Professional Documents
Culture Documents
I.
INTRODUCTION
126
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
II.
LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Nonverbal Communication
Reference [24] defined nonverbal communication as a
process whereby people, through the intentional or
unintentional behaviour of normative actions and expectations,
other than words themselves, express experiences, feelings, and
attitudes in order to relate to and control themselves, others,
and their environments (p. 8). Although [25] also agreed that
nonverbal communication refers to communication by using
methods other than words, the authors highlighted that
nonverbal communication is a rather complex phenomena,
which at times cannot be completely separated from verbal
communication, but is instead intertwined with each other.
Several authors have organized nonverbal communication into
different categories. Reference [26] categorized nonverbal
communication into physical appearance, gesture and
movement, face and eye behaviour, vocal behaviour, space,
touch, environment and time, while [18] categorized nonverbal
behaviours into proxemics, kinesics, oculesics and vocalic.
Based on the study by [3], nonverbal communication is divided
into kinesics such as body movements, body orientation, eye
contact, nodding, hand shaking, and smiling; proxemics, such
as the distance and relative posture between the speaker and the
listener during a communication process; paralanguage such as
vocal qualities or verbal cues; and physical appearance such as
physical attractiveness and appropriate clothing.
B. Emotional Contagion
In recent years, there has been an increasing amount of
literature on emotional contagion [10, 20, 27, 28, 29]. Although
there is a lack of agreement in the literature on an exact
definition for emotion, the term is usually explained with
reference to a list of feelings such as anger, disgust, fear, joy,
sadness, and surprise [30]. Meanwhile, emotional contagion is
explained as a process in which a person or group influences
the emotions or behaviour of another person or group through
the conscious or unconscious induction of emotion states and
behavioural attitudes [31]. Consistent with this definition, [32]
explained emotional contagion as the tendency to
automatically
mimic
and
synchronize
expressions,
vocalizations, postures, and movements with those of another
persons, and consequently, to converge emotionally (pp. 96).
Overall, this theory is useful to aid the understanding of various
interpersonal communication settings where face-to-face
interactions are involved. Relating back to this study, the
emotional contagion theory is particularly valuable to explain
emotional response of hotel guest towards the display of
nonverbal behaviours by hotel employees.
C. Relationship between Nonverbal Communication and
Emotional Respose
The experiment by [33] found that both positive and
negative emotional responses can be unknowingly elicited
when exposed to different facial expressions, indicating that
emotional communication can occur unconsciously during
face-to-face interaction. Extending from the previous
experiment, [34] reported that mimicry was detected for the
expression of anger, sadness, disgust, and happiness. Moreover,
127
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
H2.
Proxemics
Paralanguage
Negative
emotion
Physical
appearance
Figure I: A proposed conceptual framework.
Source: Adapted from [19].
128
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
Nonverbal communication
The employee has a nice, friendly attitude in serving customers.
The employee uses proper eye contact.
The employee nods his/ her head properly.
The employee shakes his/ her hand properly.
The employee serves with polite smiles.
The employee serves me from a proper distance.
The employee keeps appropriate distance while serving me.
The employee has appropriate physical touch with me when
providing services.
The employee converses in a proper tone.
The employee converses clearly.
The employee converses in a gentle tone.
The employee converses in a proper speed.
The employees voice is not annoyingly loud.
The employee has an attractive look.
The employee is properly dressed.
The employee has an arranged hairstyle.
Emotional response
This hotel makes me feel happy.
This hotel makes me feel pleased.
This hotel makes me feel entertained.
This hotel makes me feel delighted.
This hotel makes me feel unhappy.
This hotel makes me feel annoyed.
This hotel makes me feel bored.
This hotel makes me feel disappointed.
RESULTS
A. Profile of Respondents
The demographic characteristics of the respondents are
presented in Table III. Respondents consisted of 43.8% male
and 56.2% female. With regards to age, 39.1% of the
respondents were 20 to 29 years old, 32.8% were 30 to 39
years old, 22.7% were 40 to 49 years old, and 5.5% were 50
years old or older. The majority of the respondents (85.9%)
were locals. As for the hotel stayed, 69.5% of the respondents
stayed in Tune Hotel and 30.5% stayed in De Galleria Hotel.
