Multisensory Dimensions Effect on Affective Attitudes, Restaurant Attachment and Positive Word of Mouth of Quick-Service Restaurants

Mmakoma Priscilla Mashao¹, Eugine Tafadzwa Maziriri^², Tinashe Chuchu³

Abstract: The constant growth of South Africa’s quick-service restaurants, also known as the fast food outlets industry, has transformed the food industry landscape, food consumption patterns, and the intensity of industry competition. As such, it is imperative for marketers in this industry to look beyond their branding and promotional efforts in order to appeal to the modern customer and a multisensory approach has become a critical strategy for the success of all businesses, especially service businesses such as restaurants. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of multisensory dimensions (smell, sound, sight, taste and touch) on affective consumer attitudes towards quick-service restaurants as well as restaurant attachment, and in turn positive word of mouth on the restaurants in South Africa. A quantitative research approach was utilised for this investigation and a convenience sampling procedure was embraced. Data was collected from 270 quick-service restaurant student customers within the Braamfontein Business District of Johannesburg. The data analysis was done in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 25 for demographic data analysis and AMOS 25 was utilised for the structural equation modelling. The tested relationships produced satisfactory results consistent with how they were hypothesised. Unequivocally, it was discovered that affective attitudes and restaurant attachment had the strongest relationship of all relationships that were tested. Implications were presented as well as proposals for further research.

The constant growth of South Africa’s quick-service restaurants, also known as the fast food outlets industry, has transformed the food industry landscape, food consumption patterns, and the intensity of industry competition (Maumbe, 2012). It is therefore imperative for outlets in this industry to look at more than just their branding and their service offerings in order to gain competitive advantage. According to a survey done by Brand South Africa in 2016, the living standards in the country have shown a remarkable degree of improvement over the past 20 years (Brand South Africa, 2018). This had also previously been proved by a report done by the IDC, showing South Africa’s gross domestic product (GDP) to have been 77% larger in real terms by 2012 relative to 1994. In addition, the country has seen an increase in its black middle class, also known as the black diamonds, labour force participation by women, and rural-urban migration (Maumbe, 2012). These key domestic market trends are being manifested through increased consumerism and fast food consumption (Maumbe, 2012). Just like in other emerging economies where per capita incomes have been rising, the tradition of eating home-cooked meals has declined in South Africa. As both household incomes and standards of living rise, more people are affording to eat out.

There has also been an increased interest in understanding the role of multisensory experience in marketing literature. Sensory marketing is broadly understood as a process of engaging consumer senses to influence their emotions, perceptions, choices, preferences and consumption (Krishna, 2010). Academic research in sensory marketing suggests that sensory aspects of a product such as smell, sight, sound, taste, and touch influence consumer evaluation of the product (Harvard Business Review, 2018). Sensory information is dominantly linked to consumer’s perception of products and services (Krishna, 2010). It is argued that individuals react instinctively and subconsciously to sensory stimuli such as smell as opposed to learnt stimuli such as a brand name or logo (Scott & Uncles, 2018). This has recently been evident in the marketers attempt to use consumer’s multisensory perception to build sensory signatures whereby unique brand identities are formed in the hospitality industry. Thus, understanding the role of multisensory dimensions in the evaluation of products and services is becoming increasingly relevant from both theoretical and managerial perspectives, in the marketplace.

Against the aforementioned background, it is imperative to note that scant studies have addressed the link between multisensory dimensions (smell, sight, sound, taste, touch), affective attitudes towards quick service restaurants, restaurant attachment, and positive word of mouth. The existing number of papers focusing on luxury restaurants, full-service restaurants and hotels (Balázs, 2012; Ehsan, 2012; Scott & Uncles, 2018; Amorntatkul & Pahome, 2011) have looked at multisensory dimensions in different contexts such as focusing on the impact of multisensory evaluation on overall attitudes and purchase intentions, as well as the role of individual personality variable in influencing the interrelationship between sensory evaluation and behavioural outcomes (Balaji, Srividya Raghavan &Subhash, 2011). Huang and Liao examined factors that induce a multisensory flow experience in an e-shopping context through the use of augmented-reality interactive technology (Huang & Liao, 2017). The gap between the recognition of the importance of multisensory stimulation and the research techniques used to study the effects of such stimulation on consumption experiences was addressed in a recent Scott and Uncles study (Scott & Uncles, 2018). A study by Guzel and Dortyol in Turkey examined how business executives can create a memorable experience by appealing to consumers’ multi-sensory organs emotionally and rationally in the tourism and hotel industry, specifically focused on the Adam & Eve hotel. From their point of view, determining the most successful multi-sensory brand experience concept, which the customers find most satisfying, is becoming a critical marketing strategy (Guzel & Dortyol, 2016).

Amorntatkul and Pahome (2011) mentioned how sensory marketing applies to the hotel and restaurant industry in order to influence customer behaviour in their Thailand study. The study also examined how sensory markeing can be used in an effective way as a promotional tool (Amorntatkul & Pahome, 2011). Xue Yu’s 2010 sensory study in restaurant interior design looked at creating a restaurant sensory design framework, which is applicable for restaurant designers as well as an effective reference for restaurant owners (Yu, 2010). Balázs (2012) did a sensory evaluation in the food industry and the aim of the study was to examine how consumers evaluate different food products, which then leads to opinions about the products (Balázs, 2012). Ehsan (2012) examined the factors important for the selection of fast food restaurants in an empirical study across three cities of Pakistan, in which sensory factors were briefly looked at (Ehsan, 2012), while a local study concentrated on describing the rise of South Africa’s quick-service restaurant industry(Maumbe,2012). Additionally, a recent study by (Jalilvand et al., 2017) among others focused on examining the factors that may influence tourists’ WOM about restaurants implying on the critical role of relationship quality.

