Advertisement

Voter’s Perceptions on Candidate Choice for Director of Public Educational Institutions

  • Lilian Gazzoli Zanotelli
  • Emerson Wagner MainardesEmail author
  • Rogério Dias Correia
Article
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

This study aimed to verify whether the voters’ perceptions (trust, expertise, attractiveness, image and perceived quality) from the academic community influence voting intention for a director of a public educational institution. The sample consisted of 358 respondents. In the results, there were significant and positive influences between expertise and trust; trust and perceived quality; perceived quality and voting intention; perceived image and attractiveness. It is concluding from this that, in a non-traditional political context, there is a concern by the voters with the quality of their candidates representing them in a management position, such as that of a director.

Keywords

Non-traditional voters’ perceptions Voting intention Perceived quality Trust Attractiveness Expertise Perceived image 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq/Brazil), project 303669/2015-2, and by Portuguese Science Foundation (FCT/Portugal) through NECE (Núcleo de Estudos em Ciências Empresariais), project UID/GES/04630/2019.

References

  1. Aghekyan-Simonian, M., Forsythe, S., Kwon, S. W., & Chattaraman, V. (2012). The role of product brand image and online store image on perceived risks and online purchase intentions for apparel. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(3), 325–331.Google Scholar
  2. Akdeniz, B., Calantone, R. J., & Voorhees, C. M. (2013). Effectiveness of marketing cues on consumer perceptions of quality: The moderating roles of brand reputation and third-party information. Psychology and Marketing, 30(1), 76–89.Google Scholar
  3. Apkarian, J., Mulligan, K., Rotondi, M. B., & Brint, S. (2014). Who governs? Academic decision-making in US four-year colleges and universities, 2000–2012. Tertiary Education and Management, 20(2), 151–164.Google Scholar
  4. Balestri, C. (2016). On the inefficiency of political exchange. Public Organization Review, 16(2), 167–178.Google Scholar
  5. Barros, D. F., Sauerbronn, J. F. R., & Ayrosa, E. A. T. (2012). Representações do eleitor: revendo teorias e propondo novos caminhos. Revista de Administração Pública, 46(2), 477–491.Google Scholar
  6. Beldad, A., De Jong, M., & Steehouder, M. (2010). How shall I trust the faceless and the intangible? A literature review on the antecedents of online trust. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 857–869.Google Scholar
  7. Bonds-Raacke, J., & Raacke, J. D. (2007). The relationship between physical attractiveness of professors and students’ ratings of professor quality. Journal of Psychiatry, Psychology and Mental Health, 1(2), 1–7.Google Scholar
  8. Bruckmann, S., & Carvalho, T. (2014). The reform process of Portuguese higher education institutions: From collegial to managerial governance. Tertiary Education and Management, 20(3), 193–206.Google Scholar
  9. Caldwell, C., & Clapham, S. E. (2003). Organizational trustworthiness: An international perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(4), 349–364.Google Scholar
  10. Chou, H. Y. (2014). Effects of endorser types in political endorsement advertising. International Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 391–414.Google Scholar
  11. Cunningham, G. B., Fink, J. S., & Kenix, L. J. (2008). Choosing an endorser for a women’s sporting event: The interaction of attractiveness and expertise. Sex Roles, 58(5), 371–378.Google Scholar
  12. Dassonneville, R., Hooghe, M., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. (2017). Do electoral rules have an effect on electoral behaviour? An impact assessment. West European Politics, 40(3), 503–515.Google Scholar
  13. Delgado-Ballester, E., Munuera-Aleman, J. L., & Yague-Guillen, M. J. (2003). Development and validation of a brand trust scale. International Journal of Market Research, 45(1), 35–54.Google Scholar
  14. Dodds, W. B., Monroe, K. B., & Grewal, D. (1991). Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers' product evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(3), 307–319.Google Scholar
  15. Donina, D., Meoli, M., & Paleari, S. (2015). The new institutional governance of Italian state universities: What role for the new governing bodies? Tertiary Education and Management, 21(1), 16–28.Google Scholar
  16. Farrag, D. A. R., & Shamma, H. (2014). Factors influencing voting intentions for Egyptian parliament elections 2011. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 5(1), 49–70.Google Scholar
  17. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.Google Scholar
  18. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.Google Scholar
  19. Hoegg, J., & Lewis, M. V. (2011). The impact of candidate appearance and advertising strategies on election results. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(5), 895–909.Google Scholar
  20. Hossain, T. M. (2010). Hot or not: And analysis of online professor – Shopping behavior of business students. Journal of Education for Business, 85(3), 165–167.Google Scholar
  21. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., & Saarinen, L. (1999). Consumer trust in an internet store: A cross-cultural validation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5(2), 0–0.Google Scholar
  22. Kim, D., & Perdue, R. R. (2011). The influence of image on destination attractiveness. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 28(3), 225–239.Google Scholar
  23. Kirkland, P. A., & Coppock, A. (2017). Candidate choice without party labels: New insights from conjoint survey experiments. Political Behavior, 39(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, Y., & Koo, J. (2015). Athlete endorsement, attitudes, and purchase intention: The interaction effect between athlete endorser-product congruence and endorser credibility. Journal of Sport Management, 29(5), 523–538.Google Scholar
  25. Lenz, G. S., & Lawson, C. (2011). Looking the part: Television leads less informed citizens to vote based on candidates’ appearance. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 574–589.Google Scholar
  26. Lim, C. S., & Snyder, J. M. (2015). Is more information always better? Party cues and candidate quality in us judicial elections. Journal of Public Economics, 128, 107–123.Google Scholar
  27. Liu, J., Hu, J., & Furutan, O. (2013). The influence of student perceived professors’ “hotnees” on expertise, motivation, learning outcomes, and course satisfaction. Journal of Education for Business, 88(2), 94–100.Google Scholar
  28. Lord, K. R., & Putrevu, S. (2009). Informational and transformational responses to celebrity endorsement. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 31(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  29. Mo, C. H. (2015). The consequences of explicit and implicit gender attitudes and candidate quality in the calculations of voters. Political Behavior, 37(2), 357–395.Google Scholar
  30. Moraes, R. M., & Teixeira, A. J. C. (2017). When engagement meets politics: Analysis of a Brazilian public institution. Public Organization Review, 17(4), 495–508.Google Scholar
  31. Myers, J. P. (2008). Democratizing school authority: Brazilian teachers’ perceptions of the election of principals. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 952–966.Google Scholar
  32. Newman, B. I. (2002). Testing a predictive model of voter behavior on the 2000 US presidential election. Journal of Political Marketing, 1(2–3), 159–173.Google Scholar
  33. Nisbett, G. S., & Dewalt, C. C. (2016). Exploring the influence of celebrities in politics: A focus group study of young voters. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 24(3), 144–156.Google Scholar
  34. Ohanian, R. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokespersons’ perceived image on consumers’ intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31(1), 46–54.Google Scholar
  35. Olbrich, R., & Jansen, H. C. (2014). Price-quality relationship in pricing strategies for private labels. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 23(6), 429–438.Google Scholar
  36. Olivola, C. Y., Funk, F., & Todorov, A. (2014). Social attributions from faces bias human choices. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(11), 566–570.Google Scholar
  37. Paro, V. H. (2011). Escolha e formação do diretor escolar. Cadernos de Pesquisa: Pensamento Educacional. Curitiba, 6(14), 36–50.Google Scholar
  38. Paro, V. H. (2013). A utopia da gestão escolar democrática. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 60, 51–53.Google Scholar
  39. Praino, R., Stockemer, D., & Ratis, J. (2014). Looking good or looking competent? Physical appearance and electoral success in the 2008 congressional elections. American Politics Research, 42(6), 1096–1117.Google Scholar
  40. Riniolo, T. C., Johnson, K. C., Sherman, T. R., & Misso, J. A. (2006). Hot or not: Do professors perceived as physically attractive receive higher student evaluations? The Journal of General Psychology, 133(1), 19–35.Google Scholar
  41. Scammell, M. (2015). Politics and image: The conceptual value of branding. Journal of Political Marketing, 14(1–2), 7–18.Google Scholar
  42. Schiffman, L., Thelen, S. T., & Sherman, E. (2010). Interpersonal and political trust: Modeling levels of citizens' trust. European Journal of Marketing, 44(3), 369–381.Google Scholar
  43. Schnurr, B., Brunner-Sperdin, A., & Stokburger-Sauer, N. E. (2017). The effect of context attractiveness on product attractiveness and product quality: The moderating role of product familiarity. Marketing Letters, 28(2), 241–253.Google Scholar
  44. Sekhon, H., Ennew, C., Kharouf, H., & Devlin, J. (2014). Trustworthiness and trust: Influences and implications. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(3–4), 409–430.Google Scholar
  45. Skrbinjek, V., Šušteršič, J., & Lesjak, D. (2017). Political preferences and public funding of tertiary education during the economic crisis. Tertiary Education and Management, 1–19.Google Scholar
  46. Snoj, B., Korda, A. P., & Mumel, D. (2004). The relationships among perceived quality, perceived risk and perceived product value. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 13(3), 156–167.Google Scholar
  47. Sproles, G. B., & Kendall, E. L. (1986). A methodology for profiling consumers decision-making styles. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 20(2), 267–279.Google Scholar
  48. Stockemer, D., & Praino, R. (2017). Physical attractiveness, voter heuristics and electoral systems: The role of candidate attractiveness under different institutional designs. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(2), 336–352.Google Scholar
  49. Whelan, J., Goode, M. R., Cotte, J., & Thomson, M. (2016). Consumer regulation strategies: Attenuating the effect of consumer references in a voting context. Psychology and Marketing, 33(11), 899–916.Google Scholar
  50. Wu, P. C., Yeh, G. Y., & Hsiao, C. R. (2011). The effect of store image and service quality on brand image and purchase intention for private label brands. Australasian Marketing Journal, 19(1), 30–39.Google Scholar
  51. Yoo, J. W., Lee, H. S., & Jin, Y. J. (2018). Effects of celebrity credibility on Country’s reputation: A comparison of an Olympic star and a political leader. Corporate Reputation Review, 21(3), 127–136.Google Scholar
  52. Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. The Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FUCAPE Business SchoolVitóriaBrazil

Personalised recommendations