Lastly, in terms of the duration of stay at respective hotels,
58.6% stayed for less than three days, 32.8% stayed for three to
seven days, and 8.6% stayed for more than 7 days.
TABLE III.
Characteristics
Gender
Age
Nationality
Hotel stayed
Duration of stay
Frequency
56
72
50
42
29
7
110
18
89
39
75
42
11
Percentage
43.8
56.2
39.1
32.8
22.7
5.5
85.9
14.1
69.5
30.5
58.6
32.8
8.6
B. Factor Analysis
Factor analysis was conducted to confirm that distinct
dimensions existed for each factor. In this study, the total
number of items to measure all of the variables was 24. Using
the guideline by [43], the minimum requirement for the sample
size was 120 respondents (five times 24 items). Therefore, the
current sample size of 128 respondents was acceptable and
appropriate for factor analysis. Six assumptions recommended
by [43] need to be met to ensure the appropriateness of factor
analysis. First, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling
adequacy (KMO) values must exceed .50. Second, the result of
Barletts test of sphericity should be at least significant at .05.
Third, anti-image correlation matrix of items should be at least
above .50. Fourth, communalities of the variables must be
greater than .50. Fifth, the factor loadings of .50 or above for
each item are considered practical and statistically significant
129
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
TABLE IV.
Items
Factor 1: Body and vocal behaviour
The employee has a nice, friendly attitude in
serving customers.
The employee converses in a gentle tone.
The employee uses proper eye contact.
The employee converses in a proper speed.
The employee converses clearly.
The employee serves with polite smiles.
The employee converses in a proper tone.
The employees voice is not annoyingly loud.
The employee nods his/ her head properly.
Factor 2: Physical appearance
The employee is properly dressed.
The employee has an arranged hairstyle.
The employee has an attractive look.
Factor 3: Touching behaviour
The employee shakes his/ her hand properly.
The employee has appropriate physical touch
with me when providing services.
Eigenvalue
% of variance
Total variance explained
Measure of sampling adequacy
Bartlette test of sphericity
Significant
TABLE V.
F1
F2
F3
.848
.831
.818
.813
.807
.759
.756
.728
.632
.901
.886
.854
.860
.819
8.21
41.44
78.47
.912
1575
.000
1.67
22.14
1.11
14.89
Items
Factor 1: Positive emotion
This hotel makes me feel pleased.
This hotel makes me feel entertained.
This hotel makes me feel delighted.
This hotel makes me feel happy.
Factor 2: Negative emotion
This hotel makes me feel disappointed.
This hotel makes me feel annoyed.
This hotel makes me feel bored.
This hotel makes me feel unhappy.
Eigenvalue
% of variance
Total variance explained
Measure of sampling adequacy
Bartlette test of sphericity
Significant
F1
F2
.936
.924
.913
.904
4.71
44.09
85.22
.811
1040
.000
.941
.891
.890
.826
2.11
41.14
C. Reliability Analysis
In general, an alpha value close to 1.0 indicates high
internal consistency reliability, an alpha value less than 0.6 is
considered to be poor, valued of 0.7 are considered acceptable,
and values above 0.8 are deemed to be good [45]. All of the
Cronbachs alpha values revealed significantly over 0.8,
indicating good reliability (Table VI).
TABLE VI.
Construct
Variables
No. of items
Nonverbal
communication
Cronbachs
Alpha
.95
3
2
4
4
.93
.82
.95
.93
Emotional
response
130
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
Positive
emotion
Physical
appearance
Negative
emotion
Touching
behaviour
Figure II: Modification of conceptual framework.
TABLE VII.
Hypotheses
The perception of hotel employees nonverbal communication is
H1.
positively related to the positive emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees body and vocal
H1a.
behaviour is positively related to the positive emotions of
hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees physical appearance
H1b.
is positively related to the positive emotions of hotel
guests.
