The Bias of Size in Gambling Decisions: Evidence from a Casino Game Hierarchy

backgammon-2488089_1920[We’re pleased to welcome author Lawrence Hoc Nang Fong, Davis Ka Choi Fong, Robin Chark, Peter Man Wai Chui of the University of Macau. They recently published an article in Cornell Hospitality Quarterly entitled “The Bias of Size in Gambling Decisions: Evidence from a Casino Game,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, Dr. Wang reflects on the inspiration for conducting this research:]

cqxb_58_2.cover

What motivated you to pursue this research?
This study stems from the authors’ observations of Cussec players in casinos. As gamblers strive to predict the outcome based on previous outcome pattern shown on the screen which is attached to the table, is there any other hint they are trying to locate? While the Chinese characters “Big” and “Small” are clearly displayed on the screen, they can be the hint. Our feeling is that gamblers would incline to bet on “Big” as it sounds more positive than “Small” and they may intrinsically link “Big” to win which is the positive outcome in gambling. Given this speculation, we’ve tried to find whether there had been a study about the said phenomenon, but we got nothing. We think this topic deserves documentation in the literature and thus initiated this research.

In what ways is your research innovative, and how do you think it will impact the field?
Cognitive bias has been a popular research agenda for decades. The bias of size, to our best understanding, remains unexamined. We believe that this study opens a new research stream of cognitive bias in gambling. Future research may examine the questions that we raised at the end of the paper:
“Is the bias maintained if the cue is physical size? In the gambling context, will an outcome option with a larger area on the table layout signal a higher chance of winning?”

What is the most important/ influential piece of scholarship you’ve read in the last year?
Peetz and Soliman’s (2016) paper entitled “Big money: The effect of money size on value perceptions and saving motivation” is an importance piece of work that sheds light to our study. They found that a picture of money with larger size was perceived as more valuable. While gambling is an activity overwhelmed by monetary reward, the mental link between “Big” and win (money as reward) is not unreasonable. We felt blessed to discover and read Peetz and Soliman’s paper.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research from Cornell Hospitality Quarterly and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Service Employee Responses to Angry Customer Complaints

man-314424_1280

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Christina Jerger of the Catholic University of Eichstaett–Ingolstadt and Jochen Wirtz of the National University of Singapore. They recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Service Employee Responses to Angry Customer Complaints: The Roles of Customer Status and Service Climate,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, Jerger reflects on the inspiration for conducting this research:]

 

 

It is not uncommon that customers behave aggressively in service encounters, especially after experiencing a service failure. In turn, front line service employees should not retaliate this customer misbehavior to not jeopardize effective service recovery. Furthermore, service employees are requested to not discriminate customers and to treat them equal in terms of their displayed emotions as well as offered restitution in the service recovery encounter. The equal customer treatment becomes even more important in our increasingly diverse societies but is scantly researched.

This research gap spans many fruitful avenues for the research I have conducted as part of my PhD thesis. This current study examines whether a customer’s status determines how well service employees respond when they get confronted with an angry customer complaint, and whether a firm’s strong service climate can help to reduce customer status effects. Specifically, to assess employees’ emotional (i.e., expressed anger) and behavioral (i.e., restitution offered) service recovery responses, we had to develop an innovative field experimental design: We conducted role-played complaints in fast-food restaurants and observed and coded employees’ actual responses. In addition, we conducted scenario-based experiments with restaurant waiters to find out more about how the employees’ background and their personality might influence their responses to angry customers of different status.

The studies’ findings confirm that in weak service climate conditions, employees treated low-status customers significantly worse; they expressed more anger and they were less likely to offer restitution. In contrast, a strong service climate moderated the effects of customer status on employees’ response behaviors in both studies. As a result, employees’ service recovery behaviors converged at what is generally considered good practice in customer service. The strong organizational rules, routinization of recovery processes, better employee skills and knowledge, and guidance by leadership meant that employees knew what is expected from them and led to better service recovery outcomes. Importantly, employees did not treat low-status customers worse than high-status ones.

Interestingly, although it didn’t reach statistical significance in both studies, we found a tendency that low-status customers were more likely to receive restitution in a strong service climate than high-status customers. It seemed that employees made an effort to not treat low-status customers worse than high-status customers, and in the process, they overcompensated low-status customers.

