Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour
Affective dimensions of the waiting experience
Introduction
For a typical transit trip, 10–30% of travel time is spent waiting (Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2009). Research indicates that travelers are particularly sensitive to waiting times, before, after and at interchange points when using the service. Waiting for buses is a reason for disliking the bus (Stradling, Noble, Carreno, Jeffrey, & Marshall, 2004) and part of the perceived service quality (Morfoulaki, Tyrinopoulos, & Aifadopoulou, 2007). Improving waiting experiences through different interventions can thus significantly improve the perceived quality and attractiveness of public transport. Related to interventions, an important first step is to establish what type of waiting situations are most dissatisfying for the travelers.
People seem to frequently experience emotions during waiting situations. Everyday examples of affective reactions during waiting experiences relating to public transport services can easily be found: The train is late and this makes the traveler angry. While waiting for his or her connecting bus, the traveler feels bored. In each of these waiting situations, individuals experience different emotional reactions. Knowledge of these reactions is an important issue for public transport management since they have been found to influence both overall satisfaction and post purchase behaviors in other services (e.g., Bielen and Demoulin, 2007, Houston et al., 1998, Katz et al., 1991, Maute and Dubé, 1999, Zeelenberg and Pieters, 2004).
During recent years, the concept of emotions or affect has been receiving increased attention in consumer research (Simonson, Carmon, Dhar, Drolet, & Nowlis, 2001). Despite the noted importance of affect in consumption, relatively little is known about the affective dimensions of waiting experiences in general and in public transport particular. This article attempts to further our understanding of waiting, by focusing on affective dimensions and traveler satisfaction.
Over the past fifteen years, service research has produced a variety of results concerning the affective experience of waiting. A literature review shows that previous empirical research exclusively describes waiting periods as negative affective experiences (Carmon et al., 1995, Davis and Heineke, 1994, Davis and Heineke, 1998, Dubé et al., 1991, Durrande-Moreau, 1999, Rafaeli et al., 2002, Taylor, 1994). One important research area has been the impact of perceived duration on affect (see for example Houston et al., 1998, Taylor, 1994).
Turning to the affective structure of waiting experiences, studies have found empirical support for different types of negative emotions. Support has been found, for instance, for a variation in pleasantness and arousal (Rafaeli et al., 2002). Most field studies (Casado Diaz and Más Ruiz, 2002, Folkes et al., 1987, Pruyn and Smidts, 1998, Taylor, 1994) have found that waiting gives rise to the emotions of anger and uncertainty. In an experimental study, Dubé-Rioux, Schmitt, and Leclerc (1989) found that subjects were more “upset” when the delay occurred before they had ordered their meal than when it occurred in the middle of the dining experience. By asking men and women visiting a polyclinic about their affective experiences of waiting in the waiting room (Pruyn & Smidts, 1998), it was found that they experienced irritation, annoyance, boredom, and stress while waiting. There is a lack of empirical research on how waiting experiences relate to affect in public transport. However, research in commuting and stress have shown that being delayed while driving the car (e.g., waiting due to congestion) leads to feelings of frustration, irritation, and loss of control (Koslowsky, 1997, Novaco et al., 1991, Novaco et al., 1990, Schaeffer et al., 1988).
Previous research has revealed a number of affective reactions experienced while waiting in different services. However, the studies described above were all rather explorative. Previous studies have not related their findings to any particular theory of affect. A relevant theoretical framework may be the theory of affect as proposed by Russell and Barrett, 1999, Russell, 2003. According to this theory, the concept of “core affect” is suggested as a useful unit of analysis of emotion-related phenomena. Core affect is defined as elementary feelings of pleasure or displeasure and of activation or deactivation. Core affect is part of all emotion-related concepts; they are similar to what other refers to as activation (Thayer, 1989), affect (Watson & Tellegen, 1985) and mood (Morris, 1989), and what are commonly called feelings (Russell, 2003). When people attribute their core affect to an object (an employee, a service offer, etc.), they experience it as “having an emotion” such as “anxiety” or “happiness”. The concept of core affect is one way to start thinking systematically about emotion-related phenomena, as it is the “core” of all emotion loaded events. It is what makes an event “hot” or “emotional” (Russell, 2003). In summary, there is a lack of structured empirical evidence upon which to build an understanding of how waiting in public transport influences affective feelings. Thus, the affective structure across different types of waiting situations has not yet been thoroughly investigated.
