# Expectancy-disconfirmation and consumer satisfaction: A meta-analysis

“Expectancy-disconfirmation and consumer satisfaction: A meta-analysis” (2025), by Tom Schiebler et al. Business and Management research paper. Original abstract below, unchanged. A free PDF is available.

- Authors: Tom Schiebler, Nick J. Lee, Felix C. Brodbeck
- Published: January 30, 2025
- Field: Business and Management
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-024-01078-x
- Free PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11747-024-01078-x.pdf

## Abstract

Expectancy-disconfirmation has been the dominant paradigm to explain the formation of consumer satisfaction for over 40 years. Within this paradigm, it is possible for expectations to have opposing effects on consumer satisfaction depending on the underlying psychological processes presupposed. In general, assimilation processes predict positive effects, while contrast processes predict negative effects. A comprehensive assessment of the empirical evidence for these positions is missing. Hence, we provide a meta-analysis of expectancy-disconfirmation research, using 150 records ( N = 58,597), to test the direct effects of perceived performance and performance expectations on consumer satisfaction, while also including disconfirmation as a mediator in each path (using meta-analytical path analysis). We found evidence for an overall positive relationship between expectations and consumer satisfaction ( r = .29 [0.24, 0.34]) and no evidence supporting contrast effects. Moderator analyses revealed that the positive correlation between performance expectations and consumer satisfaction was significantly stronger for predictive (vs. normative) expectations, for services (vs. goods), and for cross-sectional (vs. longitudinal and experimental) studies. Furthermore, we found an unexpected downward publication bias, which suggests that the true correlation between disconfirmation and consumer satisfaction is higher than the (already high) estimate we found. We discuss how future research can empirically scrutinize popular practitioner views and promote the development of causal explanations, account for non-linear effects, and elucidate the anomalous publication bias found here.

Canonical page: https://nerdi.pages.dev/paper/W4406963416
Read three real papers a day in Nerdi (iPhone): https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id6813826387?pt=128757794&ct=web-paper&mt=8