\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in Hospitality Industry: The Case of Selected Hotels in Jimma Town, Ethiopia},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2016-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2016)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2016-01-15}
\title{Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in Hospitality Industry: The Case of Selected Hotels in Jimma Town, Ethiopia}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Seid Hussen  Ali}

             \affil[1]{  Jimma University}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 16 December 2015 Accepted: 2 January 2016 Published: 15 January 2016}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


Hospitality is an umbrella term covering a variety of businesses, including restaurants, hotels, resorts and casinos. In a highly competitive hotel industry, individual hoteliers must find ways to make their products and services stand out among the others. The main aim of this study was to investigate service quality and customers satisfactions in hospitality industry: the case of selected hotels in Jimma town in Ethiopia, by applying a modified version of the LODGING QUALITY INDEX model. In line with the objective, descriptive and explorative research methods were employed to analyze the data collected through questionnaire from a sample of 172 respondents and correlation and regression analysis were used to see the cause and effect relationships. The key finding showed that there was a negative gap between actual service and expected service in all dimensions of lodging quality index and significant and positive relationships of five service quality dimensions and customers satisfactions.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{service quality, LODGING QUALITY INDEX, expectations, perceptions, and satisfaction.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
espite the vast amount of research done in the area of service quality, quality related issues have received little research attention within the hospitality context especially in Ethiopia. The hotel industry consists of many different services, including accommodation, restaurants, cafes, and catering. The market for the hotel industry, especially classified hotels in a developing country like Ethiopia, is closely linked to the tourism industry, because a majority of consumers for the sector come from international tourists (G/egziabher, 2015).\par
Even though Ethiopia is in development path in different service sectors, still the country suffered from having world class hotel chains in number and providing international service standards. The country also suffered attracting more private hotel owners due to different reasons and the existed hotels do not perform well as per the international hotel standards and these clearly show that the country does not enjoy economic contribution from hospitality industry as expected \hyperref[b11]{(Mitiku, 2015)}.\par
According to Ethiopian ministry of culture and tourism quality standards to the hotels grading requirements and classification evaluation criteria states Author ?: Jimma University. e-mail: seidju63@gmail.com that to obtain a higher Star rating a progressively higher quality and range of services and physical facilities should be provided across all areas with particular emphasis in five key areas: cleanliness, service, food, bedrooms and bathrooms \hyperref[b3]{(Culture, 2015)}.\par
For the reason that Ethiopia initially overlooked the hotel sector by not paying attention to the hospitality industry, authorities likewise failed to monitor the code of ethics governing hoteliers. The hotels handling of customer related issues are not scientific still it is following traditional way for example throwing the food in front of the guest, insulting the guests, cheat the guest or failure to give the change back as fast as possible, chewing gum while serving the guests, pasting finger into the nose while serving, touching hair and other bodies, failure to keep their neatness and the poor quality of food and lack of complaint handling. In addition they were simply collecting money with no progress in service quality and with no applicable practical SERVQUAL model (G/egziabher, 2015). These problems likewise have been seen currently in Jimma town hotels service.\par
The research results showed that most of the hotels in Jimma town did not meet the standards those are expected in terms of service delivery such as adequate facilities, excellent customer relationship, and knowledge of product or service offerings, trained personnel, provision of confidence and trust of services offered. These have led to customers complaining of poor quality of service, loss of confidence and dissatisfaction.\par
Moreover, managers of the observed hotels sometimes act as if today's profits are primary and customer satisfaction is secondary. They have lost sight of the idea that customers are their most important priority. Many of them have no idea who their customers are, or what their customers want and have no idea how to find out. This attitude leads to fewer repeat customers and negative word of mouth.\par
Even if few studies were conducted on hospitality industry for example by G/egziabher  {\ref (2015)} and \hyperref[b1]{Andargie (2013)} assessed hotel related services in Addis Ababa, deep reviewed of these research result showed that there is a gap in way of measuring customers satisfactions. As different writers stated that customers' satisfactions should be measured based on D computing the actual service and expected service results. Customer satisfaction is the outcome of customer's perception of the value received in a transaction or relationship, where value equals perceived service quality, compared to the value expected from transactions or relationships with competing vendors \hyperref[b14]{(Parasuraman et al, 1988)}.\par
The objective of the study is to show the gap between provided services and expected services and relationships in terms of five dimensions: tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, confidences and communications and customers' satisfactions the case of selected hotels in Jimma town, Ethiopia.\par
Providing high standard of service quality can result in high level of customer satisfaction \hyperref[b15]{Suki (2013)} and based on the widely common service quality measurement model LODGING QUALITY INDEX developed by \hyperref[b6]{Getty and Thompson (1995)} and to see the relationship of these five dimensions with customer satisfaction hypotheses were done. 
\section[{II.}]{II.} 
\section[{Literature Review a) Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction}]{Literature Review a) Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction}\par
Quality in a service business has become a measure of the extent to which the service provided meets the customer's expectations. Companies have found that in order to increase profits and market share, they should pay much attention to service quality. Service quality has become a key strategic factor for companies to differentiate their products and services from other competitors by using service quality. Many researchers recommend that customers assess service quality by comparing what they feel a seller should offer and compare it against the seller's actual service performance \hyperref[b5]{(Gronroos, 1982)} and the importance of quality to firms and customers is unequivocal because of its benefits contributing to market share and return on investment \hyperref[b14]{(Parasuraman et al, 1988)}.\par
According to Henning-Thurau et al (2001), the service quality is considered essential for the success and survival in a competitive environment and this influence the consumer behavior in a decision making process, and also the level of relationship between customer and company and can impact customer's loyalty. Measuring service quality is a better way to dictate whether the services are good or bad and whether the customers will or are satisfied with it.\par
Likewise Murasiranwa et al (2010), the hospitality industry has been facing increased number of competitors and a pressure environment, as a consequence of the combined effect of the current worldwide economic situation, technological advancement and globalization. The competitive environment in a hospitality industry has modified the way the companies' delivery the quality of service to customers and has made them adopting new approaches to maximize the customer satisfaction based in a service quality.\par
Furthermore, the players in the hospitality industry, precisely the hotel has been directed the efforts to change the way they act in this industry, focusing in understand customer's needs and set out strategies to meet or exceed these needs. The way they have found to achieve this strategy is to raise the attention to service quality from the customer's perspective (Al \hyperref[b2]{Khattab \& Aldehayyat, 2011)}. 
