Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In a Comment on a recent article in this Journal by Bodvarsson and Gibson (1999), Lynn (2000) criticizes the authors’ claims for why earlier studies on tipping find that tip size is only weakly related to customer evaluations of service quality. This paper presents a critical reply to Lynn’s Comment. Contrary to Lynn’s claims: (a) the weakness of the tipping-service relationship is likely not due to restricted variation in mean percentage tips across quality rankings; (b) ordinal ranking scales used to measure service quality do preclude valid statistical tests; (c) multi-personal, subjective questionnaires are suspect because there is no real evidence that words like “excellent” or “fair” actually do have common meaning across cultures; and (d) given that the surveys in Bodvarsson and Gibson’s study were completed anonymously with no rewards or punishments, there is no reason to expect atypical amounts of bias.
Bodvarsson et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: