outcomes in E], see (Goldstein, Lay, & Schneider, 1984) (p. 343).
N
 Restaurant Selection

Table 4.
The mean scores (M) based on the ranking of the most importing attributes
considered when selecting a restaurant.
To Dine Out for a Social Occasion To Eat Out as Substitute for Cooking at Home
1. Quality of the food, M= 38%. 1. Location, M= 29%.
2. Type of food, M= 18%. 2. Quality of the food, M= 23%.
3. Cleanliness, M= 13%. 3. Cleanliness, M= 19%.
4. Location, M= 9%. 4. Price of food/meal, M= 10%.
5. Good reputation, M= 6%. 5. Type of food, M= 10%.
 Restaurant Selection

Table 5. Hypothesized Questions (Ho) used in the Survey of Dublin Consumers

H
1. I would try a new restaurant out without knowing what to expect,
H
2. If a restaurant were more than ten miles away from home I would not consider it,
H
3. Restaurants are good value for money,
H
4. Price is not important when selecting a restaurant,
H
5. The restaurant must have prestige before I would consider it,
H
6. Distance is not an issue if the restaurant is good,
H
7. The more expensive the restaurant the better the quality,
H
8. I would consider a lot of different restaurants within a certain price,
H
9. If the atmosphere in the restaurant were good I would not notice the poor
food quality,
H
10. The restaurant selection depends on your mood,
H
11. Restaurant selection is a joint decision by two or more people,
H
12. Culture influences restaurant selection decisions in Ireland,
H
13. Restaurant selection depends on the occasion,
H
14. I would not select a restaurant that gives me a time to vacate,
H
15. Restaurants are too busy to consider service quality,
H16.
The service quality is not important if the food is good,
H
17. The taste of the food is the most important aspect when selecting a restaurant,
H
18. If the atmosphere in the restaurant were good I would not notice the
poor service quality,
H
19. I tend to select restaurants I feel welcome in, even if the quality is not great,
H
20. If I want to try food better than I cook / get at home I would have to pay
a high price,
H
21. The food quality is not important if the service is good,
H
22. When I am selecting a restaurant, I consider both the food and service
quality provided.
 Restaurant Selection

Table 5a. Independent Sample Test Results for Hypothesized Questions (Ho)
Respondents N = Male 117, Female 117

Males Females
Mean SD Mean SD df t p<.05 Eta squared Ho
H
1 3.01, 1.57 3.53, 1.45 (234) = -2.620 .009 .028 Accept H 1
H H
2 2.67, 1.51 2.68, 1.46 (234) = -0.088 .930 .000 Reject 2
H H
3 2.62, 1.02 2.81, 0.99 (234) = -1.422 .156 .009 Reject 3
H H
4 2.41, 1.28 2.39, 1.17 (234) = .106 .916 .000 Reject 4
H H
5 2.13, 1.14 2.00, 1.05 (234) = .830 .407 .003 Reject 5
H H
6 3.28, 1.35 3.37, 1.31 (234) = -0.491 .624 .001 Accept 6
H H
7 2.06, 1.14 1.99, 1.00 (234) = .545 .586 .001 Reject 7
H H
8 3.80, 1.14 3.80, 1.11 (234) = .000 1.000 .000 Accept 8
H H
9 1.78, 1.05 1.63, 1.01 (234) = 1.071 .285 .005 Reject 9
H H
10 3.55, 1.27 3.74, 1.22 (234) = -1.143 .254 .006 Accept 10
H H
11 3.44, 1.29 3.65, 1.24 (234) = -1.236 .218 .006 Accept 11
H H
12 3.24, 1.23 3.55, 1.21 (234) = -1.924 .056 .016 Accept 12
H H
13 4.11, .985 4.23, 0.90 (234) = -0.966 .335 .004 Accept 13
H H
14 3.44, 1.32 3.44, 1.21 (234) = .000 1.000 .000 Accept 14
H H
15 2.44, 1.15 2.31, 1.17 (234) = .896 .371 .003 Reject 15
H H
16 2.11, 1.13 1.94, 0.98 (234) = 1.295 .197 .007 Reject 16
H H
17 3.31, 1.13 3.35, 1.24 (234) = -0.220 .826 .000 Accept 14
H H
18 1.81, 1.09 1.86, 0.98 (234) = -0.377 .707 .001 Reject 18
H H
19 2.58, 1.20 2.45, 1.19 (234) = .815 .416 .003 Reject 19
H H
20 2.94, 1.43 2.73, 1.26 (234) = 1.206 .229 .006 Reject 20
H H
21 1.71, 1.11 1.56, 0.82 (234) = 1.133 .258 .005 Reject 21
H H
22 4.28, .99 4.39, 0.89 (234) = -0.828 .409 .003 Accept 22

