The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
486
Received March 2002
Revised April 2002
Accepted May 2002

The configuration of the

university image and its
relationship with the
satisfaction of students

Asuncion Beerli Palacio, Gonzalo Daz Meneses and

Pedro J. Perez Perez
Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas,
Gran Canaria, Spain

Keywords Brand image, Universities, Customer satisfaction, Students

Abstract This work centers on the study of the image of universities, with the aims of
explaining the process of image forming by means of its different components, both in its
cognitive and affective dimensions and of analyzing its relationship with the students' satisfaction
with the university. The results of the empirical work carried out on a representative sample of
6,775 students studying at a Spanish university demonstrate that the cognitive component of
image is an antecedent of the affective component. In turn, both of those components influence
the forming of the overall image of the university and the cognitive, affective and overall images
statistically and significantly influence the students' satisfaction with the university.

Journal of Educational
Administration,
Vol. 40 No. 5, 2002, pp. 486-505.
# MCB UP Limited, 0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/09578230210440311

Introduction
According to an established and long-held conclusion, brand image has
considerable influence on consumer behavior (Loudon and Della Bitta, 1995,
p. 406). Thus, corporate image is a predictor of the decision to pursue contact
with organizations (Gatewood et al., 1993) by attracting its internal and external
publics, both present and potential (Boyle, 1996; Collins and Stevens, 1999).
Similarly, the influence of image on increases in sales (Barich and Kotler, 1991)
and on the strengthening of brand loyalty (Kasulis and Lusch, 1981; Sirgy and
Samli, 1985) has been shown. Therefore, it is logical that nowadays brand image
is of great importance both in the context of companies and in the non-profit field.
With reference to the higher education university environment, which is the
context of this empirical research, there is no doubt that it is becoming
increasingly important that universities have a distinct image in order to
maintain their competitiveness in the market (Parameswaran and Glowacka,
1995). In fact, many universities have increased their investments in order to
distinguish themselves from their competitors, by strengthening the image of
``prestige'' or ``quality'' (McPherson and Schapiro, 1998), an action that has even
led to American universities having high levels of borrowing (Ghosh et al.,
2001). Corporate image has a strong impact on:
.
the clients' (the students') decisions, affecting both the keeping of
present students and the attraction of potential students (Fielder et al.,
1993; James et al., 1999); and

the attitudes of other publics that may affect funding (Landrum et al., Configuration of
1998).
the university

The importance of brand image can be extended to the university context,

which is a new area of interest as a subject for study and as an area for the
practical application of marketing management (Landrum et al., 1998). The
reasons for the greater attention that this field of study is receiving lately are
related to several circumstances that affect universities not only in Spain, but
also in Europe and North America. On the one hand, the advances in new
information technology have led to new teaching methods by means of distance
learning. On the other hand, greater economic and administrative facilities for
the transfer of teaching and research staff, as well as that of students of
different nationalities, offer teachers and students alike greater geographical
mobility, and thus, due to inter-university agreements, give them the
opportunity to cross national frontiers (Mazzarol, 1998). Both of those factors
favor greater competition in attracting students, in recruiting teaching and
research staff and in finding new external sources of funding (Landrum et al.,
1998). Moreover, as Kazoleas et al. (2001) point out, basing themselves on
various theoretical studies of the university, the perceptions of the
predominance of research into teaching, the bad financial management, and the
inadequacy of the universities' services to society show that positive images
are not a foregone conclusion, a fact that has driven universities to study their
image and the process of image forming. So, in this context corporate image
plays an important role as a form of competitive advantage for those
universities that do not want to prejudice their future (Parameswaran and
Glowacka, 1995).
Furthermore, the corporate image of universities is a new topic that is
arousing interest, since academic research into corporate communication has
traditionally focused on the transmitter of and the construction process of
messages and has ignored the approaches focusing on the receiver (Cheney and
McMillan, 1990; Marcus and Goodman, 1991; Elsbach and Sutton, 1992;
Capriotti, 1999; Cornelissen, 2000). This fact, and the fact that most works on
corporate image in general, and that of universities in particular, gives a
specially attractive and novel value to the empirical studies of the university
image that are oriented towards the consumer (Williams and Moffit, 1995;
Landrum et al., 1998).
Of the few published works that exist on university image from the
perspective of the recipient those that have attempted to analyze the imageforming process stand out. In the research of Kazoleas et al. (2001) there was an
analysis of the organizational, personal and environmental factors in the
processing of the university's image as perceived by the public. For their part,
Milo et al. (1989) studied the effects of negative publicity on the image of
the university, while Parameswaran and Glowacka (1995) analyzed the
relationship between university image and companies' perceptions of the
aptitude of graduates for a professional career, and they reach the conclusion

image

487

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
488

that university image serves as a construct, when the companies are familiar
with the university, and as a halo effect when there is less familiarity. On the
other hand, in the work of Grady et al. (1996) the different images of the
teaching center held by the various publics (teachers, students, parents etc.)
according to their differing circumstances and personal subjectivity are
analyzed. We also came across studies that dealt with the influence of image on
the perceived value of the service (Leblanc and Nguyen, 1999) or on loyalty
(Nguyen and Leblanc, 2001). Lastly, we stress the importance of the
suggestions of Ivy (2001) for improving the image and positioning and those of
Fram (1982) who stresses the importance of the teaching staff, the orientation of
the students' predispositions, the survey of student satisfaction and the study of
public opinion in the community surrounding the university, as determinants
in the optimization of university image.
This research adopts a perspective focused towards the image recipients in
the university context. To do this work, we carried out an empirical study
among a representative sample of 6,775 students at a Spanish university, by
means of a personal survey, with the aim of analyzing the relationships
existing between the cognitive, affective and overall images and their role as a
precedent of the students' satisfaction.
Review of the literature
Image and its components
The concept of image has been the object of much confusion stemming from the
polysemy of the term itself. However, in spite of the lack of agreement among
the different authors, there is the underlying idea of seeing image as ``the
mental representation of a real object that acts in that object's place'' (Capriotti,
1999, p. 16). Most of the definitions that have been proposed and the
measurements used consider image as a set of beliefs or attributes that is prone
to a merely cognitive approach. However, in the first proposed definition, there
is a latent dimension relating to the feelings aroused by the object whose image
is being evaluated. So, Martineau (1958) regarded the image of commercial
establishments as:
. . . the way in which the stores are described in the consumer's mind based on functional
qualities and psychological attributes.

