Consumers’ expectations and importance attached to provider’s warmth and competence in luxury and non-luxury service settings Open Access

The constant increase in travelers over the years has led to a dynamic and fast-growing tourism industry (Jain et al., 2023; Luna-Cortes et al., 2023), resulting in a wide variety of hospitality options (Kuhzady et al., 2021). Several factors have contributed to this expansion, including the rise of lodging platforms (Kuhzady et al., 2021), evolving consumer preferences (Luna-Cortes et al., 2023) and increased demand for hospitality alternatives that in the past were considered niche (Jain et al., 2023). For instance, while many consumers still choose low-cost accommodations (Kuhzady et al., 2021), there has been an increase in the number of consumers who stay in luxury hotels (Luna-Cortes et al., 2023). Indeed, recent reports indicate that the market size of the luxury hospitality sector will increase from US$93.4bn in 2022 to US$238.5bn by 2028 (Jain et al., 2023). Among the key attributes that differentiate budget and luxury hotels, scholars highlight the appearance, attitude and performance of service providers (Amatulli et al., 2021; Farmaki et al., 2021; Luna-Cortes et al., 2023; Peng and Chen, 2019).

The distinction between luxury and non-luxury service settings is not merely economic but psychological and experiential. Consumers approach these settings with different expectations, shaped by the symbolic value, social norms and emotional goals (Luna-Cortes, 2024). In luxury services, consumers often seek exclusivity, precision and professionalism, which may elevate the importance of some service providers’ characteristics over others (Aagerup, 2020; Ward and Dahl, 2014; Wang et al., 2020). Conversely, in non-luxury settings, where affordability may raise concerns about reliability or trustworthiness, closeness and warmth may serve as a compensatory cue, reassuring consumers and fostering relational comfort (Peng and Chen, 2019; Güntürkün et al., 2020). These contextual differences suggest that service providers in luxury settings can face unique challenges in balancing traits such as warmth and competence, since warm behavior might be perceived as unprofessional or inconsistent with the brand’s prestige (Habel et al., 2017; Marinova et al., 2018). Therefore, understanding how consumers prioritize service providers based on stereotypes is essential for both theory and practice.

When examining individuals’ reactions based on stereotypes, the stereotype content model (SCM) is the most widely used theory in the literature (Aaker et al., 2012; Andrei et al., 2017; Cuddy et al., 2011; Fiske et al., 2002, 2007; Güntürkün et al., 2020; Halkias and Diamantopoulos, 2020; Judd et al., 2005; Kirmani et al., 2017; Marinova et al., 2018; Kolbl et al., 2019; Luna-Cortes, 2024). The theory indicates that two fundamental traits guide individuals’ impression formation, namely, “warmth and competence.” Warmth is associated with friendliness and kindness, while competence is associated with efficacy and skill (Fiske et al., 2007). Building on the foundations of this theory in social psychology (Fiske et al., 1999; Zanna and Hamilton, 1972), an important topic of research has focused on understanding the primacy of one trait over the other in different contexts (Aaker et al., 2012; Andrei et al., 2017; Fiske et al., 2002, 2007; Kolbl et al., 2019; Luna-Cortes, 2024). Determining which trait is more important for individuals helps practitioners make decisions. For example, adapting the appearance and behavior of frontline service providers to the situation or the service setting (Güntürkün et al., 2020).

Fiske et al. (2002) initially argued that individuals try to determine others’ intentions first and, subsequently, their ability to enact those intentions, suggesting a primacy of warmth over competence. Some authors challenged these early assumptions, considering that the primacy of a trait depends on the social context (Judd et al., 2005). Research in marketing indicated a primacy of competence over warmth (Aaker et al., 2012). According to Aaker et al. (2012), the importance of competence when consumers judge brands is due to people’s admiration of highly competent organizations. However, some studies find mixed evidence (Andrei et al., 2017) or suggest that warmth is the most important dimension when judging certain organizations and brands (Kolbl et al., 2019). Conclusions also differ in the context of luxury versus non-luxury service settings (Luna-Cortes, 2024). While some authors suggest that deep and intimate connections during guest−staff interactions might lead to positive reactions in a luxury service setting (i.e. warmth as a primary dimension) (Correia et al., 2022; Jain et al., 2023), other studies suggest that too friendly interactions at a luxury setting might lead to negative consumers’ reactions (Aagerup, 2020). Some authors pointed out that unfriendly responses from service providers in luxury settings are common and even desirable (Ward and Dahl, 2014), while other authors maintain that, also in a luxury setting, service providers should present a warm attitude (Shahid and Paul, 2022).

These conflicting results lead to a need for research, since managers have little orientation regarding initiatives based on the warmth-competence framework, and are prone to make dysfunctional decisions, such as focusing on the wrong dimension to attract new customers or build customer relationships (Güntürkün et al., 2020). This might occur in luxury contexts if service providers select the wrong approach (Aagerup, 2020), or if non-luxury service brands opt to copy the strategy of more prestigious service brands, which might not fit consumer expectations and preferences in the non-luxury setting (Luna-Cortes, 2024). To fill this gap, the present research examines consumers’ expectations and the importance attached to providers’ warmth and competence in luxury versus non-luxury service settings. The research tests consumer expectations among potential and actual users. In addition, this research examines how different combinations of these two traits can influence consumer intentions differently in luxury and non-luxury service settings.