The perception of hotel employees touching behaviour is
H1c.
positively related to the positive emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees nonverbal communication is
H2.
negatively related to the negative emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees body and vocal
H2a.
behaviour is negatively related to the negative emotions
of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees physical appearance
H2b.
is negatively related to the negative emotions of hotel
guests.
The perception of hotel employees touching behaviour is
H2c.
negatively related to the negative emotions of hotel
guests.
E. Descriptive Statistics
The mean and standard deviation values for all of the study
variables are presented in Table VIII. The mean scores for each
of the three components of nonverbal communication varied
from 4.50 to 5.55. This indicates that the respondents had a
moderate to high perception of nonverbal communications
displayed by hotel employees. The standard deviation for these
components ranged from 0.83 to 1.16. With regards to
emotional response, positive emotion had a higher mean value
of 4.72, with a standard deviation of 1.33. In comparison,
negative emotion had a lower mean value of 2.81, with a
standard deviation of 1.46.
TABLE VIII.
Variables
Body and vocal behaviour
Physical appearance
Touching behaviour
Positive emotion
Negative emotion
Mean
5.55
4.71
4.50
4.72
2.81
Standard deviation
0.83
1.16
1.01
1.33
1.46
F. Correlation Analysis
Pearson correlation coefficients were computed in order to
examine the strength and the direction of the relationship
between all constructs in the study. In general, correlation
value can be interpreted as: small/ weak when the correlation
value is r = -.10 to -.29 or r = .10 to. 29, medium/ moderate
when the value is r = -.3 to r = -.49 or r = .3 to r = .49, large/
strong when the value is r = -.50 to -1.00 or r = .50 to 1.00 [46].
All of the nonverbal communication dimension variables were
found to be positively correlated with positive emotion (Table
IX). Specifically, both body and vocal behaviour (r = .636, p <
0.01) and physical appearance (r = .637, p < 0.01) were
strongly and significantly correlated with positive emotion.
Meanwhile, touching behaviour (r = .460, p < 0.01) was found
to be moderately and positively associated with positive
emotion.
Only body and vocal behaviour and physical appearance
were found to be negatively correlated with negative emotion.
In particular, body and vocal behaviour (r = -.307, p < 0.01)
was moderately and negatively associated with negative
emotion whereas physical appearance (r = -.205, p < 0.05) was
weakly and negatively correlated to negative emotion.
Touching behaviour, however, has found no correlation with
negative emotion. Meanwhile, the correlation between
nonverbal communication variables and negative emotion are
significant and negative except for touching behaviour. It is
noteworthy that the correlations between some of the
independent variables, such as between physical appearance
and body and vocal behaviour (r = .55); and between touching
behaviour and vocal behaviour (r = .58) are strong, suggesting
that the dimensions of nonverbal communication may not be
that distinct. However, the results of the correlation coefficient
analysis indicated that none of the correlation coefficient values
of the studied variables is above 0.8. Hence, multicollinearity
does not exist in this study [43].
TABLE IX.
Variables
Body and
1
vocal
behaviour
Physical
2
appearance
Touching
3
behaviour
Positive
4
emotion
Negative
5
emotion
1
1
.553**
.578**
.422**
.636**
.637**
.460**
-.307**
-.205*
-.012
-.383**
131
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
Standardized coefficient
Beta ()
.371**
.399**
.077
Note: Significant levels: ** p < 0.01
Standardized coefficient
Beta ()
-.409**
-.090
.263*
Note: Significant levels: ** p < 0.01
TABLE XII.
Statement of Hypothesis
The perception of hotel employees nonverbal
H1.
communication is positively related to
the positive emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees body
H1a.
and vocal behaviour is positively related
to the positive emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees
H1b.
physical appearance is positively related to
the positive emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees
H1c.
touching behaviour is positively related to
the positive emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees nonverbal
H2.
communication is negatively related to
the negative emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees body
H2a.
and vocal behaviour is negatively related
to the negative emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees
H2b.
physical appearance is negatively related
to the negative emotions of hotel guests.