Kennedy (1977) distinguishes two components of image: functional, related to

tangible stimuli that can be easily measured, and emotional, associated with
psychological conditions that become apparent in feelings and attitudes.
Subsequently, and taking that definition of image established by Martineau
(1958), Mazursky and Jacoby (1986) explain that functional qualities referred to
physical properties, such as: the range of goods, the price band and the layout
of the store, while the psychological attributes refer to the consumer's sense of
belonging, to his sensation of good or bad taste and his feeling of warmth
toward the store. Consequently, in the earliest considered meanings of brand
image, there was an underlying cognitive dimension as well as an affective one.

The distinction between the cognitive and affective components of image Configuration of
has been made and used in many fields that have coined both concepts
the university
according to their own scientific jargon. So, for example, there is referential
image
significance versus evaluative, formalist vs expressive and connotative vs
denotative as semantic adaptations in the fields of linguistics, psychology,
sociology, communications and others regarding the cognitive vs affective
489
dichotomy. This is used in the field of marketing in general, and in that of
consumer behavior in particular, to express the foundations on which beliefs
and feelings, respectively, are based (Baloglu and Brinberg, 1997).
Later, with the aim of activating the notion of image, various authors tended
to consider it as an attitude or a bundle of attitudes based on the attributes
evaluated (Doyle and Fenwick, 1974; Engel and Blackwell, 1982; James et al.,
1976). In this way, through scientific research into attitudes, the recognition of
the cognitive and affective components of image acquired greater doctrinal
importance. This is because the empirical works centering on attitudes went
further than the one-dimensional model of Fishbein and Ajzen and proposed a
multi-dimensional model, like that in the three components theory, or in the
theory of reasoned action. So, the results of Bagozzi and Burnkrant's (1985)
study permit the conclusion that the separate treatment of the cognitive and
affective responses leads to a better description of the attitudinal structure and
better behavioral predictions.
McInnis and Price (1987) point out that the research in this field shows that
image is a process originating from ideas, feelings and the previous experiences
of the organization that are recalled and transformed into mental pictures
(Yuille and Catchpole, 1977). More recently, after reviewing the literature on
brand image, Dobni and Zinkhan (1990) concluded that image is a perceptual
phenomenon that is formed by rational and emotional interpretation and that
has cognitive components, the beliefs, and affective components, the feelings.
Similarly, Sanz De La Tajada (1996, p. 240) considered that corporate image
encompassed:
. . . the representations, both rational and affective, that an individual or group of individuals
associate with a company or institution as a net result of the experiences of, attitudes toward,
feelings and information about the company that the group has.

On the basis of the above, and in line with Mazursky and Jacoby (1986),
corporate image may be studied from two approaches:
(1) from the top downwards, identifying the facets or components that
make up corporate image; or
(2) from the bottom upwards, discovering what ideas or attributes play a
part in the different facets of corporate image.
According to Keaveney and Hunt (1992) in order to capture in its entirety the
richness of the image of commercial establishments, the cognitive and affective
components must be included, since they provide an understanding and the
measurement of the image. In addition, Stern and Krakover (1993) stressed that

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
490

the overall image is formed subjectively through a system inextricably linked

with the designative and evaluative perceptions, in other words, the cognitive
and affective components.
However, research into image has hardly scratched the surface of the
analysis of each component of the process of image forming by the publics
(Capriotti, 1999, p. 26). There are several reasons for this lack, among which
there seems to be the following:
.
the imbalance in favor of management (Cornelissen, 2000);
.
the lack of agreement on the underlying variables of image and the
validity of the analysis methodology (Burns et al., 1995);
.
the lack of definition and the polysemy of the term ``image'' and its
components (Capriotti, 1999, p. 16); and
.
the theoretical nature of most of the literature about image, attempting
overall understanding of corporate image forming (Capriotti, 1999;
Cornelissen, 2000).
On the other hand, Baloglu and Brinberg (1997), in their review of literature,
identified many works in the psychological field that dealt with either the
cognitive or the affective component, but not both together. Those authors
quote Lynch (1960), Ittelson (1973) and Golledge (1987) as exponents of the
study of the cognitive component, and Craik (1971), Russel (1980), Russel and
Pratt (1980), Russel and Snodgrass (1987) and Hanyu (1993) as exponents of the
study of the affective component.
However, although the difference between the two components is important,
according to Baloglu and Brinberg (1997), they should not be approached as if
they were not interrelated. In fact, from a theoretical point of view, the
literature, not only of marketing, but also of other disciplines, agrees about the
cognitive component being an antecedent of the affective component and that
the evaluative responses of the consumer depends on his knowledge of the
objects (Holbrook, 1978; Anand et al., 1988; Stern and Krakover, 1993; Russel
and Pratt, 1980). Kennedy (1977) observed that the feelings of the emotional
component stem from individual experiences of an organization and from
processing the information about the attributes constituting the functional
indicators of image or tangible characteristics of the organization. In the
empirical study carried out in the tourist field by Baloglu and McCleary (1999),
it is shown that the cognitive evaluations of image influence the affective ones,
and that both components are forerunners of the overall image of a tourist
destination. That work also confirmed that the affective component has greater
influence on the overall image than the cognitive component does. On this line
of argument, Russel and Snodgrass (1987) stress the importance of the affective
dimension of image to consumer behavior, considering that it may be more
influential than the cognitive component. However, O'Neil and Jasper (1992)
thought it necessary to carry out further studies of the association between the
responses of a cognitive nature and those with an affective character.

On the basis of the above, we set out three hypotheses aimed at confirming Configuration of
the influence of the cognitive component of university image on the affective
the university
component, and in turn, to verify the influence that both of those components
image
have on the forming of the overall university image.
H1. The cognitive component of image significantly influences the affective
component of image.
491
H2. The cognitive component of the university's image positively and
significantly influences the overall image of the university.
H3. The affective component of the university's image positively and
significantly influences the overall image of the university.
Image and satisfaction
Customer satisfaction has been widely debated in the literature and numerous
definitions of it have been proposed without a consensus ever having been
reached. Giese and Cote (2000), having thoroughly reviewed the main
definitions that had been proposed, identify three basic distinguishing
components:
(1) The type of response, that is, whether it is a cognitive, affective or
conative response, as well as the intensity of the response.
(2) The center of attention or the object of this response, which may be
based on an evaluation of the standards related to the product, on the
experiences of the consumption of the product, or on the attributes
associated with the purchase, such as the sales staff.
(3) The time or moment at which the evaluation is made, which may be
expressed as before or after making the choice, after consumption, after
accumulated experiences, or at any other time.
For example, Halstead et al. (1994) consider that satisfaction is an affective
response, centered on comparing the result of the product with some standard
set prior to the purchase and measured during or after consumption. On the
other hand, Mano and Oliver (1993) state that satisfaction is an attitude or
evaluative judgement that varies on a hedonistic continuum centered on the
product and is evaluated after consumption. Lastly, Fornell (1992) defines
satisfaction as a general evaluation based on the result of the product perceived
after the purchase and compared with expectations prior to the purchase.
Giese and Cote (2000), having carried out an empirical study by means of
personal interviews and meetings with consumer groups, reached the
conclusion that satisfaction comprises three essential elements:
(1) a general affective response that varies in its intensity;
(2) focus on the choice of product, purchase and/or consumption; and
(3) the moment of determination, which varies according to the different
situations and its duration in time, which is generally limited.

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
492

This theoretical framework permits the development of specific definitions that

are adapted to the context of each research and are conceptually richer
and empirically more useful than one generic definition, by facilitating the
interpretation and comparison of empirical results. Therefore, for the means of
this study, satisfaction has been considered to be an affective response in a time
(t), the moment of the latest registration of the students, resulting from the
evaluation of the teaching services and study support offered to the student by
the university. That satisfaction is determined by:
.
the expectations of the students prior to entering university (t 1),
following the predominant model in the literature on disconfirmation of
expectations (Nguyen and Leblanc, 1998);
.
the ideals associated with a university (Cadotte et al., 1987; Tse and
Wilton, 1988); and
.
variables included in the cognitive component of satisfaction (Oliver,
1993).
The relationship between customer satisfaction and corporate image has not
been the object of much attention in the literature (Nguyen and Leblanc, 1998).
The studies found in the field of university education investigate the most
relevant factors or dimensions of expectations (Patterson et al., 1998; House,
1999), or relate satisfaction with perceived quality (Athiyaman, 1997; Browne
et al., 1998). However, in other fields, corporate image has been studied as an
antecedent or mediator of constructs regarding the evaluation of organizations,
products or services perceived quality, perceived value, loyalty individually
or together with satisfaction (Stafford and Enis, 1969; Render and O'Connor,
1976; Darden and Schwinghammer, 1985; Sirgi and Samli, 1989; Clow et al.,
1995; Mazanec, 1995; Nguyen and Leblanc, 1998; Bloemer and De Ruyter, 1998;
Bloemer et al., 1998; Andreassen and Lindestad, 1998; Abdullah et al., 2000;
Kandampully and Suharatanto, 2000).
According to Nguyen and Leblanc, satisfaction has no significant direct
effect on corporate image; in other words, high levels of customer satisfaction
do not necessarily lead to a favorable corporate image. That contradicts much
of the literature that indicates that corporate image is a function of the
accumulated effect of (dis)satisfaction (Oliver and Linda, 1981; Bolton and
Drew, 1991; Johnson and Fornell, 1991; Fornell, 1992), or that image acts as a
filter of satisfaction in a simplification of the decision process, a conclusion
taken from the works of Weiner (1985) and Folkes (1988). However, in that
study of Nguyen and Leblanc (1998), it can be seen that overall satisfaction,
through the perceived value of the service, does have an indirect effect on
image, which may be explained by the assertion of Barich and Kotler (1991)
that a company has a strong image if the clients believe that they receive good
value in their transactions with the company.
The influence of corporate image on satisfaction has, to some extent, been
empirically validated. Andreassen and Lindestad (1998) verified that corporate

image has a strong influence on customer satisfaction, especially if the Configuration of

