Encountered Space and Situated Lay-Knowledge: A Mixed Methods Approach

Abstract

This research draws on the geographical concept of situated lay-knowledge to highlight how the formation of tourists’ attitudes to travel destinations challenges the theoretical foundation of the theory of planned behavior (TPB). It suggests that situated lay knowledge is dynamic as opposed to static, which is the accepted basis of TPB, and subsequently, proposes a “Situated Lay-Knowledge Travel Behavior Model” (SLKTB). The model was tested in a mixed methods approach where Chinese tourists, who knew little about Portugal, encountered Portuguese culture and cuisine in Macau. The overall results demonstrate that the formation of tourists’ attitudes about travel destinations is not preexisting or static but dynamic and created from their ongoing encounters.

Smart dining, smart restaurant, and smart service quality (SSQ)

“…More specifically, physical servicescape in our study refers to manmade physical outlooks of the restaurant service setting where dining services take place (Ji et al , 2021). It captures physical qualities from built restaurant designs, spatial layout, dining service facilities and equipment, cleanliness of the setting and ambient conditions (Chao et al , 2021).…”

“…Accordingly, any physical cue embedded in the physical outlook, from exterior designs decorated in the entrance area to interior cues in the dining space, shapes service quality perceptions. Indeed, physical servicescape remains essential to stimulate customer responses (Ji et al , 2021; Hightower et al , 2002), considering patrons seek a sense of comfort from built dining surroundings. For example, Interviewee 1 raised a point about the seating space of the smart restaurant by stating, “The spatial design of seating area was finely crafted [so] that we were able to maintain comfort from it.” Likewise, customers were overwhelmingly amazed by physical surroundings built upon recent technological innovations, as the following review comment suggests:…”

“…Additionally, s-servicescape integrates three core tangible aspects of the service encounter: physical, social and service-product. Ji et al (2021, p. 1276) refer to these attributes as encountered space, to notion that these objects are “constituted in designed spaces, in the way that wider culture presents and represents leisure and in imaginative symbolism constructed by individuals.” In other words, there are sociocultural meanings attached with artifacts, server appearance, ambience and design and social interactions that render special connotations to diners. Hence, meanings and experiences constructed through this encountered “smart” space along with patrons’ sociocultural background may inspire additional imageries, from what Ji et al calls lay knowledge, into the future of smart lifestyle and habitat.…”

Will Social Distancing in Service Encounters Affect Consumers’ Value Perception During the COVID-19 Pandemic? The Role of Servicescape, Self-Efficacy, and Technological Intervention

“…The concept of "third place" has often been applied to places where social interaction happens. For example, a restaurant is an encountered space (Ji et al 2021), live sport events provide a unique experience to fans (Chen, Lin, and Chiu 2013;Uhrich and Benkenstein 2010), and a café is a place where people can work or arrange meetings (Nguyen et al 2019). Notably, many bookstores in the United Kingdom have been repositioned as destination stores (Clements 2005).…”

“…Solomon et al (1985) introduced the term "service encounter" to denote the interaction between consumers and service providers. Service encounters are considered salient determinants of consumers' satisfaction because consumer attitude evolves according to the service encounter (Ji et al 2021). The "physical environment," as introduced by Baker (1987), is a crucial feature of service encounters because services are produced and consumed simultaneously.…”