Deducing from the above studies is imperative to mention that the mechanisms by which multisensory dimensions would influence affective attitudes towards restaurants, restaurants attachment and positive word of mouth is often characterized as vapid and is still in need of enhanced scientific rigor. Furthermore, given the aforementioned importance of comprehending multisensory dimensions in the restaurant sector, the dearth of research on this particular niche area is indeed astonishing and now warrant academic scrutiny and empirical inquiry. Furthermore, the aforementioned prior studies have been largely conducted in developed countries Therefore, little is known on the same from the developing parts of the world such as African countries—South Africa in particular. Hence, this lacuna deserves empirical inspection in the case of a neglected context of restaurants in the developing countries.

Hence, the focal purpose of the current research is to address this lacuna and investigate how multi-sensory dimensions (smell, sight, sound, taste and touch) would influence affective attitudes towards quick-service restaurants, restaurant attachment, and positive word of mouth of among student consumers in Johannesburg, South Africa.

The rest of this article is apportioned as follows: the next section focuses on the study’s problem statement, literature review, conceptual model development and the hypotheses. The methodology that guides the study is discussed hereafter and, subsequently, the study results, discussions, implications, recommendations and conclusions are presented.

Peter Caldon has in his book highlighted the failure rate in the restaurant industry and how most of the restaurants find it difficult to retain customers (Caldon, 2017). In South Africa, this can be accounted to the relatively challenging economic conditions such as the rising prices, weak Rand, increasing taxes, low consumer confidence and declining disposable incomes (Euromonitor, 2018). These factors also lead to high demand elasticity and increased brand substitutions in unfavourable conditions. According to a number of studies such as Namkung and Jang, (2010); Erdis, (2010); Petzer and Johannes, (2011); Zainal, Radzi, Hashim and Chik (2012); Min and Min, (2013); Guzel and Dortyol, (2016); Jalilvand et al., (2017); Mankiw, (2018), business owners need to look beyond their branding and promotional efforts in order to appeal to the modern customer and a multisensory approach has become a critical strategy for the success of all businesses, especially service businesses such as restaurants (Guzel & Dortyol, 2016).

Moreover, in line with the aforementioned perspectives, it can be noted that the problem to be explored in this study focuses on the restaurant managers 'difficulty in retaining student customers with different preferences when it comes to fast food consumption. When one wants to understand the origin of the problem, the answer to the following research questions would have to be determined.

This section of the literature review discusses the different research variables undertaken as part of this study.

Smell of all the five senses, is deemed the most powerful by sensory literature as it is directly connected to the memory of the customer. It is the closest linked to emotions because the brain’s olfactory system detects odours, fast-tracks signals to the limbic system and links emotions with memories (Soars, 2010). Previous studies done by Gueguen among others have also proved how ambient aromas increased customer dwell time in restaurants (Guéguen & Jacob, 2014). Odor is a key motivational factor in human behaviour and plays a critical role in behaviour patterns (Yu, 2010). In restaurant context, smell plays a significant role in enhancing taste perception.

Sight refers to the physical sense by which light stimuli received by the eye are interpreted by the brain and constructed into a representation of the position, shape, brightness, and usually colour of objects in space (Merriam-Webster, 2018). In service industries, the most common component of sight is colour, and this is due to the reason that colour can influence customer moods and emotions (Elder & Krishna, 2010). People can be influenced by colours for example, red is used as the most romantic colour, green symbolizes nature (Chapman, 2010). In the restaurant industry, red is often used because it has been scientifically proved to be an appetite stimulant (Hartel, 2015). Consumers are drawn to objects they are familiar with as elaborated by the Mere Exposure theory and seeing a particular quick-service restaurant frequently breeds familiarity, which then leads to the willingness to try it and future recommendation.

A sensorial sound strategy is used to reinforce the identity and image of a brand. Sound, and especially music, as a sensory expression, attaches meaning to people and is a source of inspiration (Hultén, 2011). This strategy also emphasizes the significance of sensory expressions such as atmosphere and theme, which are often used in creating a sound experience. A study done in a Dallas restaurant, showed how music can influence customers to spend more time in a restaurant, for example a slow tempo could persuade a customer to stay longer than fast a tempo (Kontukoski, Paakki, Thureson, Uimonen & Hopia, 2016). Further research also indicates how the music in a restaurant should match the situational context and the message the restaurant wishes to convey (Heung & Gu, 2012). It is therefore imperative that the various quick-service restaurants carefully select and align the music and sounds to be exposed to their customers.

Taste according to (Hultén, 2011) includes much more than the actual flavor and relates to sensory expressions such as interplay, symbiosis and synergy, emphasizing the significance of other senses. It comprehensively looks at how a product looks, smells, feels, and sounds (Hultén, 2011). Taste encompasses five sensations being bitter, salty, sweet, sour, and umami. A taste experience is more related to the customer’s multi-sensory product or service experience, and it can include such other sensory expressions as smell, sound, design and sight as these build on the interplay and synergies between different senses (Krishna, 2012). Taste is considered critical in many cosmologies and can determine an entirely different sensory order for consumers (Rybanská & Nagyová, 2017). Hulten (2011) further states that the sensory taste strategy differentiates a brand, approaching the consumer’s mind and senses both from a cognitive point of view and from an emotional one.

The touch dimension looks at strengthening the identity and image of a brand through a physical and psychological interaction with customers (Gu, 2013). Touching products makes remembering them easy, for example, having previously touched the Mc Donald’s packaging makes it easier to remember how it feels like. This experience is facilitated through sensory expressions such as material, weight and form. Spence and Gallace (2011) explain the tactile branding and tactile marketing concepts of touch in Marketing and how consumers evaluate products based on their texture. Touch therefore helps with product identification the quick-service restaurant consumers will reach full satisfaction once they have come in contact with the various restaurant products.

