Mary Jo Bitner

Servicescapes: The Impact ofPhysical Surroundings on

Customers and EmployeesA typology of service organizations is presented and a conceptual framework is advanced for exploringthe innpact of physical surroundings on the behaviors of both customers and employees. The ability ofthe physical surroundings to facilitate achievement of organizational as well as marketing goals is ex-plored. Literature from diverse disciplines provides theoretical grounding for the framework, which servesas a base for focused propositions. By examining the multiple strategic roles that physical surroundingscan exert in service organizations, the author highlights key managerial and research implications.

THE effect of atmospherics, or physical design anddecor elements, on consumers and workers is rec-

ognized by managers and mentioned in virtually allmarketing, retailing, and organizational behavior texts.Yet, particularly in marketing, there is a surprisinglack of empirical research or theoretically basedframeworks addressing the role of physical surround-ings in consumption settings. Managers continuallyplan, build, change, and control an organization'sphysical surroundings, but frequently the impact of aspecific design or design change on ultimate users ofthe facility is not fully understood.

The ability of the physical environment to influ-ence behaviors and to create an image is particularlyapparent for service businesses such as hotels, restau-rants, professional offices, banks, retail stores, andhospitals (Baker 1987; Bitner 1986; Booms and Bitner1982; Kotler 1973; Shostack 1977; Upah and Fulton1985; Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Berry 1985). Be-

Mary Jo Bitner is Assistant Professor of Mariceting, Arizona State Uni-versity. The author acknowledges the support of the First interstate Centerfor Services iVIarketing, Arizona State University, in conducting the re-search. The extensive assistance of Michael Hutt and the comments ofLawrence Crosby, Stephen Brown, Beth Walker, and Susan Kleine aregratefully acknowledged, as are the helpful suggestions of three anon-ymous JM reviewers.

cause the service generally is produced and consumedsimultaneously, the consumer is "in the factory," oftenexperiencing the total service within the firm's phys-ical facility. The factory (or the place where the ser-vice is produced) cannot be hidden and may in facthave a strong impact on customers' perceptions of theservice experience. Even before purchase, consumerscommonly look for cues about the firm's capabilitiesand quality (Berry and Clark 1986; Shostack 1977).The physical environment is rich in such cues (Ra-poport 1982) and may be very influential in com-municating the firm's image and purpose to its cus-tomers. Research suggests that the physical setting mayalso influence the customer's ultimate satisfaction withthe service (Bitner 1990; Harrell, Hutt, and Anderson1980).

Interestingly, in service organizations the samephysical setting that communicates with and influ-ences customers may affect employees of the firm(Baker, Berry, and Parasuraman 1988). Research inorganizational behavior suggests that the physical set-ting can influence employee satisfaction, productiv-ity, and motivation (e.g., Becker 1981; Davis 1984;Steele 1986; Sundstrom and Altman 1989; Sundstromand Sundstrom 1986; Wineman 1986). The customeris left out of that research stream, however, just as

Journal of MarketingVol. 56 (April 1992), 57-71 Servicescapes / 57

the employee typically is ignored in the limited at-mospherics research in marketing (e.g., Donovan andRossiter 1982; Kotier 1973; Milliman 1982, 1986).For example, in the Milliman experiments, music tempowas varied and the effect on a variety of consumerbehaviors was measured; however, the effects on em-ployee satisfaction and productivity were not ex-plored. Because services generally are purchased andconsumed simultaneously, and typically require directhuman contact, customers and employees interact witheach other within the organization's physical facility.Ideally, therefore, the organization's environmentshould support the needs and preferences of both ser-vice employees and customers simultaneously.

The purpose of this article to take a first step to-ward integrating theories and empirical findings fromdiverse disciplines into a framework that describes howthe built environment (i.e., the manmade, physicalsurroundings as opposed to the natural or social en-vironment), or what is referred to here as the "ser-vicescape," affects both consumers and employees inservice organizations. First, a typology of service or-ganizations is presented that illuminates importantvariations in form and usage of the servicescape. Next,a conceptual framework is offered for explaining en-vironment-user relationships in service organizations,and specific research propositions are advanced. Theframework is anchored in the environmental psychol-ogy research tradition and also draws together rele-vant literature in marketing, organizational behavior,human factors/ergonomics, and architecture. Finally,the linkages between the service organization typol-ogy and the framework are examined, and key man-agerial and research implications are discussed.

A Typology of Servicescapçs"The way the physical setting is created in organi-zations has barely been tapped as a tangible organi-zational resource" (Becker 1981, p. 130). Manage-ment of the physical setting typically is viewed astangential in comparison with other organizationalvariables that can motivate employees, such as payscales, promotions, benefits, and supervisory rela-tionships. Similarly, on the consumer side, variablessuch as pricing, advertising, added features, and spe-cial promotions are given much more attention thanthe physical setting as ways in which customers canbe attracted to and/or satisfied by a firm's services.A clear implication of the model presented here is thatthe physical setting can aid or hinder the accomplish-ment of both intemal organizational goals and exter-nal marketing goals.

As is true of any organizational or marketing vari-able, the importance of physical setting depends onthe nature of the job and the nature of the consump-

tion experience. The position advanced here is that thephysical surroundings are, in general, more importantin service settings because customers as well as em-ployees often experience the firm's facility. However,not all service firms and industries are alike (Lovelock1983; Schmenner 1986), nor do they face the samestrategic issues in planning and designing their ser-vicescapes. Figure 1 is a typology categorizing ser-vice organizations on two dimensions that capture im-portant differences in the management of theservicescape. Firms that share a cell within the matrixface similar issues related to the design of their phys-ical spaces.

The vertical dimension relates to who is perform-ing actions within the servicescape—the customer, orthe employee, or both. One extreme is represented bythe "self-service" organization in which few if anyemployees are present and the level of customer ac-tivity is high. At the other extreme is the "remote ser-vice" where there is little or no customer involvementin the servicescape and sometimes even little em-ployee involvement, such as in fully automated voice-messaging services. Note from Figure 1 that "inter-personal services" are positioned between the two ex-tremes. In those organizations, both customers andemployees are present and performing actions withinthe servicescape. The relative level of involvement ofcustomers and employees determines whose needsshould be consulted in the design of the environment.In interpersonal servicescapes, special considerationmust be given to the effects of the physical environ-ment on the nature and quality of the social interactionbetween and among customers and employees.

Whether customers, employees, or both are pres-ent within the servicescape also determines the typesof objectives a firm might expect to accomplish throughuse of its physical environment. In self-service set-tings, the creative use of physical design could sup-port particular positioning and segmentation strategiesand enhance specific marketing objectives, such ascustomer satisfaction and attraction. At the other ex-treme, for remote services, organizational objectivessuch as employee satisfaction, motivation, and oper-ational efficiency could be the primary goals in phys-ical setting design, because few customers would eversee or experience the firm's physical setting. For in-terpersonal services, both organizational and market-ing objectives could potentially be targeted throughcareful design of the servicescape. Even marketinggoals such as relationship building (Crosby, Evans,and Cowles 1990) could be infiuenced by the designof the physical setting.