These research goals lead to the following research questions: (1) To what extent do consumer expectations and the relative importance attached to warmth and competence differ in luxury and non-luxury service settings? (2) How do different combinations of warmth and competence influence consumer perceptions and intentions in luxury versus non-luxury service settings? Answering these research questions provides various theoretical and managerial implications. Research on luxury has focused primarily on the consumption of tangible luxury products, while fewer studies have examined luxury services in general (Luna-Cortes et al., 2023; Semaan et al., 2024). In fact, “the knowledge we have of the luxury market heavily relies on a goods-centric view” (Semaan et al., 2024, p. 538). Thus, the findings contribute to the literature on service management and the luxury industry (Alhouti et al., 2024; Holmqvist et al., 2023; Medler-Liraz and Seger-Guttmann, 2025; Saxena et al., 2023), adding knowledge to several disciplines, and filling some gaps identified in recent reviews on the SCM and luxury and non-luxury services (Jain et al., 2023; Luna-Cortes, 2024).

The theoretical foundations of the two-dimensional structure of social judgments were established by Zanna and Hamilton (1972), who reinterpreted Asch’s (1946) classic centrality effect in person perception. Asch (1946) argued that warm/cold were central traits, which describe someone as intelligent, skillful, industrious, determined, practical and cautious. Zanna and Hamilton (1972) argued that warm−cold interactions were key to understanding good or bad impressions. Building on these initial interpretations, the studies by Fiske et al. (1999, 2002) established the theoretical foundations of the SCM. Since then, research in social psychology considers warmth and competence to be the two fundamental dimensions of human impression formation (Cuddy et al., 2011; Fiske et al., 2007; Judd et al., 2005).

Building on this early research in social psychology, scholars applied the SCM to investigate consumer evaluations of service providers. Some authors examined racial stereotypes (Cuddy et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2023). For instance, Asian service providers are considered colder, affecting consumer reactions (Lee et al., 2023). Other stereotypes examined in service research were based on weight and gender, with evidence of heavy women rating higher in warmth (Smith et al., 2016). Research also showed that less weight correlates with physical attractiveness, which can increase competence perceptions for both men and women (Li et al., 2021). These factors affect perceived quality (Ang et al., 2018), connecting key stereotypes identified in social psychology with recommendations for practitioners in service management.

In addition, perceptions of warmth and competence can affect service recovery (Dandotiya et al., 2024; Huang and Ha, 2020; Huang et al., 2020; Liu and Li, 2022). Prior findings suggest that warm (versus competent) interactions are more effective (Huang and Ha, 2020). Hence, service providers’ characteristics that suggest warmth (e.g. baby face) (Liu and Li, 2022) or warm interactive styles (e.g. the use of emoticons) (Li et al., 2019) were recommended during service recovery. However, consumers can perceive lower competence if the warm interaction is not believable (e.g. forced), or not authentic (Andrzejewski and Mooney, 2016), for example, when providers show too broad smiles (Yao et al., 2022). Finally, the most current applications of the SCM in service research are on artificial intelligence and robot providers, with much emphasis on the effect of anthropomorphism on both warmth and competence perceptions (Belanche et al., 2021; Chi et al., 2024; Choi et al., 2021; Song et al., 2024; Xu and Liu, 2022).

Besides the great number of studies on the SCM, it is still unclear in which situations consumers prefer warm or competent service providers (Güntürkün et al., 2020; Kirmani et al., 2017; Luna-Cortes, 2024). Conflicting results regarding the primacy of one trait over the other have a long-standing history in the social psychology literature (Fiske et al., 2002; Judd et al., 2005). Fiske et al. (1999, 2002) first indicated that individuals normally characterize others as warm but incompetent or competent but cold (i.e. an ambivalent association). Judd et al. (2005) challenged this assumption, presenting scenarios in which the two dimensions were either positively or negatively associated. Later, the studies by Fiske et al. (2007) and Cuddy et al. (2011) supported their earlier conclusions. Fiske et al. (2002, 2007) also argued that individuals try to determine others’ intentions first and, subsequently, their ability to enact those intentions, suggesting a primacy of warmth over competence. In service research, Kirmani et al. (2017) suggested that warmth-related attributes are more important in services associated with object care (i.e. mechanics and house cleaners) compared to people care services (i.e. hair stylists and masseuses).

Building on these findings, the study by Güntürkün et al. (2020) found that the relative importance of warmth versus competence shifts toward competence for services that offer care for people compared to services that offer care for objects. Therefore, consumers might establish the importance of warmth or competence for an industry or specific setting before they make contact with the service provider (Güntürkün et al., 2020; Kirmani et al., 2017). When comparing luxury and non-luxury service options, results on the primacy of warmth over competence, or vice versa, are still inconclusive. While some authors suggest a primacy or warmth in luxury settings (Correia et al., 2022; Jain et al., 2023; Shahid and Paul, 2022), other authors indicate that warmth in luxury settings might lead to negative consumer reactions (Aagerup, 2020; Ward and Dahl, 2014), and a competence approach should prime (Habel et al., 2017). Based on these conflicting results, the recent review by Luna-Cortes (2024) identified a need for research on which of the two traits, warmth or competence, is more important for consumers in luxury versus non-luxury service settings. The following literature review sections connect the SCM with service providers in luxury and non-luxury settings.

Although the majority of research on luxury has focused on luxury goods, and “academic research has largely ignored luxury services” (Wirtz et al., 2020, p. 665), in the past five years, scholars have conducted a significant amount of studies to define luxury services, and present new theoretical and practical implications for luxury service management (e.g. Ahn and Gao, 2024; Alhouti et al., 2024; Batat, 2022; Boukis et al., 2024; Holmqvist et al., 2023; Hyun et al., 2024; Le et al., 2021; Medler-Liraz and Seger-Guttmann, 2025; Peng et al., 2022; Ryu et al., 2022; Saxena et al., 2023; Shin and Jeong, 2022; Shin et al., 2022; Semaan et al., 2024; Schill and Godefroit-Winkel, 2022; Taishoff et al., 2022). Prior research identified key attributes of luxury services, including an exclusive hedonic and social value, which is expensive as well as extraordinary (Wirtz et al., 2020). The unique value of a luxury service is cocreated in the ecosystem where the service is offered (Taishoff et al., 2022). Among the different stakeholders that form this peculiar ecosystem, scholars highlight the importance of the consumers (Holmqvist et al., 2023). The type of consumers who use luxury services, as well as their behavior, mold the ecosystem’s servicescape (Taishoff et al., 2022), influence the perception of other users, create new relationships and adapt the offer (Holmqvist et al., 2020, 2023; Semaan et al., 2024).