Furthermore, our findings show that service climate governs both employees’ immediate affective and delayed conative recovery responses. This suggests that a strong service climate is authentic, internalized, and on a level of deep acting. Therefore, it is effective in governing employee responses in difficult situations, including in establishing emotional display rules.

One major input to building a strong service climate is training. A strong service climate seems a necessary requirement for effectively dealing with angry customer complaints. Employees should be trained in handling their feelings and how to use emotional displays in an appropriate manner. Especially for organizations with a weak service climate, this training needs to include on how to treat customers equally and independent of potential biases employees may have.

Overall, this paper offers highly valuable insights for service theory and management and helps understanding how service employees respond to angry customer complaints.

 

Christina Jerger, July 18, 2017

02JSR13_Covers.inddStay up-to-date with the latest research from the Journal of Service Research and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Customer Service photo attributed to PublicDomainPictures. (CC)

Webinar Highlights: Presenting Data Effectively

[The following post is re-blogged from Social Science Space. Click here to view the original article.]


Crystal clear graphs, slides, and reports are valuable – they save an audience’s mental energies, keep a reader engaged, and make you look smart. This webinar held on June 6, 2017, covers the science behind presenting data effectively and will leave viewers with direct, pointed changes that can be immediately administered to significantly increase impact. Guest Stephanie Evergreen also addresses principles of data visualization, report, and slideshow design that support legibility, comprehension, and stick our information in our audience’s brains.

Evergreen’s presentation was followed by an audience question-and-answer session, which is included in the recording. Not all the questions were answered at the time, and Evergreen answers some additional session questions below.

Evergreen is an internationally recognized speaker, designer, and researcher best known for bringing a research-based approach to better communicate through more effective graphs, slides, and reports. She holds a PhD from Western Michigan University in interdisciplinary evaluation, which included a dissertation on the extent of graphic design use in written research reporting. Evergreen has trained researchers worldwide through keynote presentations and workshops, for clients including Time, Verizon, Head Start, American Institutes for Research, Rockefeller Foundation, Brookings Institute, and the United Nations. She is the 2015 recipient of the American Evaluation Association’s Guttentag award, given for notable accomplishments early in a career.

She is co-editor and co-author of two issues of New Directions for Evaluation on data visualization. She writes a popular blog on data presentation at StephanieEvergreen.com. Her books SAGE Publishing books Presenting Data Effectively and Effective Data Visualization both reached No. 1 on Amazon bestseller lists. A second edition of Presenting Data Effectively was published in May.

  1. When is it best to place the data information (e.g. 20 percent) on a bar or lollipop vs. using a scale on the side or bottom of a chart?

If people will want to know the exact value, add the data label. If the overall pattern of the data and estimated values are sufficient, use a scale. But don’t use both – that’s redundant.

  1. How do your clients and colleagues respond to the ‘flipped report,’ in which research findings and conclusions are presented before the discussion, literature, methodology, and background sections?

With a “duh” as in “Why haven’t I thought of that before”? Generally, clients appreciate how a flipped report values their time. On occasion, you and I will find audiences who really bristle at the idea, usually people steeped in the academic culture, so check first if a flipped report structure would be okay.

  1. Any tips for the converted about changing resistant organizational culture to data visualization? “You need to use our template!”

Culture change is slow, so the first tip is to be patient. After that, try remaking one of your own old (bad) slides or graphs to show what an overall would look like. See if you can get a friendly client or customer you know to give you feedback on it. Then report on the redesign and the feedback to others in your organization. Try getting someone from senior management on board. Leave a copy of my book in their mailbox or in the break room. And hang in there.

  1. How do we report small numbers? Without percentages?

I would report small numbers as raw numbers, not percentages. Try an icon array for a visual.

  1. Where is the best place to get report templates?

In your imagination! Any report template is going to look like a report template, not like something that fits your own work. Look around for inspiration, for sure, like on my Pinterest boards, but create your own style that fits you and your work.

  1. What program do you use to create dashboards or infographics? We’ve used Piktocharts…. are there others?

I work within the Microsoft Office suite. I make dashboards in Excel and infographics in PowerPoint. This way I have total control over the design and everyone on my team can make edits. A quick Google search of either dashboard or infographic programs will give you hundreds of choices you could work with. If you want something from that list, look for maximum flexibility, low learning curve, and reasonable expense.

  1. Each chart can have multiple findings; are we skewing the results when we highlight certain findings over others using color and data?

