Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Service Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, M. A.
Right arrow Articles by Beatty, S. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Positive and Negative Effects of Switching Costs on Relational Outcomes

Michael A. Jones

University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

Kristy E. Reynolds

The University of Alabama

David L. Mothersbaugh

The University of Alabama

Sharon E. Beatty

The University of Alabama

Research increasingly suggests the importance of switching costs in customer retention strategies. However, research on the downstream effects of different types of switching costs is lacking. This study seeks to address this issue by proposing and testing a framework for examining the alternative routes through which different types of switching costs (i.e., procedural, social, and lost benefits) operate in affecting relational outcomes. Consistent with our hypotheses, social switching costs, and lost benefits costs appear to bolster affective commitment, which subsequently increases positive emotions and repurchase intentions and decreases negative word of mouth. Furthermore, and again consistent with our hypotheses, procedural switching costs appear to bolster calculative commitment, which subsequently increases repurchase intentions in some instances but also increases negative emotions and negative word of mouth. Overall, this study's findings suggest that service firms should use caution when utilizing procedural switching costs as a retention strategy.

Key Words: consumer commitment • consumer relationships • services marketing • switching costs

Journal of Service Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, 335-355 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1094670507299382


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Service ResearchHome page
Y. Polo and F. J. Sese
How to Make Switching Costly: The Role of Marketing and Relationship Characteristics
Journal of Service Research, November 1, 2009; 12(2): 119 - 137.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Service ResearchHome page
U. M. Dholakia, V. Blazevic, C. Wiertz, and R. Algesheimer
Communal Service Delivery: How Customers Benefit From Participation in Firm-Hosted Virtual P3 Communities
Journal of Service Research, November 1, 2009; 12(2): 208 - 226.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Med Care Res RevHome page
E. A. Platonova, K. N. Kennedy, and R. M. Shewchuk
Understanding Patient Satisfaction, Trust, and Loyalty to Primary Care Physicians
Med Care Res Rev, December 1, 2008; 65(6): 696 - 712.
[Abstract] [PDF]