基于期望和感知绩效的卫生服务满意度研究测量模型的比较

Q3 Psychology
Diana E. Forero , Alina Gómez
{"title":"基于期望和感知绩效的卫生服务满意度研究测量模型的比较","authors":"Diana E. Forero ,&nbsp;Alina Gómez","doi":"10.1016/j.sumpsi.2017.06.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The literature on satisfaction measurement features several models for establishing the relationship between expectations, service performance and satisfaction. The set of measures used includes the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA), expectation disconfirmation and the satisfaction determinants model. This paper presents a comparison of different measurement models on the basis of a sample of 2900 health services users. The comparison shows that the expectations disconfirmation model allows to establish significant correlations between service attributes and general satisfaction, yet it warrants an adjustment of data distribution to identify the attributes where confirmation and disconfirmation are presented – when not due to chance. On the other hand, the direct effect approach allows to identify predictor attributes of satisfaction better than the other models do, whereas the importance – performance model is easier to implement but can generate erroneous conclusions about the service attributes that generate satisfaction.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38992,"journal":{"name":"Suma Psicologica","volume":"24 2","pages":"Pages 87-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.sumpsi.2017.06.002","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of measurement models based on expectations and perceived performance for the satisfaction study in health services\",\"authors\":\"Diana E. Forero ,&nbsp;Alina Gómez\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.sumpsi.2017.06.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The literature on satisfaction measurement features several models for establishing the relationship between expectations, service performance and satisfaction. The set of measures used includes the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA), expectation disconfirmation and the satisfaction determinants model. This paper presents a comparison of different measurement models on the basis of a sample of 2900 health services users. The comparison shows that the expectations disconfirmation model allows to establish significant correlations between service attributes and general satisfaction, yet it warrants an adjustment of data distribution to identify the attributes where confirmation and disconfirmation are presented – when not due to chance. On the other hand, the direct effect approach allows to identify predictor attributes of satisfaction better than the other models do, whereas the importance – performance model is easier to implement but can generate erroneous conclusions about the service attributes that generate satisfaction.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Suma Psicologica\",\"volume\":\"24 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 87-96\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.sumpsi.2017.06.002\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Suma Psicologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S012143811730019X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Suma Psicologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S012143811730019X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

在满意度测量的文献中,有几个模型用来建立期望、服务绩效和满意度之间的关系。所使用的一套措施包括重要性-绩效分析(IPA),期望不确认和满意度决定因素模型。本文以2900名卫生服务用户为样本,对不同的测量模型进行了比较。比较表明,期望失证模型允许在服务属性和总体满意度之间建立显著的相关性,但它需要调整数据分布,以识别出现确认和失证的属性——当不是偶然的时候。另一方面,直接效应方法可以比其他模型更好地识别满意度的预测属性,而重要性-绩效模型更容易实现,但可能会对产生满意度的服务属性产生错误的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of measurement models based on expectations and perceived performance for the satisfaction study in health services

The literature on satisfaction measurement features several models for establishing the relationship between expectations, service performance and satisfaction. The set of measures used includes the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA), expectation disconfirmation and the satisfaction determinants model. This paper presents a comparison of different measurement models on the basis of a sample of 2900 health services users. The comparison shows that the expectations disconfirmation model allows to establish significant correlations between service attributes and general satisfaction, yet it warrants an adjustment of data distribution to identify the attributes where confirmation and disconfirmation are presented – when not due to chance. On the other hand, the direct effect approach allows to identify predictor attributes of satisfaction better than the other models do, whereas the importance – performance model is easier to implement but can generate erroneous conclusions about the service attributes that generate satisfaction.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Suma Psicologica
Suma Psicologica Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信