When focusing on consumers’ perceptions and behavior, research on luxury services has recently started investigating the factors that influence perceived value, risk assessment and purchasing decisions (Alhouti et al., 2024; Boukis et al., 2024; Hyun et al., 2024; Medler-Liraz and Seger-Guttmann, 2025; Saxena et al., 2023). Among these, some studies have indicated the importance of a well-recognized service brand, which should signal distinctiveness and unique identity (Ahn and Gao, 2024; Chang et al., 2016; Saxena et al., 2023). Other authors have focused on how aesthetics can suggest high quality in this context (Ryu et al., 2022). For instance, some combinations of colors lead to classical aesthetic perceptions, feelings of pleasure and dominance in the luxury service setting (Kim et al., 2020), together with a biophilic design (i.e. nature elements), which can evoke a differentiated experience and escapism (Shin et al., 2022). Other attributes examined in the literature are the use of advanced technology − which should be adapted to the image of the service (Shin and Jeong, 2022) − and luxury brands’ prosocial behavior (Alhouti et al., 2024 Hyun et al., 2024).

Besides the factors mentioned above, scholars have highlighted the importance of relational marketing (Le et al., 2021). Relationships and interactions are key factors that help differentiate luxury service brands in the market, including interactions with service providers. To provide a service that encompasses all the features of the luxury offer, scholars indicate that service providers must make efforts to adapt to consumers’ preferences and expectations (Peng et al., 2022). Although few studies have examined interactions in luxury versus non-luxury service settings (Luna-Cortes, 2024), recent research suggests that consumer reactions toward the same interaction differ in the two contexts. For instance, the study by Medler-Liraz and Seger-Guttmann (2025) showed that, while waitress flirting led to higher tips in non-luxury restaurants, this interaction had no effect in luxury restaurants. The present study applies the SCM to expand the literature on consumer reactions to luxury versus non-luxury services. The research focuses on luxury hospitality, which shares most of the key elements that characterize luxury services, as described next.

An important context investigated in the literature of luxury service management is luxury hospitality, including luxury hotels (Jain et al., 2023; Luna-Cortes et al., 2023). A luxury hotel is a unique and superior accommodation in terms of quality. It includes an exclusive design, exceptional facilities, amenities and other physical attributes that represent wealth and status (Peng and Chen, 2019). When choosing a luxury hotel, consumers usually recognize star ratings and hotel brands (Farmaki et al., 2021). Among all the products and service attributes that contribute to the service experience at a hotel, some authors highlight the employees’ performance (Amatulli et al., 2021). At a luxury hotel, consumers usually expect to find highly qualified providers. Employees’ capability in this context helps to avoid uncertainty and ensures that the core needs of the service are fully covered (Peng and Chen, 2019). Such capabilities are related in the literature to providers’ competence (Güntürkün et al., 2020). Research shows that capability concerns reflect uncertainty about the service provider’s ability to accomplish the task (Güntürkün et al., 2020), which is something consumers expect to avoid in a luxury hotel (Amatulli et al., 2021; Farmaki et al., 2021). In the luxury context, the core needs of the service are expected to be fully covered (Peng and Chen, 2019). Customers assume that employees will exhibit the necessary competence to fulfill this role and that being warm may dilute or divert their attention from focusing on properly fulfilling the excellent service (Marinova et al., 2018).

In addition, luxury settings, such as luxury clubs and stores of luxury brands, can be shaped by the character of their guests (Aagerup, 2020; Ward and Dahl, 2014). Customers of luxury services are often perceived as less friendly but highly successful (Aagerup, 2020). In connection with this, some authors have indicated that, while competence in a luxury service context might be perceived as indispensable, customers may view employees’ warmth as useless (Huang et al., 2020; Singh et al., 2018). Other authors suggest that consumers look for prestige and respect, rather than feeling that other people “like them” (Kirmani et al., 2017). “Liking” depends more strongly on warmth, while “respect” depends more strongly on competence (Wojciszke et al., 2011). Although, for some companies, consumers might compensate for lower competence with higher warmth, for highly prestigious companies this is not likely to occur (Kirmani et al., 2017), suggesting a primacy of competence in luxury service settings, such as a luxury hotel (Luna-Cortes, 2024). Based on these previous findings, the following hypothesis is proposed:

In the context of non-luxury/affordable services, consumers usually show higher concern with price than with the quality of the service (Ye et al., 2020). Guests should expect service providers at the destination to be helpful and friendly at affordable hotels, which can contribute to overcoming skepticism (Peng and Chen, 2019). Consumers’ skepticism in this context usually occurs because cheaper services can increase concern about providers’ shirking or cheating (Mishra et al., 1998). Warmth service providers mitigate such risk by reducing relational concerns. This can lead to consumers seeking closer relationships with providers (Güntürkün et al., 2020). Compared with luxury brands, consumers feel empathy for less resourceful companies, thereby attenuating the dominance of competence (Kirmani et al., 2017). Huang et al. (2020) indicated that, when consumers anticipate lower quality regarding the rooms and other accommodation elements, customers value employees’ warmth as a tactic for compensation, conveying a pleasant, agreeable and empathetic disposition. In this context, the quality of employees’ interpersonal interactions in displaying empathy, listening and being kind is critical in enhancing customers’ sense of self-worth (Patterson et al., 2009). Thus, we expect that in non-luxury service settings, such as low-priced hotels, warmth will overcome competence:

Regarding the combinations of providers’ warmth and competence, prior research shows that providers rating high in both traits are normally perceived by consumers as being generally good, and providers rating low in both dimensions are normally perceived as being generally bad (Güntürkün et al., 2020). Interesting differences appear in the ambivalent association of the two traits (Kirmani et al., 2017). This is when service providers are perceived as high in one trait and low in the other. These combinations allow for theoretical inferences and managerial implications (Güntürkün et al., 2020; Kirmani et al., 2017). Following the theoretical reasoning discussed in the previous section, we expect that competence will take precedence over warmth in a luxurious service context because consumers pursue task-related goals in their relationships with service providers, as competence is more diagnostic for assessing task performance (Marinova et al., 2018) and the quality of offerings (Aaker et al., 2012). Otis (2008) showed that employers in luxury hotels expect their workers to adapt their manners to match the aesthetics, taste and expectations demanded by consumers in these high-class settings. As Dion and Borraz (2017) indicated, working in a luxury setting conveys the status of a social elite. As luxury brand representatives, service employees embody a particular style, taste and class, which might not be associated with exceedingly warm service providers. This might be especially true as some studies show that many consumers infer lower competence when service providers display behavior and characteristics usually associated with higher warmth (Luna-Cortes, 2024).

Habel et al. (2017) indicated that, although many consumers do not appreciate when service providers enforce rules directly on them, when observing that service providers are strict and enforce rules on others (low warmth), consumers react positively, since they perceive that providers are acting to ensure a high quality of the service, which is key in a luxury service setting (Jain et al., 2023; Luna-Cortes et al., 2023). Following Ward and Dahl (2014), showing warm signals at a luxury setting, such as “smiling figures to exuberantly welcome consumers” (p. 590), might lead to negative consumer reactions. Thus, while high competent providers seem to be a requirement when consumers choose luxury services, for some consumers of luxury services, warmth might not be a primary trait (Aagerup, 2020; Luna-Cortes, 2024). Hence, competence might be considered a key factor in consumers’ perception of service quality in luxury hospitality, which might lead to higher satisfaction (Peng and Chen, 2019), and willingness to stay (Ye et al., 2020), while warmth can be perceived as secondary (Huang et al., 2020) or even signal lack of self-reliance (Li et al., 2019). Based on these prior findings, we expect that, in a luxury hotel, service providers rating high in competence and low in warmth (versus high in warmth and low in competence) will lead to consumers expecting higher service quality and showing higher willingness to stay at the hotel:

Regarding providers in non-luxury service settings, Ward and Dahl (2014) indicated that, while unfriendly behavior from employees who represent high-aspiration service brands can lead to positive reactions, cold behavior from employees who represent affordable brands leads to adverse consumer reactions. We previously hypothesized that consumers expect and attach more importance to warmth than to competence in a non-luxury service context, where friendly service providers will contribute to overcoming skepticism (Peng and Chen, 2019) and mitigate risks by reducing relational concerns (Güntürkün et al., 2020). Warmth in affordable services can be perceived as compensation, conveying a pleasant, agreeable and empathetic disposition (Huang et al., 2020), enhancing customers’ sense of self-worth influenced by the cheaper and low-class service (Patterson et al., 2009). Thus, we expect that, in a non-luxury hotel, service providers rating high in warmth and low in competence (versus high in competence and low in warmth) will lead to consumers expecting higher service quality and showing higher willingness to stay at the hotel:

The theoretical reasoning of H3 and H4 include an interaction of two conditional variables [i.e. levels of warmth and competence, and the service setting (luxury versus non-luxury)], mediating effect (i.e. expected service quality) and the dependent variable (i.e. willingness to stay). The model that includes the relationships that will be tested is presented in Figure 1.

Five studies were conducted. Studies 1a and 1b were online experiments that tested the effect of the service setting (luxurious versus non-luxurious) on consumers’ expectations and importance attached to providers’ warmth and competence. Studies 2a and 2b were two field survey studies. Study 2a used a sample of participants who were staying in five-star hotels. Study 2b used a sample of participants who were staying in three-star hotels or a lower category. The goal of these two studies was to test consumers’ expectations and importance attached to warmth and competence in real-life settings. Finally, Study 3 was a between-subjects design experiment that tested consumers’ belief about the quality of the service and their willingness to stay at a luxury (versus non-luxury) hotel when service providers rate high in competence and low in warmth (versus high in warmth/low in competence).

This study aims to examine if and how consumers differ in their expectations of service providers’ warmth and competence when they are exposed to a luxury (versus non-luxury) service setting. Based on the theoretical foundations discussed, we propose that consumers expect higher competence than warmth in a luxury service setting, while they expect the opposite in a non-luxury setting (i.e. higher warmth than competence). In addition, the study aims to examine if service providers’ competence is more important than warmth for consumers in a luxury setting, while service providers’ warmth is more important than competence in a non-luxury service setting.

We launched the study on Prolific, where 100 participants from the UK answered a survey in exchange for a nominal payment. After a brief introduction and asking for consent, participants were asked to look at some pictures of Esfreya Hotel (a fictional hotel brand). Half of the participants were exposed to pictures of a five-star luxury hotel, and the other half were exposed to pictures of a two-star hotel. No more information about the hotel was presented (see  Appendix).

