【摘要】 近年来,旅游景区频繁发生服务失误事件,如何进行有效的服务补救,需要引起学术界以及实践界更多的关注。为了明晰旅游景区服务补救问题,文章从情绪感染理论的视角出发,对旅游服务补救的策略进行精细化研究。文章采用两个实验对4个研究假设进行实证检验,研究结果表明:1)旅游景区采取补救措施能够显著提高游客的正面响应;2)游客情绪在服务补救与游客正面响应间起着完全中介作用;3)与功利补救相比,象征补救对游客情绪的影响更显著;4)补救方式与失误类型存在部分交互作用,过程失误时象征补救的效果会更好,结果失误时象征补救与功利补救无显著差别。最后,提出了旅游景区补救的具体实践措施以及未来研究方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 The emergence of experience economy makes tourism scholars and practitioner pay more and more attention to the service quality. As a critical factor of tourism experience quality, tourism service quality plays an important role in both the service and recovery stages. Just like other service,tourism service is heterogeneous and invisible. What’s more, since the tourism consumption mainly happens in the unusual environment, tourism service failure occurs more frequently than other types of service. In the previous tourism service failure and recovery studies, researchers have focused on tourism enterprises, such as hotels and airlines. Surprisingly, scenic areas have received little attention,given that the service failures in scenic areas is second most reported by consumers. Tourists in scenic areas emphasize emotional experience more than utilitarian experience. Hence, it is of the great importance to study how to effectively improve tourist satisfaction. A good tourism service recovery can improve tourist satisfaction. More importantly, it helps build long-term relationship with customers.Previously, scholars have done research on tourist satisfaction considering the mode of cognition. Little research has investigated the mode of emotion. This paper refers to the emotional contagion theory, and attempts to clarify the recovery strategies of scenic areas. This paper adopted scenario experiment, and used 2 experiments to test 4 hypotheses. Results show that:(1) recovery actions from scenic areas significantly improve tourist attitude;(2) The effect of recovery actions on tourist attitude is mediated by tourists. emotions;(3) compared with utilitarian recovery, symbolic recovery has a more positive impact on tourist emotions;(4) there is partial interaction between recovery methods and failure types.Specifically, symbolic recovery is more effective in process failure; however, there is no significant difference between symbolic recovery and utilitarian recovery in outcome failure. Different from the previous research, which claims symbolic recovery to be always effective, the current study contribute to a better understanding of symbolic and utilitarian recovery strategies by c onsidering the failure types. Based on the discussion above, we propose that scenic areas should not overlook the service failure, but to plan recovery strategy wisely. In addition, service staffs of scenic areas ought to take recovery strategies according to failure types rather than compensation. The limitations and future research directions were discussed.更多还原