Author (year)


Key findings


Ryzin (2004)

First time applied the model of expectancy disconfirmation on citizen satisfaction with public services, i.e. in the field of public management.

Expectations and disconfirmation played a dominant role to form satisfaction with the quality of public service.

Expectations were measured with previous experience that can give rise to bias result. Direct measure of disconfirmation was absent.

Ryzin (2006)

Two alternative methods (perceived & subtractive disconfirmation) were utilized to measure disconfirmation.

With the rise of expectation perceived (negative) disconfirmation will decrease which is completely opposite for subtractive disconfirmation.

Role of expectation to form disconfirmation was not clear as it depend on how disconfirmation is measured.

Roch & Poister (2006)

Relationship among perceived disconfirmation and satisfaction is examined with three specific services of local government.

Disconfirmation plays the key role to form satisfaction judgment with public services. However, expectations and perceived service quality also have independent impact on satisfaction.

The study is confined in only one state focusing with three service areas. So the result may vary across state and with other sets of services.

Ryzin (2007)

Conceptual framework has formed to link the objective and subjective measure of performance along with behavioral intention of citizen.

The conceptual framework is explained with the help of ACSI model, EVLN model and Expectancy disconfirmation model.

Influence of demographic variable to form satisfaction has not explored.

James (2009)

Role of expectation disconfirmation and expectation anchoring were explained to form satisfaction or dissatisfaction judgment.

Disconfirmation is directly (positively) linked with predicted probability of satisfaction and inversely connected to dissatisfaction.

The relationship among objectively measured performance and satisfaction or dissatisfaction was not proved.

Poister & Thomas (2011)

Applied this model in state government on the motorist’s satisfaction with the different aspects of high way. The model is also expanded with a new variable called grade.

Influence of grade and perceived performance is stronger than the negative effect of expectation on satisfaction.

Formation of expectation was not mentioned.

Hietbrink et al. (2012)

Applied this model to assess satisfaction with public sector project.

Satisfaction with process, outcome and information jointly formed overall satisfaction.

The result of this study was based on small amount of data.

Morgeson (2012)

Tested the model in the context of federal government and expand the model with the antecedent of expectations which include party id, political ideology and trust.

Trust has positive influence to form expectations. The effect disconfirmation on satisfaction is stronger in local government whereas effect of expectations and performance and from performance to satisfaction is stronger in federal government framework.

The study was conducted with those citizens who have communicated with federal government within a defined/narrow span of time.

Ryzin (2013)

Experimentally test the theory of expectancy disconfirmation with the public service (street cleanliness).

Expectation exerted little or no net effect on satisfaction.

As the street cleanliness is clearly visible, so the effect of prior expectations was not clear.

Zhu et al.(2018)

The theory was applied in cross country context in the field of service delivery. Expectations of service providers have taken into consideration in this study.

The study explained how the effect of disconfirmation on expectations, perceived performance and satisfaction differ across various countries within different markets. Effects of different cultures on the above mentioned variables were well described.

The study has limited only in two service sectors (tourism and hospitality).