Consumer attitudes are defined as favourable or unfavourable evaluative reactions towards a product or service, exhibited in ones beliefs, feelings, or intended behaviour (Myers & Twenge, 2013). Consumer attitudes tend to influence purchase behaviour (Ndlela & Chuchu, 2016). They are a social orientation and an underlying inclination to respond to something either favourably or unfavourably, for example, spreading positive word of mouth about one’s favourite quick-service restaurant. Attitudes can be divided into cognitive, affective and conative attitudes (Fiske, 2013) and for the purpose of this study, the researchers will be looking at affective attitudes. These are feelings or emotions that something evokes, for example, wanting Nando’s as a result of the sound and sight of their funny advertisements. Therefore, affective attitudes form part of the three attitudes in Psychology and are defined as are feelings or emotions that something evokes (Fiske, 2013). Affective attitudes refer to an evaluation or emotional response to the attitude object and are thought to be the central core of attitudes (Fiske, 2013). For example, wanting a specific product because its smell makes you feel good or visiting a particular restaurants, e.g. spur, because you love the colours displayed in it and the ambiance. A brand’s value is derived from individual consumers’ actions in the market (Buil, De Chernatony & Martínez, 2013), so understanding consumers’ attitudes and responses to a brand is important. The positive feelings and emotions that a particular brand evokes on customers can lead to consumer loyalty, less price sensitivity as well as improved communication effectiveness. Building restaurant attachment involves eliciting positive emotional responses and generating favourable attitudes towards the brand among target consumers (Kumar, von Kriegstein, Friston & Griffiths, 2011). In this research context, affective attitudes emphasize the emotional rewards and feelings from sensory stimuli from a particular quick-service restaurant, such as a sense of pleasure and happiness (Bian & Forsythe, 2012).

Restaurants need to create personal servicescape as well as provide excellent service to their customers in order to be successful (Symons, 2013). A servicescape is the physical environment where the service transaction occurs and comprises of numerous elements, such as colour, music, smell, and layout and design (Lin & Chiang, 2010). The restaurant servicescape as well as sensory effects have a strong impact on consumption experiences and can lead to restaurant attachment (Namkung, 2009). Oneto (2014) defines attachment as an emotional connection between people and things (Oneto, 2014). Thus, just as people can be attached to a person, they can also for a host of reasons, become attached to a restaurant. Attachment somewhat goes deeper than loyalty and is formed by three elements, being affection, connection and passion (Oneto, 2014). People with strong attachments influence other people around them and in this research context, restaurant advocates are of great significance as they foster positive word of mouth. The attached advocates increase restaurant customer base by bringing their friends along. Additionally, the greater the satisfaction and attachment experienced by customers, the greater the level of trust and word of mouth activity (Kassim & Abdullah, 2010), also known as the likelihood to return and recommend to others (Yu, 2010).

According to Merriam-Webster (2018), word of mouth generally refers to information orally communicated. In the marketing context, word of mouth refers to information a customer provides to others concerning the consumption of a product or service (Leisen Pollack, 2017). Positive word of mouth has been defined as informal recommendation between private parties concerning evaluations of goods and services (Sweeney, Soutar & Mazzarol, 2012), and it can be oral or written by a satisfied customer and is not for commercial purposes (Oetting, 2010). It is often also called “word of mouse” (Berger, 2014) when electronically communicated. Moreover, inferring from the aforementioned elucidations it can be stated positive word of mouth features as the outcome of the variables in this study and this is because the restaurant industry relies heavily on word of mouth, especially those that do not have sufficient marketing budgets.

A conceptual model describes the relationship between variables investigated in the study (Nana, Tobias-Mamina, Chiliya & Maziriri, 2019). Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual model reflecting the distinct paths and connections between the constructs under investigation. Based on a synthesis of the converging literature related to the research variables, a conceptual model was proposed to guide the empirical study as shown in Figure 1. Visual representation facilitates an understanding of the conceptual model proposed.

H6: Affective attitudes have a positive and a significant impact on restaurant attachment;

H7: Restaurant attachment has a positive and a significant impact on positive word of mouth.

This study submits to the positivist paradigm, since it intends to test several a priori hypotheses to determine relationships between the independent and dependent variables. The researchers selected a quantitative research approach, since it increases accuracy through statistical analysis. A non-probability sampling, a form of convenience sampling was used in selecting participants for the study. This was due to the difficulty of obtaining a sampling frame since a finite list of respondents from the Braamfontein business district in Johannesburg cannot be computed. A total of 270 willing respondents completed the survey on multisensory dimensions effect on affective attitudes, consumer restaurant attachment and positive word of mouth in quick-service restaurants.

For this study, a self-administered questionnaire was used to collect the necessary data. As with any empirical work, it is important to consider how the proposed variables should be measured. Hence, measurement scales were operationalised from previous studies. The questionnaire was divided into nine sections. Section A comprised questions pertaining to the respondents’ demographic factors, such as age, gender, education level, frequency of purchase at a restaurant, most visited quick-service restaurant and reason for visiting quick-service restaurants. Section B assessed ‘smell’ and was measured using a four-item scale adapted from Nwokolo (2015) Spangenberg, Crowley and Henderson (1996) and Muntaha (2016). Section C measured ‘sight’ and used a six-item scale adapted from Fisher and Nechushtan (1994). Section D assessed ‘sound’ and used a seven-item scale adapted from Muntaha (2016). Section E measured ‘taste’ with a four-item scale adapted from Liem, Aydin and Zandstra (2012) and Muntaha (2016). Section F comprised questions on ‘touch’ which are measured using a five-item scale adapted from Peck and Childers (2003). In addition, section G assessed ‘affective attitudes’ and was measured using a nine-item scale adapted from Siu, Kwan and Zeng (2016). Furthermore, section H measured ‘restaurant attachment’ and used a seven-item scale adapted from Park, MacInnis, Priester, Eisingerich and Iacobucci, (2010). Moreover, Section I assessed ‘positive word of mouth’ and used a six-item scale adapted from Brown, Barry, Dacin and Gunst, (2005). Through a five-point Likert scale, interviewees were solicited to exhibit the degree of their concurrence with every statement, where 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither disagree nor agree/neutral, 4 = agree and 5 = strongly agree.