After seeing the pictures, participants answered two blocks of questions. In the first block, they were asked about their expectations of the receptionist at the hotel. From 1 (Not at all) to 9 (Extremely), participants were asked how competent, skilled, efficient and capable (i.e. four items measuring competence) and how helpful, caring, friendly and warm (i.e. four items measuring warmth) they expected the hotel receptionist would be. The items were selected based on previous research by Halkias and Diamantopoulos (2020) and Güntürkün et al. (2020). Next, participants were asked how important these attributes were for them during the interaction with a hotel receptionist of these characteristics (i.e. the same eight items). Finally, participants provided information related to demographics (see Table 1).

The items used to measure expected competence (α = 0.90), expected warmth (α = 0.95), importance of competence (α = 0.88) and importance of warmth (α = 0.94) were averaged. First, the results show that, when comparing luxury versus non-luxury, consumers expected both traits to be higher in a luxury than in a non-luxury hotel [expected competence: M_{expected competence-luxury} = 7.87, M_{expected competence non-luxury} = 5.02, t = 6.07, p < 0.01; expected warmth: M_{expected warmth-luxury} = 7.27, M _{expected warmth non-luxury} = 5.04, t = 6.74, p < 0.01]. They also attached more importance to both traits in the luxury than in the non-luxury hotel [importance competence: M_{importance competence-luxury} = 7.63, M_{importance competence non-luxury} = 5.46, t = 6.47, p < 0.01; importance warmth: M_{importance warmth-luxury} = 6.76, M_{importance warmth non-luxury} = 6.10, t = 3.45, p < 0.05]. These results indicate that, at luxury hotels, consumers generally expect a higher quality of service, reflected in all providers’ features. The goal of this study is to examine the primacy of one trait over the other, which, as hypothesized, we expect that it will differ depending on the context.

The results of the T-test reveal that participants who saw the pictures of the luxury hotel expected higher competence than warmth [expectation at luxury hotel: M_competence = 7.87, versus M_warmth = 7.27; t = 2.23, p < 0.05] and perceived competence to be more important than warmth [importance at luxury hotel: M_competence = 7.63, versus M_warmth = 6.76; t = 3.32; p < 0.05]. Regarding the answers of the participants who saw the pictures of the non-luxury hotel, there was no difference between expected warmth and competence [expectation at non-luxury hotel: M_competence = 5.02, versus M_warmth = 5.04; t = −0.84; p = 0.40]. However, the results show a difference in the importance attached by the participants to these two traits in the condition of a non-luxury hotel. In this case, warmth was rated as more important than competence [importance at non-luxury hotel: M_competence = 5.46, versus M_warmth = 6.10; t = 3.58, df = 98, p < 0.01] (H1 and H2 are partially supported).

The purpose of Study 1b is to test if the results of Study 1a can be replicated in a study without pictures, avoiding possible biases based on the colors, designs, space or other characteristics of the images used.

We recruited 100 participants from the USA. The data was gathered in Prolific. After providing consent, participants were randomly exposed to one of two conditions (luxury versus non-luxury hotel), only controlling for an equal number of respondents per condition and their gender [i.e. 50 participants were exposed to the luxury hotel condition (25 males, 25 females); 50 participants were exposed to the non-luxury hotel condition (25 males, 25 females)]. The two conditions are indicated below:

• (Luxury hotel): Esfreya H. is a five-star hotel. This is a luxurious hotel. The price of a hotel room at Esfreya H. goes from €300 to €500. The building shows the unique architecture of a luxury hotel. The decoration, doors and furniture are made with expensive materials. Now, we would like you to take about 20 s to imagine yourself visiting Esfreya H. Then, please answer the questions that follow.

• (Non-luxury hotel): Esfreya H. is a two-star hotel. This is an affordable hotel. The price of a hotel room at Esfreya H. goes from €40 to €70. The building shows the ordinary architecture of an affordable hotel. The decoration, doors and furniture are made with inexpensive materials. Now, we would like you to take about 20 s to imagine yourself visiting Esfreya H. Then, please answer the questions that follow.

Next, the respondents answered the same survey as in Study 1a. Participant characteristics (i.e. demographics) are presented in Table 2.

The items used to measure expected competence (α = 0.71), expected warmth (α = 0.91), importance of competence (α = 0.81) and importance of warmth (α = 0.80) were averaged. When comparing luxury versus non-luxury, consumers expect both traits to be higher in the luxury than in the non-luxury hotel [expected competence: M_{expected competence-luxury} = 7.67, M_{expected competence non-luxury} = 4.7, t = 9.83, p < 0.01; expected warmth: M_{expected warmth-luxury} = 7.11, M_{expected warmth non-luxury} = 5.22, t = 7.89, p < 0.01]. They also attached more importance to both traits in the luxury hotel [importance competence: M_{importance competence-luxury} = 7.58, M_{importance competence non-luxury} = 5.80, t = 7.32, p < 0.01; importance warmth: M_{importance warmth-luxury} = 6.94, M_{importance warmth non-luxury} = 6.42, t = 3.56, p < 0.05]. As mentioned before, in luxury hotels, consumers expect a higher quality of service in general.

As in Study 1a, the goal of this study is to examine the primacy of one trait over the other, which, as hypothesized, we expect that it will differ depending on the context. The results show that participants who read the text of the luxury hotel expected higher competence than warmth (expectation at luxury hotel: M_competence = 7.67, M_warmth = 7.11; t = 3.38, p < 0.05) and perceived competence to be more important than warmth (importance at luxury hotel: M_competence = 7.58, M_warmth = 6.94; t = 3.88, p < 0.01). Participants who read the text of the non-luxury hotel expected higher warmth than competence (expectation at non-luxury hotel: M_competence = 4.7, M_warmth = 5.22; t = 3.09, p < 0.05) and perceived warmth to be more important than competence (importance at non-luxury hotel: M_competence = 5.80, M_warmth = 6.42; t = 2.26, p < 0.05) (H1 and H2 are supported).