customer has little knowledge about the service. Other authors, such as
the university
Hildebrandt (1988) and Mazursky and Jacoby (1986) similarly point out that
image
image precedes the consumer's evaluation. However, that influence of image on
satisfaction requires a more complete validation, since some contradictory
results can be observed. For example, the study of Bloemer et al. (1998) was not
493
able to validate the hypothesis that image, by means of satisfaction, had an
indirect effect on loyalty, while in the work of Bloemer and De Ruyter (1998),
exactly the opposite was demonstrated.
This effect of image on satisfaction has also been validated in other fields.
Lim et al. (2000), in referring to the perceived image of a profession (defined as
the beliefs about the significance of belonging to a profession, regarding its
social status, capacity and the patterns of behavior of its members), point out
that prestige stands out from other factors of image for its influence on
satisfaction, since those employees who see their profession as prestigious,
have high levels of satisfaction with their job.
Based on our review of the above literature, and taking into account the
different components of image, we set out the following hypotheses:
H4. The cognitive component of the university image significantly
influences the students' satisfaction with the university.
H5. The affective component of the university image positively and
significantly influences the students' satisfaction with the university.
H6. The overall image of the university positively and significantly
influences the students' satisfaction with the university.
Methodology
The empirical work that we carried out is based on self-administered
questionnaires in a personal survey of 6,675 students enrolled in different
courses at a Spanish university. Students registering at the university for the
first time were not included in the sample since, due to their lack of experience,
they were unable to assess their satisfaction with the university. The sample
size was determined by the number of students who voluntarily completed the
questionnaire at the time of enrolment. The assumed sample error is 1.02 per
cent for a population of 22,054 university students. The distribution of the
sample by courses did not show any great differences compared to the actual
percentage of students enrolled in different courses and years.
On the basis of the objectives of this research, the scales used to measure the
different components of image are shown below:
(1) Cognitive image of the university:
.
bad facilities/good facilities;
.
limited range of courses/wide range of courses;
.
bad university atmosphere/good university atmosphere;

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
494

easy to enter university to study/difficult to enter university to

study;
.
cheap/expensive;
.
bad teaching staff/good teaching staff;
.
bad education/good education;
.
good preparation of students/bad preparation of students;
.
practical/theoretical;
.
not very demanding/very demanding;
.
not oriented towards or concerned about the students/oriented
towards and concerned about the students;
.
distanced from the students/close to the students;
.
distanced from companies/close to companies;
.
distanced from society/close to society;
.
not very crowded/overcrowded;
.
popular/elitist;
.
traditional/innovative;
.
old/young;
.
old-fashioned/advanced;
.
non-prestigious/prestigious; and
.
bad reputation/good reputation.
(2) Affective image of the university:
.
unpleasant/pleasant;
.
boring/stimulating;
.
stressful/relaxing; and
.
gloomy/cheerful.
(3) Overall image of the university: very negative/very positive.
(4) University satisfaction:
.
differences between this university and the expected one;
.
differences between this university and an idealistic university; and
.
level of satisfaction with this university.
.

The cognitive component of university image was measured by means of a

semantic differential scale of 21 items and seven points. In order to develop that
scale, we held four preliminary meetings with groups of university students, as
well as reviewing the literature on university image (Weissman, 1990; Sanz De La
Tajada, 1996; Landrum et al., 1998). The affective component of image was

measured by the semantic differential scale, developed by Russell and Pratt Configuration of
(1980), of four items and seven points. Finally, the overall image was measured by
the university
means of a semantic differential scale with only one item and seven points,
image
ranging from very positive to very negative. Lastly and based on Fornell (1992),
we used a seven-point Likert scale with three items to measure satisfaction.
Analysis of results
Before describing the causal model that we propose, we checked the reliability
of the scales used by means of Cronbach's alpha coefficient. The reliability
index for the scales used was relatively high, with alpha values of 0.8329 and
0.8031 for the scales of the cognitive and affective components respectively,
and 0.7901 for the scale of satisfaction.
We also carried out analyses of factorial validity on the scales of the
cognitive and affective components of university image, whose results are
shown in Tables I-III, respectively. The KMO ratios and those of Bartlett's
Variables
Distanced from/close to the
students
Not oriented/oriented towards
students
Good/bad teaching staff
Distanced from/close to society
Prepares students badly/well
Bad/good teaching
Distanced from/close to companies
Good/bad university atmosphere
Not prestigious/prestigious
Bad/good reputation
Old-fashioned/advanced
Poor/good facilities
Limited/wide range of degrees and
courses
Traditional/innovative
Not overcrowded/overcrowded
Cheap/expensive
Practical/theoretical
Not very demanding/very
demanding
Popular/elitist
Easy to enter/difficult to enter to
study
Old university/young university

F1

F2

F3

F4

F5

0.78223

0.14861

0.18621

0.3593

0.12432

0.77321
0.70784
0.68606
0.68587
0.67306
0.60879
0.55432
0.30526
0.34292
0.44900
0.24197

0.22270
0.26850
0.20858
0.39249
0.42795
0.15171
0.24624
0.76495
0.74199
0.65205
0.55218

0.11554
0.02023
0.09675
0.12204
0.13334
0.16882
0.10636
0.08548
0.10079
0.02842
0.03327

0.4260
0.05864
0.10996
0.05457
0.06608
0.27645
0.14459
0.12302
0.05581
0.08308
0.04637

0.08492
0.13066
0.19003
0.15978
0.16509
0.17210
0.02759
0.11987
0.10972
0.20585
0.15928

0.53867 0.04576 0.08502

0.50437 0.13213
0.18494
0.08302
0.60629 0.12355
0.02595
0.59540 0.29643
0.01964
0.58141 0.31494

0.10479
0.42263
0.13365
0.01216
0.14939

0.14063
0.32738
0.00531
0.07211
0.09734
0.00712
0.14940

0.33998
0.06491

0.53105
0.04647

0.06103 0.14970
0.71184 0.03572

0.25342
0.03079

0.04659
0.09098

0.24076
0.19486

0.52886 0.01908
0.10262
0.80329

Note: Per cent explained variance: 55.2 per cent

Ratio KMO: 0.90039
Bartlett ratio: 70451.158
Significance level: 0.0000

495

Table I.
Exploratory factorial
analysis of the
cognitive image of
university

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
496

sphericity suggested the use of a factorial analysis. Referring to the first scale,
the preliminary factorial analysis with varimax rotation of the attributes
determining university image permitted us to extract five factors with
eigenvalues higher than that for the whole, the total explained variance being
55.2 per cent. The results of that analysis can be considered quite satisfactory
since, although they do not exceed 60 per cent of the explained variance
recommended in social sciences (Hair et al., 1987), the correlations between the
factors and the different items expressed by means of the factorial loads is
significant, in so far as most of them show levels above 0.5 per cent (Hair et al.,
1987).
In first place, and regarding the dimensions represented by the five factors
describing the cognitive component of university image, we point out that the
first factor, which we could label ``university orientation and preparation'' is
explained by the attributes mainly related to the university's orientation
towards the students, society and companies, as well as by the preparation it
provides for the students. The second factor, which we have called ``reputation'',
is basically characterized by the variables regarding the prestige and
reputation of the university and, to a lesser degree, by the facilities and range of
courses. The third factor, called ``crowding'', is defined by attributes linked to
the number of students, the cost of studies, their theoretical or practical
character, and how demanding they are of the students. This is explained by
the tendency for students to consider that a high cost should mean more
practical teaching or fewer students, while high/low demands are reflected by
Variables

