Linking prestige perception with consumption experience, loyalty, and WOM
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between perceived external prestige (PEP), the student experience, attitude, and behaviour in the context of higher education institutions. Design/methodology/approach – A comparison of the relationships between prestige perception, the student experience, WOM, and loyalty is examined within a one highly prestigious institution and one mid-ranked institution. Multigroup structural equation modelling was employed to examine data obtained from 948 respondents at the two institutions. Findings – While respondents from the top-ranked institution exhibit a significantly higher perception of university prestige than mid-ranked university respondents, no significant differences were found between the two groups of respondents in terms of the strengths of relationships between constructs. The analysis revealed that students’ perception of their university experience performed a full mediating effect on the relationship between PEP and WOM, as well as a partial mediating effect on the relationship between PEP and loyalty. Practical implications – Student perceptions of the university experience is a strong indicator of attitude and behaviour. For university administrators, enhancing the student experience is just as important as managing a university’s reputation with respect to engendering loyalty and positive WOM. Originality/value – This is the first study to link PEP with student attitude and behaviour. The findings provide interesting theoretical insights as well as useful managerial implications to enhance consumer experience which in turns affect their attitude and behaviour towards the organisation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it