The perception of hotel employees
H2c.
touching behaviour is negatively related to
the negative emotions of hotel guests.
V.
Results
Partially
supported
Supported
Supported
Rejected
Partially
supported
Supported
Rejected
Rejected
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
133
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
134
IRACST- International Journal of Research in Management & Technology (IJRMT), ISSN: 2249-9563
Vol. 3, No.4, August 2013
[11] Barger, P. B. and Grandey, A. A. (2006). Service with a smile and
encounter satisfaction: Emotional contagion and appraisal mechanisms.
The Academy of Management Journal, 49(6), 1229-1238.
[12] Hennig-Thurau, T., Groth, M., Paul, M. and Gremler, D. D. (2006). Are
all smiles created equal? How emotional contagion and emotional labor
affect service relationships. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 58-73.
[13] Sderlund, M. and Rosengren, S. (2008). Revisiting the smiling service
worker and customer satisfaction. International Journal of Service
Industry Management, 19(5), 552-574.
[14] Sderlund, M. and Rosengren, S. (2010). The happy versus unhappy
service worker in the service encounter: Assessing the impact on
customer satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Customer Services, 17,
161-169.
[15] Sderlund, M. and Julander, C.-R. (2009). Physical attractiveness of the
service worker in the moment of truth and its effect on customer
satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 216-226.
[16] Kim, J.-E., Ju, H. W., and Johnson, K. K. P. (2009). Sales associates
appearance: Links to consumers emotions, store image, and purchases.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 407-413.
[17] Koernig, S. K. and Page, A. L. (2002). What if your dentist looked like
Tom Cruise? Applying the match-up hypothesis to a service encounter.
Psychology and Marketing, 19(1), 91-110.
[18] Gabott, M. and Hogg, G. (2000). An empirical investigation of the
impact of non-verbal communication on service evaluation. European
Journal of Marketing, 34(3/4), 384-398.
[19] Jung, H. S. and Yoon, H. H. (2011). The effects of nonverbal
communication of employees in the family restaurant upon customers
emotional responses and customer satisfaction. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 30, 542-550.
[20] Verbeke, W. (1997). Individual differences in emotional contagion of
sales person: Its effect on performance and burnout. Psychology and
Marketing, 14(6), 617-636.
[21] Sabah Economic Development and Investment Authority. (2011). Build
High-Margin Services Sector in Tourism and Logistics,
http://www.sedia.com.my/SDC_Blueprint/Blueprint_Eng/2.BuildHighMarginServicesSectorinTourismandLogistics.pdf
Retrieved 30 April 2012.
[22] Sabah Tourism Board. (2012). Sabah: Visitors Arrival by Nationality,
http://www.sabahtourism.com/corporate/statistics/Jan-Dec2011.html
Retrieved 12 March 2012.
[23] Rodrguez-Daz, M. and Espino-Rodrguez, T. F. (2006). Developing
relational capabilities in hotels. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 18(1), 25-40.
[24] Hickson III, M. L. and Stacks, D. W. (1993). Nonverbal communication
studies and applications (3rd edition). Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown
Communications.
[25] Knapp, M. L. and Hall, J. A. (2006). Nonverbal communication in
human interaction (6th edition). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
[26] Richmond, V. P. and McCroskey, J. C. (2004). Nonverbal behavior in
interpersonal relations (5th edition). Boston: Pearson Education.
[27] Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its
influence on group behaviour. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4),
644-675.
[28] Hashim, J., Wok, S. and Ghazali, R. (2008). Organizational behaviour
associated with emotional contagion among direct selling members.
Direct Marketing: An International Journal, 2(3), 144-158.
[29] Lundqvist, L.-O. (2008). The relationship between the Biosocial Model
of Personality and susceptibility to emotional contagion: A structural
equation modelling approach. Personality and Individual Differences,
45, 89-95.
[30] Cabanac, M. (2002). What is emotion? Behavioural Processes, 60, 6983.
[31] Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its
influence on group behaviour. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4),
644-675.
[32] Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T. and Rapson, R. L. (1993). Emotional
contagion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2(3), 96-99.
135