Roger Hiroshi Albornoz-Toyohama
Ruth Mendigure-Hachircana
Sady Haro-Casildo
Carlos D. Abanto-Ramírez
95% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
- Unidad de Posgrado de Ciencias Humanas y de la Educación, Universidad Peruana Unión, Lima, Peru
Introduction: This study investigates the impact of institutional reputation (IR), social responsibility (SR) and student loyalty (LY) on student retention (RT) in university students.
Methods: Using a quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional design, 409 students of private universities, both domestic and foreign, were surveyed.
Results: Analysis using Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) revealed that SR positively influences LY (β = 0.218, p < 0.001) and RT (β = 0.123, p = 0.006). LY showed a strong impact on RT (β = 0.765, p < 0.001), whereas IR significantly influenced LY (β = 0.556, p < 0.001). Contrary to expectations, no direct relationship was found between institutional reputation and retention. In addition, it was shown that SR had a positive effect on IR (β = 0.531, p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, it is concluded that SR positively predicts LY, RT and IR, Ly positively predicts RT and IR LY, with significant implications for university management and research at this educational level.
1 Introduction
Private higher education institutions that wish to sustain themselves over time must learn how to compete in the competitive marketplace to attract and retain students. If they fail to do so, they will encounter financial problems, affect teaching quality and therefore have an impact on student satisfaction. Therefore, it is necessary to have strategies for students to commit and remain in the institution (Cardona et al., 2023; Xuerong and Kanjanapathy, 2024). For this reason, it is necessary to know the factors by which students decide to enroll in certain institutions.
Recent studies have identified several elements that contribute to student retention, including institutional reputation, university social responsibility (USR), and student loyalty (Latif et al., 2021; Rasoolimanesh et al., 2023; Snijders et al., 2020). These factors interact in a complex way, creating an ecosystem that directly affects the educational experience and, therefore, students’ decision to continue their studies at a particular institution.
The factors highlighted in the perception and commitment towards their institutions are institutional reputation (Akıllı, 2023; Kihl et al., 2018) and university social responsibility (Latif et al., 2021; Suranta and Rahmawati, 2024), the latter factor taking more strength in influencing loyalty and the decision to remain in the educational institution. Nevertheless, while previous research emphasizes the significance of institutional loyalty and reputation, a knowledge gap exists due to the paucity of studies addressing these factors collectively, particularly from a strategic perspective that contributes to student retention in the university context (Raja, 2023).
We will also highlight that service quality generates student satisfaction and consequently trust in their institutions; these aspects favor student loyalty, being one of the important factors for student retention (Chandra et al., 2019; Khashab et al., 2022; Nguyen et al., 2024). This loyalty also fosters a sense of belonging and commitment to the institution. Nevertheless, while previous research emphasizes the significance of institutional loyalty and reputation, a knowledge gap exists due to the paucity of studies addressing these factors collectively, particularly from a strategic perspective that contributes to student retention in the university context, even more so in the Latin American context (Raja, 2023). In this regard, the present investigation aims to contribute to existing knowledge by addressing this gap. Therefore, the main objective of this research is to analyze how institutional reputation, university social responsibility and student loyalty influence student retention in university students.
1.1 Literature review
1.1.1 Influence of social responsibility on university student loyalty, institutional reputation and retention
The university social responsibility promotes with its actions the significant contribution to the care of the environment and society (Latif et al., 2021; Suranta and Rahmawati, 2024) and in turn this factor positively influences the loyalty of students of those institutions that develop these activities in addition to educational training. Likewise, Latif et al. (2021) had empirically evidenced that university social responsibility is of great influence on student loyalty. This study showed that the influence is also exerted through factors such as perceived service quality, student satisfaction, and trust in the university.
Congruent with this, Mostafa and Hamieh (2021) state that university social responsibility activities impact loyalty dimensions as well as student attitudes and behavior. Along the same lines, research by Suranta and Rahmawati (2024) found that institutional image and perception of service quality are considered factors that impact student loyalty and play a mediating role. This theoretical basis suggests that private educational institutions that effectively implement and communicate their social responsibility initiatives can expect an increase in student loyalty.
