SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education / 2017 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 3

LOYALTY, TRUST, SATISFACTION AND PARTICIPATION IN UNIVERSITAS TERBUKA AMBIANCE: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION

Herman HERMAN
Pages
84–95
Publication Date
2017-07-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results showed that loyalty is significantly influenced by trust, satisfaction, participation and interaction between the independent variables.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Factors affecting the loyalty of students in Universitas Terbuka are investigated in this paper.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The population was students registered in the first semester of 2014.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results showed that loyalty is significantly influenced by trust, satisfaction, participation and interaction between the independent variables.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Loyalty · trust · satisfaction

Abstract

Factors affecting the loyalty of students in Universitas Terbuka are investigated in this paper. The aim was to elucidate how all the variables such as trust, satisfaction and participation interrelate with one another. Loyalty was the dependent variable; trust, satisfaction and participation were the independent variables. Data were accumulated using instruments in the form of questionnaires. The population was students registered in the first semester of 2014. Respondents were taken purposively from 22 of 37 regional offices throughout Indonesia, representing the western and middle part of the country; 1,099 questionnaires from respondents were finally completed and processed. Two hypotheses were established and then assessed. Statistically, factor analysis, correlation and multiple regression were thoroughly utilized to comprehend the interaction and behavior of all variables engaged. The results showed that loyalty is significantly influenced by trust, satisfaction, participation and interaction between the independent variables. However, three out of four interaction variables contributed negatively to loyalty. Besides, the variances of independent variables, including their interactions, explain 60% of loyalty’s variance.

🔖

Cite This Article

HERMAN, H. (2017). LOYALTY, TRUST, SATISFACTION AND PARTICIPATION IN UNIVERSITAS TERBUKA AMBIANCE: STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 3, 84–95. https://ajindex.com/articles/139878

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Anderson, H. & Jacobsen, P.N. (2000). Creating loyalty: Its strategic importance in your customer strategy, in Brown (ed.). Customer Relationship Management. Ontario: John Willey. Anderson, J.C. & Narus, J.A. (1990). A Model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 54 (January), pp. 42-58.
  2. Angelova, B. & Zekiri, J. (2011). Measuring Customer Satisfaction with Service Quality Using American Customer Satisfaction Model (ACSI Model). International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 232-258. 93 Anthanassopoulus, A., Gounaris, S., & Sathakopoulus, V. (2001). Behavioral responses to customer satisfaction: An empirical study. European. Journal of Marketing, 35 (5/6), pp. 687-707.
  3. Areti, V. (2006). Satisfying distance education students of the Hellenic Open University. E-mentor, 2 (14), 1-12.
  4. Aydin, S. & Ozer, G. 2005. ‘How switching costs affect subscriber loyalty in the Turkish mobile phone market: an exploratory study’, Journal of Targeting, Measurement Analysis for Marketing, 14(2), pp. 141–155.
  5. Bloemer, J. & Ruyter, K.D. (1998). On the relationship between store image, store satisfaction and store loyalty. European Journal of Marketing, 32 (5/6), pp. 499-513.
  6. Burke, A. (2011). Group Work: How to Use Groups Effectively The Journal of Effective Teaching, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2011, 87-95.
  7. Chen, P., Gonyea, R., & Kuh, G. (2008). Learning at a distance: engaged or not?. Journal of Online Education, Vol. 4, Issue 3 http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view= article&id=438 Chen, D., & Guo, W. Y. (2005). Distance learning in China. Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 3 (4), 1-5.
  8. Crocker, L. & Algina, J. (2006). Introduction to classical & modern test theory. Chicago: Cengage Learning. Dancer, D., & Kamvounias, P. (2005). Student involvement in assessment: A project designed to assess class participation fairly and reliably. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 445-454 (ES). Doney, P.M. & Cannon, J.P. (1997). An Examination of the nature of trust in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 61(April), pp. 35-51.
  9. Duckworth, A. L., Quinn, P. D., & Tsukayama, E. (2011). What No Child Left Behind Leaves Behind: The Roles of IQ and Self-Control in Predicting Standardized Achievement Test Scores and Report Card Grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, December 19, pp. 1-13.
  10. Galyon, C.E., Blondin, C.A., Yaw, J.S., Nalls, M.L. & Williams, R.L (2012). Social