The horizontal dimension of Figure 1 captures thecomplexity of the servicescape. Some service envi-ronments are very simple, with few elements, fewspaces, and few forms. They are termed "lean" en-

58 / Journal of Marketing, April 1992

FIGURE 1Typology of Service Organizations Based on Variations in Form and Usage of the Servicescape

Types of Service Organizations Based onWho Performs Actions Within the

Servicescape

Self-service (customer only)

Interpersonal services (both customer andemployee)

Remote service (employee only)

Physical Complexity of the Servicescape

Elaborate

Golf LandSurf 'n Splash

HotelsRestaurantsHealth clinicHospitalBankAirlineSchoolTelephone companyInsurance companyUtilityMany professional services

Lean

ATMTicketronPost office kioskMovie theaterExpress mail dropoffDry cleanerHot dog standHair salon

Telephone mail order deskAutomated voice-messaging-based

services

vironments. Ticketron outlets and Federal Expressdropoff kiosks would qualify as lean environments, asboth provide service from one simple structure. Forlean servicescapes, design decisions are relativelystraightforward, especially in self-service or remoteservice situations in which there is no interaction be-tween customers and employees. Other servicescapesare very complicated, with many elements and manyforms. They are termed "elaborate" environments. Anexample is a hospital with its many floors, rooms, so-phisticated equipment, and complex variability infunctions performed within the physical facility. In suchan elaborate environment, the full range of marketingand organizational objectives theoretically can be ap-proached through careful management of the service-scape. For example, a patient's hospital room can bedesigned to enhance patient comfort and satisfactionwhile simultaneously facilitating employee productiv-ity. Figure 1 suggests that firms such as hospitals thatare positioned in the elaborate interpersonal servicecell face the most complex servicescape decisions.

by both customers and employees and that both groupsmay respond cognitively, emotionally, and physiolog-ically to the environment. Those internal responses tothe environment influence the behavior of individualcustomers and employees in the servicescape and af-fect social interactions between and among customersand employees. Though the model shares similaritieswith other models (e.g., Mehrabian and Russell 1974),it is unique in its breadth of synthesis (for example,Mehrabian and Russell focus on emotional responsesonly), the incorporation of both customers and em-ployees and their interactions, and its application tocommercial settings. In the following sections, eachof the components of the framework is defined anddeveloped. Attention centers first on the behaviors thatmay be influenced by the servicescape and then onthe internal responses and the controllable dimensionsthat constitute the servicescape. Propositions based onthe framework are highlighted, and implications forfirms within specific cells of the service typology arediscussed.

Conceptual FrameworkThough the typology in Figure 1 highlights the rela-tive complexity of environmental decisions across dif-ferent types of service organizations, it does not ex-plain what behaviors are influenced, or why, or howone would go about planning and designing an envi-ronment to achieve particular objectives. Figure 2 isa rich framework for addressing those questions andfor exploring the role of physical environment in ser-vice organizations. The framework suggests that a va-riety of objective environmental factors are perceived

Behaviors in the ServicescapeThat human behavior is influenced by the physicalsetting in which it occurs is essentially a truism. In-terestingly, however, until the 1960s psychologistslargely ignored the effects of physical setting in theirattempts to predict and explain behavior. Since thattime, a large and steadily growing body of literaturewithin the field of environmental psychology has ad-dressed the relationships between human beings andtheir built environments (for reviews of environmentalpsychology, see Darley and Gilbert 1985; Holahan

Servicescapes / 59

FIGURE 2Framework for Understanding Environment-User Relationships in Service Organizations

ENVIRONMENTALDIMENSIONS

HousncMODERATORS INTQtNAL RESPONSES BEHAVIOR

AiiibiHitCQndidons. tempetature. air quality. noise. music. odor

Space/Puuctioil. layout

. Aimishings

. etc.

SigiH, Symbols

. signage

. personal artifacts

. style of decor

. etc.

Penxived

Servicescape

ResponseModerators

Customer

Moderators

. bdie& . mood

. categor- . attitiu

al PhvsioloDical

e . comfortI'jjiinfi , movemoit

. symbolic . physicalTfiftftn^ft nt

1Employee

Responses

. stay longerI COfTlTTlltmClrt. carry out plan

Ayaid(opposites of

approach)

Custooier

Responses

1Cosnitive Emotional Fhvsioloidcal• D M Í 6 & > m o o d < imtH

. cstcgof- . fllliludp . comfort

. symbolic . physicaltnffHniTiff fit

Social InteractionsBetween andAmong Custcandsand ^aployees.

Approach. attraction. stay/eiqilore. speud money. retum. carry outplan

Anaáá(ofpoeitesaíappiœch)

1986; Russell and Ward 1982; Stokols and Altman1987).' Here it is assumed that dimensions of the or-ganization's physical surroundings influence impor-tant customer and employee behaviors. The types ofbehaviors that are influenced are identifled and dis-cussed next.

Individual Behaviors

Environmental psychologists suggest that individualsreact to places with two general, and opposite, formsof behavior: approach and avoidance (Mehrabian andRussell 1974). Approach behaviors include all posi-tive behaviors that might be directed at a particularplace, such as desire to stay, explore, work, and af-filiate (Mehrabian and Russell 1974). Avoidance be-

' Research on the built environment is only one aspect of environ-mental psychology. The field also encompasses the study of humanbeings and their relationships with the natural and social environment.What distinguishes environmental psychology from other areas of in-quiry is its concem "with the reciprocal and interactive influences thattake place between the thinking and behavior of an organism and theenvironment surrounding that organism" (Darley and Gilbert 1985, p.949).

haviors reflect the opposite, in other words, a desirenot to stay, explore, work, and affiliate. In a study ofconsumers in retail environments, Donovan and Ros-siter (1982) found that approach behaviors in that set-ting (including shopping enjoyment, returning, attrac-tion and friendliness toward others, spending money,time spent browsing, and exploration of the store) wereinfluenced by perceptions of the environment. Milli-man (1982, 1986) found that the tempo of backgroundmusic can affect traffic flow and gross receipts in bothsupermarket and restaurant settings. In actual servicesettings, examples of environmental cues being usedto change behavior are abundant. At one 7-11 store,the owners played "elevator music" to drive away ayouthful market segment that was detracting from thestore's image. Cinnamon roll bakeries commonly pumpthe wonderful fragrance of their freshly baked prod-ucts out into mall traffic areas to entice customers intothe store.

In addition to attracting or deterring entry, the ser-vicescape can actually influence the degree of success

60 / Journal of Marketing, April 1992

consumers experience in executing their plans onceinside (Darley and Gilbert 1985; Russell and Snod-grass 1987). Each individual comes to a particular ser-vice organization with a goal or purpose that may beaided or hindered by the setting. For example, assumethat a traveler enters an airport and (1) is confusedbecause he or she cannot find signage giving direc-tions to the assigned gate and (2) is emotionally dis-tressed because of crowds, poor acoustics, and hightemperature. The traveler is unable to carry out thepurpose for entering the environment, at least not veryeasily. Here the servicescape directly inhibits the ac-complishment of the customer's goal. Similarly,physical surroundings and conditions could constrainan employee's ability to do his or her work and therebydetract from the purpose for being in the servicescape.

Clearly, firms want to encourage approach behav-iors and the ability of customers and employees to carryout their plans while at the same time discouragingavoidance behaviors. As Figure 2 shows, the ap-proach/avoidance behaviors of employees and cus-tomers are determined largely by individual intemalresponses (cognitive, emotional, and physiological) tothe environment. The three types of internal responsesare discussed in greater detail subsequently. The basicassumption is that positive (negative) intemal re-sponses lead to approach (avoidance) behaviors.

Pi: Positive (negative) intemal responses to the service-scape lead to approach (avoidance) behaviors.a. For employees, approach includes such behaviors

as affiliation, exploration, staying longer, expres-sions of commitment, and carrying out the purposefor being in the organization. Avoidance is repre-sented by the opposite behaviors.

b. For customers, approach includes such behaviorsas coming in, staying, spending money, loyalty,and carrying out the purpose for being in the or-ganization. Avoidance is represented by the op-posite behaviors.

Social InteractionsIn addition to its effects on their individual behaviors,the servicescape influences the nature and quality ofcustomer and employee interactions, most directly ininterpersonal services. Bennett and Bennett (1970) statethat "all social interaction is affected by the physicalcontainer in which it occurs." They go on to suggestthat the physical container affects the nature of socialinteraction in terms of the duration of interaction andthe actual progression of events. In many service sit-uations, a firm may want to ensure a particular pro-gression of events (i.e., a "standard script") and limitthe duration of the service. Forgas (1979) suggests thatenvironmental variables such as propinquity, seatingarrangements, size, and flexibility can define the pos-sibilities and limits of social episodes, such as thosebetween and among customers and employees. He also

suggests that physical environments represent a subsetof social mies, conventions, and expectations in forcein a given behavior setting, serving to define the na-ture of social interaction. In developing the conceptof behavior settings. Barker (1968) implies that re-curring social behavior pattems are associated withparticular physical settings and that when people en-counter typical settings, their social behaviors can bepredicted.

Empirical studies confirm the impact of physicalsetting on the nature of social interaction. Behaviorssuch as small group interaction, friendship formation,participation, aggression, withdrawal, and helping haveall been shown to be influenced by environmentalconditions (Holahan 1982). Similarly, in studies ofworkplace design, researchers have found that com-munication pattems, group cohesion, and the forma-tion of friendships and small groups can be influencedby the physical setting (Sundstrom and Sundstrom 1986,Part III). By implication, those findings suggest thatthe servicescajje influences the nature of social inter-actions between and among customers and employ-ees.

Examples are again abundant in actual service set-tings. Even casual observation of a Club Med facilityconfirms that the highly complex setting is designedto encourage social interaction among and betweenguests and employees. Seating arrangements and thefood preparation process at Benihana restaurants sim-ilarly encourage interactions among total strangers, aswell as contact between patrons and the Japanese chefwho prepares their meals in full view. In most air-ports, in contrast, research suggests that the arrange-ment of seating typically discourages comfortableconversation among travelers and their companions(Sommer 1974).

One of the challenges in designing environmentsto enhance individual approach behaviors and en-courage the appropriate social interactions is that op-timal design for one person or group may not be theoptimal design for others. Research in a bank settingsuggests, for example, that employees and customershave different needs and desires for their physical sur-roundings (Baker, Berry, and Parasuraman 1988).Similarly, an environment that is conducive to an em-ployee's individual work needs may not enhance theemployee's ability to converse and interact interper-sonally with customers.

P2: For interpersonal services, positive (negative) intemalresponses to the servicescape enhance (detract from)the nature and quality of social interactions betweenand among customers and employees.

P3: Optimal design for encouraging employee (customer)approach behavior may be incompatible with the de-sign required to meet customer (employee) needs and/or facilitate positive employee-customer interactions.

Servicescapes / 61

Service Topology and Behavior

The research tradition in environmental psychologystrongly suggests that the physical environment caninfluence behaviors in several ways. Therefore the firststep in the purposeful design of the servicescape is toidentify desirable customer and/or employee behav-iors and the strategic goals that the organization hopesto advance through its physical facility. For example,in designing their corporate headquarters offices,Scandinavian Airline Systems first identified partic-ular goals that it wanted to achieve, among themteamwork and open and frequent communication amongmanagers. The employee behaviors associated withthose goals were identified and architects were com-missioned to propose designs that would be conduciveto the behaviors and ultimately support the strategicgoals.

The typology (Figure 1) provides a structure forisolating the relevant behavioral issues. Self-servicefirms will be most interested in predicting and under-standing customer behaviors (e.g., coming in, explo-ration, staying) in the physical setting and the poten-tial achievement of marketing objectives such ascustomer attraction, satisfaction, and retention. Incontrast, firms that operate remote services will focuson employee behaviors (e.g., productivity, affiliationwith coworkers) and the achievement of organiza-tional goals such as teamwork, productivity, and in-novation. Organizations that are positioned in the in-terpersonal service cell will be concerned with bothcustomer and employee behaviors, as well as the ef-fects of physical setting on the interactions betweenand among customers and employees. There the strat-egist must understand the plans and goals of all par-ticipants and anticipate compatibility dilemmas in de-signing the servicescape. Once behaviors most likelyto be influenced by the servicescape are identified,challenging questions emerge: What intemal re-sponses (e.g., feelings, beliefs) will lead to the de-sired behaviors and how should the environment beconfigured to bring about such responses? The nexttwo sections address those questions.

Internal Responses to theServicescape

One can infer from the environmental psychology lit-erature that employees and customers in service firmsrespond to dimensions of their physical surroundingscognitively, emotionally, and physiologically, and thatthose responses are what influence their behaviors inthe environment. Hence, the perceived servicescapedoes not directly cause people to behave in certainways. As Figure 2 shows, perceptions of the service-scape lead to certain emotions, beliefs, and physio-

logical sensations which in tum influence behaviors.Behaviors are thus mediated by a person's intemal re-sponses to the place. Though the intemal responses(cognitive, emotional, and physiological) are dis-cussed independently here, they are clearly interde-pendent. For example, a person's beliefs about a place,a cognitive response, may well influence emotionalresponse to the place and vice versa.

Environment and Cognition

As shown in Figure 2, the perceived servicescape mayelicit cognitive responses (Golledge 1987; Kaplan andKaplan 1982; Rapoport 1982), influencing people'sbeliefs about a place and their beliefs about the peopleand products found in that place. In that sense, theenvironment can be viewed as a form of nonverbalcommunication (Broadbent, Bunt, and Jencks 1980;Rapoport 1982), imparting meaning through whatRuesch and Kees (1956) called "object language." Forexample, particular environmental cues such as the typeof office fumiture and decor and the apparel wom bya lawyer may influence a potential client's beliefs aboutwhether the lawyer is successful or not successful, ex-pensive or not expensive, and trustworthy or not trust-worthy. In a consumer study, variations in verbal de-scriptions of store atmospherics were found to alterbeliefs about a product (perfume) sold in the store(Gardner and Siomkos 1986). Another study showedthat a travel agent's office decor affected customer at-tributions for the travel agent's behavior (Bitner 1990).Variations in environmental cues may also affect em-ployees' beliefs. For example, office size and type offumishings may affect an employee's beliefs about theimportance of his or her function within the firm inrelation to other employees. In all of those cases, per-ceptions of the servicescape influence beliefs aboutthe environment itself, but also appear to affect beliefsabout other, seemingly unrelated, service attributes.

In other cases, perceptions of the servicescape maysimply help people to distinguish a firm by influenc-ing how it is categorized. Categorization is the pro-cess by which people assign a label to an object; whenpeople see a feathered animal flying through the air,they categorize it as a "bird" and not a "fish" (Lokenand Ward 1990; Mervis and Rosch 1981). Similarly,the overall perception of the servicescape enables theconsumer or employee to categorize the firm men-tally. For example, research shows that in the restau-rant industry a particular configuration of environ-mental cues suggests "fast food" whereas anotherconfiguration suggests "elegant sit-down restaurant"(Ward, Bitner, and Bames 1992). In such situations,environmental cues serve as a mnemonic or shortcutdevice enabling customers to categorize and distin-guish among types of restaurants.

Because services are relatively intangible in com-

62 / Journal of IVIarketing, April 1992

parison with most manufactured goods (Shostack 1977)and because many services are high in experience andcredence attributes (Zeithaml 1981), they generallyafford fewer intrinsic cues on which to form beliefsabout service quality, particularly in initial purchasesituations. Hence, in such situations consumers andemployees tend to use extrinsic cues (such as thephysical surroundings) to infer quality (Zeithaml 1988).In other words, people may use their beliefs about theservicescape as surrogate indicators in forming beliefsabout service quality and other attributes of the ser-vice and/or the people who work in the organization.

P4: Perceptions of the servicescape and associated positive(negative) cognitions can lead to positive (negative)beliefs and attributions associated with the organiza-tion, its people, and its products.

P5: Perceptions of the servicescape influence how peoplecategorize the organization; thus, the environment servesas a mnemonic in differentiating among firms.

Pi. The servicescape's influence on beliefs, attributions,and categorization of the organization is stronger forinexperienced customers or new employees, and whenfew intrinsic cues are available on which to categorizeor base beliefs.

Environment and Emotion

In addition to inñuencing cognitions, the perceivedservicescaf)e may elicit emotional responses that in turninfiuence behaviors. In a long stream of research,Mehrabian and Russell and their colleagues have pro-grammatically explored emotional responses to envi-ronments (e.g., Mehrabian and Russell 1974; Russelland Lanius 1984; Russell and Pratt 1980; Russell andSnodgrass 1987). Through their research they haveconcluded that the emotion-eliciting qualities of en-vironments are captured by two dimensions: plea-sure-displeasure and degree of arousal (i.e., amountof stimulation or excitement). In other words, any en-vironment, whether natural or manmade, can be lo-cated in a two-dimensional space refiecting peoples'emotional response to the place. Research shows thatemotional response measured on those dimensions canpredict behaviors with respect to the environment. Forexample, environments that elicit feelings of pleasureare likely to be ones where people want to spend timeand money (Donovan anud Rossiter 1982; Mehrabianand Russell 1974), whereas unpleasant environmentsare avoided. Similarly, arousing environments areviewed positively unless the excitement is combinedwith unpleasantness (Mehrabian and Russell 1974).That is, unpleasant environments that are also high inarousal (lots of stimulation, noise, confusion) are par-ticularly avoided. Hui and Bateson (1991) found thatin the context of environmental crowding, increasedperceptions of personal control are related positivelyto increased pleasure. Other environmental dimen-sions (e.g., clear signage, good ventilation, adequate

space) may also increase perceptions of personal con-trol.

Research also suggests that emotional responses tothe environment may be transferred to people and/orobjects within the environment (Maslow and Mintz1956; Mintz 1956; Obermiller and Bitner 1984). Inthe Obermiller and Bitner study, respondents whoviewed retail products in an emotionally pleasing en-vironment evaluated the products more positively thandid subjects who viewed the same products in an un-pleasing environment. Hence, perceptions of the ser-vicescape appear to have infiuenced seemingly unre-lated feelings about the products.

Other researchers also have emphasized the emo-tion-eliciting or affective qualities of environments,suggesting that environments can be viewed as aes-thetic stimuli capable of eliciting affect (Wohlwill1976). In his work aimed at explaining the affectiveassessment of outdoor environments, Kaplan (1987)concluded that preference for or liking of a particularenvironment can be predicted by three environmentaldimensions: complexity, mystery, and coherence.Complexity (visual richness, ornamentation, infor-mation rate) has been found consistently to increaseemotional arousal, whereas coherence (order, clarity,unity) has been found to enhance positive evaluation(Nasar 1989). In addition, compatibility has been found'to infiuence perceptions of order, and preference hasbeen found to increase with compatibility (Nasar 1987).Compatibility in natural settings refers to how well aplace blends in with its surroundings and is relatedinversely to contrasts (in color, texture, size, and shape)with the natural background; in urban settings com-patibility results from replication of features such asmaterials, style, and overall shapes (Nasar 1989). Otherresearch has shown that people respond positively tonature and prefer natural to manmade elements (Ka-plan and Kaplan 1982), whereas the presence of whatNasar (1989) terms environmental "nuisances" has beenfound to reduce preference and perceptions of qualityin urban settings. In urban settings such things as poles,wires, signs, and dilapidated buildings and vehiclesare classified as nuisances. Research is needed to de-fine the cues that would determine compatibility andthe objects that would be classified as nuisances inservice settings.

P7: Customer and employee emotional responses to theservicescape can be captured by two dimensions,pleasure and arousal.a. Pleasure increases approach behaviors.b. Arousal, except when combined with unpleasant-

ness, increases approach behaviors.Pg: Perceptions of greater personal control in the service-

scape increase pleasure.P9: Complexity in the servicescape increases emotional

arousal.P,o: Compatibility, the presence of natural elements, and

Servicescapes / 63

the absence of environmental "nuisances" in theservicescape enhance pleasure.

Pi,: Perceptions of the servicescape and associated posi-tive (negative) emotions can lead to positive (nega-tive) feelings associated with the organization, itspeople, and its products.

Environment and PhyslologY

The perceived servicescape may also affect people inpurely physiological ways. Noise that is too loud maycause physical discomfort, the temperature of a roommay cause people to shiver or perspire, the air qualitymay make it difficult to breathe, and the glare of light-ing may decrease ability to see and cause physical pain.All of those physical responses may in turn directlyinfluence whether or not people stay in and enjoy aparticular environment. For example, it is well knownthat the relative comfort of seating in a restaurant in-fluences how long people stay. When they becomeuncomfortable (subconsciously or consciously) sittingon a hard surface in a fast food restaurant, most peo-ple leave within a predictable period of time. Simi-larly, environmental design and related physiologicalresponses affect whether a person can perform his orher job function (e.g., Riley and Cochran 1984).

A vast amount of research in engineering and de-sign has addressed human physiological responses toambient conditions as well as physiological responsesto equipment design (Bennett 1977; Obome 1987;Sanders and McCormick 1987). Such research fits un-der the rubric of human factors design or ergonomics.Human factors research systematically applies rele-vant information about human capabilities and limi-tations to the design of things and procedures peopleuse. The primary focus and application of the researchhas been within the military, in space programs, andin the design of computers, automobiles, and em-ployee work stations. Such research has great poten-tial for application in the design of commercial en-vironments, taking into account the effects of designon both customers and employees who coexist and in-teract in the environment.

In addition to directly affecting behavior, physi-ological responses may influence seemingly unrelatedbeliefs and feelings about the place and the peoplethere. Research has shown that when people are phys-ically uncomfortable because of ambient temperature,their affective response to strangers is less positive thanwhen they are physically comfortable (Griffitt 1970).Mehrabian and Russell (1974, ch. 4) review numer-ous studies of emotional reactions to sensory stimulisuch as color, thermal conditions, light intensity, sound,and odors.

Pi2: Positive (negative) physiological responses to the ser-vicescape can result in positive (negative) beliefs andfeelings associated with the organization, its people,105and its products.

Service Typology and Internal Responses

Combining the typology of servicescapes (Figure 1)with the conceptual understanding of the internal re-sponses of customers and employees leads to insightsfor designing and managing the servicescape. For ex-ample, a self-service firm that wants to enhance cus-tomer approach behaviors such as attraction and stay-ing longer can assess the environmental dimensionsor cues that may elicit particular cognitive, emotional,or physiological responses. Attraction would most likelybe facilitated by positive cognitive and emotional re-sponses to the firm's exterior, whereas staying woulddepend more on positive emotional and physiologicalresponses to the organization's interior space. In mea-suring the emotion-eliciting qualities of a particularservicescape, attention might be given to emotionaldimensions identified by Mehrabian and Russell(pleasure-displeasure and degree of arousal) as wellas to perceptions of control (Hui and Bateson 1991).

For interpersonal services, an effective service-scape design anticipates the likely responses of em-ployees and customers to environmental conditions andcreates the proper setting for the service encounter. Insuch cases, several goals and behaviors will be iden-tified for both customers and employees as well as fortheir interactions. The desired behaviors then can belinked directly to their internal response counterparts.For example, what type of emotional response on thepart of customers will be needed to encourage themto interact comfortably with each other as in the caseof a Club Med? Or, in the case of a hospital, whatbeliefs, emotions, and physiological responses willencourage patients to get up and walk around the fa-cility if that is a desired behavior for their recovery?

Because elaborate services (e.g., banks, hospitals,restaurants) consist of many forms and spaces, plan-ning for compatibility and coherence is a particularlychallenging task. In lean environments, coherencewould be easier to achieve and measure and nuisanceseasier to identify and eliminate. Similarly, enhancingpersonal control is more straightforward in remote andself-service firms than in interpersonal service firms,where giving a sense of control to both employees andcustomers simultaneously may be difficult.

Response ModeratorsIn general, people respond to environments in the waysdescribed here—cognitively, emotionally, physiolog-ically—and their responses influence how they be-have in the environment. As with all behavioral re-lationships, however, the strength and direction of therelation between variables is moderated by personaland situational factors. Here, and in Figure 2, thosefactors are referred to as "response moderators."

Studies have shown that individual personality traits

64 / Journal of Marketing, April 1992

can influence a person's reaction to his or her physicalsurroundings (Mehrabian and Russell 1974; Russelland Snodgrass 1987). Arousal-seeking is one such trait.Arousal-seekers enjoy and look for high levels ofstimulation, whereas arousal-avoiders prefer lowerlevels of stimulation. Thus, an arousal-avoider whofound him- or herself in a loud, bright disco withflashing neon might show strong dislike for the en-vironment whereas an arousal-seeker would be veryhappy. In a related vein, Mehrabian (1977) proposedthat some people are better screeners of environmentalstimuli than others. Screeners of stimuli would be ableto experience high levels of stimulation, but not beaffected by it. In other words, they can ignore exter-nal environmental stimulation. Nonscreeners wouldbe highly affected and might exhibit extreme re-sponses even to low levels of stimulation.

An individual's response to an environment oftendepends on situational factors as well, such as his orher plan or purpose for being in the environment(Russell and Snodgrass 1987; Snodgrass, Russell, andWard 1988). Though the individual differences in per-sonality traits are relatively stable, plans and purposesfor being in or seeking out a particular environmentmay vary from day to day or hour to hour. What theindividual notices and remembers about the environ-ment, as well has how he or she feels about it, is in-fluenced by the purpose for being there. In a labo-ratory study, subjects' knowledge of environmentaldetails and affective response to a place were foundto be influenced by what they had planned to do whilethere—wait, explore, spy, or redecorate (Ward et al.1988).

In addition to the plan or purpose, each individualenters an environment in a particular mood state (e.g.,happy, depressed, lonely, anxious, excited, impa-tient). Such mood states are likely to affect as well asbe differentially affected by variations in physical sur-roundings (see Gardner 1985). A person who is feel-ing anxious and fatigued after a fhistrating day at workis likely to be affected differently by a highly arousingrestaurant environment than he or she would be aftera relaxing three-day weekend. Similarly, Harrell andHutt (1976) suggest that people who are impatient orvery time sensitive on entering a retail store are moreaffected by crowding than those who are patient andnot sensitive to time factors.

What an individual expects to find in an environ-ment also affects how the individual responds to theplace. In general, when expectations are negativelydisconflrmed, the person is likely to dislike the place.The opposite occurs when expectations are met or whenthe environment exceeds expectations. Expectationsvary across individuals on the basis of their past ex-periences in the environment or in similar environ-

ments, as well as what they have heard or read aboutthe place.

P13: Personality traits (such as arousal-seeking tendenciesand ability to screen environmental stimuli) moderatethe relationship between the perceived servicescapeand intemal responses.

P14: Situational factors (such as expectations, momentarymood, plans and purposes for being in the service-scape) moderate the relationship between the per-ceived servicescape and intemal responses.

Dimensions of the ServicescapeA complex mix of environmental features constitutethe servicescape and influence intemal responses andbehaviors. Speciflcally, the dimensions of the physi-cal surroundings include all of the objective physicalfactors that can be controlled by the firm to enhance(or constrain) employee and customer actions. Thosefactors include an endless list of possibilities, such aslighting, color, signage, textures, quality of materials,style of furnishings, layout, wall decor, temperature,and so on. On the basis of a review of diverse liter-atures, three composite dimensions were identified asbeing particularly relevant to the present analysis:ambient conditions, spatial layout and functionality,and signs, symbols, and artifacts (see Figure 2). Be-cause the base of research findings is context-specificand therefore not easily generalized, the effect of asingle dimension on customers and employees is dif-.ficult to forecast. However, relevant dimensions of theservicescape can be isolated and general patterns canbe explored.

Environmental psychologists contend that peoplerespond to their environments holistically. That is,though individuals perceive discrete stimuli, it is thetotal configuration of stimuli that determines their re-sponses to the environment (Bell, Fisher, and Loomis1978; Holahan 1982; Ittelson et al. 1974). Hence,though the dimensions of the environment are definedindependently here, it is important to recognize thatthey are perceived by employees and customers as aholistic pattern of interdependent stimuli. Note in Fig-ure 2 that the holistic pattern is reflected in the per-ceived servicescape construct.

P15: Customers and employees perceive the environmentholistically, as a composite of three dimensions: am-bient conditions; spatial layout and functionality; signs,symbols, and artifacts. Each dimension may affect theoverall perception independently and/or through itsinteractions with the other dimensions.

Ambient Conditions

Several authors have identified ambient conditions asa factor that affects perceptions of and human re-sponses to the environment (Baker 1987; Baker, Berry,and Parasuraman 1988; Becker 1981; Darley and Gil-

Servicescapes / 65

bert 1985; Russell and Snodgrass 1987; Sundstrom andSundstrom 1986; Wineman 1982). Ambient condi-tions include background characteristics of the envi-ronment such as temperature, lighting, noise, music,and scent. As a general rule, ambient conditions affectthe five senses. However, sometimes such dimensionsmay be totally imperceptible (gases, chemicals, infra-sound), yet may have profound effects (Russell andSnodgrass 1987), particularly on employees who spendlong hours in the environment.

A very limited number of empirical studies in con-sumer research confirm that ambient factors may in-fluence customer responses. For example, in studiesof restaurants and supermarkets, it has been illustratedthat music tempo can affect pace of shopping, lengthof stay, and amount of money spent (Milliman 1982,1986). In another study, familiarity of music playedin a department store setting was found to affect shop-per's perceptions of how long they spent shopping;when the music was unfamiliar to subjects, they be-lieved they had spent more time shopping (Yalch andSpangenberg 1988). Hundreds of studies of the work-place spanning many decades have shown that light-ing, temperature, noise, music, and color can all in-fluence employee performance and job satisfaction (seeSundstrom and Sundstrom 1986, Part II, for a re-view).

Pi6: The effects of ambient conditions on the overall, ho-listic perception of the servicescape are especially no-ticeable when they are extreme (e.g., loud music, hightemperature), when the customer or employee spendsconsiderable time in the servicescape (e.g., hospitalstay vs. visit to dry cleaner), and when they conflictwith expectations (e.g., loud music in a law office).

Spatial Layout and Functionality

Because service encounter environments are purpose-ful environments (i.e., they exist to fulflU speciflc needsof consumers, often through the successful comple-tion of employee actions), spatial layout and func-tionality of the physical surroundings are particularlyimportant. Spatial layout refers to the ways in whichmachinery, equipment, and furnishings are arranged,the size and shape of those items, and the spatial re-lationships among them. Functionality refers to theability of the same items to facilitate performance andthe accomplishment of goals. Much of the empiricalresearch in organizational behavior and psychologyhas illustrated effects of the spatial layout and func-tionality dimension, always from the employee's pointof view (for reviews, see Davis 1984; Sundstrom andSundstrom 1986; Wineman 1982, 1986). With the ex-ception of some research on retail store layout, crowd-ing (Harrell and Hutt 1976; Harrell, Hutt, and An-derson 1980; Hui and Bateson 1990, 1991), and useof orientation aids (e.g., Levine, Marchon, and Han-

ley 1984; Seidel 1983; Wener 1985), surprisingly lit-tle has been published about the effects of spatial lay-out and functionality on customers in commercialservice settings. Logic suggests that spatial layout andfunctionality of the environment are highly salient tocustomers in self-service environments where they mustperform on their own and cannot rely on employeesto assist them. Similarly, if the tasks to be performedare very complex, efflciency of layout and function-ality will be more important than when the tasks aremundane or simple. When either the employees orcustomers are under time pressure, they will also behighly conscious of the relative ease with which theycan perform their tasks in the environment.

P,7: The effects of spatial layout and functionality are par-ticularly salient in self-service settings, when the tasksto be performed are complex, and when either theemployee or customer is under time pressure.

Signs, Symbols, and Artifacts

Many items in the physical environment serve as ex-plicit or implicit signals that communicate about theplace to its users (Becker 1977, 1981; Davis 1984;Wener 1985; Wineman 1982). Signs displayed on theexterior and interior of a structure are examples of ex-plicit communicators. They can be used as labels (e.g.,name of company, name of department), for direc-tional purposes (e.g., entrances, exits), and to com-municate rules of behavior (e.g., no smoking, chil-dren must be accompanied by an adult). Signage canplay an important part in communicating firm image.Signs have even been found to reduce perceivedcrowding and stress in a jail lobby setting (Wener andKaminoff 1982).

Other environmental objects may communicate lessdirectly than signs, giving implicit cues to users aboutthe meaning of the place and norms and expectationsfor behavior in the place. Quality of materials used inconstruction, artwork, presence of certificates andphotographs on walls, floor coverings, and personalobjects displayed in the environment can all com-municate symbolic meeming and create an overall aes-thetic impression. Restaurant managers, for example,know that white table cloths and subdued lightingsymbolically convey full service and relatively highprices, whereas counter service, plastic furnishings,and bright lighting symbolize the opposite. In officeenvironments, certain cues such as desk size andplacement symbolize status and may be used to rein-force professional image (Davis 1984; McCaskey 1979;Peters 1978; Pfeffer 1981; Sundstrom and Sundstrom1986). Studies of faculty office design indicate thatdesk placement, presence of diplomas on the wall, andtidiness of the office can influence students' beliefsabout the person occupying the office (Campbell 1979;Morrow and McElroy 1981). In another study of fac-

66 / Journal of Marketing, April 1992

ulty offices, certain environmental cues were found tobe symbolically associated with personality traits ofthe faculty member believed to occupy the office(Ward, Bitner, and Gossett 1989). Such symbolic andaesthetic communication is extremely complex—it maybe intentionally conveyed or it may be accidental, itmay be subject to multiple interpretations, and it mayhave intended and unintended consequences (Becker1977; Davis 1984).

