Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
William Kettinger, Choong-C. Lee, Sunro Lee (1995)
Global Measures of Information Service Quality: A Cross‐National StudyDecision Sciences, 26
William Kettinger, Choong-C. Lee (1997)
Pragmatic Perspectives on the Measurement of Information Systems Service QualityMIS Q., 21
P. Asubonteng, K. McCleary, J. Swan (1996)
SERVQUAL revisited: a critical review of service qualityJournal of Services Marketing, 10
R. Bagozzi, Fred Davis, P. Warshaw (1992)
Development and Test of a Theory of Technological Learning and UsageHuman Relations, 45
C. Fornell, D. Larcker (1981)
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error.Journal of Marketing Research, 18
P. Curran, S. West, J. Finch (1996)
The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis.Psychological Methods, 1
T. Dyke, V. Prybutok, Leon Kappelman (1999)
Cautions on the Use of the SERVQUAL Measure to Assess the Quality of Information Systems ServicesDecision Sciences, 30
T. P. Dyke, L. A. Kappelman, V. R. Prybutok (1997)
Measuring information systems service quality: Concerns on the use of the SERVQUAL questionnaireJournal of Information Technology, 21
D. Gerbing, James Anderson (1988)
An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its AssessmentJournal of Marketing Research, 25
L. Pitt, R. Watson, C. Kavan (1995)
Service Quality: A Measure of Information System EffectivenessMIS Q., 19
T. Dyke, Leon Kappelman, V. Prybutok (1997)
Measuring Information Systems Service Quality: Concerns on the Use of the SERVQUAL QuestionnaireMIS Q., 21
G. M. Maruyama (1998)
Basics of structural equation modelingJournal of Retailing
William Kettinger, Choong-C. Lee (1994)
Perceived Service Quality and User Satisfaction with the Information Services FunctionDecision Sciences, 25
A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml, L. L. Berry (1991)
Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scaleMIS Quarterly, 67
R. Watson, L. Pitt, C. Kavan (1998)
Measuring Information Systems Service Quality: Lessons From Two Longitudinal Case StudiesMIS Q., 22
K. G. Jöreskog, D. Sörbom (1996)
Prelis 2: User's reference guideDecision Sciences
A. Parasuraman, V. Zeithaml, L. Berry (1988)
SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality.Journal of Retailing, 64
L. F. Pitt, R. T. Watson, B. C. Kavan (1997)
Measuring information systems service quality: Concerns for a complete canvasDecision Sciences, 27
L. Pitt, R. Watson, C. Kavan (1997)
Measuring Information Systems Service Quality: Concerns for a Complete CanvasMIS Q., 21
A. Parasuraman, V. A. Zeithaml, L. L. Berry (1988)
SERVQUAL: A multiple‐item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service qualityMIS Quarterly, 64
T. P. Dyke, V. R. Prybutok, L. A. Kappelman (1999)
Cautions on the use of the SERVQUAL measure to assess the quality of information system servicesMIS Quarterly, 30
R. Watson, L. Pitt, Chris Cunningham, D. Nel (1993)
User satisfaction and service quality of the IS department: closing the gapsJournal of Information Technology, 8
J. M. Ferguson, R. A. Zawacki (1993)
Service quality: A critical success factor for IS organizationsInformation Strategy: The Executive's Journal
W. J. Kettinger, C. C. Lee (1995)
Global measurements of information service quality: A cross‐national studyMIS Quarterly, 26
W. J. Kettinger, C. C. Lee (1997)
Pragmatic perspectives on the measurement of information systems service qualityJournal of Marketing, 21
A. Parasuraman, V. Zeithaml, L. Berry (1985)
A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future ResearchJournal of Marketing, 49
R. P. Bagozzi, F. D. Davis, P. R. Warshaw (1992)
Development and test of a conceptualization of technological learning and usageHuman Relations, 45
This article describes the results of a study assessing the psychometric properties of the expectations and perceptions‐of‐performance instruments and the difference‐score data contained within the information systems (IS)‐Adapted SERVQUAL measurement paradigm. The central claim of this study is: In order for rational inferences to be made about service expectations, service performance perceptions, or the gap between them, each of the two instruments must exhibit reasonable psychometric properties in isolation before difference‐scores are taken. Analysis of data from a field study (N= 401) through structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques produces empirical evidence indicating that both of the instruments exhibit low psychometric quality and yet the difference‐scores exhibit “psychometric inflation.” That is, the quality of the difference‐score data is in many ways apparently superior to the raw data from both instruments. Negative conclusions are reached as to the efficacy of either individual instrument and, thus, the full IS‐Adapted SERVQUAL paradigm. Questions and prospects for further research in this important area of service quality measurement/management are presented, and a potentially rich future for IS service quality is outlined. It is strongly suggested that future IS service quality research be based on development of a new instrument, grounded in attributes endemic to IS services and developed using the best available development techniques.
Decision Sciences – Wiley
Published: Mar 1, 2002
Keywords: ; ; ;
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.