Plagiarism Checker X - Report Originality Assessment Overall Similarity Date: Jan 27, 2026 .
:34 AM) Matches: 15 / 5265 words Sources: 2 Remarks: No similarity found, your document looks healthy.
Verify Report:
Scan this QR Code
5 - WML 3
FILE - 1034.
PDF
Journal of General Education and Humanities Vol.
No.
February 2026, pp.
953 Ae 966, https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 ISSN 2963-7147
953 Journal homepage:
https://journal-gehu.
com/index.
php/gehu Comparing Customer Loyalty Formation in Coffee-To-Go and Slow Bar Coffee Shops: The Roles of Price.
Service, and Brand Experience Anakisida Huda Mas'ud1.
Tulus Haryono2 Master of Management Study Program.
Faculty of Economics and Business.
Sebelas Maret University.
Surakarta.
Indonesia Article Info ABSTRACT Article history: Received 2026-01-05 Revised 2026-01-22 Accepted 2026-01-24 The rapid expansion of the coffee shop industry in Yogyakarta has been accompanied by a shift in business orientation from efficiencydriven coffee-to-go outlets to experience-oriented slow-bar coffee shops, creating distinct patterns in customer loyalty formation.
This study aims to compare how brand experience, customer service perception, and customer price perception influence customer loyalty, with trust and satisfaction acting as mediating variables across the two coffee shop models.
quantitative research design was applied using survey data collected from 240 coffee shop customers in Yogyakarta.
The data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling with Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS) and supported by Multi-Group Analysis (MGA) to identify differences between coffee-to-go and slow bar segments.
The findings reveal that the mechanisms underlying loyalty formation vary significantly between the two models.
coffee-to-go shops, customer price perception and service perception have a stronger impact on satisfaction and loyalty, whereas in slow bar coffee shops, brand experience and trust play a more prominent role.
Trust and satisfaction are empirically validated as significant mediating variables in both contexts.
These results indicate that different business models require distinct strategic approaches to effectively strengthen customer Keywords: Brand Experience Customer Price Perception Customer Service Perception Loyalty Trust This is an open-access article under the CC BY-SA Corresponding Author: Anakisida Huda Mas'ud Master of Management Study Program.
Faculty of Economics and Business.
Sebelas Maret University.
Surakarta Email:
anakisidahuda@gmail.
INTRODUCTION Coffee consumption in Indonesia has shown a steady upward trajectory over recent years, indicating that coffee has evolved beyond a functional beverage into an integral element of social life and cultural expression.
The continuous increase in national coffee consumption reflects changing consumer behavior, where coffee shops are no longer merely https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 954 places to purchase drinks but also serve as spaces for interaction, identity formation, and lifestyle representation .
This growth indicates rising public interest in coffee not only as a beverage but also as a cultural symbol, becoming increasingly prominent across communities.
The City of Yogyakarta has emerged as a center of growth for the coffee shop industry in Indonesia amid rising coffee In 2022.
Yogyakarta was home to more than 3,000 coffeeshops.
This number far exceeded those of neighboring cities such as Surakarta, with approximately 400 coffeeshops, and Semarang, with around 700 .
The widespread presence of the coffee industry in Yogyakarta reflects strong consumer demand for coffee and the cityAos role as a cultural and tourism hub, elevating coffee shops to important spaces for social Over the past decade, the growth of coffeeshops in Yogyakarta has followed a remarkably rapid and consistent pattern.
In 2014, there were approximately 350 coffeeshops in the city, a figure that nearly doubled to 600 in 2015 .
This upward trend continued sharply, reaching 1,200 coffeeshops in 2017 (Nurwigati, 2.
, 3,500 in 2019, and ultimately 3,700 in 2024 (Klara, 2.
This substantial increase demonstrates that the coffee industry in Yogyakarta has expanded in a massive and sustained manner.
The coffee shop business in Yogyakarta has experienced rapid growth, accompanied by significant shifts in trends .
Over the past ten years, nine types of coffee establishments have gained popularity in Indonesia, six of which include American coffee chains.
Italian coffee chains, local coffee chains, coffee-to-go outlets, specialty coffee shops, and bakery and pastry cafys .
In addition, three other types of coffee shops have emerged as notable trends in recent years, namely co-working space cafys, slow bar coffee, and street coffee.
Alongside this growth, a significant shift in consumer trends has taken place.