\section[{b) Customer satisfaction}]{b) Customer satisfaction}\par
Customer satisfaction is the outcome of customer's perception of the value received in a transaction or relationship, where value equals perceived service quality, compared to the value expected from transactions or relationships with competing vendors (W.H.D.P.U.G, 2014).\par
In order to achieve customer satisfaction, it is important to recognize and to anticipate customers' needs and to be able to satisfy them. Companies which are able to rapidly understand and satisfy customers' needs, make greater profits than those which fail to understand and satisfy them \hyperref[b0]{(Almsalam, 2014)}.\par
Commitment towards quality improves the guest's level of satisfaction and increases profits and consequently the benefits gained by the guest and the employee. On the opposite, mistakes in service provision cost the hotel money and its reputation may suffer. This is the "non-quality cost" concept. The scenario created by non-quality service can be daunting for any hotel manager. An unhappy guest does not usually express his/her unhappiness to the management of a hotel, but will on average, inform at least nine other people about poor service experiences. A happy guest will, by contrast, only inform three people about his/her good service experiences in a hotel (W.H.D.P.U.G, 2014).\par
Moreover based on (Oliver 1980), customer satisfaction is stated based on the expectation disconfirmation point of view. Before purchasing or using the product or service, customers always have their personal expectation about its performance. After buying or using product or service, if the result is equal or better than expectation, it means the expectation has positive confirmation. In the opposite case, if the result is lower than expectation, we have negative confirmation. Customers are said to be satisfied only if there are positive confirmations of expectation. Customer satisfaction leads to repeat purchases, loyalty and to retain customers. Satisfied customers are more likely to repeat buying products or services. They will also tend to say good things and to recommend the product or service to others. On the other hand dissatisfied customers respond differently. Dissatisfied customers may try to reduce the dissonance by abandoning or returning the product, or they may try to reduce the dissonance by seeking information that might confirm its high value \hyperref[b10]{(Kotler, 2000)}.\par
The SERVQUAL instrument is used to assess consumer perceptions and expectations regarding the quality of a service. The original service dimensions used by consumers to judge the quality of a service include: Assurance-knowledge and courtesy of all employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence in hotel guests. Empathy-consideration, individualized attention the hotel provides to its guests. Reliability-the ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately. Responsiveness-a sincere willingness to assist guests and provide timely service. Tangibles-The ambience and general appearance of the physical facilities, rooms, restaurants, equipment, personnel, and communication materials \hyperref[b13]{(Na, 2010)}.\par
For each dimension, the SERVQUAL scale provides a score for customer expectations (E) and as core for customer perceptions (P) of service providers' performances. Customer expectations are wants or desires of customer, what they feel from the providers or it can be the prediction of future events. While customer perceptions are measured directly within and after their experience in using service. They reveal the evaluations of customers about what they gain from service \hyperref[b13]{(Na, 2010)}.\par
According to \hyperref[b14]{Parasuraman et al (1988)}, the difference between the two scores is service quality (Q). 
\section[{Q = P -E}]{Q = P -E}\par
The key to optimizing service quality is to maximize this positive gap score. The negative value of this gap score reveals the dissatisfaction of customers. The input to calculate this score is customers' feedbacks. 
\section[{c) Lodging Quality Index}]{c) Lodging Quality Index}\par
The lodging quality index (LQI) is a multidimensional scale developed on the basis of SERVQUAL model. The process of the LQI scale began with ten dimensions that were originally in the first version of SERVQUAL \hyperref[b14]{(Parasuraman et al, 1988)}. The authors claimed that the LQI is a generic measure of hotel service quality \hyperref[b13]{(Na, 2010)}. 
\section[{d) Previous Studies on Hotel Industry}]{d) Previous Studies on Hotel Industry}\par
According to the study by \hyperref[b8]{Hasan (2014)}, on the measuring service quality and customer satisfaction of the Hotels guests in Bangladesh, guest states that the hotel guests' perceptions of service quality provided by the hotel industry were lower than their expectations. The lowest expectations and perceptions were given by Bangladesh guests towards the hotels and domestic and international hotel guests the results showed that the overall customer satisfaction levels towards the hotel stay is not satisfactory. Likewise, \hyperref[b9]{Kariru (2014)} has made a research on the customers' perceptions and expectations of service quality in hotels in Western tourism circuit, in Kenya indicated that the hotels have room to improve their service quality and adapt to customers' expectations, so as to generate increased customer satisfaction and the resultant competitiveness. It is evident that a gap exists between customers' perceived and expected service quality standards of hotels.\par
Furthermore, G/egziabher ?? 2 (2015)examined the service quality and customerss satisfaction in hotel industry in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on three star hotels stated that the combination of tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, confidence and communication together has significant and positive effect on customer satisfaction. And also the hotel guests' perceptions of service quality provided by the hotel industry were lower than their expectations.\par
Andargie (2013) conducted a study on foreign customer satisfaction in Ethiopian five star hotels Sheraton Addis and Hilton intercontinental hotels reported that foreign customers are not satisfied by the services of the hotels, more over all services quality dimensions created a gap in their expectation and perception of guests. Besides Zeleke (2012) has examined a study about the impact of service quality on customer satisfaction at the public owned National Alcohol and Liquor Factory stated that the five service quality dimensions brought an impact on customer satisfaction was significant in all factors of service quality. 
\section[{e) Conceptual Frame work}]{e) Conceptual Frame work}\par
Conceptual framework was developed to identify the capability to predict the customer satisfaction based on the dimensions of service quality.\par
The conceptual frame work depicts the relationship between the independent and the dependent variables.\par
Currently the LODGING QUALITY INDEX model has been proven to be the best model to measure service quality in service sectors especially with the customer perspective. This idea generates an assumption that the five dimensions of LODGING QUALITY INDEX model could have a direct relationship with customer satisfaction. To see the relationship between customer satisfaction and service quality dimensions it is better to use the model (G/egziabher, 2015 and Na, 2010). 
\section[{Predicted Model of Customer Satisfaction based on Service Quality dimensions (LQI)}]{Predicted Model of Customer Satisfaction based on Service Quality dimensions (LQI)}\par
Source: extracted from review of related literature If customers agree that they are satisfied and give the reasons for satisfaction as service quality; service quality dimension has significant relationship with service quality and customer satisfaction, then a conclusion could be drawn that service quality has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction and with service quality dimensions.\par
To know about the impact of the individual dimensions of hotel service quality on overall customer satisfaction, multiple regressions using the following model can predict:\par
We allow for independent variables five to potentially be related to the dependent variable one.Let: x1=tangibility X2= reliability X3=responsiveness X4=confidence X5=communications Overall Customer Satisfaction(y) =??0+ ??1 x1 + ??2 x2 + ??3 x3 + ??4x4 +??5x5 + e\par
Where: ? 0 is the intercept ? 1 ,?.? 5 are coefficients/parameters associated withX 1 , X 2 ? X 5 y -Response variable X 1 X 2 ? X5 are known constants/explanatory variables e -is random error III. 
\section[{Research Methodlogy}]{Research Methodlogy}\par
The study was descriptive in nature and employed explanatory research method which was aimed at establishing the cause and effect relationship between variables. The researcher used the facts or information already available to analyze and make a critical evaluation of the data/information. 
\section[{a) Sampling Technique and Sample Size}]{a) Sampling Technique and Sample Size}\par
In this study, both non probability and probability sampling were employed. Purposive/ judgment type of non-probability sampling was used for selecting the hotels and probability sampling was used. The sample size of this research was 172 guests from population of approximately 1428 guests based on ratio of customers in the specified days. The sample size from the guests is calculated as follows;\par
no-Adjusted sample size N -The population size. n=196/1+ (195/1428) n=172\par
The sample break down of hotels based on ratio: Central hotel, Syf hotel, Honey Land hotel and W/abegaze hotel based on the ratio of (  {\ref 8}   
\section[{b) Data Collection Instrument}]{b) Data Collection Instrument}\par
For the purpose of gathering primary data, structured questionnaire were developed and administered with the selected sample respondents/ guests. In this survey, self-completion questionnaire with closed questions were developed.\par
The questionnaire were a complete survey of 40 questions covering mostly hotel services including the first division with 4 items based on general information second part with 30 items based LODGING QUALITY INDEX. 
\section[{c) Data Analysis}]{c) Data Analysis}\par
Quantitative analysis techniques were employed to show processed data in absolute terms through the use of descriptive statistical tools such as frequency, valid percentages, minimum and maximum value, mean and standard deviation of results with the help of SPSS version 16 by employing descriptive and inferential analysis techniques.\par
IV. 
\section[{Data Analysis and Discussions}]{Data Analysis and Discussions}\par
All items shows strong consistency and its constructs indicated by values of Cronbach's alpha higher than 0.70. This suggests that the items concerned adequately measure a single construct for each tested variable (tangibility, empathy, responsiveness, reliability, assurance). Reliability measurements for each construct are shown in Table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.1.  First, the results in the table 4.4 in the dimension Tangibility showed that customers had high expectations for an excellent hotel to have modern functionality and appearance of the property. However, when their perceptions of studied hotels functionality and appearance were compared to their expectation levels a gap of -0.65 was found.\par
The data shows that customer perceptions' on actually having modern looking functionality and appearance of the property were lower than what they expected. That is provided services by the studied hotels had not been met customers' expectations based on all Tangibility dimension.\par
All the tangibility dimensions such as visually appealing front desk, the neatness of employees, the restaurant's atmosphere, attractiveness of outdoor surroundings, brightness of the hotel, well maintaining interior and exterior of the hotel are not appealing as the customers' expectations. As a result negative difference between perceptions and expectations of the customers The data shows that Customers' expectation levels vary in this dimension according to which service attribute was being evaluated. However, on all the statements in this dimension customers' expectations exceeded their perceptions of the service quality at the studied hotels (-0.83) These finding indicates that Overall satisfactions on studied hotels promised service dependably and accurately was below customer expectations. Customers were asked six questions to ascertain their level of expectations and perceptions on the above variables. In the statement of responsiveness dimension customers' perceptions range from (mean 2.85 to 3.05) and expectations (mean 3.85 to 3.99) results -0.92. In all items of responsiveness such as employee's willingness to promptly respond the customers' request, availability of informative literature about the hotel, employee's willingness to solve the guest problem quick availability of room service, fast check-in check-out procedure are a negative results to customers satisfactions. Fourth, Customers' expectations and perceptions on confidence dimension of the Hotel were sought on six variables (Table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.7) above. They were examined through six questions to verify their level of expectations and perceptions on the above variables. The result perceptions mean's score range from (mean 2.96 to 3.13) and expectations (3.60 to 4.00);\par
In all items includes: knowledge of employees about local place, treatments' of guest, secured environment delivered by the hotels, politeness of staffs and facilities located suitable place are a negative results when we compare customers' expatiations.\par
A negative difference (-0.75) was observed with regard to the customers' perceptions and expectations of the all confidence dimension. It confirmed that customers' expectations had not been met and they were dissatisfied about the confidence dimension of Hotel services. Finally, Customers were asked six questions to ascertain their level of expectations and perceptions on the communications variables (Table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.8) above. Dimension of communications perceptions range from (mean 2.9 to 3.2) and expectations (mean 3.5 to 3.8).\par
It showed that the customers' perception was lower than their expectations.\par
A negative difference (-0.72) on the dimension of communications was noted between the customers' expectations and perceptions.\par
It showed that the customers' perception was lower than their expectation and they had been dissatisfied with the communications dimension of the Hotel. Customers had expressed dissatisfaction with items includes Charges on customers' account were clearly explained, Hotels employees have the customer's best interest at heart, customers received undivided attention at the front desk, Reservationists tried to find These findings indicate that the customers still expect more in the quality of service given by the service providers. Because service delivered by Jimma Hotels are not match with their expectations. Table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.2.1 shows that Correlation value between service quality dimensions and customer satisfaction. The results of correlation analysis supported the hypothesis H1, H2, H3, H4, \& H5 and proved that there is a positive and strong significance relationship between the LODGING QUALITY INDEX dimensions and customer satisfaction. 
\section[{b) Correlation Result of Service quality and Customer satisfaction}]{b) Correlation Result of Service quality and Customer satisfaction}\par
Tangibility and customer satisfaction (r=0.345**, p < 0.01), reliability and customer satisfaction (r =0.418**, P < 0.01), responsiveness and customer satisfaction (r=0.545**, P < 0.01), confidence and customer satisfaction (r = 0.474**, p< 0.01), communications and customer Satisfaction (r=0.402**, P < 0.01) are positively correlated respectively. 
\section[{Reliability}]{Reliability}\par
is positive relations with responsiveness(r=0.361**, P<0.01).\par
Responsiveness is no correlations with confidence and communications (r=0.297**, p< 0.01 and r=244**, p<0.01 respectively).\par
Confidence is positive relations with communications (r=.471**, p<0.01).\par
Tangibility is no correlations with reliability and confidence (r=0.134*, p<0.05 and 0.213**, p<0.01 respectively). 
