Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Priorities of consumers for restaurant preferences: A conjoint analysis study on generation Z

Year 2022, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 6 - 6, 31.12.2022

Erkan Sezgin Beyza Uyanık

https://doi.org/10.48119/toleho.1187392

Abstract

Eating out is more essential than ever before in social life. Consumers are considering food as well as the other factors when preferring restaurants. In this particular study, Conjoint Analysis was used to determine the restaurant preferences of Generation Z who are supposed to be the largest consumer group of the future. A pre-test was addressed to 21 participants about 10 restaurant evaluation factors of the Taband scale and the first three factors that were ranked the most importance were selected for the research. Finally, the first three factors that emerged as price/quality/location, food and atmosphere including 12 variables were presented to 172 Generation Z participants with 25 experimental design cards. The data obtained were evaluated with the Conjoint Analysis method and the benefit coefficients related to the factors were defined comparatively between the groups. According to the results of the study, although there are differences in the second and third preferences and rates of the groups, the atmosphere factor has always emerged as the first preference of the Generation Z.

Keywords

Restaurant preferences consumer Conjoint Analysis Generation Z

References

  • Abubakar, M., Hamzah, E., Maher, A. &Elçi, A. (2017). University students’ perception on the fast food industry service quality in Terengganu. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 9(2), 551-560.
  • Akarçay, E. & Suğur, N. (2015). Dışarıda Yemek: Eskişehir’de Yeni Orta Sınıfın Fast-Food Yeme-İçme Örüntüleri. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi 18(1). https://doi.org/10.18490/sad.19085
  • Albayrak, A. (2014). Müşterilerin restoran seçimlerini etkileyen faktörler: İstanbul örneği. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 25(2), 190-201.
  • Ali, K. Erişlik, K. & Karadağ, Y. (2022). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Kahve Tercihlerine Etki Eden Faktörlerin Konjoint Analiziyle Değerlendirilmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 11(2), 258-268.
  • Bagozzi, R. (1994). Advanced Marketing Research. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Becker-Suttle, C., Weaver, P. & Crawford-Welch, S. (1994). A pilot study utilizing conjoint analysis in the comparison of age-based segmentation strategies in the full service restaurant market. Journal of Restaurant & Foodservice Marketing, 1(2), 71-91.
  • Biçici, F. (2008). Yiyecek içecek işletmelerinde yabancı turistlerin psikolojik fiyatlandırma uygulamalarıyla ilgili algılamaları: Britanyalı turistler üzerinde bir çalışma Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71.
  • Bugge, A. B. & Lavik, R. (2010). Eating out: A multifaceted activity in contemporary Norway. Food, Culture & Society, 13(2), 215-240. Dziadkowiec, J. & Rood, A. S. (2015). Casual-dining restaurant preferences: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 18(1), 73-91.
  • Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological bulletin, 51(4), 380.
  • Gamze, Ö. & Ceylan, R. (2016). Dondurma tüketimi tercihini etkileyen özelliklerin konjoint analizi ile belirlenmesi. Alphanumeric Journal, 4(2), 147-158.
  • Green, P. E. ve Rao, V. R. (1971). Conjoint measurement-for quantifying judgmental data. Journal of Marketing research, 8(3), 355-363.
  • Green, P. E. ve Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5(2), 103-123.
  • Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R. & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  • Handoko, I. (2021). What approach and avoidance factors drive Gen-Z consumers to buy bubble tea? An exploratory study. Young Consumers.
  • Harrington, R. J., Ottenbacher, M. C. & Kendall, K. W. (2011). Fine-dining restaurant selection: Direct and moderating effects of customer attributes. Journal of foodservice business research, 14(3), 272-289.
  • Kılıç, B., Bekar, A., & Yozukmaz, N. (2021). The New Foodie Generation: Gen Z. In Generation Z Marketing and Management in Tourism and Hospitality (pp. 223-247). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
  • Kim, Y. S., Raab, C., & Bergman, C. (2010). Restaurant selection preferences of mature tourists in Las Vegas: A pilot study. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 11(2), 157-170.
  • Klein, R. L. (1990). New technologies for listening to the voice of the customer. Second Symposium on Quality Function Deployment (pp. 197–203.), Novi, Michigan. 18–19 June 1990.
  • Knutson, B., Beck, J., & Elsworth, J. (2006). The two dimensions of restaurant selection important to the mature market. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 14(3), 35-47.
  • Koo, L. C., Tao, F. K., & Yeung, J. H. (1999). Preferential segmentation of restaurant attributes through conjoint analysis. international Journal of Contemporary Hospitality management. 11(5), 242-250.
  • Korkmaz, S. (2005). Fast food hızlı yemek pazarında rekabetçi stratejilerin etkinliği: üniversite gençliğinin tercihlerinin analizi. Gazi Üniversitesi Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi(2), 22-39.
  • Kotler, P. (1973). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of retailing, 49(4), 48-64.
  • Labrecque, J. & Ricard, L. (2001). Children's influence on family decision-making: a restaurant study. Journal of Business Research, 54(2), 173-176.
  • Lee, J. H. & Hwang, J. (2011). Luxury marketing: The influences of psychological and demographic characteristics on attitudes toward luxury restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 658-669.
  • Lucio, S. (2014). Market study using conjoint analysis for the implementation of a crowdsourcing application. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
  • Monroe, K. B. (1990). Pricing: Making profitable decisions. McGraw-Hill College.
  • Naipaul, S. (2002). Psychological pricing strategies and consumers response behavior: an empirical investigation in the restaurant industry. The Ohio State University.
  • Oğuzalp, A. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinin restoran tercihini etkileyen faktörler: konya örneği.
  • Okumus, B., Dedeoğlu, B. B., & Shi, F. (2021). Gender and generation as antecedents of food neophobia and food neophilia. Tourism Management Perspectives, 37, 100773.
  • Olsen, W. K., Warde, A., & Martens, L. (2000). Social differentiation and the market for eating out in the UK. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 19(2), 173-190.
  • Önder, N. (2022). Tüketici Z’nin DNA’sı. https://www.marketingturkiye.com.tr/haberler/tuketici-znin-dnasi/
  • Özdemir, N. (2019). Kuşaklararasılık ve kültürel değişme. Çocuk ve Medeniyet, 4(7), 125-149.
  • Ravald, A. & Grönroos, C. (1996). The value concept and relationship marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 30(2), 19-30.
  • Reynolds-Allie, K. & Fields, D. (2011). Alabama restaurant preferences and willingness to pay for local food: A choice based approach.
  • Ryu, K. & Jang, S. (2008). DINESCAPE: A scale for customers' perception of dining environments. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 11(1), 2-22.
  • Sezgin, E. (2022). Development of Taband restaurant rating scale utilizing mixed methods. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 27, 100458.
  • Spang, R. L. (2007). Restoranın icadı: Paris ve modern gastronomi kültürü (B. S. Şener, Trans.). Dost Kitabevi.
  • Szymkowiak, A., Melović, B., Dabić, M., Jeganathan, K. & Kundi, G. S. (2021). Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the internet, and technology in the education of young people. Technology in Society, 65, 101565.
  • T.C. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı. (2021). Gıda ve İçecek Sektör Raporu.
  • Tabaschnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2011). Using multivariate statistics, (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
  • The Food Standards Agency. (2019). Future Consumer: Food.
  • TÜİK. (2020). Hanehalkı Tüketim Harcaması, 2019. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Tuketim-Harcamasi-2019-33593
  • Turan Yıldız, S. (2022). Dijitalin Yerlileri: Z Kuşağının Tüketici Kimliği. http://sml.boun.edu.tr/index.php/2022/03/19/dijitalin-yerlileri-z-kusaginin-tuketici-kimligi/
  • Turanlı, M., Cengiz, D. T. & Işık, M. (2013). Konjoint analizi ile gazete tercihlerini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi. Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal, (19), 1-26.
  • Türkay, O. & Atasoy, B. (2020). Restoran Seçiminde Kişiliğin Rolü: Sakarya Örneği. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 23(2), 401-412.
  • Turley, L. W. & Milliman, R. E. (2000). Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 193-211.
  • Warde, A., ve Martens, L. (2000). Eating out: Social differentiation, consumption and pleasure. Cambridge University Press.
  • Wolff, K. & Larsen, S. (2019). Are food-neophobic tourists avoiding destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 76(C), 346-349.
  • Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 25(2), 139-153.
  • Zalatan, A. (1998). Wives’ involvement in tourism decision processes. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(4), 890-903.

Year 2022, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 6 - 6, 31.12.2022

Erkan Sezgin Beyza Uyanık

https://doi.org/10.48119/toleho.1187392

Abstract

References

  • Abubakar, M., Hamzah, E., Maher, A. &Elçi, A. (2017). University students’ perception on the fast food industry service quality in Terengganu. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 9(2), 551-560.
  • Akarçay, E. & Suğur, N. (2015). Dışarıda Yemek: Eskişehir’de Yeni Orta Sınıfın Fast-Food Yeme-İçme Örüntüleri. Sosyoloji Araştırmaları Dergisi 18(1). https://doi.org/10.18490/sad.19085
  • Albayrak, A. (2014). Müşterilerin restoran seçimlerini etkileyen faktörler: İstanbul örneği. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 25(2), 190-201.
  • Ali, K. Erişlik, K. & Karadağ, Y. (2022). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Kahve Tercihlerine Etki Eden Faktörlerin Konjoint Analiziyle Değerlendirilmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 11(2), 258-268.
  • Bagozzi, R. (1994). Advanced Marketing Research. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Becker-Suttle, C., Weaver, P. & Crawford-Welch, S. (1994). A pilot study utilizing conjoint analysis in the comparison of age-based segmentation strategies in the full service restaurant market. Journal of Restaurant & Foodservice Marketing, 1(2), 71-91.
  • Biçici, F. (2008). Yiyecek içecek işletmelerinde yabancı turistlerin psikolojik fiyatlandırma uygulamalarıyla ilgili algılamaları: Britanyalı turistler üzerinde bir çalışma Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57-71.
  • Bugge, A. B. & Lavik, R. (2010). Eating out: A multifaceted activity in contemporary Norway. Food, Culture & Society, 13(2), 215-240. Dziadkowiec, J. & Rood, A. S. (2015). Casual-dining restaurant preferences: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 18(1), 73-91.
  • Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological bulletin, 51(4), 380.
  • Gamze, Ö. & Ceylan, R. (2016). Dondurma tüketimi tercihini etkileyen özelliklerin konjoint analizi ile belirlenmesi. Alphanumeric Journal, 4(2), 147-158.
  • Green, P. E. ve Rao, V. R. (1971). Conjoint measurement-for quantifying judgmental data. Journal of Marketing research, 8(3), 355-363.
  • Green, P. E. ve Srinivasan, V. (1978). Conjoint analysis in consumer research: issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5(2), 103-123.
  • Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R. & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  • Handoko, I. (2021). What approach and avoidance factors drive Gen-Z consumers to buy bubble tea? An exploratory study. Young Consumers.
  • Harrington, R. J., Ottenbacher, M. C. & Kendall, K. W. (2011). Fine-dining restaurant selection: Direct and moderating effects of customer attributes. Journal of foodservice business research, 14(3), 272-289.
  • Kılıç, B., Bekar, A., & Yozukmaz, N. (2021). The New Foodie Generation: Gen Z. In Generation Z Marketing and Management in Tourism and Hospitality (pp. 223-247). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
  • Kim, Y. S., Raab, C., & Bergman, C. (2010). Restaurant selection preferences of mature tourists in Las Vegas: A pilot study. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 11(2), 157-170.
  • Klein, R. L. (1990). New technologies for listening to the voice of the customer. Second Symposium on Quality Function Deployment (pp. 197–203.), Novi, Michigan. 18–19 June 1990.
  • Knutson, B., Beck, J., & Elsworth, J. (2006). The two dimensions of restaurant selection important to the mature market. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 14(3), 35-47.
  • Koo, L. C., Tao, F. K., & Yeung, J. H. (1999). Preferential segmentation of restaurant attributes through conjoint analysis. international Journal of Contemporary Hospitality management. 11(5), 242-250.
  • Korkmaz, S. (2005). Fast food hızlı yemek pazarında rekabetçi stratejilerin etkinliği: üniversite gençliğinin tercihlerinin analizi. Gazi Üniversitesi Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi(2), 22-39.
  • Kotler, P. (1973). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of retailing, 49(4), 48-64.
  • Labrecque, J. & Ricard, L. (2001). Children's influence on family decision-making: a restaurant study. Journal of Business Research, 54(2), 173-176.
  • Lee, J. H. & Hwang, J. (2011). Luxury marketing: The influences of psychological and demographic characteristics on attitudes toward luxury restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(3), 658-669.
  • Lucio, S. (2014). Market study using conjoint analysis for the implementation of a crowdsourcing application. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul: İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
  • Monroe, K. B. (1990). Pricing: Making profitable decisions. McGraw-Hill College.
  • Naipaul, S. (2002). Psychological pricing strategies and consumers response behavior: an empirical investigation in the restaurant industry. The Ohio State University.
  • Oğuzalp, A. (2020). Üniversite öğrencilerinin restoran tercihini etkileyen faktörler: konya örneği.
  • Okumus, B., Dedeoğlu, B. B., & Shi, F. (2021). Gender and generation as antecedents of food neophobia and food neophilia. Tourism Management Perspectives, 37, 100773.
  • Olsen, W. K., Warde, A., & Martens, L. (2000). Social differentiation and the market for eating out in the UK. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 19(2), 173-190.
  • Önder, N. (2022). Tüketici Z’nin DNA’sı. https://www.marketingturkiye.com.tr/haberler/tuketici-znin-dnasi/
  • Özdemir, N. (2019). Kuşaklararasılık ve kültürel değişme. Çocuk ve Medeniyet, 4(7), 125-149.
  • Ravald, A. & Grönroos, C. (1996). The value concept and relationship marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 30(2), 19-30.
  • Reynolds-Allie, K. & Fields, D. (2011). Alabama restaurant preferences and willingness to pay for local food: A choice based approach.
  • Ryu, K. & Jang, S. (2008). DINESCAPE: A scale for customers' perception of dining environments. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 11(1), 2-22.
  • Sezgin, E. (2022). Development of Taband restaurant rating scale utilizing mixed methods. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 27, 100458.
  • Spang, R. L. (2007). Restoranın icadı: Paris ve modern gastronomi kültürü (B. S. Şener, Trans.). Dost Kitabevi.
  • Szymkowiak, A., Melović, B., Dabić, M., Jeganathan, K. & Kundi, G. S. (2021). Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the internet, and technology in the education of young people. Technology in Society, 65, 101565.
  • T.C. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı. (2021). Gıda ve İçecek Sektör Raporu.
  • Tabaschnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2011). Using multivariate statistics, (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
  • The Food Standards Agency. (2019). Future Consumer: Food.
  • TÜİK. (2020). Hanehalkı Tüketim Harcaması, 2019. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Hanehalki-Tuketim-Harcamasi-2019-33593
  • Turan Yıldız, S. (2022). Dijitalin Yerlileri: Z Kuşağının Tüketici Kimliği. http://sml.boun.edu.tr/index.php/2022/03/19/dijitalin-yerlileri-z-kusaginin-tuketici-kimligi/
  • Turanlı, M., Cengiz, D. T. & Işık, M. (2013). Konjoint analizi ile gazete tercihlerini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi. Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics e-Journal, (19), 1-26.
  • Türkay, O. & Atasoy, B. (2020). Restoran Seçiminde Kişiliğin Rolü: Sakarya Örneği. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 23(2), 401-412.
  • Turley, L. W. & Milliman, R. E. (2000). Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research, 49(2), 193-211.
  • Warde, A., ve Martens, L. (2000). Eating out: Social differentiation, consumption and pleasure. Cambridge University Press.
  • Wolff, K. & Larsen, S. (2019). Are food-neophobic tourists avoiding destinations. Annals of Tourism Research, 76(C), 346-349.
  • Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer value: the next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 25(2), 139-153.
  • Zalatan, A. (1998). Wives’ involvement in tourism decision processes. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(4), 890-903.
There are 51 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Tourism (Other)
Journal Section Peer-reviewed Articles
Authors

Erkan Sezgin 0000-0003-4330-0559

Beyza Uyanık 0000-0003-2550-3440

Early Pub Date September 19, 2022
Publication Date December 31, 2022
Submission Date October 11, 2022
Acceptance Date November 4, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 4 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Sezgin, E., & Uyanık, B. (2022). Priorities of consumers for restaurant preferences: A conjoint analysis study on generation Z. Journal of Tourism Leisure and Hospitality, 4(2), 6-6. https://doi.org/10.48119/toleho.1187392
 Download Cover Image

Abstracting & Indexing

TR_Dizin_logo_live-e1586763957746.png       |       5e5f5ea367664.png       |  pub-doaj-1140x400.jpg      | ici2.png |   uni_global_ulrichs_header.png   |   

Making Submissions via DergiPark

The article—prepared according to author guidelines (covering text, references, tables, and figures)—should be sent to Journal of TOLEHO via DergiPark.

Please, use the links below to access the visual descriptions of the submission steps;

Full Open Access Strategy

Journal of TOLEHO is fully sponsored by Anadolu University Faculty of Tourism. Therefore there aren't any article submission, processing or publication charges. 

There are also no charges for rejected articles, no proofreading charges, and no surcharges based on the length of an article, figures or supplementary data etc. All items (editorials, corrections, addendums, retractions, comments, etc.) are published free of charge.

Journal of TOLEHO is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the users or institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

Therefore, all articles published will be immediately and permanently free to read and download. All items has their own unique URL and PDF file.

All items published by the Journal of Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License

The licence permits others to use, reproduce, disseminate or display the article in any way, including for commercial purposes, so long as they credit the author for the original creation.

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal exclusive right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.

However, Anadolu University Press can also demand to make an additional license agreement with the corresponding author of the study after first publication, in order to publish the manuscript in full text on various other platforms (web page, databases, indexes, promotion circles and etc.).