This study was governed by the University of the Witwatersrand’s conditions, which necessitate studies concerning human participation to apply for human research ethics committee’s approval before a study can be carried out. The researchers acquired the ethics clearance certificate from the designated ethics committee at the University before questionnaires were given out to respondents. The protocol number was: CBUSE/1309.

This section presents the findings of the study. First, the sample profile followed by the results of hypothesis testing. The table below, table 1, presents the study’s sample profile.

In table 1, it can be seen that in terms of age most of the participants were aged 18 to 25 at 60% while, females dominated the sample accounting for also 60% of the sample. In terms of educational level, about 71% of the participants indicated that they had a university degree. About 66% of the participants stated that they buy food from a quick service restaurant at least a few times a week and KFC receives the most customers, at 33% of the sample. Buying take outs is the most common reason for visiting quick service restaurants according to the research as this was indicated by about 81% of the sample.

The scale accuracy analysis is presented in Table 2. This section is centered on a discussion of the descriptive statistics, measurement scale reliability and validity. First of all, in terms of descriptive statistics, Table 2 shows the mean scores ranging between 3.37 and 4.18 (out of 5.0) were computed for all the constructs examined in the study. These scores depict a collective inclination towards both the ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ positions on the Likert scales. As posited by Hair, Babin, Anderson and Tatham (2010), the relationship between the mean and the SD is that a small estimated SD denotes that respondents’ responses were consistent and that the response distributions lie close to the mean. Conversely, a large SD indicates that the responses are varying, making the response distribution values fall away from the mean of the distribution (Hair et al., 2010). Moreover, the SD value should be less than 1, but it is recommended to at least include a value of less than 2 to ensure that there is no issue of outliers (Drost, 2011). Table 2 reveals that the highest SD value was reported at 1.102 and the lowest SD value was 0.723. This information indicates that the data points are clustered around the mean. The SD values are below 2; hence, it indicates that there was no presence of outliers. Table 2 reveals that, on the ‘taste variable’, one item (TS4) was deleted, as the item to total correlation values was less than 0.5. It is worth mentioning that this item was deleted because it did not meet convergent validity, as it did not measure at least 50% of what it is supposed to measure. As such, this item did not require further analysis.

Three values being the Cronbach’s alpha test, composite reliability test and average variance extracted test are considered when testing the reliability of the research constructs. The Cronbach’s alpha value was used to measure the internal consistency and reliability of each construct. According to Nunnally and Bernstein (1994), the value has to be above 0.7. It is seen on the table above that most of the constructs read values between 0.7 and 0.9 and meet the threshold. Composite reliability and AVE for each construct were also computed and assessed to determine if they met the required thresholds for reliability and validity. As per the results shown in Table 2, the lowest CR value (0.71) is well above the recommended value of 0.6 (Hulland, 1999), while the lowest obtained AVE value (0.46) is above the recommended value of 0.4 (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). This indicates that convergent validity was achieved, further confirming excellent internal consistency and reliability of the measurement instruments used.

Convergent validity is an element used to determine the degree to which a construct is brought together by its indicators, explaining the items variance (Sarstedt et al., 2014). It shows how two measures of the same constructs are related and items are said to exhibit good convergent validity when its value is greater than 0.5 (Sarstedt et al., 2014). The convergent validity of the items in this study was assessed by checking if the individual factor loadings were greater than 0.5. The factor loadings ranged between 0.590 and 0.843 and these items had loadings above the 0.5 threshold as indicated on the table below. Thus, revealing that each item measure at least more than 50 percent of it is supposed to measure.

Key: SM=Smell, ST=Sight, SD=sound, TA=taste, TC=touch, AA=affective attitudes, RA=restaurant attachment, PW=positive word of mouth, SD= Standard Deviation; CR= Composite Reliability; AVE= Average Variance Extracted, FD= Factor loadings

According to Field (2013), discriminant validity refers to items measuring different concepts. Table 3 shows the results of the discriminant validity analysis. As shown in Table 3, all the correlation coefficients of this study fell below 0.70, thereby confirming the theoretical uniqueness of each variable in this research (Field 2013).

Key: SM=Smell, ST=Sight, SD=sound, TA=taste, TC=touch, AA=affective attitudes, RA=restaurant attachment, PW=positive word of mouth

A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the psychometric properties of all latent construct measures. The measurement model fits the data well, i.e. (CMIN/DF 0.90) = 1.245, Tucker and Lewis index (TLI>0.90) = 0.948, incremental fit index (IFI>0.90) = 0.959, comparative fit index (CFI>0.90) = 0.998 and root mean square approximation error (RMSEA <0.08) = 0.030 (Schreiber, Nora, Stage, Barlow, & King, 2006).

The results of the analysis of the structural model showed that all fit statistics for the structural model could be tolerated within the range, that is β 2/(df) = 1.526, NFI = 0.918, IFI = 0.949, TLI = 0.932, CFI = 0.949 and RMSEA = 0.044. Figure 2 presents the structural model.