Table 6. Analyses of Preferred types of Restaurant and Respondents Age

Age Group 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 +
Steakhouse 42% 47% 44% 34% 27%
Seafood 44% 45% 46% 38% 47%
 Restaurant Selection Page 27 of 28
Wine Bar / Bistro 48% 34% 34% 34% 0%
Greek 33% 30% 26% 17% 7%
Mixed Ethnic 53% 47% 44% 31% 20%
French 56% 53% 52% 48% 27%
Japanese 35% 34% 24% 24% 7%
Fish & Chip 14% 9% 8% 17% 20%
In store 9% 8% 20% 10% 7%
Italian 76% 70% 66% 83% 47%
Hotel 40% 34% 36% 38% 53%
Brasserie 33% 26% 34% 31% 7%
Café 29% 21% 16% 10% 0%
Pub carvery 20% 23% 28% 34% 47%
American diner 27% 26% 14% 13% 7%
Fast-food 15% 15% 14% 10% 13%
Pizza house 42% 42% 30% 21% 20%
Vegetarian 19% 17% 18% 24% 20%
Pub restaurant 37% 28% 38% 34% 47%
Chinese / Thai 73% 79% 58% 59% 20%
Food court 16% 15% 10% 10% 13%
Table 6 presents the fundamental property 1 results =
Pr (E)= [number of outcomes in E], see (Goldstein et al., 1984) (p. 343).
N
 Restaurant Selection Page 28 of 28

Table 7. Attributes that Influence Restaurant Selection in Dublin

and Respondents Age
Age Group 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+
Location 71% 74% 78% 83% 67%
Type of Food 92% 81% 74% 83% 80%
Cost of Food 65% 57% 64% 55% 60%
New Meal Experience 45% 47% 44% 48% 27%
Menu Item Variety 46% 42% 60% 45% 20%
Competent Waiting Staff 38% 38% 36% 38% 33%
Friendliness of Staff 55% 47% 58% 45% 67%
Quality of Food 97% 85% 92% 86% 93%
Quality of Service 66% 66% 66% 76% 60%
Speed of Service 40% 36% 30% 21% 27%
Ambience / atmosphere 75% 68% 72% 86% 73%
Comfort Level of Restaurant 55% 55% 40% 48% 40%
Prompt Handing of Complaints 12% 17% 10% 17% 13%
Handling of Reservations 20% 21% 16% 28% 20%
Food Portion Size 34% 26% 14% 17% 13%
Cleanliness 75% 68% 76% 69% 80%
Parking Facilities 18% 30% 28% 38% 67%
Restaurant Decor 32% 34% 34% 14% 13%
Sells Draft Beer 14% 11% 10% 3% 13%
Restaurant is Spacious 15% 19% 12% 10% 7%
Charcoal Grilled Steaks 6% 13% 4% 21% 20%
Good Reputation 75% 64% 68% 62% 53%
Table 7 presents the fundamental property 1 results =
Pr (E)= [number of outcomes in E], see (Goldstein, Lay, & Schneider, 1984) (p. 343).
N