Since the previous studies showed fictitious scenarios, the goal of Study 2a is to test whether users in the luxury setting expect the service provider to be more competent and attach more importance to this trait.

We used nonprobabilistic (convenient) sampling to gather the data using a structured questionnaire. The data for Study 2a was collected in Monte Carlo (Monaco) and Menton (French Riviera, France), an area where there are several five-star hotels. The interviewer was located in the vicinity of five-star hotels in these cities. When the interviewer identified guests (e.g. a guest coming out of the hotel), they were asked to participate in the survey. The first was a filter question, asking whether the guest had stayed in the hotel (i.e. five-star) for at least 24 h. Additionally, to take the survey, they should have at least an intermediate-high (B2) level of English, the language in which the survey was conducted. The response rate was very low (i.e. most potential participants were unwilling to participate). This led to difficulties in gathering the data. After several weeks, we collected 63 responses, which formed the sample for this study.

Once respondents agreed to participate, they were asked to answer a questionnaire about the personnel at the hotel where they were staying. They were asked: “When you book a room in a hotel of these characteristics, what do you expect to find regarding the following characteristics of the service providers….” The following attributes were presented to them: competent, skilled, efficient and capable, helpful, caring, friendly and warm (scaled from 1 to 9). Next, they were asked: “Please rate how important it is for you that in this hotel service providers are…” (same eight factors). Participants provided demographic information at the end (see Table 3).

The items used to measure expected competence (α = 0.79), expected warmth (α = 0.77), perceived competence (α = 0.80) and perceived warmth (α = 0.93) were averaged. The results showed that participants expected higher competence (M_competence = 7.36) than warmth (M_warmth = 6.63) [t = 2.72; p < 0.01], and attached more importance to competence than to warmth [M_warmth = 6.75; M_competence = 7.26; (t = 1.69; p = 0.048)] (H1 supported).

We used the same method as in Study 2a, but the surveys were collected in Ventimiglia (Italy). Many hotels in this area of Italy (a few kilometers from Monaco and the French Riviera) are three-star hotels or lower. The interviewer was located near the vicinity of hotels of these characteristics and asked identified guests to participate. The response rate at this setting was higher, allowing us to gather a higher number of responses. A total of 106 participants answered the survey (same questions as in Study 2a; see demographics in Table 4).

The items of the two constructs were averaged. In this study (non-luxury setting), the results show that participants expected higher warmth (M_warmth = 5.55) than competence (M_competence = 4.15) [t = 7.78; p < 0.01]. In addition, they attached more importance to warmth (M_warmth = 5.85) than to competence (M_competence = 4.81) [t = 6.67; p < 0.01] (H2 supported).

Although Studies 2a and 2b were conducted separately (i.e. independent surveys), when comparing the results of the two studies, a general finding observed in Studies 1a and 1b appeared in Studies 2a and 2b as well, namely, that the means of expected warmth and competence, and importance attached to warmth and competence, are consistently higher in luxury compared to non-luxury hotels. Thus, although the primacy of one of the traits changes depending on the setting, the results show that consumers always expect service providers to be both warmer and more competent in luxury than in non-luxury settings.

This study examines whether service providers rating high in competence and low in warmth (versus high in warmth and low in competence) in a luxury (versus a non-luxury) hotel affect consumers’ expected quality of the service and their willingness to stay in the hotel.

We asked 160 participants from the UK to answer a questionnaire in Prolific for a nominal payment. This study was a 2 (luxury versus non-luxury) x 2 (high competence/low warmth versus high warmth/low competence) between-subjects design experiment. We did not consider the other combinations of warmth and competence (i.e. high warmth/high competence; low warmth/low competence) since these would present information about service providers being high or low in all factors, which would most likely lead to rather obvious conclusions. The study aims to find which of the two traits is more important in each setting to assess the quality of the service and the willingness to stay in the hotel. The test was balanced (i.e. 40 participants per condition) to ensure the robustness of the results (see demographics in Table 5).

Before answering the questions in the questionnaire, participants were randomly assigned to one of the four conditions. The service setting (luxury versus non-luxury) was manipulated using the pictures in Study 1a. To manipulate high competence and low warmth (versus high warmth and low competence), the following information was presented after the pictures: “Tourists who stayed at Esfreya Hotel fill out a survey about the personnel who assist at the hotel. Based on the results of last year’s survey, the personnel at Esfreya Hotel have been described by previous guests as efficient, capable, skilled and competent [friendly, caring, helpful and warm]. However, guests considered that the service providers at the hotel were not as friendly, caring, helpful or warm [efficient, capable, skilled or competent].”

In addition, participants saw a graphic that showed prior guests’ ratings about four characteristics of service providers at the hotel. From 0 being the lowest rate possible and 10 being the highest, the graphic showed skilled and efficient rating “9” and caring and friendly rating “3” in the high competence/low warmth condition, and the opposite in the high warmth/low competence condition (i.e. friendly, caring = 9; skilled, efficient = 3).

Once the participants saw the pictures, graphics and read the comments, they were invited to answer a series of questions in a questionnaire. They were asked to imagine that they needed to travel and decided to stay at Esfreya Hotel. Based on the information they just read, they answered three questions, from 1 (very bad, very low quality, very unprofessional) to 7 (very good, very high quality, very professional) to capture “…your belief about the quality of the service provided at the hotel.” After providing the answers to these items, participants were asked to imagine that they would like to travel and were able to afford to stay at Esfreya Hotel, then, they were asked: “How willing would you be to stay at this hotel?” (nine-points Likert scale: 1 − very unwilling to 9 − very willing). At the end of the questionnaire, participants provided information about demographics.