Table II.
Exploratory factorial
analysis of the
affective image of
university

F1

Agreeable/disagreeable
Boring/stimulating
Sad/cheerful
Stressful/relaxing
Note: Explained variance: 63.5 per cent
KMO ratio: 0.77588
Bartlett ratio: 14971.18
Significance level: 0.0000

Variance

Table III.
Exploratory factorial
analysis of satisfaction
with the university

0.85357
0.84904
0.84578
0.61386

F1 Cognitive
F2 Cognitive
F3 Cognitive
F4 Cognitive
F5 Cognitive
Constant

image
image
image
image
image

Note: R2 = 0.49820

Significance

0.588564
0.352744
0.096101
0.0644935
0.100599
0.000688

80.301
48.109
13.102
8.860
13.726
0.0946

0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.9252

the degrees obtained and the number of students repeating years, thus Configuration of
implying that the higher the demands, the more crowded the university is. The
the university
fourth factor is determined by ease of university entrance, in so far as the less
image
elitist it is thought to be and the easier it is to enter the university to study, the
more accessible it is considered. Lastly, the fifth factor is explained by a single
variable that refers to the age of the university. In second place, and referring to
497
the affective component, the factorial analysis extracted only one factor, with
an eigenvalue higher than one, that explains the feelings aroused by the
university among the students, the explained variance being 63.5 per cent.
Finally an exploratory factorial analysis of the scale of satisfaction similarly
revealed one single factor that explained 70.5 of the total variance.
We established a model of structural equations using amos 4 software as a
basis to check the hypotheses put forward in this work. To that effect, we
carried out a path analysis to determine the direction and significance of the
proposed causal relationships. The resulting causal model is shown in Figure 1
with the indicators of fit, verifying that the model displays a good fit for all the
data since all the values of the measurements of absolute fit and incremental fit
exceed the recommended level. In that sense, we obtained a 2 value of 11.227
with ten degrees of freedom and a significance level of 0.340, while the
goodness of fit index (GFI = 1) and RMR = 0.011 indicate the model's goodness
of fit. For the indicators of incremental fit, we obtained values of above 0.9,
which is considered acceptable. Finally the values of the indicators AGFI and
CMIN/DF indicated the model's good parsimony, since the value of the former

Figure 1.
Path model

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
498

is higher than 0.9 and the second falls in the recommended interval of between
1 and 3.
The results of the estimators of the described model of trajectories are shown
in Table IV, which lists the standard regression weights and the critical ratios.
It can be seen that all the factors of the cognitive factor of image significantly
influence the affective image, thus verifying H1. The cognitive factors that
exercise the greatest positive influence are the orientation and training of the
university (F1COG) and reputation (F2COG): the third and fourth factors
negatively influence the affective image, so, the more overcrowded the
university is and the more difficult it is for students to enter the university, the
more negative their affective image of the university is. The fifth factor,
referring to the maturity or youth of the university, significantly and positively
influences the affective image in that, the younger the university is perceived to
be, the greater are the positive feelings towards it.
In the relationship between the cognitive image and the overall image it can
be seen that the critical ratios are all above the recommended value of 1.96,
except for the relationship between the third factor and overall image, thus
verifying H2, albeit only partially. The aspects referring to the orientation and
training of the university, as well as its reputation, are those that most
influence overall image, as they also do in their relationship with the affective
image. The affective component has a positive and significant influence on the
overall image of the university, thus leading us to accept H3.
H4, which maintains that there is a statistically significant relationship
between the cognitive component of image and student satisfaction, is also
verified, although only partially, since the relationships between the first three
factors and satisfaction reveal some statistically significant regression
Relations

Table IV.
Results of the
estimators of the
model of trajectories

Orientation and preparation ! affective

Reputation ! affective
Crowding ! affective
Entrance ! affective
Yuth-mature ! affective
Orientation and preparation ! overall image
Reputation ! overall image
Crowding ! overall image
Entrance ! overall image
Youth-mature ! overall image
Affective image ! overall image
Overall image ! satisfaction
Affective image ! satisfaction
Orientation and preparation ! satisfaction
Reputation ! satisfaction
Crowding ! satisfaction
Entrance ! satisfaction
Youth-mature ! satisfaction

Std estimators

Critical ratios (CR)

0.591
0.351
0.084
0.069
0.103
0.316
0.305
0.006
0.029
0.017
0.423
0.349
0.210
0.270
0.195
0.030
0.004
0.007

68.023
40.434
9.682
7.968
11.816
32.482
36.569
0.826
3.837
2.207
40.156
29.446
18.497
26.614
21.997
4.154
0.487
0.972

coefficients while the relationship with the last two factors is not statistically Configuration of
significant. As in the above relationships, it is the first two factors that exercise
the university
a greater positive influence on satisfaction while the factor relating to
image
overcrowding has less influence, which is logically negative.
The relationships between the affective image, overall image and
satisfaction also show statistically significant regression coefficients and,
499
therefore confirm H5 and H6.
Conclusions
The increased competition between universities is conferring greater
importance to the image of those education centers both from a scientific point
of view as a subject for study, and from a practical point of view as a way to
obtain competitive advantage. This increased competition, which is developing
internationally, due to new technology and the spread of transnational
agreements between universities, has led to North American and European
universities competing fiercely for students, teaching and research staff and
new external sources of funding. In that context, those universities that have a
strong, distinctive image will be in a better position to face successfully the new
reality which will take shape in the near future.
There are few published works in the empirical context that analyze the
perceived image from a descriptive point of view since many universities
choose not to disclose information that affects their strategic position and that
would reveal their strengths and weaknesses to their competitors (Landrum
et al., 1998). However, some authors have presented, albeit briefly, some
findings of their research, for example Sanz De La Tajada's (1996) study of
the image of the University of ICAI-ACADE, or the study of the image of the
University of Texas by Hanson et al. in 1998. Furthermore, most of the
empirical works that we have reviewed have approached corporate university
image from the perspective of the transmitter. Similarly, Landrum et al. (1998)
state that there are very few, even insufficient, research works available on the
formation of the image of universities by their various publics, and that more
works are necessary. In fact, some years earlier in their bibliographic review,
Parameswan and Glowacka (1995) did not find a single study of the
development of university image.
The shortage of practical works permitting the analysis of the perceived
university image, and the importance that the study of the image forming
process has in increasing the competitiveness of those academic institutions,
has led us to carry out this empirical work, which is based on a survey of 6,775
students at a Spanish university. By that means, we analyzed how the image of
those education centers is shaped through the cognitive and affective
components, as well as analyzing the influence of the different components of
image on the satisfaction of the students with the university. Although on
reviewing the literature we found theoretical works that stressed the
importance of measuring image through both the cognitive and affective
dimensions, there are hardly any empirical works that have checked how the

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
500

overall image is formed by those components in an interrelated way and how

that process is linked to the students' satisfaction.
The results of our work verified that:
.
the cognitive component of university image influenced the affective
component of that image;
.
the overall university image is formed through its cognitive and
affective components; and
.
the overall university image is more influenced by the affective
component than by the cognitive.
In addition, it will be verified that:
.
determined aspects of the cognitive component of image influence the
satisfaction of the students;
.
the affective image is the component that exercises more influence on
the students' satisfaction; and
.
the overall image also influences that satisfaction.
The practical implications of this research stem from the evidence that the
overall university image is formed by means of two different components, the
cognitive and the affective, and that the factors determining those components
influence the overall image and satisfaction in different ways, with the affective
component being more influential on the overall image of the university and the
satisfaction of the students. On that empirical basis, those responsible for
the university should pay more attention to developing policies, both of
communication and management, that have a bearing on those attributes that
exert most influence on the affective and overall images of the university and
on satisfaction. Those policies must also take into account the factors relating
not only to ``the orientation towards, and the preparation of, students'' but also
to the ``reputation'' and ``ease of entrance to the university'', but they must avoid
those cognitive attributes that have hardly any influence on the affective and
overall images, in other words, those dealing with ``overcrowding'' and the
``maturity/youth'' of the university. In this way, the brand image of the
university will have sound foundations that are relevant to one of its key
publics, the students, whose satisfaction depends on the perceived image, and it
will be able to project a corporate identity in which the benefits relevant to that
public are provided in a unique, distinctive manner.
From our opinion, this study could be considered representative of
universities, especially medium-sized Spanish universities whose number of
students is over 20,000 and whose offer of degrees is over 50. Nevertheless the
limitations of this work stem from its area of application, so from a purely
academic point of view, it would be recommendable to extend this research to
other fields of activity in order to be able to generalize the results. Furthermore,
it would be advisable to continue this line of research in the university context,
looking in depth at those factors that may influence the formation of the

university image and the satisfaction of the students. Those would include, for Configuration of
example, the students' socio-economic characteristics (sex, age, social class)
the university
and the psychographic ones (personality, values, life style, motivations).
image
Similarly, it would be interesting to study the university image forming process
among other interested groups, such as the teaching and research staff,
companies, public organizations and society in general.
References
Abdullah, M., Alnasser, A., Aamjad, D. and Husain, N. (2000), ``Evaluating functional
relationship between image, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty using general
maximum entropy'', Total Quality Management, Vol. 1 No. 4-6, pp. 826-30.
Anand, P., Holbrook, M.B. and Stephens, D. (1988), ``The formation of affective judgments: the
cognitive-affective model versus the independence hypothesis'', Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 15, pp. 386-91.
Andreassen, T.W. and Lindestad, B. (1998), ``Customer loyalty and complex services. The impact
of corporate image on quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty for customers with
varying degrees of service expertise'', International Journal of Service Industry
Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 7-23.
Athiyaman, A. (1997), ``Linking student satisfaction and service quality perceptions: the case of
university education'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 7/8, pp. 528-41.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Burnkrant, R.E. (1985), ``Attitude organization and the attitude-behavior
relation: a reply to Dillon and Kumar'', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 49,
pp. 47-57.
Baloglu, S. and Brinberg, D. (1997), ``Affective image of tourism destinations'', Journal of Travel
Research, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 11-15.
Baloglu, S. and McCleary (1999), ``A model of destination image formation'', Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 868-97.
Barich, H. and Kotler, P. (1991), ``A framework for marketing image management'', Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 20-33.
Bloemer, J., De Ruyter, K. and Peeters, P. (1998), ``Investigating drivers of bank loyalty: the
complex relationship between image, service quality and satisfaction'', International
Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 276-86.
Bloemer, J. and De Ruyter, K. (1998), ``On the relationship between store image, store satisfaction
and store loyalty'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 5/6, pp. 499-513.
Bolton, R.N. and Drew, J.H. (1991), ``A multistage model of customers assessments of service
quality and value'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 17, pp. 375-84.
Boyle, E. (1996), ``An experiment in changing corporate image in the financial services industry
in the UK'', Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 56-69.
Browne, B.A., Kaldenberg, D.O., Browne, W.G. and Brown, D.J. (1998), ``Student as customer:
factors affecting satisfaction and assessment of institutional quality'', Journal of Marketing
for Higher Education, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 1-14.
Burns, D.J., Lanasa, J. and Lackman, C. (1995), ``Images of suburban regional shopping malls.
Relationships wit mall locations and mall preference'', Conference Proceedings, Marketing:
Foundations for a Changing World, Orlando, FL.
Cadotte, E.R., Woodruff, R.B. and Jenkins, R.L. (1987), ``Expectations and norms in models of
consumer satisfaction'', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24, pp. 305-14.
Capriotti, P. (1999), Planificacion estrategica de la imagen corporativa, Editorial Ariel SA, Ariel
Comunicacion, Barcelona.

