Measuring expectations: forecast vs. ideal expectations. Does it really matter?

Consumer’s participation in service delivery is so central to cognition that it affects consumer’s quality evaluations. The study presented in this paper investigates the ways that visitor expectations change as a result of first hand experience with a service in the context of a major art exhibition. The research design allowed for two operational definitions of expectations, namely forecast and ideal expectations, in order to investigate differences between respondents’ pre and post experiences with a service. A total of 550 respondent visitors were interviewed during a major art exhibition, using two questionnaires delivered to two sub samples of respondents. The primary questionnaire was designed to capture recalled expectations after visitation while the parallel questionnaire captured forecast expectations prior to visitation and perceptions in the post experience phase. The findings suggest that forecast expectations were different to ideal expectations in both qualitative and quantitative ways and that these differences had important implications for perceptions of service quality. These differences can be explained, at least in part, by the way that expectations are formed and by the way that expectations are shaped by the actual visitation experience. For market researchers, the question of when and how to measure expectations has important implications for research design.

What are we measuring when we evaluate journals?

This article undertakes two studies to examine issues related to journal rankings. Study 1 examines the consistency between journal rankings reported in past studies. It finds that while there is consistency when comparing these studies, this consistency does not always occur outside the top-ranked journals. Study 2 explores whether individuals believe that the weighting of four underlying evaluative criteria—that is, prestige, contribution to theory, contribution to practice, and contribution to teaching—vary, based on (1) whose criteria are used (individual or individuals’ perception of their institutions weighting), (2) the geographic region in which the individuals teach (North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific), and (3) whether or not an individual works at an institution offering a Ph.D./D.B.A. The results suggest that some differences in criteria weighting exist. Implications are discussed, with it being suggested that it may not be possible to develop a universally applicable set of journal rankings.

Audience experience : measuring quality in the performing arts

Traditional measures of quality in the performing arts include critical reviews, awards, attendance data, the reputation of the director, company or lead performers, and attributions of success such as festival participation or sponsorship and grants. However, the recent literature on audience values, quest for authenticity and the personal experience suggests the need for empirical research into the capacity of the audience experience as an appropriate and important measure of quality in the performing arts. The authors use primary research with performing arts audiences to explore notions of quality, audience risk and audience experience to redefine the quality-measurement paradigm.