The coffee-to-go concept gained popularity around 2019 by offering fast service, affordable prices, and high convenience, aligning with the preferences of urban consumers who prioritize efficiency .
However, following the pandemic, the slow bar coffee concept began to attract increasing attention.
This model emphasizes manual brewing, direct interaction between baristas and customers, and a more immersive consumption experience.
The emergence of slow bar coffee indicates that consumers are increasingly valuing experiential, emotional, and relational aspects rather than focusing solely on speed and price .
These contrasting trends raise an important research question: how is customer loyalty formed across different coffee shop business models? While coffee-to-go outlets tend to rely on price fairness and service efficiency to retain customers, slow-bar coffee shops appear to rely more on experiential value, trust, and emotional engagement .
Despite the relevance of this issue, existing studies generally examine customer loyalty determinants in a single business context, without directly comparing different coffee shop models within a single analytical framework .
Previous research has shown that brand experience plays a crucial role in shaping trust and loyalty in the coffee shop industry, highlighting the importance of sensory and emotional engagement in consumer behavior .
Other studies emphasize that customer price perception and service perception significantly influence satisfaction and loyalty, https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
955 particularly in efficiency-driven or technology-based service contexts .
However, these studies have not explicitly addressed how these variables operate differently across coffeeto-go and slow-bar coffee models, especially in a highly competitive local market such as Yogyakarta.
Based on this gap, the present study proposes a comparative approach to examine the mechanisms underlying customer loyalty formation in coffee-to-go and slow-bar coffee shops.
This research integrates brand experience, customer price perception, and customer service perception as antecedent variables, with trust and satisfaction positioned as mediating factors influencing loyalty .
The main objective of this study is to analyze and compare the structural relationships among these variables across the two business models, thereby providing a more comprehensive understanding of how loyalty is developed under differing service orientations .
From a theoretical perspective, this study draws on consumer behavior and relationship marketing theories, which emphasize the roles of perceived value, experiential consumption, satisfaction, and trust in building long-term customer relationships.
By applying these theories in a comparative setting, this research is expected to enrich the literature on service differentiation and loyalty formation in the coffee shop industry.
2 The findings of this study are expected to offer both academic and practical benefits.
Academically, the research contributes to the development of loyalty models by demonstrating how distinct business concepts shape distinct mechanisms of loyalty formation.
In practice, the results are expected to provide strategic insights for coffee shop managers in Yogyakarta, enabling them to design more effective pricing, service, and experiential strategies that align with their specific business models and target METHOD This study employs an explanatoryAecomparative design with a quantitative approach to examine causal relationships among variables while simultaneously comparing their effects across two types of coffee shops in Yogyakarta, namely to-go coffee and slow bar coffee.
Data analysis was conducted using Partial Least SquaresAeStructural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to evaluate both the measurement and structural models.
It was further complemented by Partial Least Squares Multi-group Analysis (PLS-MGA), preceded by Measurement Invariance of Composite Models (MICOM) testing to ensure measurement equivalence across groups.
The study population consisted of customers of both types of coffee shops, and a sample of 240 respondents was selected based on the number of indicators and using purposive sampling with specific criteria.
The data comprised quantitative primary data collected online through a five-point Likert-scale questionnaire, which had undergone validity and reliability testing.
Data collection was conducted during OctoberAeNovember 2025, and the entire analytical process was supported by SmartPLS version 4.
0 to obtain a comprehensive understanding of differences in the formation of trust, satisfaction, and loyalty across the two types of coffee shops.
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 956 3.
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis The results of the PLS-SEM analysis are shown on the following page.
Figure 1.
Measurement Model Outer Model Convergent Validity: Average Variance Extracted (AVE) A construct is considered to have adequate convergent validity when the AVE value is Ou 0.
A high AVE value indicates that the indicators consistently represent the same construct, thereby reflecting a good level of consistency and reliability in the measurement.
Table 1.
Results of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Brand Experience 0.
Customer Price Perception 0.
774 Customer Service Perception 0.
754 Loyalty 0.
Satisfaction 0.
832 Trust 0.
818 Source: Processed primary data, 2025 Based on Table 1, the results of the convergent validity test show that all research variables have Average Variance Extracted (AVE) values above 0.
50, and therefore meet https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
957 the criteria for convergent validity.
This finding indicates that each construct adequately explains the variance in its corresponding Discriminant Validity: HeterotraitAeMonotrait Ratio (HTMT) A construct is considered to demonstrate good discriminant validity when the HTMT value is below the recommended threshold, namely HTMT < 0.
r more conservatively, < 0.