These outcomes demonstrated the completeness of the model and the fitness of the model measurements converged well. The investigation’s hypothesis was tested to assess the connections between latent variables. Table 4 shows the outcomes produced after the hypotheses tests. These are displayed in the next sections.

Key: Key: SM=Smell, ST=Sight, SD=sound, TA=taste, TC=touch, AA=affective attitudes, RA=restaurant attachment, PW=positive word of mouth.

The first hypothesis (H1) stated that smell has a positive and a significant impact on affective attitudes. As a result of the survey it emerged that the path coefficient value for hypothesis 1 is -0,046, which is an indication of a weak association and relationship between smell and affective attitudes. The P value is 0.229, which, therefore, means that the hypothesis is not supported and is insignificant. This may be because these studies looked at over a thousand respondents while this one only assessed about a quarter of this amount. Perhaps similar results may have been obtained if the sample sizes were similar.

Hypothesis two (H2) stated that sight Shas a positive and a significant impact on affective attitudes. The results from the survey however disprove this with a path coefficient value of -0,023 and a P-value of 0.748 which indicate a negative and insignificant relationship between these two constructs. These results are in contradiction with those outlined in (Yoon & Park, 2012; Shafaei, Nejati & Abd Razak, 2016). This may be because these were close related studies on sight and attitudes as research on this nexus within the restaurant industry is scant. Perhaps if another study is done with a larger sample, these results may have been consistent. Another reason may be that this study was conducted within a university setting where most of the respondents are students who do not necessarily care about how the quick-service restaurant they consume from looks like or how the food is advertised because they are in search for value for money.

The third hypothesis (H3) stated that sound has a positive and a significant impact on affective attitudes. It emerged as a result of the survey that the path coefficient value for hypothesis 3 is 0.236, which is an indication of a strong a relationship between sound and affective attitudes. The results also yielded three stars (***) as a p-value, indicating a highly significant relationship. The results obtained in this study are in accord with literature previously studied in this study, whereby Yoon and Park (2012) investigated and ranked influences of core sensory concepts on brand attitude, which found that auditory appeal is number four on the impact it has on general consumer attitudes.

Hypothesis four (H4) stated that taste has a positive and a significant impact on affective attitudes. The results from the survey were however inconsistent with this hypothesis as they yielded a path coefficient of -0.143 and a p-value of 0.033. This proved the relationship between taste and affective attitudes to be negative and insignificant. These findings did not substantiate those from Trendel and Werle (2016) who in their study titled “Distinguishing the affective and cognitive bases of implicit attitudes to improve prediction of food choices” found that attitudes toward food are driven by two distinct constructs that often have diverging evaluative consequences, being the automatic affective reactions to food such as tastiness and the automatic cognitive reactions to food (Trendel & Werle, 2016). The results were also inconsistent from those yielded from Nystrand and Fjørtoft (2015), whose results supported the view that taste positively impacts consumer persuasive and affective attitudes. The contradiction in these results with those yielded in this study may be because these studies used a mixed methodology when collecting the results. Perhaps if the same approach was taken, the results would have been consistent.

The fifth hypothesis (H5) stated that touch has a positive and a significant impact on affective attitudes. As a result of the survey it emerged that the path coefficient value for hypothesis 5 is 0.196, which is an indication of a strong association and relationship between touch and affective. The P value is 0,007, which, therefore, means that the hypothesis is significant, and it is well supported. This finding has ample support from previous empirical research studies such as that conducted by Sailer and Ackerley (2017) on whether touch exposure affects hedonic and discriminative aspects of tactile perception, which found a positive correlation between these two constructs.

The sixth hypothesis (H6) stated that affective attitudes have a positive and a significant impact on restaurant attachment. It emerged as a result of the survey that the path coefficient value for hypothesis 6 is 0.653, which is an indication of a strong a relationship between affective attitudes and restaurant attachment. The results also yielded three stars (***) as a p-value, indicating a highly significant relationship. The results obtained in this study are in accord with literature previously studied in this study, whereby Liu, Batra and Wang (2014) and Park et al. (2010) proved that brand affective attitudes produced significant and positive effects on brand preference as well as attachment.

The seventh and last hypothesis stated that restaurant attachment has a positive and a significant impact on positive word of mouth. This was proved true by the results from this survey which yielded a path coefficient of 0.393 and a three stars (***) P-value. This indicated a strong and significant correlation, which is in line with the works of Dolbec and Chebat (2013) who reinforce with results from their study that attachment has implications for marketing relevant consumption behaviours, such as repeat purchases, and willingness to recommend a brand. These results are also consistent with those from Chen, Dwyer and Firth (2018), from which it was predicted that there is a nexus between restaurant attachment and positive word of mouth.

The implications of this study are two-fold. The study adds to scant literature on the impact of multisensory dimensions on affective attitudes. Existing literature on attitudes focuses on cognitive and behavioural attitudes and has a very minimal touch on affective attitudes. The study therefore will contribute to the deficient literature on this, as well as contribute to the pool of multisensory research as investigated with attachment and word of mouth. The implications of the relationship between sound and affective attitudes is that marketers in quick-service restaurants need to work on improving the ambient sound in these restaurants as it influences the consumer mood, actual time spent in the restaurant, perception of time spent, actual spending and the overall affective attitudes consumers have on these restaurants. Quick-service restaurants like Chicken Licken, KFC and McDonald’s often have peak hours that make the wait for service unbearable if the sound in the restaurant is unpleasant or if there is no sound at all. As such, marketers in these restaurants need to invest in ambient sound or music for customers such as the majority surveyed in this study. The implications of the positive relationship between the touch dimension and affective attitudes indicates that consumers highly regard the feel of the items around these restaurants as well as the feel of the food sold in these restaurants. As such, restaurant managers and markers in quick-service restaurants need to focus on the aesthetics inside their restaurants as well as improve the packaging of their items to increase their appeal on the customer. Restaurant managers and marketers also need to focus on ways to emotionally affect their consumers in their marketing as this build on restaurant attachment and in turn positive word of mouth, which is the main objective.

Despite this study's interesting results, its constraints are worthy to be recognised. The research was limited due to time and financial constraints. When the data was collected, in 2018, the researchers resided in Johannesburg, within the Parktown and Braamfontein area and conducted the study around this area. Due to restrictions of geographic area and the researchers not being able to travel to other regions to obtain data, the findings are only representative of the target population and may not represent the views of other quick-service restaurant consumers within the country or even the greater Johannesburg area. The study also followed one methodological approach, which was the quantitative approach. The results would have perhaps been more insightful if a mixed method approach was used and focus groups were used in addition to the surveys. A qualitative design may have been helpful in making follow-ups to the responses provided in the quantitative design. Consequently, the quantitative responses are validated by these follow-ups. As such, if the above were to be addressed in future studies, more accurate results may be obtained.

Current work leaves room for potential work into multisensory dimensions and their effect on positive mouth-words. The same variables can be studied in greater depth or certain variables that were not included in this analysis can be investigated. The study was conducted focusing within the University of the Witwatersrand borders, which makes it biased towards generations that are not within a university setting or those that are in other regions. The researchers also recognize that since the focus of the study was on affective attitudes as a variable, maybe future research may be focused on cognitive or behavioural attitudes. The researchers suggest that if a similar study is conducted, it should be conducted on a much larger scale with a larger sample size and a wide geographical area. This may provide the researcher with more accurate results and an unlimited demographic profile of respondents. Finally, conducting research of such a nature may require paired methodologies so to allow both the qualitative and quantitative paradigms to supplement each other, as well as an extended period of time. This may allow for greater accuracy in the findings.

Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), pp. 411–423.

Bian, Q. & Forsythe, S. (2012). Purchase intention for luxury brands: A cross cultural comparison. Journal of Business Research, 65(10), pp. 1443-1451.

Brand South Africa. (2018). Living standards improve in South Africa. Retrieved from https://www.brandsouthafrica.com/south-africa-fast-facts/news-facts/living-standards-240216, date: 15.02.2020.

Brown, T. J.; Barry, T. E.; Dacin, P. A. & Gunst, R. F. (2005). Spreading the word: Investigating antecedents of consumers’ positive word-of-mouth intentions and behaviors in a retailing context. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 33(2), pp. 123-138.

Buil, I.; De Chernatony, L. & Martínez, E. (2013). Examining the role of advertising and sales promotions in brand equity creation. Journal of business research, 66(1), pp. 115-122.

Caldon, P. (2017). Balanced Approach To Restaurant Management. [S.L.]: Iuniverse Com.

Chapman, C. (2010). Color theory for designers, Part 1. The meaning of colour [Online] Retrieved from https://www. smashingmagazine. com/2010/01/28/color-theoryfor-designers-part-1-the-meaning-of-color/, date. 28.02.2020.

Chen, N. C.; Dwyer, L. & Firth, T. (2018). Residents' place attachment and word-of-mouth behaviours: A tale of two cities. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 36, pp. 1-11.

Dolbec, P. Y. & Chebat, J. C. (2013). The impact of a flagship vs. a brand store on brand attitude, brand attachment and brand equity. Journal of Retailing, 89(4), pp. 460-466.

Elder, R. S. & Krishna, A. (2010). The effects of advertising copy on sensory thoughts and perceived taste. Journal of consumer research, 36(5), pp. 748-756.

Erdis, C. (2010). Investigating customer services in selected restaurants in the Tshwane area: an exploratory study. Master’s Dissertation. University of South Africa

Euromonitor (2018). South Africa Retrieved from https://www.euromonitor.com/south-africa, date. 15.03.2018.

Fisher, B. & Nechushtan, A. (1994). U.S. Patent No. 5,359,800. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Gu, M. (2013). The Impact of Visual Appearance in Brand Image. Retrieved from https://www.theseus.f/bitstream/handle/10024/69237/Gu_Mingya. pdf?sequence=1, date 15.03.2018.

Guéguen, N. & Jacob, C. (2014). Clothing color and tipping: Gentlemen patrons give more tips to waitresses with red clothes. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 38(2), pp. 275-280.

Güse, K. (2011). Brand personalities and consumer-brand relationships as elements of successful brand management. Bamberg: Univ. of Bamberg Press.

Guzel, O. & Dortyol, T. (2016). Exploring the Multi-Sensory Based Memorable Tourism Experiences: A Study of Adam & Eve Hotel in Turkey. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets, 2(4), pp. 28-39.

Hair Jr, J. F.; Sarstedt, M.; Hopkins, L. & Kuppelwieser, V. G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). European business review. 26(2), pp. 106-121

Hair, J. F.; Babin, B. J.; Anderson, R. E. & Tatham, R.L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. A global perspective (7th edn.). London: Prentice-Hall.

Hartel, K. (2015). How Colors Can Change Your Appetite and Eating Habits. Fit Day.

Harvard Business Review. (2018). The Science of Sensory Marketing. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/03/the-science-of-sensory-marketing, date 15.03.2018.

Heung, V. C. & Gu, T. (2012). Influence of restaurant atmospherics on patron satisfaction and behavioral intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), pp. 1167-1177.

Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), pp. 195–204.

Hultén, B. (2011). Sensory marketing: the multi-sensory brand-experience concept. European Business Review, 23(3), pp. 256-273.

Jalilvand, M. R.; Salimipour, S.; Elyasi, M. & Mohammadi, M. (2017). Factors influencing word of mouth behaviour in the restaurant industry. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 35(1), pp. 81-110.

Kassim, N., & Abdullah, N. A. (2010). The effect of perceived service quality dimensions on customer satisfaction, trust, and loyalty in e‐commerce settings. Asia pacific journal of marketing and logistics, 22 (3), pp. 351-371

Kontukoski, M.; Paakki, M.; Thureson, J.; Uimonen, H. & Hopia, A. (2016). Imagined salad and steak restaurants: Consumers’ colour, music and emotion associations with different dishes. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 4, pp. 1-11.

Krishna, A. (2012). An integrative review of sensory marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception, judgment and behavior. Journal of consumer psychology, 22(3), pp. 332-351.

Kumar, S.; von Kriegstein, K.; Friston, K. & Griffiths, T. D. (2012). Features versus feelings: dissociable representations of the acoustic features and valence of aversive sounds. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(41), pp. 14184-14192.

Liem, D. G.; Aydin, N. T. & Zandstra, E. H. (2012). Effects of health labels on expected and actual taste perception of soup. Food Quality and Preference, 25(2), pp. 192-197.

Lin, M. Q. & Chiang, Y. F. (2010). The influence of store environment on perceived experiential value and behavior intention. Asia Pacific Management Review, 15(2), pp. 281-299.

Liu, W.; Batra, R. & Wang, H. (2017). Product touch and consumers’ online and offline buying: the role of mental representation. Journal of Retailing, 93(3), pp. 369-381.

Maumbe, B. (2012). The rise of South Africa’s quick-service restaurant industry. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 2(2), pp. 147-166.

Merriam-webster (2018). Definition of SIGHT. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sight, date. 15.03.2020.

Muntaha, A. (2016). The Effect of Multi-Sensory Branding on Purchase Intention at Coffee Shops In South Africa. (Master’s Dissertation). University of the Witwatersrand

Namkung, Y. & Jang, S. C. S. (2010). Effects of perceived service fairness on emotions, and behavioral intentions in restaurants. European Journal of Marketing, 44(9/10), pp. 1233-1259.

Nana, S.; Tobias-Mamina, R.; Chiliya, N. & Maziriri, E.T (2019). The impact of corporate rebranding on brand equity and firm performance. Journal of Business and Retail Management Research, 13(4), pp. 93-102.

Ndlela, T. & Chuchu, T. (2016). Celebrity Endorsement Advertising: Brand Awareness, Brand Recall, Brand Loyalty as Antecedence of South African Young Consumers Purchase Behaviour. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 8(2), pp. 79-90.

Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychological theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Oneto, C. (2014). Restaurant attachment vs. Brand Loyalty: What is the Difference & Why Does It Matter? Let’s Talk Ice Cream. Meltwater.

Park, C. W.; MacInnis, D. J.; Priester, J.; Eisingerich, A. B. & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Brand attachment and brand attitude strength: Conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. Journal of marketing, 74(6), pp. 1-17.

Peck, J. & Childers, T. L. (2003). Individual differences in haptic information processing: The need for touch scale. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(3), pp. 430-442.

Rybanská, J. & Nagyová, Ľ. (2017). The sense of taste. Sensory and aroma marketing. Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Sailer, U. & Ackerley, R. (2019). Exposure shapes the perception of affective touch. Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 35, pp. 109-114.

Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C. M.; Henseler, J. & Hair, J. F. (2014). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long range planning, 47(3), pp. 154-160.

Schreiber, J. B.; Nora, A.; Stage, F. K.; Barlow, E. A. & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), pp. 323–338.

Scott, R. O. & Uncles, M. D. (2018). Bringing sensory anthropology to consumer research. European Journal of Marketing, 5 (1/2), pp. 302 -327

Shafaei, A.; Abd Razak, N. & Nejati, M. (2016). Integrating two cultures successfully: Factors influencing acculturation attitude of international postgraduate students in Malaysia. Journal of research in international education, 15(2), pp. 137-154.

Siu, N. Y. M.; Kwan, H. Y. & Zeng, C. Y. (2016). The role of brand equity and face saving in Chinese luxury consumption. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 33(4), pp. 245–256.

Soars, B. (2009). Driving sales through shoppers’ sense of sound, sight, smell and touch. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 37(3), pp. 286-298.

Spangenberg, E. R.; Crowley, A. E. & Henderson, P. W. (1996). Improving the store environment: do olfactory cues affect evaluations and behaviors? Journal of marketing, 60(2), pp. 67-80.

Spence, C. & Gallace, A. (2011). Multisensory design: Reaching out to touch the consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 28(3), pp. 267-308.

Symons, M. (2013). The rise of the restaurant and the fate of hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(2), pp. 247-263.

Trendel, O. & Werle, C. O. (2016). Distinguishing the affective and cognitive bases of implicit attitudes to improve prediction of food choices. Appetite, 104, pp. 33-43.

Yoon, S. J. & Park, J. E. (2012). Do sensory ad appeals influence brand attitude? Journal of Business Research, 65(11), pp. 1534-1542.

Yu, X. (2010). Sensory study in restaurant interior design. (Master’s Dissertation). Lowa state university.

Zainal, A.; Radzi, S. M.; Hashim, R.; Chik, C. T. & Abu, R. (2012). Current Issues in Hospitality and Tourism: Research and Innovations. CRC Press, Boca Raton.

TC3: I buy food from this restaurant because I like how it feels when I touch it;

RA2: My thoughts and feelings toward this restaurant are often automatic, coming to mind seemingly on their own;

1Ms, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, Address: 1 Jan Smuts Avenue, Johannesburg, 2000, South Africa, E-mail: priscillammashao@gmail.com.

