The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the performance of five alternative measures of service quality in the high education sector – service quality (SERVQUAL), importance‐weighted SERVQUAL, service performance (SERVPERF), importance‐weighted SERVPERF, and higher education performance (HEdPERF). Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected by means of a structured questionnaire containing perception items enhanced from the SERVPERF and HEdPERF scales and expectation items from the SERVQUAL scale, modified to fit into the higher education (HE) sector. The first draft of the questionnaire was subject to a pilot testing through a focus group and an expert evaluation. Data were gathered from a sample of 360 students of a Portuguese University in Lisbon. Scales were compared in terms of unidimensionality, reliability, validity and explained variance. Findings: It can be concluded that SERVPERF and HEdPERF present the best measurement capability, but it is not possible to identify which one is the best. Research limitations/implications: Since the study only examined the measurement capabilities of the five instruments at a single faculty, the collection of more data in other institutions is required in order to provide more general results. Practical implications: The current results do make available some important insights into how the five alternative instruments of service quality in an HE context compare with one another. Originality/value: The paper attempts to develop insights into comparative evaluations of five measuring instruments of service quality in an HE setting.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298805200302 · Cited by 18,292
Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension
Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299205600304 · Cited by 10,628
Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation
Kahle, L. R., & Malhotra, N. K. (1994) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151953 · Cited by 7,087
Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/s0022-4359(00)00028-2 · Cited by 6,398
Importance-Performance Analysis
Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224297704100112 · Cited by 4,284
(1991) · Journal of Retailing · Cited by 3,949
Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1994) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299405800110 · Cited by 3,139
Classifying Services to Gain Strategic Marketing Insights
Lovelock, C. H. (1983) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224298304700303 · Cited by 1,996
Cited by
Evaluation of the factors that determine quality in higher education: an empirical study
Tsinidou, M., Gerogiannis, V., & Fitsilis, P. (2010) · Quality Assurance in Education · doi:10.1108/09684881011058669 · Cited by 408
Ali, F., Zhou, Y., Hussain, K., Nair, P. K., & Ragavan, N. A. (2016) · Quality Assurance in Education · doi:10.1108/qae-02-2014-0008 · Cited by 355
Metadata
- Authors
- Brochado, A.
- Venue
- Quality Assurance in Education
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009-04-24
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 174-190
- ISSN
- 0968-4883 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2026356388
- Cited by
- 338
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 24.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09684880910951381
- The paper
- Brochado, A. (2009). Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880910951381
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.