501

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
502

Cheney, G. and McMillan, J.J. (1990), ``Organizational rhetoric and the practice of criticism'',
Journal of Applied Comunication Research, Vol. 18, pp. 93-114.
Clow, K.E., Fischer, A.K. and O'Bryan, D. (1995), ``Patient expectations of dental services'',
Journal of Health Care Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 3, Fall, pp. 23-31.
Collins, C. and Stevens, C.K. (1999), ``Initial organizational images and recruitment: a withinsubjects investigation of the factors affecting job choices'', paper presented at the 14th
Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA.
Cornelissen, J. (2000), ``Reputation management. Corporate image: an audience centre model'',
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 119-25.
Craik, K. (1971), ``The assessment of places'', in McReynolds (Ed.), Advances in Psychological
Assessment, Vol. 2, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Darden, W.R. and Schwinghammer, J.K.L. (1985), ``The influence of social characteristics on
perceived quality in patronage choice behavior'' in Jacoby, J. and Olson, J. (Eds), Perceived
Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA,
pp. 161-72.
Dobni, D. and Zinkhan, G.M. (1990), ``In search of brand image: a foundation analysis'', Advances
in Consumer Research, Vol. 17, pp. 110-19.
Doyle, P. and Fenwick, I. (1974), ``How store image affects shopping habits in grocery chains'',
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 39-52.
Elsbach, K.D. and Sutton, R.I. (1992), ``Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate
actions: a marriage of institutional and impression management theories'', Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 35, pp. 699-738.
Engel, J.F. and Blackwell, R.D. (1982), Consumer Behaviour, Dryden Press, New York, NY.
Fielder, J.S., Hilton, C.B. and Motes, W.H. (1993), ``Educational services marketing: a proposed
system for enhanced recruitment of students'', Journal of Professional Services Marketing,
Vol. 8, pp. 191-205.
Folkes, V.S. (1988), ``Recent attribution research in consumer behavior: a review and new
directions'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, pp. 548-65.
Fornell, C. (1992), ``National satisfaction barometer: the Swedish experience'', Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 56, pp. 6-21.
Fram, E.H. (1982), Maintaining and Enhancing A College or University Image, Institute of
Technology, Rochester, NY.
Gatewood, R.D., Gowan, M.A. and Lautenschlager, G.J. (1993), ``Corporate image, recruitment
image, and initial job choice decisions'', Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36,
pp. 414-27.
Ghosh, A., Whipple, T.W. and Bryan, G.A. (2001), ``Student trust and its antecedents in higher
education'', Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 72 No. 3.
Giese, J.L. and Cote, J.A. (2000),``Defining consumer satisfaction'', Academy of Marketing Science
Review, on line, 00 (01),
Golledge, R.G. (1987), Environmental Cognition, Stockols and Altman, I. (Eds), John Wiley &
Sons, New York, NY.
Grady, N.B., Fisher, D.L. and Fraser, B.J. (1996), ``Images of school through metaphor
development and validation of a questionnaire'', Journal of Educational Administration,
Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 41-53.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E. and Tatham, R.L. (1987), Multivariate Data Analysis, Macmillan,
Estados Unidos.
Halstead, D., Hartman, D. and Schmidt, S.L. (1994), ``Multisource effects on the satisfaction
formation process'', Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, pp. 114-29.

Hanson, G.R., Norman, T. and Williams, A. (1998), The Decision to Attend UT-Austin:
What Makes a Difference?, Office of Student Affairs Research, University of Texas at
Austin, TX.
Hanyu, K. (1993), ``The affective meaning of Tokyo: verbal and non-verbal approaches'', Journal
of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 13, pp. 161-72.
Hildebrandt, L. (1988), ``Store image and the prediciton of perfomance on retailing'', Journal of
Business Research, No. 17, pp. 91-100.
Holbrook, M.B. (1978), ``Beyond attitude structure: toward the informational determinants of
attitude'', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 15, pp. 545-56.
House, J.D. (1999), ``The effects of entering characteristics and instructional experiences on
student satisfaction and degree completion: an application of the input-environmentoutcome assessment model'', International Journal of Instructional Media, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 423-35.
Ittelson, W.H. (1973), Environment and Cognition, Seminar Press, New York, NY.
Ivy, J. (2001), ``Higher education institution image: a correspondence analysis approach'',
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 276-82.
James, D.L., Durand, R.M. and Drevers, R.A. (1976), ``The use of a multi-atribute model in a store
image study'', Journal of Retailing, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 23-34.
James, R., Baldwin, G. and Mcinnis, C. (1999), Which University? The Factors Influencing the
Choices of Prospective Undergraduates, Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The
University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
Johnson, M.D. and Fornell, C. (1991), ``A framework for comparing customer satisfaction across
individuals and product categories'', Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 12, pp. 267-86.
Kandampully J. and Suharatanto, D. (2000), ``Customer loyalty in the hotel industry: the role of
customer satisfactinon and image'', International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 346-51.
Kasulis, J. and Lusch, R.F. (1981), ``Validating the retail store image concept'', Journal of Academy
of Marketing Science, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 419-34.
Kazoleas, D., Kim, Y. and Moffit, M.A. (2001), ``Institutional image: a case study'', Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 205-16.
Keaveney, S.M. and Hunt, K.A. (1992), ``Conceptualization and operationalization of retail store
image: a case of rival middle-level theories'', Journal of Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 165-75.
Kennedy, S.H. (1977), ``Nurturing corporate image'', European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 3,
pp. 120-64.
Landrum, R.E., Turrisi, R. and Harless, C. (1998), ``University image: the benefits of assessment
and modeling'', Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 53-68.
Leblanc, G. and Nguyen, N. (1999), ``Listening to the customer's voice: examining perceived
service value among business college students'', International Journal of Educational
Management, No. 13/4, pp. 187-98.
Lim, V.K.G., Teo, T.S.H. and See, S.K.B. (2000), ``Perceived job image among police officers in
Singapore: factorial dimensions and differential effects'', Journal of Social Psychology,
Vol. 140 No. 6, December, pp. 740-51.
Loudon, D. and Della Bitta, A. (1995), Comportamiento del Consumidor, Conceptos y Aplicaciones,
McGraw-Hill, Mexico City.
Lynch, K. (1960), The Image of the City, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.