2 PhD, Department of Business Management, University of the Free State, South Africa, Address: 205 Nelson Mandela Drive, Park West, Bloemfontein, 9301, South Africa, E-mail: maziririet@ufs.ac.za.

3 PhD, Department of Marketing Management, University of Pretoria, South Africa, Address: Lynwood Road, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa, Corresponding author: Emai: tinashe.chuchu@up.ac.za.

AUDŒ, Vol. 16, no. 2/2020, pp. 176-200

Category		Frequency	Percentage (%)
Age	18-25	161	59,63
	26-25	105	38,89
	36-45	4	1,48
	Total	270	100
Gender	Male	106	39,26
	Female	162	60
	Prefer not to say	2	0,74
	Total	270	100
Education level	Postgraduate degree	61	22,59
	Degree	191	70,74
	Diploma	8	2,96
	Matric	10	3,70
	Total	270	100
How often they eat form quick-service restaurants	Everyday	11	4,07
	A few times a week	178	65,93
	A few times a month	42	15,56
	Once in a while	39	14,44
	Total	270	100
Most visited quick-service restaurant	KFC	90	33,33
	Chicken licken	62	22,96
	McDonald’s	56	20,74
	Kara Nichas	2	0,74
	Sizzler’s	5	1,85
	Debinairs	16	5,93
	Steers	22	8,15
	Other	17	6,30
	Total	270	100
Reason for Visiting quick-service restaurants.	Eat breakfast/lunch/dinner	25	9,26
	Socialize	25	9,26
	Get take-out	220	81,4
	Total	270	100

Research Constructs		Item	Descriptive statistics			Cronbach’s Test		CR	AVE	FD
			Mean Value		SD	Item-total	α value
Smell	SM1		3.94	3.901	0.880	0.507	0.764	0.77	0.46		0.599
	SM2		4.00		0.825	0.610					0.636
	SM3		3.84		0.920	0.579					0.739
	SM4		3.81		0.857	0.562					0.738
Sight	ST1		3.89	3.731	0.928	0.512	0.757	0.85	0.48		0.636
	ST2		3.89		0.789	0.585					0.600
	ST3		3.92		0.884	0.507					0.751
	ST4		3.37		1.004	0.512					0.716
	ST5		3.58		0.940	0.605					0.723
	ST6		3.74		0.915	0.676					0.714
Sound	SD1		4.04	3.998	0.861	0.620	0.843	0.88	0.52		0.678
	SD2		3.65		1.062	0.639					0.649
	SD3		4.09		0.858	0.588					0.687
	SD4		4.07		0.777	0.657					0.713
	SD5		4.04		0.846	0.785					0.725
	SD6		3.99		0.799	0.516					0.730
	SD7		4.11		0.784	0.653					0.850
Taste	TS1		4.11	4.071	0.773	0.651	0.725	0.71	0.46		0.590
	TS2		4.15		0.723	0.514					0.689
	TS3		4.01		0.867	0.637					0.737
Touch	TC1		4.09	3.980	0.618	0.674	0.724	0.85	0.53		0.617
	TC2		3.94		0.767	0.683					0.755
	TC3		3.91		0.758	0.658					0.627
	TC4		3.97		0.851	0.710					0.781
	TC5		3.99		0.886	0.784					0.843
Affective Attitude	AA1		3.98	3.991	0.908	0.764	0.836	0.90	0.49		0.619
	AA2		3.90		0.899	0.698					0.633
	AA3		3.80		1.102	0.660					0.622
	AA4		3.86		1.050	0.716					0.775
	AA5		3.95		0.860	0.619					0.745
	AA6		3.99		0.864	0.576					0.734
	AA7		4.14		0.773	0.501					0.736
	AA8		4.12		0.894	0.534					0.715
	AA9		4.18		0.836	0.555					0.711
Restaurant Attachment	RA1		4.00	3.898	0.908	0.533	0.812	0.86	0.46		0.611
	RA2		3.96		0.899	0.565					0.631
	RA3		3.79		1.001	0.585					0.688
	RA4		3.89		0.942	0.563					0.661
	RA5		3.90		0.974	0.628					0.683
	RA6		3.84		1.009	0.528					0.741
	RA7		3.90		0.947	0.641					0.746
Positive word of mouth	PW1		4.01	4.048	0.862	0.660	0.759	0.88	0.55		0.697
	PW2		4.07		0.899	0.686					0.775
	PW3		4.10		0.863	0.656					0.799
	PW4		4.04		0.923	0.684					0.739
	PW5		4.04		0.867	0.682					0.715
	PW6		4.02		0.950	0.638					0.716

	SM	ST	SD	TS	TC	AA	RA	PW
SM	1
ST	0.424^**	1
SD	0.397^**	0.389^**	1
TS	0.381^**	0.324^**	0.452^**	1
TC	0.169^**	0.132^*	0.403^**	0.517^**	1
AA	0.043	0.015	0.174^**	0.145^*	0.362^**	1
RA	0.108	0.026	0.195^**	0.087	0.252^**	0.487^**	1
PW	0.133^*	0.060	0.174^**	0.087	0.167^**	0.330^**	0.424**	1

Hypothesis		Path coefficients β	P-value	Outcome
SM ---> AA	H1	-0.046	0.229	Negative and insignificant
ST ---> AA	H2	-0.023	0.748	Negative and insignificant
SD ---> AA	H3	0.236	***	Positive and significant
TA ---> AA	H4	-0.143	0.083	Negative and insignificant
TC ---> AA	H5	0.196	0.007	Positive and significant
AA ---> RA	H6	0.653	***	Positive and significant
RA ---> PW	H7	0.393	***	Positive and significant