“Skewing” sounds like we are manipulating, but that’s not the case. Using color to highlight a certain part of the graph still leaves the rest of the graph completely intact and able to be seen. Adding color does, however, reflect an interpretation we have made of the data. But that isn’t “skewing” – it’s telling people our point and that’s why they are listening to us in the first place.

  1. Can you please explain the difference between your two books? Thanks!

Sure! Effective Data Visualization walks you through how to choose the right chart type and then how to make it in Excel. Presenting Data Effectively talks about formatting graphs well with consideration of text and color and broadens that discussion to address dashboards, slides, handouts, and reports.

  1. One challenge I face is presenting nuanced findings in an accessible way. For example, when there are limitations to the data or subgroups that need to be acknowledged or findings need to be interpreted with caution. As a researcher, it worries me that the client might put tentative findings “out there”, misrepresenting them (to a degree).

This makes your title and subtitle ever more important. Be very clear in your wording that the findings are limited. You can also add things like confidence intervals to your graph if you are confident that the reader will know how to interpret them. If it is still going to be a concern, don’t make a graph of the data. People are drawn to graphs because we look at pictures so don’t put the data in a picture if you are worried people won’t read the nuanced narrative.

Understanding Customer Barriers and Barrier-Attenuating Practices in Access-Based Services

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Simon Hazée, Cécile Delcourt, and Yves Van Vaerenbergh who recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Burdens of Access: Understanding Customer Barriers and Barrier-Attenuating Practices in Access-Based Services.” Below, the authors share more insight on their research in the service industry:]

What motivated you to pursue this research? JSR_16.2_72ppiRGB_powerpoint.jpgWe are witnessing a global rise of what’s been called ‘the access economy’. This growth is yet mainly driven by an increasing supply, with lots of companies—including manufacturers like BMW or Daimler AG—offering services that grant customers limited access to goods. Although these services offer several potential advantages, convincing customers to use them remains challenging. Service innovation failures represent potential losses of revenues that can even endanger firms’ competitiveness; indicating the pressing need to understand the barriers that keep customers from participating in the access economy.

Were there any surprising findings? Customers face several important barriers for why they don’t participate in the access economy, and these barriers do not always have rational grounds. For instance, one striking observation is that customers are afraid of contamination. After all, when accessing goods, you know for sure that someone else—whom you do not know—has touched the product; this may create disgust and avoidance responses. Another surprising finding is that customers believe they must engage in a bunch of practices to attenuate the barriers themselves. For example, customers must be ready to alter or postpone their needs to counter the fact that goods might not be available when needed, an important barrier perceived by customers.
Interestingly, although engaging in such practices helps attenuating barriers, customers also consider them as burdensome.

In what ways is your research innovative, and how do you think it will impact the field?Our findings suggest that customers reject service innovations not only in response to numerous perceived barriers associated with the innovation but also out of consideration of the practices in which they must engage to attenuate those barriers. Prior research shows customers typically adopt and use access-based services to avoid the burdens of ownership. We show that they reject these services due to the burdens of access, which include the barriers to access and the barrier-attenuating practices. Understanding both the barriers and the practices in which customers engage is critical for theory and practice; it can reveal new ways to see, examine, and manage service innovations. In sum, the success of access initiatives is not necessarily for those service providers that show the benefits of using the service, but might be for those who are best at overcoming the barriers as well as facilitating and limiting the practices in which customers engage.

Visit the JSR homepage to sign up for email alerts today!

Customer misbehaviour in the collaborative economy: Is it contagious or not?

Co-authors Tobias Schaefers, Kristina Wittkowski, Sabine Benoit, and Rosellina Ferraro recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Contagious Effects of Customer Misbehavior in Access-Based Services.” Below is their informational video as a supplement to their article, which helps analyze how connections to a person’s community can influence behavior in the given shared space.

 

Don’t forget to visit the journal’s homepage to sign up for email alerts so you never miss the latest research!

When, and How, Should Firms Educate Their Customers?

[We’re pleased to welcome author Simon Bell of the University of Melbourne, Australia. Bell recently published an article in the Journal of Service Research entitled “Unraveling the Customer Education Paradox: When, and How, Should Firms Educate Their Customers?,” co-authored by Seigyoung Auh and Andreas B. Eisingerich. From Bell:]

  • What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

We have long been fascinated by service firms’ reluctance to let customers “into the kitchen”. Service firms have traditionally kept customers in the dark. The thinking is that giving cuJSR_16.2_72ppiRGB_powerpoint.jpgstomers too much insight or access to how a firm operates places that firm’s ‘black box’ or proprietary methodologies at risk. Educating customers apparently provides them with the skills to shop around and potentially switch to a competitor. Yet we noticed in our consulting work that some service firms (and even some service employees) were challenging this thinking. They were proactively educating their customers and seeme
d to be the better for it. We were keen to discover what was going on.

