| Abstract: | This study revisits the theory, data, and analysis in Prentice and Woodside (2013). The study here applies fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to customer service–evaluation data from seven mega casinos in the world's gambling capital—Macau. The study includes contrarian case analysis and offers complex algorithms of highly favorable customer outcomes—an alternative stance to theory and data analysis in comparison to the dominant logic of statistical analyses that Prentice and Woodside (2013) report. Contrary to their principal hypotheses, Prentice and Woodside (2013) report a negative main effect between problem gambling and casino service evaluations. The findings in the reanalysis here include more complex, nuanced views on the antecedent conditions relating to high problem‐gambling, immediate service evaluations, and desired customer behavior measures in casinos. Counter to the findings using symmetric testing via multiple regression analysis in Prentice and Woodside (2013), the present study, using asymmetric testing via fsQCA, recognizes the occurrence of causal asymmetry, and draws conclusions from different algorithms leading to high scores for favorable and unfavorable outcome conditions. The findings indicate that not all problem gamblers gaze on casino services harshly; the minority of problem gamblers who view casinos positively versus harshly may be the most valuable customers for the casinos—the casinos’ exceptional customers. |