There is an effect of the setting on the expected service quality, with consumers expecting higher service quality in the luxury (M_luxury = 6.32) than in the non-luxury hotel (M_non-luxury = 4.20) [t = 8.19; p < 0.01]. Similarly, participants show a higher willingness to stay in the luxury (M_luxury = 6.78) than in the non-luxurious (M_non-luxury = 4.20) hotel. However, there is no direct effect of the combinations of warmth/competence on either expected quality [M_high-warmth/_{low-competence} = 5.69; M_{high-competence}/_low-warmth = 5.57; t = 0.38, p = 0.70] or on willingness to stay [M_high-warmth/_{low-competence} = 5.33; M_{high-competence}/_low-warmth = 4.99; t = 1.63, p = 0.11].

To test the interaction between these variables, we conducted a MANOVA with (1) luxury (versus non-luxury) and (2) high-competence/low-warmth (versus high-warmth/low-competence) as the factors, and the expected quality (averaged; α = 0.95) and willingness to stay (single item) as the independent variables. In the luxury condition, the results reveal that participants exposed to high-competence/low-warmth rated higher in their expectations about the service quality, in comparison with those exposed to high-warmth/low-competence [luxury: M_{high-competence/low-warmth} = 6.42, M_{high-warmth/low-competence} = 5.62; p < 0.05]. In the non-luxury condition, no differences were observed between the participants exposed to high-competence/low-warmth and high-warmth/low-competence [non-luxury: M_{high-competence/low-warmth} = 4.03, versus M_{high-warmth/low-competence} = 4.35; p = 0.87] (see Figure 2).

In the luxury condition, participants’ willingness to stay was higher if they were exposed to high-competence/low-warmth (versus high-warmth/low-competence) [luxury: M_{high-competence/low-warmth} = 7.43, M_{high-warmth/low-competence} = 6.12; p < 0.01]. In contrast, in the non-luxury condition, participants’ willingness to stay was higher if they were exposed to high-warmth/low-competence (versus high-competence/low-warmth) [non-luxury: M_{high-competence/low-warmth} = 4.03, M_{high-warmth/low-competence} = 5.01; p < 0.01] (see Figure 3).

A bootstrapping procedure with 10,000 iterations (PROCESS Macro − Model 8; Hayes, 2017) was performed to test the moderated mediation model, with the levels of warmth/competence (high competence/low warmth versus high warmth/low competence) as the independent variable, willingness to stay as the dependent variable, mediated by expected service quality, and the moderating effect of the service setting (luxury versus non-luxury) for both relationships (see Figure 4). The analyses were conducted using PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2017). PROCESS is a statistical method that tests the significance of the indirect effect of an independent variable on a dependent variable through mediating variables, including moderating effects. Confidence intervals for the indirect effect that do not contain zero reflect a significant moderated mediation effect (Hayes, 2017). The results revealed a significant moderated mediating effect of expected quality in the indirect effect of the levels of warmth and competence in the two environments on consumers’ willingness to stay in the hotel [effect = 1.85; Boot-SE = 0.43; 95% CI (1.02, 2.71)] (see all indices in Figure 4).

Consumer expectations about service providers in different contexts are highly influenced by stereotypes (Halkias and Diamantopoulos, 2020; Güntürkün et al., 2020; Luna-Cortes, 2024). The SCM is the most widely used theory to capture consumer expectations, perceptions and behavior based on stereotypes (e.g. Aaker et al., 2012; Andrei et al., 2017; Fiske et al., 2002, 2007; Kolbl et al., 2019; Luna-Cortes, 2024). The literature showed inconclusive findings regarding which trait, warmth or competence, was more important in luxury and non-luxury service settings. For instance, while some authors suggested that, in luxury settings, warm interactions are key (Correia et al., 2022; Jain et al., 2023; Shahid and Paul, 2022), other authors suggested that warm interactions were not useful in luxury service settings (Aagerup, 2020) or could even lead to negative outcomes (Ward and Dahl, 2014). In addition, findings in the literature are scarce when comparing luxury and non-luxury service settings to reach theoretical and managerial conclusions (Luna-Cortes, 2024; Medler-Liraz and Seger-Guttmann, 2025). This gap was the motivation for the present research, leading to the following questions: (1) To what extent do consumer expectations and the importance attached to warmth and competence differ in luxury and non-luxury service settings? (2) How do different combinations of warmth and competence influence consumer perceptions and intentions in luxury and non-luxury service settings?

When comparing the two settings, the results indicate that consumers expect higher warmth and higher competence in luxury than in non-luxury hotels. Hence, compared to budget accommodation, the first-class service expected at a luxury hotel should present providers who rate higher in both traits. While some authors suggested that, in some luxury service settings, such as in luxury stores (Ward and Dahl, 2014) or luxury nightclubs (Aagerup, 2020), a cold interaction might be desirable (Aagerup, 2020; Habel et al., 2017; Ward and Dahl, 2014), when examining these stereotypes, our results show that in luxury hotels consumers expect both highly competent and warm service providers. However, significant differences were found when examining the primacy of one of the traits over the other in the two contexts. The results of Studies 1a and 1b show that, in a luxury hotel, consumers expect and attach more importance to competence than warmth, while in a non-luxury hotel, consumers expect and attach more importance to warmth than competence.

The results of Studies 2a and 2b support these conclusions with samples of guests at luxury and non-luxury hotels. Furthermore, the results of Study 3 show that, in a luxury hotel, consumers will expect higher service quality and willingness to stay if service providers rate high in competence − albeit low in warmth. In a non-luxury hotel, consumers will expect higher service quality and willingness to stay if providers rate high in warmth − albeit low in competence. These findings show a primacy of competence over warmth in the luxury setting, and a primacy of warmth over competence in non-luxury settings, supporting our hypotheses and answering the research questions.