Pig: Signs, symbols, and artifacts are particularly impor-tant in forming first impressions, for communicatingnew service concepts, for repositioning a service, andin highly competitive industries where customers arelooking for cues to differentiate the organization.

Service Typology and EnvironmentalDimensionsIn a classic study, Whyte (1980) observed human ac-tivity in public spaces and found that even subtlechanges in design (e.g., adding plants and flowers,providing comfortable perches) led to a rather dra-matic increase in activity and utilization. Similar re-sults might be achieved by examining the directionand fiow of activities in a particular servicescape. Forexample, changes in the layout and furnishings of theservice facility can be made to speed the flow of trans-actions, encourage particular forms of interaction be-tween and among customers and employees, or pro-vide opportunities for customers to linger.

The importance of particular environmental di-mensions is likely to vary across the typology of ser-vice organizations (Figure 1). For example, for self-service situations such as Ticketron facilities, ATMs,or Golf Land, the spatial layout and functionality di-mension of the servicescape is extremely important.Clear directions and simple layout aid the customer incompleting the transaction. At the other extreme, forremote services, ambient conditions assume more im-portance because employees tend to spend extendedperiods of time in the servicescape. Their physicalcomfort (temperature level, lighting) and responses tonoise level and/or music affect productivity and over-all satisfaction. Ambient conditions are similarly im-portant to employee productivity in many interper-sonal service businesses such as banks, hospitals, andhotels, but in those cases employee preferences mustbe balanced against customer needs. These are just afew of many possible examples.

Rather than a single element, it is ultimately thetotal configuration of environmental dimensions thatdefines the servicescape.

Managerial ImplicationsBy isolating the impact of the servicescape on bothcustomers and employees, the theoretical framework

raises several challenging managerial implications. Theoverall conclusion is that through careful and creativemanagement of the servicescape, firms may be ableto contribute to the achievement of both external mar-keting goals and intemal organizational goals. Manyspecific implications are discussed in preceding sec-tions; some general strategic observations are offeredhere.

The typology of service organizations combinedwith the theoretical framework suggests that the phys-ical environment may assume a variety of strategicroles in services marketing and management. First,the servicescape provides a visual metaphor for an or-ganization's total offering. In other words, the di-mensions of the servicescape act as a package, similarto a product's package, by conveying a total imageand suggesting the potential usage and relative qualityof the service (Solomon 1985). Yet, the care given toproduct package design is commonly lacking in ser-vice "package" design. Second, the servicescape canassume a facilitator role by either aiding or hinderingthe ability of customers and employees to carry outtheir respective activities. The floorplan, layout ofequipment, and equipment design can have a majorimpact on the ability of users to complete their tasksand achieve their service goals. As a facilitator, theservicescape can also encourage and nurture particularforms of social interaction among and between em-ployees and customers. Finally, the physical environ-ment can serve as a differentiator in signaling the in-tended market segment, positioning the organization,and conveying distinctiveness from competitors. Eachof the roles can be shaped to a significant degree tosupport important services marketing and manage-ment objectives of the organization.

The typology of service organizations (Figure 1)and the theoretical framework (Figure 2) help to directmanagers to relevant issues and questions that shouldbe asked in forming servicescape strategy around thebasic roles. In addition, service organizations can gainstrategic insights by examining how the servicescapeis designed and managed in other industries that oc-cupy the same cell in the typology and thus share sim-ilar characteristics.

To secure strategy advantages from the service-scape, the needs of ultimate users and the require-ments of various functional units must be incorporatedinto environmental design decisions. The servicesmarketing manager must be a strong advocate for us-ing the servicescape as an element of the organiza-tion's strategy. Yet, in most organizations, environ-mental management is a separate function performedby persons with titles such as "environmental spacemanager," "facility planner," and "facility manager"(Becker 1981; Davis and Szigeti 1982). In many or-ganizations, environmental decisions are made rou-

Servicescapes / 67

tinely without much attention to the impact on em-ployee (or consumer) behavior (Becker 1981, p. 5).

A clear implication of the conceptual framework(Figure 2) is the need for cross-functional cooperationin decision making about service environments. "Fa-cility planning and management . . . is a problem-solving activity that lies on the boundaries betweenarchitecture, interior-space planning and product de-sign, organizational [and consumer] behavior, plan-ning and environmental psychology" (Becker 1981,p. 7). As such, decisions about the physical facilitycan have an impact on human resource goals (e.g.,worker retention, worker productivity), operations goals(e.g., efficiency, cost reduction), and marketing goals(e.g., consumer attraction, consumer satisfaction).Ideally, therefore, major changes in physical designor the planning of new environments should benefitfrom input from managers in all three areas, groundedin direct input from actual users—that is, employeesand customers.

Research ImplicationsThe conceptual framework and the servicescape ty-pology suggest a wide range of research possibilities.Given the scarcity of research reported in the con-sumer behavior and marketing literature, there is a tre-mendous opportunity for theory building, empiricaltesting, development of better measures and methods,and application/replication of findings from other fields.Figure 2 and the preceding specific propositions pro-vide numerous starting points for research. The prop-ositions are purposefully general. Each one could beexplored and expanded through empirical research. Forexample, given a specific commercial environment,how does a consumer's (or employee's) purpose forbeing there affect the person's response to the place?That question addresses the moderating effects of sit-uational factors in determining environmental re-sponses. Alternatively, one could start with a partic-ular social interaction behavior such as teamworkamong employees and work back through the frame-work to discover the types of intemal responses andrelevant environmental dimensions that would en-courage such behavior. In addition to the basic re-search suggested by the framework and propositions,there is a need for research that will illuminate thedifferential importance and differential effects ofphysical surroundings across types of service indus-tries such as those identified in Figure 1. Researchopportunities also are available in exploring the abilityof the physical environment to achieve particular ob-jectives of the firm, and at what cost.

In many cases, extensive work in environmentalpsychology and organizational behavior (e.g., thestream of research by Russell and his colleagues and

the review of workplace research by Sundstrom andSundstrom 1986) can be applied and extended into theconsumer service setting. In other cases, as in the ef-fects of the environment on social interactions amongcustomers and employees, the fact that there is rela-tively little empirical work in any field to draw onallows for true pioneering research to be done.

Given the complexity of environment/behaviorrelationships, a variety of methods will be appropriate(see Bechtel, Marans, and Michelson 1987). Directobservation of environmental conditions and customerand employee behaviors may be most appropriate insome cases—for example, in research on the effect offacility layout options on customer/employee inter-action pattems. The application of direct observationmethods has just recently gained acceptance in themarketing literature (e.g., Belk, Sherry, and Wallen-dorf 1988; Belk, Wallendorf, and Sherry 1989), buthas not yet been applied to the observation of con-sumption environments (for an exception, see Sherryand McGrath 1989). Using observation methods,trained observers could make detailed accounts of cur-rent environmental conditions (i.e., environmental di-mensions in Figure 2) and the actual behaviors of theoccupants. Such observations could be extremely de-tailed and useful in an applied sense in redesigning afacility or in comparing environments. For theory de-velopment, direct observation could be the source ofadditional propositions.

Experimental methods and surveys also would beappropriate for assessing the impact of design dimen-sions on consumers and employees. Because of theexpense involved in constructing actual environments,some form of simulated environment (verbal descrip-tions, photos/slides, scale models, videos) could beused in experimental studies (see Bechtel, Marans, andMichelson 1987, ch. 5). The environmental psychol-ogy tradition has shown that simulated environmentswork well in achieving generalizable results (Nasar1989). In designing experiments, the researcher shouldrecall that people perceive environments holistically.It may be necessary to vary several environmental di-mensions (e.g., artifacts, layout, color, tidiness) si-multaneously to achieve an overall perception of thesurroundings that will significantly infiuence behav-ior. User surveys are likely to be most appropriate inassessing basic customer/employee needs and pref-erences prior to the design of experimental simula-tions, and later for postdesign evaluation.

For both experiments and surveys, applicable re-sponse measures are needed. If one uses Figure 2 asa guide, appropriate measures of cognitive, emo-tional, and physiological response to environments areneeded, as well as measures of relevant individual dif-ferences. Though several standardized measures al-ready are available (e.g., Lemke et al. 1979; Mc-

68 / Journal of Marketing, April 1992

Kechnie 1974; Mehrabian 1977; Russell and Snodgrass1987), most have not been applied to consumers incommercial settings, thus opening an opportunity forreplication and assessment of generalizability. Other,more novel approaches to measuring customer andemployee responses to environments also could beconsidered. For example. Ward, Bitner, and Gossett(1989) suggest an approach to measuring the symbolic

meaning of service environments that adapts and ex-tends ideas from research on object meaning (Kleineand Keman 1988; Szalay and Deese 1978).

The typology, framework, and propositions pro-vide direction for research on a topic that is incrediblyrich, and invite application of the full range of con-sumer and organizational methods and theories to gaina better understanding of its impact.

REFERENCESBaker, Julie (1987), "The Role of the Environment in Mar-

keting Services: The Consumer Perspective," in The Ser-vices Challenge: Integrating for Competitive Advantage, JohnA. Czepiel, Carole A. Congram, and James Shanahan, eds.Chicago: American Marketing Association, 79-84.

, Leonard L. Berry, and A. Parasuraman (1988), "TheMarketing Impact of Branch Facility Design," Journal ofRetail Banking, 10 (2), 33-42.

Barker, Roger G. (1968), Ecological Psychology. Stanford,CA: Stanford University Press.

Bechtel, Robert B., Robert W. Marans, and William Mich-elson (1987), Methods in Environmental and BehavioralResearch. New York: Von Nostrand Reinhold Company,Inc.

Becker, Franklin D. (1977), Housing Messages. Stroudsburg,PA: Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.

(198^1), Workspace. New York: Praeger Publishers.Belk, Russell W., John F. Sherry, Jr. and Melanie Wallendorf

(1988), "A Naturalistic Inquiry Into Buyer and Seller Be-havior at a Swap Meet," Journal of Consumer Research,14 (March), 449-70.

, Melanie Wallendorf, and John F. Sherry, Jr. (1989),"The Sacred and the Profane in Consumer Behavior: Theo-dicy on the Odyssey," Journal of Consumer Research, 16(June), 1-38.

Bell, Paul, J. D. Fisher, and R. J. Loomis (1978), Environ-mental Psychology. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co.

Bennett, Corwin (1977), Spaces for People, Human Factorsin Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Bennett, David J. and Judith D. Bennett (1970), "Making theScene," in Social Psychology Through Symbolic Interac-tionism, G. Stone and H. Farberman, eds. Waltham, MA:Ginn-Blaisdell, 190-6.

Berry, Leonard L. and Terry Clark (1986), "Four Ways toMake Services More Tangible," Business (October-Decem-ber), 53-4.

Bitner, Mary Jo (1986), "Consumer Responses to the PhysicalEnvironment in Service Settings," in Creativity in ServicesMarketing, M. Venkatesan, Diane M. Schmalensee, andClaudia Marshall, eds. Chicago: American Marketing As-sociation, 89-93.

(1990), "Evaluating Service Encounters: The Ef-fects of Physical Surroundings and Employee Responses,"Journal of Marketing, 54 (April), 69-82.

Booms, Bernard H. and Mary J. Bitner (1982), "MarketingServices by Managing the Environment," Cornell Hotel andRestaurant Administration Quarterly, 23 (May), 35-9.

Broadbent, Geoffrey, Richard Bunt, and Charles Jencks (1980),

Signs, Symbols and Architecture. New York: John Wiley& Sons, Inc.

Campbell, David E. (1979), "Interior Office Design and Vis-itor Response," Journal of Applied Psychology, 64 (6), 648-53.

Crosby, Lawrence A., Kenneth R. Evans, and Deborah Cowles(1990), "Relationship Quality in Services Selling: An In-terpersonal Influence Perspective," Journal of Marketing,54 (July), 68-81.

Darley, John M. and Daniel T. Gilbert (1985), "Social Psy-chological Aspects of Environmental Psychology," inHandbook of Social Psychology, 3rd ed.. Vol. II, GardnerLindzey and Elliot Aronson, eds. New York: Random HouseInc., 949-91.

Davis, Gerald and Françoise Szigeti (1982), "Planning andProgramming Offices: Determining User Requirements,"Environment and Behavior, 14 (3), 302-4, 306-15.

Davis, Tim R. V. (1984), "The Influence of the Physical En-vironment in Offices," Academy of Management Review9 (2), 271-83.

Donovan, Robert and John Rossiter (1982), "Store Atmo-sphere: An Environmental Psychology Approach," Journalof Retailing, 58 (Spring), 34-57.

Forgas, Joseph P. (1979), Social Episodes. London: AcademicPress, Inc.

Gardner, Meryl P. (1985), "Mood States and Consumer Be-havior: A Critical Review," Journal of Consumer Re-search, 12 (December), 281-300.

and George J. Siomkos (1986), "Toward a Meth-odology for Assessing Effects of In-Store Atmospherics,"Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 13, Richard J. Lutz,ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research27-31.

Golledge, Reginald G. (1987), "Environmental Cognition," inHandbook of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 1, DanielStokols and Irwin Altman, eds. New York: John Wiley &Sons, Inc., 131-74.

Griffm, William (1970), "Environmental Effects on Interper-sonal Affective Behavior: Ambient Effective Temperatureand Attraction," Journal of Personality and Social Psy-chology, 15 (3), 240-4.

Harrell, Gilbert D. and Michael D. Hutt (1976), "Crowdingin Retail Stores," MSU Business Topics (Winter), 33-9.

, , and James C. Anderson (1980), "PathAnalysis of Buyer Behavior Under Conditions of Crowd-ing," Journal of Marketing Research, 17 (February), 4 5 -

Holahan, Charles J. (1982), Environmental Psychology. NewYork: Random House, Inc.

Servicescapes / 69

(1986), "Environmental Psychology," Annual Re-view of Psychology, 381-407.

Hui, Michael K. M. and John E. G. Bateson (1990), "Testinga Theory of Crowding in the Service Environment," Ad-vances in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, Marvin E. Gold-berg, Gerald Gom, and Richard W. PoUay, eds. Ann Ar-bor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 866-73.

and (1991), "Perceived Control and theEffects of Crowding and Consumer Choice on the ServiceExpenence," Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 174—84.

Ittelson, William H., Harold M. Proshansky, Leanne G. Riv-lin, and Gary H. Winkel (1974), An Introduction to En-vironmental Psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston, Inc.

Kaplan, Stephen (1987), "Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition,"Environment and Behavior, 19 (January), 3-32.

and Rachel Kaplan (1982), Cognition and Environ-ment. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Kleine, Robert E. and Jerome B. Keman (1988), "Measuringthe Meaning of Consumption Objects: An Empirical In-vestigation," Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 15,Michael J. Houston, ed. Provo, UT: Association for Con-sumer Research, 498-504.

Kotier, Phillip (1973), "Atmospherics as a Marketing Tool,"Journal of Retailing, 49 (4), 48-64.

Lemke, S., R. Moos, B. Mehren, and M. Ganvain (1979),Multiphasic Environment Assessment Procedure (MEAP):Handbook for Users. Palo Alto, CA: Social Ecology Lab-oratory.

Levine, Marvin, Iris Marchon, and Gerard Hanley (1984), "ThePlacement and Misplacement of You-Are-Here Maps," En-vironment and Behavior, 16 (March), 139—57.

Loken, Barbara and James Ward (1990), "Altemative Ap-proaches to Understanding the Determinants of Typical-ity," ioMr/ia/o/Con.yM/ncr/fesearc/i, 17 (September), 111-26.

Lovelock, Christopher H. (1983), "Classifying Services to GainStrategic Insights," Journal of Marketing, 47 (Summer),9-20.