Lower HTMT values indicate that each construct possesses distinct characteristics and does not overlap with other constructs, thereby confirming that the measurement model can empirically distinguish among constructs.
Table 2.
Results of the HeterotraitAeMonotrait Ratio (HTMT) Brand Experience Customer Price Perception Customer Service Perception Loyalty Satisfaction Trust Brand Experience Customer Price Perception Customer Service Perception 0.
Satisfaction 0.
Loyalty 0.
Trust 0.
545 Source: Processed primary data, 2025 Based on the results of discriminant validity testing using the HeterotraitAeMonotrait Ratio (HTMT) method, all HTMT values between constructs in this research model are below the recommended threshold (< 0.
This indicates that each construct is adequately distinct and that there is no conceptual overlap among the variables.
All constructs in the research model meet the criteria for discriminant validity, meaning that each variable is empirically distinct and suitable for use in subsequent structural analysis.
Reliability Test In this study, reliability is assessed using the Construct Reliability (CR) index.
A construct is considered reliable if it has a CR value greater than 0.
70, whereas a CR value below 0.
70 indicates that the construct is not yet Table 3.
Reliability Test No Composite Reliability Description 1 Brand Experience 977 Reliable 2 Customer Price Perception 0.
911 Reliable 3 Customer Service Perception 961 Reliable 4 Loyalty 0.
938 Reliable 5 Satisfaction 0.
937 Reliable 6 Trust 0.
Reliable Source: Processed primary data, 2025 Based on the results in Table 3, all variables in this study have Construct Reliability (CR) values greater than 0.
Therefore, all variables are considered reliable, meaning their https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 958 indicators can produce consistent Consequently, all variables used in this study are valid and appropriate as research instruments.
Inner Model Coefficient of Determination / R-Square (RA) The RA value ranges from 0 to 1, with values closer to 1 indicating greater predictive capability of the model.
Generally.
RA is categorized as high (Ou 0.
, moderate .
33Ae0.
, and low (O Table 4.
Coefficient of Determination Results R Square R Square Adjusted Loyalty 471 Satisfaction 0.
451 Trust 0.
466 Source: Processed primary data, 2025 Overall, the RA results indicate that the research model has moderate explanatory power for the variables Loyalty.
Satisfaction, and Trust.
This suggests that predictor constructs such as Brand Experience.
Customer Price Perception, and Customer Service Perception, along with the mediating variables in the model, collectively explain customer behavior in Yogyakarta coffee shops reasonably well.
However, other factors outside the model may still influence the dependent variables .
fA (Effect Siz.
According to Fatiria and Nawawi .
, the interpretation of fA values is divided into three categories: 0.
indicates a small effect, 0.
15 indicates a medium effect, and 0.
35 indicates a large effect of an exogenous variable on an endogenous variable.
Therefore, fA analysis complements path coefficient testing by providing a deeper understanding of the practical impact of each relationship within the research model.
Table 5.
Effect Size Results Brand Experience Customer Price Perception Customer Service Perception Loyalty Satisfaction Trust Brand Experience 067 Customer Price Perception Customer Service Perception Trust 087 Loyalty Satisfaction 052 Source: Processed primary data, 2025 Overall, the results of the effect size analysis indicate that most of the relationships between variables in this research model fall into the small effect category, with Customer Price Perception Ie Satisfaction being the only relationship showing a medium effect .
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
959 This suggests that while the independent variables contribute to the dependent variables, their influence remains limited, and that other factors outside the model may also affect loyalty, satisfaction, and trust among coffee shop customers in Yogyakarta.
Global Model Fit Test Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) The SRMR value reflects the average standardized residual differences between the model-predicted relationships and the empirical data.
The smaller the SRMR value, the better the model fit, indicating that the structural model adequately represents the research data.
Table 6.
Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) Results Saturated Model Estimated Model SRMR 0.
037 Source: Processed primary data, 2025 Based on the SRMR test results presented in Table 6, the SRMR values are 036 for the saturated model and 0.
037 for the estimated model.
Both values are below the recommended maximum threshold of 0.
08, indicating that the research model demonstrates an excellent level of fit .
Normed Fit Index (NFI) The NFI value is obtained by comparing the misfit of the estimated model with that of a null model, indicating the modelAos improvement in fit.