Based on the results, frontline service providers must primarily be presented as highly qualified in luxury hotels. They should show high technological skills, be fluent in several languages, have an extensive vocabulary and proper accents and have knowledge about the destination and common problems their guests face during their trip. These factors can suggest providers’ competence in hospitality (Amatulli et al., 2021; Jain et al., 2023; Luna-Cortes et al., 2023; Marinova et al., 2018; Peng and Chen, 2019). Some impressions will be definitely based on these stereotypes. Therefore, managers should gather knowledge about the factors associated with highly qualified individuals in a given society based on stereotypes. For instance, guests from the USA and Europe might expect assertiveness and self-promotion, because confidence reflects competence in these regions. In other cultures (e.g. Japan, China and South Korea), competence is viewed through the lens of harmony and humility (Hofstede et al., 2005). Furthermore, looks that suggest competence change over time (e.g. the type of dress and hairstyle) (Güntürkün et al., 2020; Luna-Cortes, 2024). Managers of luxury hotels must be constantly aware of these factors to always exhibit highly competent service providers. In addition, the retention of qualified employees at luxury hotels becomes essential. While warmth is a trait inherent in many individuals, and providers might learn how to show it with proper directions (Andrzejewski and Mooney, 2016), highly competent providers are the result of years of education and work experience, which is scarcer but − as the results show − vital at luxury hotels.

While competence should form the basis of the workforce at luxury hotels, service providers should also offer warm interactions. However, showing friendliness and kindness should never compensate for a lack of skill, as might happen at budget accommodation. In luxury hotels, warmth should complement the full spectrum of first-class service, starting with a look and behavior that suggest abilities and skills to help their guests. However, in non-luxury accommodations, consumers prioritize warmth. When staying in a budget hotel, consumers might more readily accept providers’ lack of skills, but not a cold interaction. Thus, the constraints of budget hotels in hiring highly skilled providers can be compensated by showing a constant disposition to help, and showing empathy and care for the problems presented by customers. Closeness and kind interactions might help consumers excuse some lack of expertise that, in this context, consumers may expect to be lower. Frontline service providers at budget hotels should be aware of this need, and offer a friendly environment. A genuine smile, open body language (e.g. relaxed posture), eye contact that suggests attentiveness, enthusiastic tone, use of the guest’s first name, remembering their preferences and genuine compliments (Andrzejewski and Mooney, 2016; Luna-Cortes, 2024; Wang et al., 2017; Yao et al., 2022) are factors that managers should emphasize at non-luxury hotels, to suggest warm interactions, the primary stereotype trait that consumers expect and value at this type of accommodation.

This research has some limitations. First, in one of the studies (Study 2a), we encountered difficulties gathering a large sample, which can compromise the robustness of the results. Future research should aim to capture a larger sample of guests at luxury hotels. Second, we used five-star as a proxy for luxury hotels. Although the number of stars is an element that differentiates this type of accommodation from lower ranked hotels (Luna-Cortes et al., 2023), some managers might argue that not all five-star hotels are luxury hotels. Third, the stimuli in the experiments were visual. The service setting can include several stimuli, such as the smell, noise (e.g. quietness of the location) or the behavior of visitors and employees (Hoffmann and Coste-Marnière, 2012). None of these were captured. Future qualitative studies (e.g. with interviews) can provide more information about factors that display luxury, and how these factors can be associated with warmth and competence perceptions. Additionally, in Study 1, we did not capture whether participants had prior experience with the condition to which they were exposed (i.e. whether participants who were exposed to the five-star hotel had previously stayed in a five-star hotel, and whether participants who were exposed to the two-star hotel had previously stayed in a two-star hotel). This can limit the effectiveness of the results of Study 1, as some of the responses might be based on prejudice rather than personal experience. The impact of this limitation is alleviated by the fact that this research is on stereotypes (not on consumer experience), and that we did capture responses from actual users in the subsequent studies. Nevertheless, future research should consider prior experience of respondents in online or lab experiments to capture this potential bias.

Furthermore, the perception of luxury depends on the culture of the consumer (Farmaki et al., 2021). Our studies used samples of participants from Western countries. It would be useful to provide evidence of the consumers’ expectations from other cultures about providers’ warmth and competence in luxury (versus non-luxury) service settings. We recommend including cross-cultural studies, with culture as moderator. For instance, power distance can influence consumers’ evaluation of services and providers, given the characteristics of many consumers in this context (Hoffmann and Coste-Marnière, 2012). This variable could explain different expectations and behavior across various cultures.

In addition, we did not describe the characteristics of the service provider. Prior research has shown that individuals expect a specific type of interaction, and judge others differently, depending on their gender (Fiske et al., 2007). Prior research indicated that females are expected to be warmer, and males are expected to be more competent (Cuddy et al., 2011). We propose future study designs including high-warmth/low-competence (versus high-competence/low-warmth) with female (versus male) providers in luxury (versus non-luxury) service settings. Previous research has shown that a service provider who breaks the stereotype (e.g. a female orchestra conductor) and performs well might be perceived as outstanding (Matta and Folkes, 2005). Thus, including provider characteristics as moderators in future studies might lead to interesting conclusions.

As dependent variables, we included perceived quality and willingness to stay. Several intentional and behavioral variables are yet to be examined, such as the intention to recommend, the information shared on social media and consumer loyalty. Other mediating variables, such as self-congruity, social value (Luna-Cortes et al., 2019) and perceived trust (Luna-Cortés and Brady, 2024) might be important, considering their relationship with consumers’ decisions when traveling, and their importance in luxury hospitality (Farmaki et al., 2021). Besides hotels, other luxury service settings should be examined in future research. Including new contexts and variables will add knowledge about the perceptions of providers in the field of luxury compared to non-luxury services, and their intentions and behaviors in the two contexts.

Please see the image of the reception and a room of Hotel Esfreya and answer the questions that follow: