Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education

By Ana Margarida Brochado. 2009

307 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/234774f8a49ac35cb44d0587dfaef92d2b101a14

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

1. Jehad S. Aldehayyat
2. S. A. A. Khattab
3. Fraser McLeay

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. Umar Farooq Sahibzada
2. Jehad S. Aldehayyat
3. S. A. A. Khattab
4. Khawaja Fawad Latif
5. H. Woodruffe-Burton
6. M. Yusoff
7. H. Harvey
8. Rana M. Tamim

In Strategy and Management

1. Jehad S. Aldehayyat
2. S. A. A. Khattab
3. H. Harvey
4. Rana M. Tamim
5. S. Parahoo
6. Fraser McLeay
7. Tamer H. Elsharnouby

Citations in the corpus

• In search of quality: measuring Higher Education Service Quality (HiEduQual) (2019, background): “It is certain that in the case of HE the student is the primary customer (Brochado, 2009).”
• Perceptions of Service Quality in Jordanian Hotels (2011, background): “Brochado and Marques (2007) compared the performance of five alternative measures of service quality in the high education sector, and they concluded that SERVPERF scale had one of the best results in terms of criterion validity, convergent validity, and explained variance.”
• Evaluation of the factors that determine quality in higher education: an empirical study (2010, background): “Brochado (2009) compares the main alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education: SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al., 1988), (SERVPERF) (Cronin and Taylor, 1992), weighted SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al., 1991), weighted SERVPERF (Cronin and Taylor, 1992) and (HEdPERF) scale…”
• Factors influencing student satisfaction in universities in the Gulf region: does gender of students matter? (2013, background): “Therefore, a university needs to develop strategies to deliver high-quality human and technological interactions and a service delivery in a manner that it is convenient to the student as a customer, as well as enable the university to achieve continuous improvements (Brochado, 2009).”
• Dimensions Driving Business Student Satisfaction in Higher Education. (2015, background): “According to Brody and Hall (1993), Dittmar et al., (2004) and Mattilla et al., (2003), gender may impact on perceptions of interaction quality, physical environment quality, outcome quality and systems quality due to gender role socialization, decoding ability, differences in information processing”