IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v51y2017i2d10.1007_s11135-016-0428-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling university student satisfaction: the case of the humanities and social studies degree programs

Author

Listed:
  • Marcella Corduas

    (University of Naples Federico II)

  • Alfonso Piscitelli

    (University of Naples Federico II)

Abstract

This paper investigates the problem of modeling students’ satisfaction ratings of various aspects of academic teaching in six humanities departments at University of Naples Federico II. In particular, we propose a strategy for analyzing data from the annual survey used to collects feedback from students across the university. The statistical procedure for this data analysis consists of two steps. First, the random forest method is fitted to the data to identify important predictors of student global satisfaction. Second, the probability distribution of student satisfaction ratings is estimated by fitting a mixture distribution with varying parameters (denoted the CUB model). The random forest methods shows that students’ interest in the course topics, together with the course objectives and teaching tools, are the main determinants of student satisfaction. Inclusion of these covariates in the CUB models confirms their dominant role in differentiating students’ evaluations of degree courses.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcella Corduas & Alfonso Piscitelli, 2017. "Modeling university student satisfaction: the case of the humanities and social studies degree programs," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 617-628, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:51:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11135-016-0428-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-016-0428-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-016-0428-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-016-0428-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weijters, Bert & Cabooter, Elke & Schillewaert, Niels, 2010. "The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 236-247.
    2. Cicia, Gianni & Corduas, Marcella & Del Giudice, Teresa & Piccolo, Domenico, 2010. "Valuing Consumer Preferences with the CUB Model: A Case Study of Fair Trade Coffee," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 1(1), pages 1-12.
    3. Maria Iannario, 2015. "Detecting latent components in ordinal data with overdispersion by means of a mixture distribution," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 977-987, May.
    4. Janitza, Silke & Tutz, Gerhard & Boulesteix, Anne-Laure, 2016. "Random forest for ordinal responses: Prediction and variable selection," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 57-73.
    5. Weathers, Danny & Sharma, Subhash & Niedrich, Ronald W., 2005. "The impact of the number of scale points, dispositional factors, and the status quo decision heuristic on scale reliability and response accuracy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(11), pages 1516-1524, November.
    6. Federica Cugnata & Silvia Salini, 2014. "Model-based approach for importance–performance analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3053-3064, November.
    7. Silvia Bacci & Michela Gnaldi, 2015. "A classification of university courses based on students’ satisfaction: an application of a two-level mixture item response model," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 927-940, May.
    8. Maria Iannario, 2012. "Modelling shelter choices in a class of mixture models for ordinal responses," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 21(1), pages 1-22, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elke Cabooter & Bert Weijters & Alain Beuckelaer & Eldad Davidov, 2017. "Is extreme response style domain specific? Findings from two studies in four countries," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2605-2622, November.
    2. Anna Gottard & Maria Iannario & Domenico Piccolo, 2016. "Varying uncertainty in CUB models," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 10(2), pages 225-244, June.
    3. Stefania Capecchi & Maria Iannario & Rosaria Simone, 2018. "Well-Being and Relational Goods: A Model-Based Approach to Detect Significant Relationships," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 729-750, January.
    4. Cabooter, Elke & Weijters, Bert & Geuens, Maggie & Vermeir, Iris, 2016. "Scale format effects on response option interpretation and use," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2574-2584.
    5. de Rezende, Naia A. & de Medeiros, Denise D., 2022. "How rating scales influence responses’ reliability, extreme points, middle point and respondent’s preferences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 266-274.
    6. Maria Iannario & Marica Manisera & Domenico Piccolo & Paola Zuccolotto, 2012. "Sensory analysis in the food industry as a tool for marketing decisions," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 6(4), pages 303-321, December.
    7. Arboretti Giancristofaro, Rosa & Bordignon, Paolo, 2015. "Consumer preferences in food packaging: cub models and conjoint analysis," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202707, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Stefania Capecchi & Domenico Piccolo, 2017. "Dealing with heterogeneity in ordinal responses," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(5), pages 2375-2393, September.
    9. Eline Moens & Louis Lippens & Philippe Sterkens & Johannes Weytjens & Stijn Baert, 2022. "The COVID-19 crisis and telework: a research survey on experiences, expectations and hopes," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 729-753, June.
    10. Gennaro Punzo & Rosalia Castellano & Mirko Buonocore, 2018. "Job Satisfaction in the “Big Four” of Europe: Reasoning Between Feeling and Uncertainty Through CUB Models," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(1), pages 205-236, August.
    11. Stylos, Nikolaos & Vassiliadis, Chris A. & Bellou, Victoria & Andronikidis, Andreas, 2016. "Destination images, holistic images and personal normative beliefs: Predictors of intention to revisit a destination," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 40-60.
    12. Jennifer Oser & Marc Hooghe & Zsuzsa Bakk & Roberto Mari, 2023. "Changing citizenship norms among adolescents, 1999-2009-2016: A two-step latent class approach with measurement equivalence testing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(5), pages 4915-4933, October.
    13. Michela Gnaldi & Simone Del Sarto, 2018. "Variable Weighting via Multidimensional IRT Models in Composite Indicators Construction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 1139-1156, April.
    14. Takahashi, Ryo & Todo, Yasuyuki & Funaki, Yukihiko, 2018. "How Can We Motivate Consumers to Purchase Certified Forest Coffee? Evidence From a Laboratory Randomized Experiment Using Eye-trackers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 107-121.
    15. Silke Janitza & Ender Celik & Anne-Laure Boulesteix, 2018. "A computationally fast variable importance test for random forests for high-dimensional data," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 12(4), pages 885-915, December.
    16. Buczak, Philip & Horn, Daniel & Pauly, Markus, 2024. "Old but Gold or New and Shiny? Comparing Tree Ensembles for Ordinal Prediction with a Classic Parametric Approach," OSF Preprints v7bcf, Center for Open Science.
    17. Federica Cugnata & Silvia Salini, 2014. "Model-based approach for importance–performance analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3053-3064, November.
    18. Weijters, Bert & Cabooter, Elke & Schillewaert, Niels, 2010. "The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 236-247.
    19. Manisera, Marica & Zuccolotto, Paola, 2014. "Modeling rating data with Nonlinear CUB models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 100-118.
    20. Sandra Cortés & Soledad Burgos & Héctor Adaros & Boris Lucero & Lesliam Quirós-Alcalá, 2021. "Environmental Health Risk Perception: Adaptation of a Population-Based Questionnaire from Latin America," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-13, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:51:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s11135-016-0428-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.