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

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

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.

  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 

Download references

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.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emerson Wagner Mainardes.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Constructs Code Adapted variables Authors
Voting intention (VI) VI1 I intend to always vote for one director candidate Ohanian (1991)
VI2 I seek more information about the director candidate before voting
VI3 I always vote for a director candidate
Perceived quality (PQ) PQ1 Voting for a very qualified director candidate is very important to me Sproles and Kendall (1986)
PQ2 In general, I try to vote for the most qualified director candidate
PQ3 When voting for a director candidate I try to make the best choice
PQ4 In general, I strive to vote for director candidates of better quality
PQ5 I really give particular importance to the director candidate on whom I vote
PQ6 I am very particular when it comes to voting for a director candidate
PQ7 Because I value quality, I usually do not vote for the first director candidate I meet
PQ8 To satisfy me, a director candidate does not to be perfect
Trust (TR) TR1 I choose the director candidate who is most trustworthy Ohanian (1991)
TR2 I choose the director candidate who most demonstrates to be honest
TR3 I choose the director candidate who most demonstrates to be trustworthy
TR4 I choose the director candidate who most demonstrates to be sincere
TR5 I choose the director candidate who most demonstrates who proves to be someone whom I can believe in the most
Expertise (EX) EX1 I only choose the director candidate who is a specialist in school management Ohanian (1991)
EX2 I only choose the director candidate who is experient in school management
EX3 I choose the director candidate who is informed
EX4 I choose the director candidate who is qualified in school management
EX5 I choose the director candidate who is qualified in school management
Attractiveness (AT) AT1 I choose the director candidate who is physically attractive Ohanian (1991)
AT2 I choose the director candidate who has style
AT3 I choose the director candidate who is handsome/pretty
AT4 I choose the director candidate who is elegant
AT5 I choose the director candidate who is sensual
Perceived image (PI) PI1 In the elections, I choose the best-looking director candidates Hoegg and Lewis (2011)
PI2 In the elections, I choose director candidates who are more charismatic
PI3 In the elections, I choose director candidates who have prepared the best political campaign
  1. Source: Own elaboration

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zanotelli, L.G., Mainardes, E.W. & Correia, R.D. Voter’s Perceptions on Candidate Choice for Director of Public Educational Institutions. Public Organiz Rev 20, 179–201 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-019-00439-3

Download citation

Keywords

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