The closer the NFI value is to 1, the better the model fit, indicating the modelAos ability to accurately represent the data.
Table 7.
Normed Fit Index (NFI) Results Saturated Model Estimated Model NFI 0.
904 Source:
Processed primary data, 2025 Based on the NFI results presented in Table 7, the NFI values are 0.
904 for both the saturated and estimated models.
These values exceed the recommended minimum threshold of 0.
90, indicating that the research model has a good level of fit.
Hypothesis Testing The next step after evaluating the measurement model is to conduct a structural model analysis to test the formulated hypotheses.
This analysis aims to identify direct and indirect effects among the variables under study.
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 960 Table 8.
Hypothesis Testing Results Original Sample (O) T Statistics (|O/STDEV|) P Values Brand Experience -> Loyalty 0.
000 Brand Experience -> Satisfaction 0.
005 Brand Experience -> Trust 0.
000 Customer Price Perception -> Loyalty -0.
005 Customer Price Perception -> Satisfaction 0.
000 Customer Price Perception -> Trust 0.
001 Customer Service Perception -> Loyalty 0.
016 Customer Service Perception -> Satisfaction -0.
765 Customer Service Perception -> Trust 0.
000 Satisfaction -> Loyalty 0.
Trust -> Loyalty 0.
003 Brand Experience -> Satisfaction -> Loyalty 0.
050 Customer Price Perception -> Satisfaction -> Loyalty 0.
Customer Service Perception -> Satisfaction -> Loyalty -0.
775 Brand Experience -> Trust -> Loyalty 0.
015 Customer Price Perception -> Trust -> Loyalty 0.
026 Customer Service Perception -> Trust -> Loyalty 0.
018 a.
Effect of Brand Experience on Loyalty The test results indicate that Brand Experience has a positive and significant effect on Loyalty, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 614, and P-value = 0.
This finding implies that the better the brand experience customers perceive, the higher their loyalty.
Therefore.
Hypothesis 1 (H.
, which states that Brand Experience positively affects Loyalty, is supported.
Effect of Brand Experience on Satisfaction Brand Experience has a positive and significant effect on Satisfaction, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 2.
810, and P-value = 0.
This result demonstrates that positive brand experiences enhance customer satisfaction.
Thus.
Hypothesis 2 (H.
is supported.
Effect of Brand Experience on Trust Brand Experience also has a positive and significant effect on Trust, with O = 0.
Tstatistic = 4.
150, and Pvalue = 0.
000, indicating that brand experience plays an important role in building customer trust.
Accordingly.
Hypothesis 3 (H.
is supported.
Effect of Customer Price Perception on Loyalty Customer Price Perception has a negative and significant effect on Loyalty, with O = Ae 0.
T-statistic = 2.
803, and P-value = 0.
This finding suggests that unfavorable price perceptions can reduce customer loyalty.
Consequently.
Hypothesis 4 (H.
, which proposes a positive effect of Customer Price Perception on Loyalty, is not Effect of Customer Price Perception on Satisfaction Customer Price Perception has a positive and significant effect on Satisfaction, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 602, and P-value = 0.
000, indicating that price perception is an important factor in shaping customer satisfaction.
Therefore.
Hypothesis 5 (H.
is supported.
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
961 f.
Effect of Customer Price Perception on Trust Customer Price Perception has a positive and significant effect on Trust, with O = 231.
T-statistic = 3.
475, and P-value = 0.
001, indicating that perceived fair prices enhance customer trust.
Hence.
Hypothesis 6 (H.
is supported.
Effect of Customer Service Perception on Loyalty Customer Service Perception has a positive and significant effect on Loyalty, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 2.
406, and P-value = 0.
016, indicating that service quality contributes to customer loyalty.
Thus.
Hypothesis 7 (H.
is supported.
Effect of Customer Service Perception on Satisfaction Customer Service Perception does not have a significant effect on Satisfaction, with O = Ae0.
T-statistic = 0.
299, and Pvalue = 0.
Accordingly.
Hypothesis 8 (H.
is not supported.
Effect of Customer Service Perception on Trust Customer Service Perception has a positive and significant effect on Trust, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 4.
237, and P-value = 0.
000, indicating that high-quality service enhances customer trust.
Therefore.
Hypothesis 9 (H.
is supported.
Effect of Satisfaction on Loyalty Satisfaction has a positive and significant effect on Loyalty, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 3.
473, and P-value = 0.