  • Were there findings that were surprising to you?

The results of our field study showed that firms were partly right. Increasing customer expertise through proactive efforts to educate their customers actually had an overall negative impact on loyalty. This was because customers build what we call “market-related” expertise – a general knowledge about how markets work – which provides customers with the confidence to shop around. But we also found that educating customers builds “firm-specific” expertise which ties a customer more closely to the firm. It’s just that this positive effect on loyalty did not outweigh the negative. Yet, when we conducted an experimental study we found that the customer loyalty effects of customer education were positive overall. We believe this has a lot to do with the context (i.e., firm and industry) in which customer education programs might be used. Our goal in this paper was to discover whether education did indeed have both positive and negative effects on loyalty, but clearly our next focus should be revealing the different contexts in which the positive effects outweigh the negative (and vice versa).

  • How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?

We think our results have some very important implications for managers. We think that, in this “Google age”, customers are already taking responsibility for their own understanding of how services, firms, and markets work. Easily digestible information and knowledge is at everyone’s fingertips so we think it’s risky for firms to keep customers in the dark. Our findings suggest that firms should be proactive in educating customers and pay particular attention to educating them about how their firm operates. Firms need to let customers into the kitchen and provide a greater level of transparency. We showed that it’s impossible to disentangle the market-related education from the firm-specific, but it is perfectly reasonable for firms to craft educational programs around more firm-specific elements. Ultimately, customers that are more competent at consuming your services are better for your business.

Sign up for email alerts on the  Journal of Service Research homepage.

The Effect of Social Networking Sites’ Activities on Customers’ Well-Being

jhtd_41_1-cover

[We’re pleased to welcome Seonjeong Lee, Assistant Professor at Kent State University in Hospitality Management. Lee recently published an article in Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research entitled “The Effect of Social Networking Sites’ Activities on Customers’ Well-Being.” From Lee:]

  • What inspired you to be interested in this topic?

    With customers’ increased interests in their well-being, many hotels have opened their eyes to the concept of “well-being” to promote their service offerings, to distinguish their brands from competitors, and to attract more customers. For instance, Westin Hotels & Resorts launched a well-being movement to promote their brands through meeting customers’ well-being needs. Scholars have also responded to increased interests in well-being, by investigating employees’ and customers’ perspectives; however, it was still puzzling what made customers fulfill their psychological needs that fostered their well-being perceptions when customers engaged with SNSs to share their hotel experiences. Thus, this study explored the effectiveness of the well-being marketing to investigate SNSs’ activities that influenced customers’ psychological needs and impact of a sense of well-being on customers’ brand usage intent in the context of the hotel industry.

  • Were there findings that were surprising to you? 

    Results revealed that not all customers’ SNSs’ activities had positive effects on their autonomy and relatedness needs. When customers engaged with SNSs’ activities for self-centered motivations, such as self-enhancement and venting negative feelings, they fulfilled their autonomy and relatedness needs. However, customers did not positively fulfill their psychological needs when they posted their hotel experiences with other-centered motivations, such as concern for others. Even though one of the main motivations for customers to engage with SNSs’ activities was to add values to others (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004), customers might not be able to fulfill their psychological needs when they post comments of concern for others.

  • How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?

Based on prior well-being marketing research and self-determination theory, this study examined how SNSs’ activities influenced customers’ sense of well-being when customers shared their hotel experiences and how hotel brands could benefit from customers’ well-being perceptions in SNSs. Results suggest hotel marketers need to promote their well-being marketing in SNSs. As customers positively fulfill their psychological needs through self-centered SNSs’ activities, hotels need to provide a place where customers share their experience to resolve any dissatisfied incidents and promote themselves to enhance their self-concept. In addition, hotels need to develop proper response strategies to customers’ negative comments. Even though venting negative feelings positively fulfilled customers’ psychological needs, negative comments might negatively influence prospective customers. Hotels need to adopt proper response strategies to develop a positive relationship with customers.

Don’t forget to sign up for email alerts so you can stay up to date with the latest research.