Maslow, A. L. and N. L. Mintz (1956), "Effects of EstheticSurroundings," Journal of Psychology, 1 (41), 247-54.

McCaskey, Michael B. (1979), "The Hidden Messages Man-agers Send," Harvard Business Review, 57 (November-De-cember), 135-48.

McKechnie, G. E. (1974), Manual for the Environment Re-sponse Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting PsychologistsPress.

Mehrabian, Albert (1977), "Individual Differences in StimulusScreening and Arousability," Journal of Personality, 45 (2),237-50.

and James A. Russell (1974), An Approach to En-vironmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: MassachusettsInstitute of Technology.

Mervis, C. and E. Rosch (1981), "Categorization of NaturalObjects," Annual Review of Psychology, M. R. Rosen-sweig and L. W. Porter, eds. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Re-views, Inc. 32, 89-115.

Milliman, Ronald (1982), "Using Background Music to Affectthe Behavior of Supermarket Shoppers," Journal of Mar-keting, 46 (Summer), 86-91.

(1986), "The Influence of Background Music on theBehavior of Restaurant Patrons," Journal of Consumer Re-search, 13 (September), 286-9.

Mintz, Norbett L. (1956), "Effects of Esthetic SurroundingsII: Prolonged and Repeated Experience in a 'Beautiful' andan 'Ugly' Room," Journal of Psychology, 41, 459-66.

Morrow, Paula C. and James C. McElroy (1981), "InteriorOffice Design and Visitor Response: A Constructive Rep-lication," Journal of Applied Psychology, 66 (5), 646-50.

Nasar, Jack L. (1987), "Effect of Sign Complexity and Co-herence on the Perceived Quality of Retail Scenes," Jour-nal of the American Planning Association, 53 (4), 499-509.

(1989), "Perception, Cognition, and Evaluation ofUrban Places," in Public Places and Spaces, Irwin Altmanand Ervin H. Zube, eds. New York: Plenum Press, 31-56.

Obermiller, Carl and Mary Jo Bitner (1984), "Store Atmo-sphere: A Peripheral Cue for Product Evaluation," in Amer-ican Psychological Association Annual Conference Pro-ceedings, Consumer Psychology Division, David C. Stewart,ed. American Psychological Association, 52-3.

Obome, David J. (1987), Ergonomics at Work, 2nd ed. NewYork: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Peters, Thomas J. (1978), "Symbols, Pattems, and Settings:An Optimistic Case for Getting Things Done," Organiza-tional Dynamics, 1 (Autumn), 3-23.

Pfeffer, Jeffrey (1981), "Management as Symbolic Action: TheCreation and Maintenance of Organizational Paradigms,"Research in Organizational Behavior, 3, 1-52.

Rapoport, Amos (1982), The Meaning of the Built Environ-ment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Riley, M. W. and D. J. Cochran (1984), "Dexterity Perfor-mance and Reduced Ambient Temperature," Human Fac-tors, 26 (2), 207-14.

Ruesch, Jürgen and Weldon Kees (1956), Nonverbal Com-munication. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Cal-if omia Press.

Russell, James A. and U. F. Lanius (1984), "Adaptation Leveland the Affective Appraisal of Environments," Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 4 (2), 119-35.

and Géraldine Pratt (1980), "A Description of theAffective Quality Attributed to Environments," Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 38 (2), 311-22.

• and Jacalyn Snodgrass (1987), "Emotion and theEnvironment," in Handbook of Environmental Psychology,Vol. 1, Daniel Stokols and Irwin Altman, eds. New York:John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 245-81.

and Lawrence M. Ward (1982), "EnvironmentalPsychology," Annual Review of Psychology, 651-88.

Sanders, Mark S. and Emest J. McCormick (1987), HumanFactors in Engineering and Design. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Schmenner, Roger W. (1986), "How Can Service BusinessesSurvive and Prosper?" Sloan Management Review, 27(Spring), 21-32.

Seidel, A. (1983), "Way Finding in Public Space: The Dallas-Ft. Worth, U.S.A. Airport," in Proceedings of the Four-teenth International Conference of the Environmental De-sign Research Association, D. Aneseo, J. Griffen, and J.Potter, eds. Lincoln, NB: Environmental Design ResearchAssociation.

Sherry, John F., Jr. and Mary Ann McGrath (1989), "Un-packing the Holiday Presence: A Comparative Ethnographyof Two Gift Stores," in Interpretive Consumer Behavior,Elizabeth C. Hirschman, ed. Provo UT: Association forConsumer Research, 148-67.

Shostack, G. Lynn (1977), "Breaking Free From Product Mar-keting," Journal of Marketing, 41 (April), 73-80.

Snodgrass, Jacalyn, James A. Russell, and Lawrence M. Ward(1988), "Planning, Mood and Place-Liking," in Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 8 (3), 209-22.

Solomon, Michael R. (1985), "Packaging the Service Pro-vider," Services Industries Journal, 5 (July), 64-71.

70 / Journal of Marketing, April 1992

Sommer, R. (1974), Tight Spaces: Hard Architecture and Howto Humanize It. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Steele, Fritz (1986), Making and Managing High-QualityWorkplaces. New York: Teachers College Press.

Stokols, Daniel and Irwin Altman (1987), Handbook of En-vironmental Psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons,Inc.

Sundstrom, Eric and Irwin Altman (1989), "Physical Envi-ronments and Work-Group Effectiveness," Research in Or-ganizational Behavior, 11, 175-209.

and Mary Graehl Sundstrom (1986), Work Places.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Szalay, Lorand B. and James Deese (1978), Subjective Mean-ing and Culture: An Assessment Through Word Associa-tions. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Upah, Gregory D. and James N. Fulton (1985), "SituationCreation in Services Marketing," in The Service Encounter,John Czepiel, Michael Solomon, and Carol Surprenant, eds.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 255-64.

Ward, James C , Mary Jo Bitner, and John Barnes (1992),"Measuring the Prototypicality and Meaning of Retail En-vironments," Journal of Retailing, forthcoming.

, , and Dan Gossett (1989), "SEEM:Measuring the Meaning of Service Environments," in De-signing a Winning Service Strategy, Mary Jo Bitner andLawrence A. Crosby, eds. Chicago: American MarketingAssociation, 34-9.

Ward, Lawrence M., Jacalyn Snodgrass, Barry Chew, andJames A. Russell (1988), "The Role of Plans in Cognitiveand Affective Responses to Places," Journal of Environ-mental Psychology, 8 (1), 1-8.

Wener, Richard E. (1985), "The Environmental Psychologyof Service Encounters," in The Service Encounter, John

Czepiel, Michael Solomon, and Carol Surprenant, eds.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 101-12.

and Robert Kaminoff (1982), "Improving Environ-mental Information: Effects of Signs on Perceived Crowd-ing and Behavior," Environment and Behavior, 14 (6), 671 -94.

Why te, William H. (1980), The Social Life of Small UrbanSpaces. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation.

Wineman, Jean D. (1982), "Office Design and Evaluation,"Environment and Behavior, 14 (3), 271-98.

(1986), Behavioral Issues in Office Design. NewYork: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.

Wohlwill, Joachim F. (1976), "Environmental Aesthetics: TheEnvironment as a Source of Affect," in Human Behaviorand Environment, Vol. 1, Irwin Altman and Joachim F.Wohlwill, eds. New York: Plenum Press.

Yalch, Richard F. and Eric Spangenberg (1988), "An Envi-ronmental Psychological Study of Foreground and Back-ground Music as Retail Atmospheric Factors," in Efficiencyand Effectiveness in Marketing, 1988 AMA Educators' Pro-ceedings, Gary Frazier et al., eds. Chicago: American Mar-keting Association, 106-10.

Zeithaml, Valarie (1981), "How Consumer Evaluation Pro-cesses Differ Between Goods and Services," in Marketingof Services, James H. Donnelly and William R. George,eds. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 186-90.

(1988), "Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality,and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evi-dence," Journal of Marketing, 52 (July), 2-22.

, A. Parasuraman, and Leonard L. Berry (1985),"Problems and Strategies in Services Marketing," Journalof Marketing, 49 (Spring), 33-46.

Reprint No. JM562tO4

Servicescapes / 71