Configuration of
the university
image
503

Journal of
Educational
Administration
40,5
504

Mano, H. and Oliver, R.L. (1993), ``Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption
experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20,
pp. 451-66.
Marcus, A.A. and Goodman, R.S. (1991), ``Victims and shareholders: the dilemmas of presenting
corporate policy during a crisis'', Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 34, pp. 281-305.
Martineau, P. (1958), ``The personality of the retail store'', Harvard Business Review, Vol. 36,
pp. 47-55.
Mazanec, JA. (1995), ``Positioning analysis with self-organizing maps: an exploratory study on
luxury hotels'', Cornell HRA Quarterly, No. 12, pp. 80-92.
Mazursky, D. and Jacoby, J. (1986), ``Exploring the development of store images'', Journal of
Retailing, No. 62, pp. 145-65.
Mazzarol, T. (1998), ``Critical success factors for international education marketing'',
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 12 No.4, pp. 163-75.
Mcinnis, D.J. and Price, L.L. (1987), ``The role of imagery in information processing: review and
extensions'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 13, pp. 473-91.
McPherson, M. and Schapiro, M. (1988), The Student Aid Game, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, NJ.
Milo, K., Edson, K.C. and Mceuen, V. (1989), ``The impact of negative publicity on institutional
reputation and student college choice'', College and University, Vol. 64 No. 3, pp. 237-45.
Nguyen, N. and Leblanc, G. (1998), ``The mediating role of corporate image on customers
retention decisions: an investigation in financial services'', International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 52-65.
Nguyen, N. and Leblanc, G. (2001), ``Image and reputation of higher education institutions in
students' retention decisions'', International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 15
No. 6, pp. 303-11.
O'Neil, M.L. and Jasper, C.R. (1992), ``An evaluation of models of consumer spatial behavior using
the environment-behavior paradigm'', Environment and Behavior, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 411-40.
Oliver, R.L. (1993), ``Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response'', Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 418-30.
Oliver, R.L. and Linda, G. (1981), ``Effects of satisfaction and its antecedents on consumer
preferences and intention'', Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, pp. 88-93.
Parameswaran, R. and Glowacka, A.E. (1995),``University image: an information processing
perspective'', Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 6 No. 2.
Patterson, P., Romm, T. and Hill, C. (1998), ``Consumer satisfaction as a process: a qualitative,
retrospective longitudinal study of overseas students in Australia'', Journal of Professional
Services Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 135-57.
Render, B. and O'Connor, T.S., (1976), ``The influence of price, sore name and brand mane on
perception of product quality'', Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 4,
pp. 722-30.
Russel, J.A. (1980), ``A circumplex model of affect'', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 39 No. 6, pp. 1161-78.
Russel, J.A. and Pratt, G. (1980), ``A description of affective quality attributed to environment'',
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 311-22.
Russel, L.A. and Snodgrass, J. (1987), Emotion and Environment, Stockols, D. and Altman, I.
(Eds), John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Sanz De La Tajada, L.A. (1996), Auditora de la Imagen de Empresa. Metodos y Tecnicas de
Estudio de la Imagen, Editorial Sntesis, S.A. Madrid.

Sirgy, M.J. and Samli, A.C. (1985), ``A path analytic model of store loyalty'', Journal of Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 13, pp. 265-91.
Sirgy, M.J. and Samli, AC. (1989), ``A path analytic model of store loyalty involving self-concpet,
store image, geographic loyalty, and socioeconomic status'', Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 265-91.
Stafford, J.E. and Enis, B.M. (1969), ``The price-quality relationship: an extension'', Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 6, pp. 456-8.
Stern, E. and Krakover, S. (1993), ``The formation of a composite urban image'', Geographical
Analysis, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 130-46.
Tse, D.K. and Wilton, P.C. (1988), ``Models of consumer satisfaction formation: an extension'',
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25, pp. 204-12.
Ward, L. and Russel, J.A. (1981), ``The psychologycal representation of molar physical
environments'', Journal of Experimental Psychology General, Vol. 110 No. 2, pp. 121-52.
Weiner, B. (1985), ``Spontaneous causal thinking'', Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 97 No. 1, pp. 74-84.
Weissman, J. (1990), ``Institutional image assessment and modification in colleges and
universities'', Journal for Higher Education Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 65-75.
Williams, S.L. and Moffitt, M.A. (1995), ``Corporate image as an impression formation process:
prioritising personal, organizational and environmental audience factors'', Journal of
Public Relations Research, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 237-58.
Yuille, J.C. and Catchpole, M.J. (1977), ``The role of imagery in models of cognition'', Journal of
Mental Imagery, Vol. 1, pp. 171-80.

Configuration of
the university
image
505