001, confirming its important role in fostering loyalty.
Thus.
Hypothesis 10 (H.
is supported.
Effect of Trust on Loyalty Trust has a positive and significant effect on Loyalty, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 3.
and P-value = 0.
003, indicating that customer trust promotes loyalty.
Accordingly.
Hypothesis 11 (H.
is supported.
Mediating Effect of Satisfaction on the Relationship between Brand Experience and Loyalty The path Brand Experience Ie Satisfaction Ie Loyalty shows a positive, marginally significant effect, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 1.
and P-value = 0.
050, indicating that Satisfaction partially mediates the effect.
Therefore.
Hypothesis 12 (H.
is partially supported.
Mediating Effect of Satisfaction on the Relationship between Customer Price Perception and Loyalty The path Customer Price Perception Ie Satisfaction Ie Loyalty is significant, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 3.
314, and P-value = 0.
001, indicating that Satisfaction partially mediates the relationship.
Thus.
Hypothesis 13 (H.
is partially supported.
Mediating Effect of Satisfaction on the Relationship between Customer Service Perception and Loyalty The path from Customer Service Perception to Satisfaction to Loyalty is not significant, with O = Ae0.
T .
, .
=0.
287, and P = 0.
Hence.
Satisfaction does not mediate this relationship, and Hypothesis 14 (H.
is not supported.
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 962 o.
Mediating Effect of Trust on the Relationship between Brand Experience and Loyalty The path Brand Experience Ie Trust Ie Loyalty has a positive and significant effect, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 2.
432, and Pvalue = 0.
015, indicating that Trust functions as a partial mediator.
Therefore.
Hypothesis 15 (H.
is partially supported.
Mediating Effect of Trust on the Relationship between Customer Price Perception and Loyalty The path Customer Price Perception Ie Trust Ie Loyalty is significant, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 2.
236, and P-value = 0.
026, indicating that Trust partially mediates the relationship.
Thus.
Hypothesis 16 (H.
is partially Mediating Effect of Trust on the Relationship between Customer Service Perception and Loyalty The path Customer Service Perception Ie Trust Ie Loyalty has a positive and significant effect, with O = 0.
T-statistic = 2.
380, and P-value = 0.
indicating that Trust partially mediates the relationship.
Accordingly.
Hypothesis 17 (H.
is partially supported.
Multigroup Analysis (MGA) A multi-group analysis (MGA) was conducted to examine whether the effects of structural relationships within the research model differ across specific group characteristics.
Using MGA, the same model is tested across two or more respondent groups to compare the magnitudes and significance of path coefficients between them.
Table 9.
Results of the Multi-group Analysis Relationship between Variables Difference in Coefficients (Slowbar Ae Tog.
p-Value MGA Brand Experience Ie Loyalty -0.
170 Brand Experience Ie Satisfaction -0.
038 Brand Experience Ie Trust -0.
051 Customer Price Perception Ie Loyalty 0.
Customer Price Perception Ie Satisfaction 0.
157 Customer Price Perception Ie Trust 574 Customer Service Perception Ie Loyalty 0.
375 Customer Service Perception Ie Satisfaction 0.
162 Customer Service Perception Ie Trust 0.
Satisfaction Ie Loyalty -0.
075 Trust Ie Loyalty 0.
695 Brand Experience Ie Satisfaction Ie Loyalty -0.
013 Customer Price Perception Ie Satisfaction Ie Loyalty 432 Customer Service Perception Ie Satisfaction Ie Loyalty 0.
223 Brand Experience Ie Trust Ie Loyalty -0.
417 Customer Price Perception Ie Trust Ie Loyalty 527 Customer Service Perception Ie Trust Ie Loyalty 0.
365 Based on the results of the Multi-group Analysis (MGA) comparing the Slow Bar and To-Go customer groups, most of the structural relationships do not exhibit statistically significant differences between the two groups, as indicated by p-values greater than 0.
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
963 This finding suggests that, in general, the pattern of relationships among the variables in the research model is relatively consistent across both service types .
However, two paths demonstrate significant differences between the groups.
First, the relationship between Brand Experience and Satisfaction yields a p-value of 0.
038 (< 0.
with a negative coefficient difference (Ae0.
This result indicates that the effect of brand experience on customer satisfaction differs significantly between Slow Bar and ToGo customers, with the effect stronger in the To-Go group .
Second, for the mediated path Brand Experience Ie Satisfaction Ie Loyalty, the MGA results show a p-value of 0.
013 (< 0.
This finding indicates that the role of satisfaction as a mediating variable in the relationship between brand experience and loyalty differs significantly between Slow Bar and To-Go customers.
In other words, the mechanism through which loyalty is formed via satisfaction is influenced by the type of service chosen by customers .
Meanwhile, all other paths, both direct and indirect, do not show significant differences between the groups, including relationships involving Customer Price Perception.
Customer Service Perception, as well as mediation paths through Trust.
This suggests that price, service quality, and trust exert relatively similar effects on both Slow Bar and To-Go customers .
Overall, the MGA results indicate that service type (Slow Bar vs.
To-G.
moderates only specific relationships, particularly those related to brand experience and satisfaction, while the remaining structural relationships remain stable across groups .
These findings imply that strategies aimed at enhancing the brand experience should be tailored to the type of serviceo maximize customer satisfaction and loyalty .
CONCLUSION Based on the formulated research problems and objectives, the conclusions of this study are systematically structured according to the relationships among the variables tested in the research model.
These conclusions are conceptual and empirically confirmed by the results of data analysis.
Brand experience influences customer loyalty to coffee shops in Yogyakarta.
Brand experience, encompassing sensory, affective, intellectual, and behavioral dimensions, is a crucial factor in encouraging repeat purchases and fostering long-term customer commitment to coffee Brand experience influences customer trust.
Positive experiences customers have during their interactions with coffee shops can build trust in the brand's consistency, credibility, and quality.
Brand experience influences customer satisfaction.
Pleasant and meaningful brand experiences enhance customersAo positive evaluations of coffee shop performance, thereby increasing satisfaction.
Customer service perception influences customer loyalty.
CustomersAo perceptions of service quality, such as speed, friendliness, and professionalism, play an important role in shaping loyalty to coffee shops.
https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
1034 964 e.
Customer service perception influences customer trust.
Consistent and reliable service increases customersAo confidence that the coffee shop can be trusted to meet their expectations.
Customer service perception influences customer satisfaction.
Positive service perceptions encourage the formation of customer satisfaction as an outcome of evaluations of the service experience Customer price perception influences customer loyalty.
Perceptions of fair pricing that align with the benefits received encourage customer loyalty and reduce the likelihood of switching to other coffee shops.
Customer price perception influences customer trust.
Prices perceived as reasonable and transparent strengthen customersAo trust in the coffee shop's integrity and honesty.
Customer price perception influences customer satisfaction.
Aligning price with product or service quality enhances customer satisfaction with coffee shop offerings.
Trust influences customer loyalty.
High levels of trust in a coffee shop promote the development of long-term relationships and customer Satisfaction influences customer loyalty.
Satisfied customers tend to make repeat purchases, provide recommendations, and maintain relationships with the coffee Trust mediates the effect of brand experience on customer loyalty.
Positive brand experiences increase customer trust, which in turn strengthens loyalty.
Satisfaction mediates the effect of brand experience on customer loyalty.
Favorable brand experiences enhance customer satisfaction, which, in turn, drives loyalty.
Trust mediates the relationship between customer service perception and customer loyalty.
Positive service perceptions build trust, which ultimately increases customer loyalty.
Satisfaction mediates the effect of customer service perception on customer loyalty.
Perceived service quality positively affects satisfaction, which, in turn, shapes customer loyalty.
Trust mediates the effect of customer price perception on customer loyalty.
Perceptions of fair pricing increase customer trust, thereby influencing loyalty.
Satisfaction mediates the effect of customer price perception on customer loyalty.
Price perceptions that align with the value received enhance customer satisfaction and strengthen loyalty.
Overall, this study confirms that customer loyalty toward coffee shops in Yogyakarta is shaped not only by functional factors such as price and service quality, but also by experiential factors that are emotional and relational, with trust and satisfaction serving as the primary mediating ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to express our deepest gratitude to all parties who have contributed to this research.
Thank you to our colleagues who have provided advice, support, and inspiration throughout the research process.
We also wish to extend our appreciation to everyone who took the time to participate in this study.
Additionally, we are grateful to the institutions that have provided support and facilities for the conduct of this research.
All https://doi.
org/10.
58421/gehu.
965 contributions and assistance have been invaluable to the smooth progress and success of this study.
Thank you for all the hard work and collaboration that has been established.
REFERENCES .