\section[{c) Regression Analysis}]{c) Regression Analysis}\par
The researcher used multiple regression analysis to examine the independent variables: The above results illustrated the highest impact of the Responsiveness on customer satisfaction, where an increase in Responsiveness by (beta= 0.308, t=5.149, p<0.01) could cause an increase in the customer satisfaction in hotel industry.\par
Similarly, Reliability has a positive and significant effect on the customer satisfaction with (beta coefficient =0.270 t=4.729, and p<0.01).\par
Also, the customer satisfaction in Jimma studied hotels will be strongly affected by tangibility, where an increase in tangibility by (beta= 0.207, t-value=3.814, p < 0.01) will causes a direct increase in the customer satisfaction.\par
The coefficient beta and p value of Confidence were positive and significant (beta= 0.250, p < 0.01) effect on customers' satisfactions in Jimma studied hotels. Means the customer satisfaction in hotel is directly affected by the Confidence where an increase in Confidence by 0.250 will cause a direct increase in the customer satisfaction.\par
The value of communications contribution to the Customer Satisfaction is (beta=0.178, t-value of 2.963 and p-value less than 1\% sig. level). That means communications on customer satisfaction, where an increase in communications by 0.178 will cause an increase in the customer satisfaction in hotel industry.\par
The Model summary table 4.3.2and the ANOVA table4.3.3, include the R Square value, which serves as the proportions of the variation in dependent variable (customers' satisfactions) being explained by the variation in independent variable service quality dimensions. In other words this means that the R Square depicts how good the regression model is at explaining the variance in Customer Satisfaction in hotels' industry.\par
It can be observed that the coefficient of determination (R²) was 0.542, representing that 54.2\% of customer satisfaction can be explained by the five dimensions of service quality (LODGING QUALITY INDEX). This is a good finding, but in order to find out if it is significant one must study the ANOVA table. The ANOVA table shows the results from the analysis of the variance and determines if the R Square value is significant or not. In this case the ANOVA table shows that the finding is significant because the p-value is less than significance level 0.1\%. This indicates that the overall model was reasonable fit and there was a statistically significant association between service quality dimensions and customer satisfaction.  The following hypotheses were tested to answer the problem statement and consequently address the objective of the study. H0: There is no a significant relationship between the dimension tangibility of service quality and customer satisfaction.\par
H1: There is a significant relationship between the dimension tangibility of service quality and customer satisfaction.\par
The result of the multiple regression analysis found that the variable tangibility had a beta value of 0.207 and that it was significant at a 0.01\% significance level, as shown in Table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.15. These finding indicate that the researcher have very strong evidence to reject the null hypothesis and support the research hypothesis. The positive relationship between tangibility and customer satisfaction was strengthened by the strong correlation between the two variables, a Pearson coefficient of r=0.345** with p-value less than 0.01 as shown in Table4.14. So, there is a significant and positive relationship between the dimension tangibility of service quality and customer satisfaction. H0: There is no significant relationship between the dimension reliability of service quality and customer satisfaction. H1: There is a significant relationship between the dimension reliability of service quality and customer satisfaction\par
The finding in the data analysis presented in Table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.15, shows that the variable Reliability had a beta value of 0.270 and the p-value was less than one percent (1\%)level of significance. This means that the variable Reliability was the significant contributor to customer satisfaction. The data analysis also found that Reliability was strongly correlated to customer satisfaction with a significant Pearson coefficient of 0.419.\par
So, the alternative hypothesis (H2) can be supported by the data because contribution to the customer satisfaction has taken positive value and very strong evidence to reject null hypothesis with 99\% confidence level.\par
Thus it can be concluded that there is a significant and positive relationship between Reliability and customer satisfaction. H0: There is no significant relationship between the dimension responsiveness of service quality and customer satisfaction. H1: There is a significant relationship between the dimension responsiveness of service quality and customer satisfaction.\par
The regression analysis showed that responsiveness had a beta value of 0.308, which was the highest of all the variables and p-value less than 1\% sig. level. The data analysis also found that Reliability was strongly correlated to customer satisfaction with a significant Pearson coefficient of 0.543** with 1\% sig. level. With this data we can support the developed alternative (H3) and we have very strong evidence to reject the null hypothesis. So the finding concludes that there is a significant and positive relationship between Responsiveness and Customer satisfaction. H0: There is no significant relationship between the dimension confidence of service quality and customer satisfaction. H1: There is a significant relationship between the dimension confidence of service quality and customer satisfaction.\par
As shown in table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.15 in the data analysis, Confidence had a significant beta value of 0.250 and pvalue less than 1\% sig. level. And the variable confidence was also positively correlated to customer satisfaction (r=0.474** and p<0.001) as depicted in table 4.14.With this data developed alternative hypothesis (H4) can be supported and the researcher has very strong evidence against the null hypothesis at 1\% significance level.\par
So the finding concludes that there is a significant and positive relationship between Confidence and Customer satisfaction. H0: There is a significant relationship between the dimension communication of service quality and customer satisfaction. H1: There is no significant relationship between the dimension communication of service quality and customer satisfaction\par
As shown in table \hyperref[tab_9]{4}.15 in the data analysis, Communication had a significant beta value of 0.178 and p-value less than 1\% sig. level. And the variable Communication was also positively correlated to customer satisfaction (r=0.407** and p<0.001) as depicted in table 4. \hyperref[b13]{14} So the constructed alternative hypothesis can be supported and the researcher has very strong evidence against the null hypothesis at 1\% significance level. Finally it can conclude that there is a positive and significant relationship between communications and Customer satisfaction.\par
To sum up the five dimensions of the lodging quality index (LQI) those generic measures of hotel industries' quality service have significant and positive relationships with customers' satisfactions at 99\% confidence level.\par
V. 
\section[{Conclusion and Recommendations a) Conclusion}]{Conclusion and Recommendations a) Conclusion}\par
Customers are very crucial part of the success of any company. Their satisfaction with a purchased product or service influences their decision to purchase it again. This holds true for the companies in the hotels industry satisfied customers prefer to return to the same hotel or restaurant if they really liked it. Therefore, customer satisfaction plays a very important role in the hotel industry and should be seen as one of the first management's priorities at all hospitality companies. The findings of the study could be summed up:\par
1. The dimension of responsiveness has significant and positive relationships with the customers' satisfactions at more than 99\% confidence level. And also all attributes of responsiveness were not match with customer expectations. The result leads to negative disconfirmation, where performance is deemed worse than standard, resulting in dissatisfaction of customers to the studied hotels. 2. Communications had a significant and positive relationship with the customer satisfaction in hotel services. All elements of communications were results a negative sign in each considered hotels. In other words, the studied hotels were not capable in fulfilling the guest satisfactions in any elements of communications. 3. Tangibility had a significant and positive relationship with the customer satisfaction in hotel services. And negative difference between perceptions and expectations of the customers related to the Tangibility dimension was recorded. So, customers were dissatisfied with the Tangibility dimension of the studied Hotel. 4. Reliability had a significant and positive relationship with the customer satisfaction in hotel services. And also the studied hotels failed in fulfilling in customers' expectations in all elements of reliability dimensions. 5. Confidence had a significant and positive relationship with the customer satisfaction in hotel services. All items includes: knowledge of employees about local place, treatments' of guest, secured environment delivered by the hotels, politeness of staffs and facilities located suitable place are a negative average score results when we compare customers' expatiations. 
\section[{b) Recommendations}]{b) Recommendations}\par
The following are the recommendations:\par
1. To curve the problem related to responsiveness dimensions, motivating employees are critical points to the managers and owners of the hotels. When hotel companies find great employees, train them, and incorporate them into their work team, they do not want to lose them. They need to motivate them so they stay and do their work well. 2. Communication is at the heart of all business relationships. Managers must give instructions, feedback, encouragement, carry-out discipline, and solve problems using interpersonal communication.\par
There must be constant and clear communication down as well up within the company.\par
Communication is probably the most important step to achieve improved satisfaction among employees that consequently leads to increased customer satisfaction. 3. The owners of the hotels or the top level of managers should maintain the service attribute of tangibility at the acceptable level, because different type of customer usually has a variety of their preference. The facilities' physical appearance like facilities at excellent hotels should be visually appealing, materials in excellent hotels should be neat in appearance and the front office area and restaurants must be attractive and appealing. 4. Be reliable one way for the firm to keep customers' expectations from rising is to perform the service properly at the first time. It is imperative to be a reliable service provider that can deliver consistently competitive performance. 5. To solve the problems regarding confidence of employees, attracting or recruiting staffs that have adequate knowledge in managing, especially in hotel management and tourism with appropriate short and long term training and orientations concerning customers handling should be provided. Well-trained employees can deliver quality service which helps the image of the company and attracts more customers to the company. 6. Managers should understand that profit is the result of doing things right rather, than only purpose of doing business. They know that the purpose of business is to create and maintain satisfied customers. Satisfied customers not only return to the same hotel or restaurant, but they also talk favorably to others about their satisfaction. 7. Concerned bodies like the government officials are seriously considering or supporting the hospitality business to make the hotel sectors more international brand and to give attentions to the hospitality sectors like other disciplines. \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{3} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
1: Sample break down\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_0}Table 3 .}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{41} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.6584810126582279\textwidth}P{0.19151898734177214\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep Year\\
\tabcellsep 77\\
: Reliability Statistics Alpha( Perceptions) 0.780 0.761 0.853 0.882 0.813 1. How many times have you previously visit at the studied hotels within a month? Variables No. of items Tangibility 6 Reliability 6 Responsiveness 6 Confidences 6 Communications 6 Alphas (expectation) 0.803 0.803 0.841 0.892 0.879\tabcellsep Volume XVI Issue V Version I Global Journal of Management and Business Research ( )\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: 2016 E © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US)Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in Hospitality Industry: The Case of Selected Hotels in Jimma Town, Ethiopia]} 
\caption{\label{tab_1}Table 4 . 1}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{42} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.31618357487922705\textwidth}P{0.10881642512077296\textwidth}P{0.09033816425120773\textwidth}P{0.2073671497584541\textwidth}P{0.04927536231884058\textwidth}P{0.07801932367149758\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Frequency Percent Valid Percent}\tabcellsep Cumulative Percent\\
Valid\tabcellsep 1 times\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 8.1\tabcellsep 8.1\tabcellsep 8.1\\
\tabcellsep 2 times\tabcellsep 28\tabcellsep 16.3\tabcellsep 16.3\tabcellsep 24.4\\
\tabcellsep 3 times\tabcellsep 32\tabcellsep 18.6\tabcellsep 18.6\tabcellsep 43.0\\
\tabcellsep four times\tabcellsep 40\tabcellsep 23.3\tabcellsep 23.3\tabcellsep 66.3\\
\tabcellsep more than 4 times\tabcellsep 58\tabcellsep 33.7\tabcellsep 33.7\tabcellsep 100.0\\
\tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 100.0\tabcellsep 100.0\tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{As the table 4.2 shows that most of the studied}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{information's to judge or evaluate level of service quality}\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{hotels visit the hotels approximately more than four}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{to studied hotels.}\tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{times within a month. So the customers have enough}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}Table 4 . 2 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{43} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.41917808219178077\textwidth}P{0.06154598825831702\textwidth}P{0.07318982387475538\textwidth}P{0.03992172211350293\textwidth}P{0.1430528375733855\textwidth}P{0.024951076320939333\textwidth}P{0.06487279843444227\textwidth}P{0.018297455968688845\textwidth}P{0.004990215264187866\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{Frequency Percent Valid Percent}\tabcellsep Cumulative Percent\\
Valid\tabcellsep 1-8\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 10.5\tabcellsep 10.5\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 10.5\\
\tabcellsep 9-12\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 8.1\tabcellsep 8.1\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 18.6\\
\tabcellsep diploma\tabcellsep 27\tabcellsep 15.7\tabcellsep 15.7\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 34.3\\
\tabcellsep degree\tabcellsep 54\tabcellsep 31.4\tabcellsep 31.4\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 65.7\\
\tabcellsep MA and above\tabcellsep 59\tabcellsep 34.3\tabcellsep 34.3\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 100.0\\
\tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 100.0\tabcellsep 100.0\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{review service quality is composed of tangibility,}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep reliability,\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{responsiveness,}\tabcellsep confidence,\tabcellsep and\\
78\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{4}{l}{a) Level of customers' expectation and perception}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{towards service quality of hotels}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{4}{l}{This section presents the customers\textunderscore }\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{4}{l}{expectation and perception towards service quality of}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{4}{l}{Hotels. As the researcher tried to states on the literature}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}Table 4 . 3 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{44} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.04951456310679612\textwidth}P{0.4181229773462783\textwidth}P{0.026132686084142393\textwidth}P{0.07427184466019418\textwidth}P{0.05364077669902913\textwidth}P{0.07427184466019418\textwidth}P{0.05914239482200648\textwidth}P{0.09490291262135922\textwidth}}
No.\tabcellsep LODGING QUALITY INDEX\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' expectation}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' Perceptions}\tabcellsep Cust.sat. Level\\
\tabcellsep TANGEBLITY\tabcellsep \tabcellsep mean\tabcellsep S.D\tabcellsep mean\tabcellsep S.D\tabcellsep P-E=Q\\
1\tabcellsep TQ1:The front desk was visually\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.80\tabcellsep .74094\tabcellsep 3.24\tabcellsep 1.16284\\
\tabcellsep appealing\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.56\\
2\tabcellsep TQ2:The employees had clean, neat\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.88\tabcellsep .81533\tabcellsep 3.20\tabcellsep 1.14421\\
\tabcellsep uniforms\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.68\\
3\tabcellsep TQ3:The restaurant's atmosphere was\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.82\tabcellsep .84038\tabcellsep 3.20\tabcellsep 1.20366\\
\tabcellsep inviting\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.62\\
4\tabcellsep TQ4:The outdoor surroundings were\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.72\tabcellsep .88722\tabcellsep 2.98\tabcellsep .95191\\
\tabcellsep visually attractive\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.74\\
5\tabcellsep TQ5:The hotel was bright and well\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.78\tabcellsep .81305\tabcellsep 3.17\tabcellsep 1.16671\\
\tabcellsep lighted\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.61\\
6\tabcellsep TQ6:The hotel's interior and exterior\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.70\tabcellsep .75811\tabcellsep 2.96\tabcellsep .99917\\
\tabcellsep were well maintained\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.74\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Cumulative/aggregate/ level}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.78\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.12\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Dissatisfied\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep (-0.65)\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_4}Table 4 . 4 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{45} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.45569823434991974\textwidth}P{0.01364365971107544\textwidth}P{0.012279293739967898\textwidth}P{0.02728731942215088\textwidth}P{0.06958266452648475\textwidth}P{0.04911717495987159\textwidth}P{0.06958266452648475\textwidth}P{0.05730337078651685\textwidth}P{0.092776886035313\textwidth}P{0.0027287319422150884\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{3}{l}{LODGING QUALITY INDEX}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' expectation}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' Perceptions}\tabcellsep Cust.sat. Level\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{RELIABLITY}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep N\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep P-E=Q\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{1 RLQ1:My reservation was handled}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.80\tabcellsep .83576\tabcellsep 3.20\tabcellsep 1.13953\\
efficiently\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.6\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{2 RLQ2:My guest room was ready as}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.80\tabcellsep .7468\tabcellsep 3.22\tabcellsep 1.09652\\
promised\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.58\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{3 RLQ3:TV, radio, A/C, lights, and}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.81\tabcellsep .91341\tabcellsep 3.03\tabcellsep 1.16191\\
other\tabcellsep mechanical\tabcellsep equipment\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{worked properly}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.78\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{4 RLQ4:I got what I paid for 5 RLQ5:Hotel Provides services at the}\tabcellsep 172 172\tabcellsep 3.78 3.92\tabcellsep .88866 .70924\tabcellsep 2.60 2.91\tabcellsep 1.17460 .91929\tabcellsep -1.18\tabcellsep 79\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{time it promises to do so}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -1.01\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{6 RLQ6:Employees were able to}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.94\tabcellsep .72313\tabcellsep 3.10\tabcellsep 1.07921\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{accurately answer my questions}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.84\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Aggregate mean}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.84\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.01\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Dissatisfied\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep (-0.83)\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: 2016E © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US)]} 
\caption{\label{tab_5}Table 4 . 5 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{46} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.1298140770252324\textwidth}P{0.3612217795484728\textwidth}P{0.02596281540504648\textwidth}P{0.011288180610889775\textwidth}P{0.028220451527224435\textwidth}P{0.06095617529880478\textwidth}P{0.04402390438247012\textwidth}P{0.06095617529880478\textwidth}P{0.09933598937583\textwidth}P{0.028220451527224435\textwidth}}
No.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{LODGING QUALITY INDEX}\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' expectation}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' Perceptions}\tabcellsep Cust.sat. Level\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{RESPONSIVENESS}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep mean\tabcellsep S.D\tabcellsep mean\tabcellsep S.D\tabcellsep P-E=Q\\
1\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{RQ1:Employees responded promptly to}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.90\tabcellsep .77731\tabcellsep 2.85\tabcellsep 1.30981\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{my requests}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -1.05\\
2\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{RQ2:Informative literature about the}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.89\tabcellsep .71784\tabcellsep 3.05\tabcellsep 1.33449\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{hotel was provided}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.84\\
3\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{RQ3:Employees were willing to answer}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.85\tabcellsep .88973\tabcellsep 3.02\tabcellsep 1.08942\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{my questions}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.83\\
4\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{RQ4:Employees responded quickly to}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.87\tabcellsep .83043\tabcellsep 3.03\tabcellsep .95162\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{solve my problems}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.84\\
5\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{RQ5:Room service was prompt}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.96\tabcellsep .69160\tabcellsep 3.05\tabcellsep 1.15604\tabcellsep -0.91\\
6\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{RQ6:Check-in and check-out}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.99\tabcellsep .67967\tabcellsep 2.95\tabcellsep 1.11771\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{procedures were fast and efficient}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -1.04\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{AGREGATE MEAN}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.91\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2.99\tabcellsep Dissatisfied\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep (-0.92)\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{Third, Customers' expectations and perceptions}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{were sought on four variables coming under the}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Responsiveness}\tabcellsep dimension\tabcellsep (Table4.6)\tabcellsep above.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}Table 4 . 6 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{47} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.0028475711892797318\textwidth}P{0.45561139028475706\textwidth}P{0.027051926298157454\textwidth}P{0.07118927973199331\textwidth}P{0.05125628140703517\textwidth}P{0.07118927973199331\textwidth}P{0.05979899497487437\textwidth}P{0.11105527638190955\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep LODGING QUALITY INDEX\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' expectation}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' Perceptions}\tabcellsep Cust.sat. Level\\
\tabcellsep CONFIDENCE\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep P-E=Q\\
\tabcellsep 1 CQ1:Employees knew about local\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.68\tabcellsep .92215\tabcellsep 3.13\tabcellsep 1.14943\tabcellsep -0.5465\\
\tabcellsep places of interest\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep 2 CQ2Employees treated me with\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.75\tabcellsep .85925\tabcellsep 3.03\tabcellsep 1.17923\tabcellsep -0.7151\\
\tabcellsep respect\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep 3 CQ3:I felt safe in the delivery of\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 4.01\tabcellsep .78724\tabcellsep 3.10\tabcellsep 1.00093\tabcellsep -0.913\\
\tabcellsep services\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep 4 CQ4:Employees were polite when\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.80\tabcellsep .91088\tabcellsep 2.99\tabcellsep 1.18464\tabcellsep -0.8081\\
\tabcellsep answering my questions\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep 5 CQ5;The hotel provided a safe\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.74\tabcellsep .88768\tabcellsep 2.96\tabcellsep 1.21826\tabcellsep -0.7791\\
\tabcellsep environment\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
80\tabcellsep 6 CQ6:The facilities were\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.78\tabcellsep .88392\tabcellsep 3.05\tabcellsep 1.21787\tabcellsep -0.73\\
\tabcellsep conveniently located\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep AGREGATE MEAN GAP\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.79\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.04\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Dissatisfied\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep (-0.75)\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: 2016E © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) 1]} 
\caption{\label{tab_7}Table 4 . 7 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{48} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.49091580502215654\textwidth}P{0.010044313146233382\textwidth}P{0.011299852289512555\textwidth}P{0.023855243722304284\textwidth}P{0.06277695716395865\textwidth}P{0.04519940915805022\textwidth}P{0.06277695716395865\textwidth}P{0.05273264401772526\textwidth}P{0.09039881831610044\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{3}{l}{LODGING QUALITY INDEX}\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' expectation}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Customers' Perceptions}\tabcellsep Cust.sat. Level\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{COMMUNICATIONS}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep P-E=Q\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{1 CNQ1Charges on my account}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.53\tabcellsep .89461\tabcellsep 2.95\tabcellsep 1.18600\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{were clearly explained}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.5814\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{2 CNQ2:Hotels employees have the}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.77\tabcellsep .89409\tabcellsep 2.99\tabcellsep 1.16226\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{customer's best interest at heart}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.7732\\
3 CNQ4:I\tabcellsep received\tabcellsep undivided\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.73\tabcellsep .78620\tabcellsep 2.98\tabcellsep 1.21623\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{attention at the front desk}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.75\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{4 CNQ5:Reservationists tried to find}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.74\tabcellsep .94041\tabcellsep 3.21\tabcellsep 1.01585\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{out my particular needs}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.5291\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{5 CNQ6: Managers of the hotel was}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.68\tabcellsep .86319\tabcellsep 2.91\tabcellsep 1.02173\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{supervising and friendly welcoming}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
me.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep -0.7732\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{6 CNQ3:Hotels employees deals}\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 3.89\tabcellsep .89872\tabcellsep 2.92\tabcellsep 1.13132\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{with guests in a caring fashion}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Aggregate mean gap}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep 3.72\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2.99\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Dissatisfied\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep (-0.72)\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_8}Table 4 . 8 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.11102040816326532\textwidth}P{0.24285714285714283\textwidth}P{0.06244897959183674\textwidth}P{0.06244897959183674\textwidth}P{0.0936734693877551\textwidth}P{0.08673469387755102\textwidth}P{0.09714285714285714\textwidth}P{0.08673469387755102\textwidth}P{0.006938775510204082\textwidth}}
CUSTOMERS'\tabcellsep Pearson Correlation\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .345 **\tabcellsep .419 **\tabcellsep .543 **\tabcellsep .474 **\tabcellsep .402 **\\
SATISFACTION\tabcellsep Sig. (1-tailed)\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\\
TANGEBLITY\tabcellsep Pearson Correlation\tabcellsep .345 **\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .134 *\tabcellsep .097\tabcellsep .213 **\tabcellsep .104\\
\tabcellsep Sig. (1-tailed)\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .040\tabcellsep .103\tabcellsep .002\tabcellsep .088\tabcellsep 81\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\tabcellsep 172\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: 2016 E © 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).]} 
\caption{\label{tab_9}Table 4 .}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.5208913649025069\textwidth}P{0.06392757660167131\textwidth}P{0.04025069637883008\textwidth}P{0.058008356545960996\textwidth}P{0.03906685236768802\textwidth}P{0.03314763231197772\textwidth}P{0.061559888579387184\textwidth}P{0.03314763231197772\textwidth}}
Model\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Unstandardized Coefficients}\tabcellsep Standardized Coefficients\tabcellsep t\tabcellsep Sig.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Collinearity Statistics}\\
\tabcellsep B\tabcellsep Std. Error\tabcellsep Beta\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Tolerance\tabcellsep VIF\\
(Constant)\tabcellsep -3.744\tabcellsep .228\tabcellsep \tabcellsep -16.402\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
RESPON.\tabcellsep .238\tabcellsep .046\tabcellsep .308\tabcellsep 5.149\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .772\tabcellsep 1.295\\
CONFID.\tabcellsep .180\tabcellsep .045\tabcellsep .250\tabcellsep 4.021\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .711\tabcellsep 1.406\\
RELIAB.\tabcellsep .239\tabcellsep .051\tabcellsep .270\tabcellsep 4.729\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .845\tabcellsep 1.183\\
TANGEB.\tabcellsep .191\tabcellsep .050\tabcellsep .207\tabcellsep 3.814\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .937\tabcellsep 1.067\\
COMUN.\tabcellsep .135\tabcellsep .046\tabcellsep .178\tabcellsep 2.963\tabcellsep .003\tabcellsep .766\tabcellsep 1.305\\
\multicolumn{4}{l}{a. Dependent Variable: CUSTOMERS' SATISFACTIONS}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
The results are as follows:\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Estimated customers' satisfactions}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{7}{l}{(Y)=-3.744+0.308*Respo.+0.250*Conf.+0.270*Reliab.+0.207*Tang.+ 0.178*Comun.+e}\tabcellsep \\
Where:\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Constant a=-3.744\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Responsiveness Coefficient = 0.308}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Confidence Coefficient = 0.250}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Reliability Coefficient = 0.270\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Tangibility Coefficient = 0.207\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Communications Coefficient=0.178}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
e-Indicates random error.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_10}Table 4 .}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.5666666666666667\textwidth}P{0.051666666666666666\textwidth}P{0.07666666666666666\textwidth}P{0.06166666666666667\textwidth}P{0.09333333333333332\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{3.2: Model Summary}\tabcellsep \\
Model\tabcellsep R\tabcellsep R Square\tabcellsep Adjusted R Square\tabcellsep Std. Error of the Estimate\\
1\tabcellsep .543 a\tabcellsep .295\tabcellsep .291\tabcellsep .45471\\
2\tabcellsep .634 b\tabcellsep .402\tabcellsep .395\tabcellsep .42000\\
3\tabcellsep .691 c\tabcellsep .478\tabcellsep .468\tabcellsep .39383\\
4\tabcellsep .720 d\tabcellsep .518\tabcellsep .506\tabcellsep .37950\\
5\tabcellsep .736 e\tabcellsep .542\tabcellsep .528\tabcellsep .37095\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{a. Predictors: (Constant), RESPONSIVENESS}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{4}{l}{b. Predictors: (Constant), RESPONSIVENESS, CONFIDENCES}\tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{c. Predictors: (Constant), RESPONSIVENESS, CONFIDENCES, RELIABLITY}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{d. Predictors: (Constant), RESPONSIVENESS, CONFIDENCES, RELIABLITY,}\\
TANGEBLITY\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{e. Predictors: (Constant), RESPONSIVENESS, CONFIDENCES, RELIABLITY,}\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{TANGEBLITY, COMUNICATIONS}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_11}Table 4 .}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.510600706713781\textwidth}P{0.06908127208480565\textwidth}P{0.096113074204947\textwidth}P{0.06307420494699646\textwidth}P{0.060070671378091876\textwidth}P{0.021024734982332153\textwidth}P{0.030035335689045938\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{3.3: ANOVA b}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Model}\tabcellsep Sum of Squares\tabcellsep df\tabcellsep Mean Square\tabcellsep F\tabcellsep Sig.\\
1\tabcellsep Regression\tabcellsep 27.032\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 5.406\tabcellsep 39.289\tabcellsep .000 a\\
\tabcellsep Residual\tabcellsep 22.843\tabcellsep 166\tabcellsep .138\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep 49.875\tabcellsep 171\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{6}{l}{a. Predictors: (Constant), COMUNICATIONS, RELIABLITY, TANGEBLITY,}\tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{RESPONSIVENESS, CONFIDENCES}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{b. Dependent Variable: CUSTOMERS' SATISFACTIONS}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
d) Test of the Hypotheses\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_12}Table 4 .}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{© 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US)Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in Hospitality Industry: The Case of Selected Hotels in Jimma Town, Ethiopia} 			\footnote{© 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US)} 			\footnote{© 2016 Global Journals Inc. (US) 1} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Parasuraman et al. ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research’.  		 			A Parasuraman 		,  		 			V A Zeithaml 		,  		 			L L Berry 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Marketing}  		1988. 49 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Suki and &suki ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘Customer Satisfaction: Perspectives of Visitors to a Public University Library’.  		 			N Suki 		,  		 			N \&suki 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Social}  		2013. 7  (2)  p. .  	 	 (Human Science and Engineering) 
\bibitem[Kariru ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		‘Customers' perceptions and expectations of service quality in hotels in western tourism circuit’.  		 			A N Kariru 		.  	 	 		\textit{Kenya. Journal of Research in Hospitality, Tourism and Culture}  		2014.  	 
\bibitem[Culture ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		\textit{Ethiopian Hotels -Grading Requirements and Classification},  		 			M Culture 		.  		2015. Addis Abeba: Published by Ethiopian Standards Agency.  	 
\bibitem[Andargie ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{Foreign Customer Satisfaction in Ethiopian Five Star Hotels Sheraton Addis, Hilton and Intercontinental hotels},  		 			M Andargie 		.  		2013.  	 	 (Master's thesis) 
\bibitem[Zeleke ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		\textit{Impact of service quality on customer satisfaction at the public owned National Alcohol and Liquor Factory},  		 			T Zeleke 		.  		2012.  	 	 (Masters thesis) 
\bibitem[Kotler ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		 			P Kotler 		.  		\textit{Marketing Management},  				 (New Jersey)  		2000. Prentice-Hall.  	 	 (10th edition) 
\bibitem[Hasan ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		‘Measuring Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction of the Hotels in Bangladesh: A Study on National and International Hotel Guest’.  		 			S M Hasan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Management}  		2014.  	 
\bibitem[Henning-Thurau et al. ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		‘Modeling and managing student loyalty: An approach based on the concept of relationship quality’.  		 			T Henning-Thurau 		,  		 			M Langer 		,  		 			U Hansen 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Service Research}  		2001. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Murasiranwa et al. ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		 			E T Murasiranwa 		,  		 			K Nield 		,  		 			S Ball 		.  		\textit{Hotel Service Quality and Business Performance in five hotels belonging to a UK Hotel Chain: Amherst, International CHRIE Conference},  				2010.  	 
\bibitem[Khattab and Aldehayyat ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		‘Perceptions of Service Quality in Jordanian Hotels’.  		 			Al Khattab 		,  		 			S A Aldehayyat 		,  		 			JS 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Business and Management}  		2011. p. .  	 
\bibitem[
			WH D P
		 ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		‘Relationship between Service Quality and Customer Relationship in sir Lankan hotel industry’.  		 			WH D P 		,  		 			UG 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications}  		2014. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Gronroos ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		\textit{Service Management and Marketing},  		 			C Gronroos 		.  		1982. Lexington: Lexington Books. Mass. p. 27.  	 
\bibitem[G/Egziabher ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction in Hotel Industry: The Case of Three Star Hotels},  		 			A G/Egziabher 		.  		2015. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.  	 
\bibitem[Na ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		\textit{SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION IN THE HOTEL INDUSTRY},  		 			L Na 		.  		2010. p. .  	 	 (Master Graduation Thesis) 
\bibitem[Almsalam ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		‘The Effects of Customer Expectation and Perceived Service Quality on Customer Satisfaction’.  		 			S Almsalam 		.  	 	 		\textit{International Journal of Business and Management Invention}  		2014. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Getty and Thompson ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘The relationship between quality, satisfaction, and recommending behavior in Lodging Decisions’.  		 			J M Getty 		,  		 			K N Thompson 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Hospitality \& Leisure Marketing}  		1995.  	 
\bibitem[Mitiku ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘The Role of Private Sector in the Development of the Tourism Industry: The Case of Privately Owned Hotels in Addis Ababa’.  		 			H Mitiku 		.  	 	 		\textit{Thesis}  		2015. p. 3.  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