It has been hypothesized that the process during which a delay occurs should influence customers’ reactions to their wait (Hui et al., 1998, Maister, 1984). Three process stages have been proposed by Dubé-Rioux et al. (1989); Customers can wait before (pre-process), during (in-process) or after a purchase (post-process). Empirical observations suggest that emotional reactions are more complex while waiting for the service than during the service delivery itself, even though the latter wait might be longer (Davis & Maggard, 1990). This hypothesis was supported by Hui et al. (1998) who found that delays tend to produce a more negative impact on consumer response during the pre-process stage than during the in-process stage. Further empirical work is required in order to investigate the effect of the process on consumers’ reactions to waiting.
Previous research (Casado Diaz and Más Ruiz, 2002, Davis and Heineke, 1998, Tom and Lucey, 1995) has shown that waiting contributes to customer dissatisfaction. The consumer’s wait for service is a negative experience that arises during many purchase situations and seems to be a decisive element, not only with regard to the customer’s level of satisfaction with the service, but also with regard to his or her loyalty to the company (Pruyn & Smidts, 1998). The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the nature and process, during which a waiting experience occurs, on overall satisfaction.
Evidence shows that emotional/affective appraisal plays an important role in satisfaction. Westbrook, 1987, Price et al., 1995, Oliver, 1993, for instance, showed that consumers experience two summary affect states during consumption; one based on positive affects and the other based on negative affects, contributing independently and significantly to customer satisfaction beyond the expectancy-disconfirmation variables. Accordingly, overall satisfaction with the service should be taken into consideration, in addition to affective reaction, as a distinct construct when explaining the impact of waiting on service evaluation.
The present study focuses on affective feelings (i.e. core affect) as a consequence of waiting experiences relating to public transport. Previous research (e.g. Russell, 1980, Russell and Barrett, 1999, Russell and Carroll, 1999) distinguishes between two dimensions upon which all affective appraisals can be plotted: unpleasantness–pleasantness (valence) and deactivation–activation (activation or arousal) (see Fig. 1). Indeed, additional broad factors can be found, for instance, dominance (Russell & Mehrabian, 1977), affiliativeness (Markus & Kitayama, 1991), and locus of causation (Russell, 1978). However, such factors have been interpreted as being related to the event rather than the realm of the core affect (Russell & Barrett, 1999) and are thus left out of this study. Evidence from judgments of similarity between emotion adjectives (Reisenzein, 1994, Russell, 1978, Russell, 1979), judgments of facially expressed emotions (Barrett, 1996, Russell and Steiger, 1982, Watson et al., 1984), and psychophysiological measurements (Cacioppo et al., 1999, Lang, 1995) suggests that two dimensions are sufficient to depict all affective appraisals. In fact, the findings of two dimensions are so ubiquitous, and current descriptive models so similar, that Russell (2003) concludes that there is consensus among emotional researchers on this topic.
The unpleasantness–pleasantness (valence) dimension reflects the degree to which a person feels happy and pleased. The deactivation–activation (activation) dimension is a combination of activity (excited versus calm) and alertness (awake versus sleepy). In this study, participants were asked to evaluate their waiting experiences on a set of affective appraisals drawing upon this theory.
Despite a growing body of research directed toward understanding affective reactions during waiting situations, a number of issues remain unresolved. One shortcoming of previous research is its reliance on emotion scales applicable only to the specific context of the study. Furthermore, these studies have not involved systematic manipulations of waiting situations. In summary, there is a lack of structured empirical evidence on which to build an understanding of how waiting during services influences different feelings.
One conclusion, based on previous research, is that customers experience affective feelings while waiting. However, the affective structure across different waiting situations has not been investigated. Several factors can be used to define different types of wait (see, for instance, Taylor, 1994). This research focuses on two types of wait: the nature (positive, negative, or neutral) of the wait and the point in time at which the wait is initiated (pre-process and in-process). In summary, an initial hypothesis (H1) to be tested is that waiting experiences will vary in valence and activation due to the nature of the wait. A second hypothesis (H2) is that waiting will vary in valence and activation due to the point in time at which the wait is initiated (process). A third hypothesis (H3) is that overall satisfaction with the public transport system will vary due to the nature of the wait. A final hypothesis (H4) tested is that overall satisfaction with the public transport service will vary due to the process of the wait.
In summary, this study will contribute to understanding how affective reactions are associated with different waiting experiences in public transport, and provide insights into the structure of these affective reactions.
Section snippets
Methods
In a 2 × 3 factorial within-subjects design, participants read six scenarios and rated their affective reactions and satisfaction in accordance with each description. The ANOVAs were performed with process (pre-process, in-process) and nature (positive, negative, neutral) as independent variables and affect as dependent variable.
Affective reactions
Each adjective rating scale may be used for fine-grained assessments of core affect. However, it is frequently desirable to form indices. One method of obtaining indices of valence and activation is to total the rating using weights corresponding to the angles that the adjective-scale ratings form relative to a reference vector (Västfjäll et al., 2002). Valence adjective ratings are assumed to correlate perfectly with valence and are thus given the weight 1 (and the weight 0 in the activation
Discussion
The main purpose of this study was to examine affective reactions relating to waiting experiences in public transport. An important finding is that participants reported that they would feel both positive and negative affective reactions when waiting, as the difference between positive waiting scenarios, negative waiting scenarios, and neutral scenarios bore witness to.
Furthermore, the different types of waiting scenarios appeared to consistently produce reports of changes in activation and
Acknowledgement
I thank Henrik Reinikka and Annika Råbom for collecting all the data.
References (52)
- et al.
An analysis of customer satisfaction with waiting times in a two-stage service process
Journal of Operations Management
(1990) The structure of affective reactions to critical incidents
Journal of Economic Psychology
(2004)- et al.
Effects of waiting on the satisfaction with the service: Beyond objective time measures
International Journal of Research in Marketing
(1998) - et al.
Evidence for a three-factor theory of emotions
Journal of Research in Personality
(1977) - et al.
The structure in persons’ implicit taxonomy of emotions
Journal of Research in Personality
(1982) - et al.
Beyond valence in customer dissatisfaction: A review and new findings on behavioral responses to regret and disappointment in failed services
Journal of Business Research
(2004) Hedonic tone, perceived arousal, and item desirability: Three components of self-reported mood
Cognition and Emotion
(1996)- et al.
Waiting time influence on the satisfaction–loyalty relationship in services
Managing Service Quality
(2007) - et al.
The affect system has parallel and integrative processing components: Form follows function
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
(1999) - et al.
A psychological perspective on service segmentation models: the significance of accounting for consumers’ perceptions of waiting and service
Management Science
(1995)
The consumer’s reaction to delays in service
International Journal of Service Industry Management
Understanding the roles of the customer and the operation for better queue management
International Journal of Operations and Production Management
How disconfirmation, perception and actual waiting times impact customer satisfaction
International Journal of Service Industry Management
Consumers’ affective response to delays at different phases of a service delivery
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Consumers’ reactions to waiting: When delays affects the perception of service quality
Advances in Consumer Research
Waiting for service: Ten years of empirical research
International Journal of Service Industry Management
A field study of causal inferences and consumer reaction: The view from the airport
Journal of Consumer Research
The relationship between waiting in a service queue and evaluations of service quality: A field theory perspective
Psychology and Marketing
The effect of delay type and service stage on consumers’ reactions to waiting
Journal of Consumer Research
Prescription for the waiting-in-line blues: Entertain, enlighten, and engage
Sloan Management Review
Commuting stress: Problems of definition and variable identification
Applied Psychology: An International Review
The emotion probe: Studies of motivation and attention
American Psychologist
The psychology of waiting lines
Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation
Psychological Review
Patterns of emotional responses and behavioural consequences of dissatisfaction
Journal of Applied Psychology
Estimation of satisfied customers in public transport systems: A new methodological approach
Journal of the Transportation Research Forum
Cited by (45)
A people-environment framework in evaluating transport stress among rail commuters
2023, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and EnvironmentAn international time equivalency of the pure transfer penalty in urban transit trips: Closing the gap
2022, Transport PolicyCitation Excerpt :The fact of being used or not to transfer is therefore quite important in a city with low transferring experience as Vitoria-Gasteiz. These coincides with many studies that support that regular transit users penalize less the walking and waiting phases of the transfer because the familiarity with the transit system decreases uncertainty in their travel (Woyciechowicz and Shliselberg, 2005; Friman, 2010; Jensen, 2012). The availability of real-time information in Vitoria-Gasteiz is only significant for women making a transfer and is comparable to a reduction of 4.5 min of the total trip time.
Staying on or getting off the sidewalk? Testing the Mehrabian-Russell Model on pedestrian behavior
2021, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and BehaviourThe influence of waiting time on the value of headway time on a ferry service in Norway
2020, Research in Transportation EconomicsTackling single-occupancy vehicles to reduce carbon emissions: Actionable model of drivers’ implementation intention to try public buses
2020, Journal of Cleaner ProductionCitation Excerpt :On the contrary, the drivers tend to perceive a long waiting time for PT as anxiety. Hence, the long waiting time tends to elicit a negative emotion and causes worry (Friman, 2010). In Nordfjæern et al. (2014), worry is found to be weakly related to drivers’ intention and implementation intention to consider an alternative mode of transport.