Dzimińska et al. (2018) argue that institutional recognition remains a key factor in the competitiveness and positioning of the institution. Besides, Wati et al. (2024) in their study found that the image of the institution has a positive effect on students’ perceptions of the quality of the educational service. Also, Bowden et al. (2021) highlight in their research the importance of emotional commitment to generate institutional reputation, stating that social responsibility and community engagement activities foster this commitment among students and stakeholders. For their part, Harymawan et al. (2023) add that reputation is a crucial aspect that will have a differentiating effect on institutions in the educational sector. Likewise, Stein and Wei (2024) argue that student satisfaction is important for building a favorable institutional reputation. For their part, Massucci and Docampo (2019) state that periodically evaluating academic reputation and social responsibility initiatives makes an institution more attractive to talented students and professors, which in turn leads to an improvement in academic reputation.
According to Rasoolimanesh et al. (2023), social responsibility, which encompasses the actions of universities to contribute positively to society and the environment, can influence students’ decisions regarding their choice and retention at an educational institution. Although their study focused on international student mobility, it suggests potential implications for student retention in general. So too, other studies, such as those of Chrysikos et al. (2017) and Cole et al. (2014), found that satisfaction and social integration are key factors in student retention. Although they did not focus specifically on SR, their findings suggest that social responsibility initiatives, by enhancing the student’s overall experience and connection to the institution, could contribute positively to retention. In this context, Ladyshewsky (2013) highlights that constant and meaningful interaction between instructors and students enhances the educational experience and encourages retention. In the same vein, Vander Schee (2008) highlights those strategies such as academic support, time management and commitment to goals are crucial to keep students engaged and avoid attrition.
Alshamsi and Mohebi (2022), emphasize that good academic advising not only helps students plan their studies, but also increases their sense of belonging and commitment to the institution. Likewise, Leary et al. (2021) demonstrated that successful social integration leads to greater commitment to the institution and improves retention rates.
1.1.2 Influence of loyalty on student retention of university students
Snijders et al. (2020) report that the intensity of the emotional bond students develops with their educational institution and the tangible manifestations of this bond demonstrate student loyalty. Students exhibit a spectrum of attitudes and behaviors that reflect and reinforce their sense of belonging and commitment to the institution. Student participation in various extracurricular activities, positive recommendations, and the expressed intention to continue in the same institution demonstrate this loyalty (Phuengrod et al., 2021; Snijders et al., 2020). Along the same lines, Cardona et al. (2023) argue that student retention is an important factor that influences graduation rates and the overall effectiveness of the institution. Besides, Xuerong and Kanjanapathy (2024) report that they evaluate institutional performance using student retention rates to demonstrate its effectiveness. In this context, Chandra et al. (2019) and Nguyen et al. (2024) found that factors such as service quality and institutional image influence student satisfaction, which leads to student retention. In fact, Khashab et al. (2022), also confirm that loyalty contributes to increased student retention and institutional success.
Research by Osman and Saputra (2019) and Tóth and Surman (2019) highlights that service quality is a key factor affecting student satisfaction and, consequently, loyalty, which, in turn, positively influences a student’s decision to remain in school. For their part, Panda et al. (2020) highlight that interpersonal relationships with teachers and a pleasant environment are important factors in generating student retention.
In parallel, Tekel and Korumaz (2020), found in their study that strong relationships with students allow the development of loyalty and commitment to the institution.
Similarly, student retention is also influenced by innovative classroom strategies, as well as project-based learning and problem-solving methods (Egbes and Ajaja, 2023; Rumahlatu and Sangur, 2019). Complementing these results, Kanduri and Radha (2023) identified that student loyalty is generated by perceived satisfaction and the teacher’s teaching method.
The theoretical basis affirms that those private educational institutions that execute strategies to develop student loyalty will achieve high retention rates, as concluded in the studies made by Dzimińska et al. (2018), Iqbal et al. (2023), and Osman et al. (2024), that the quality of service, the perceived satisfaction of students and the trust generated influence loyalty and this is vital for institutions to be sustainable because it will be reflected in the permanence or retention of students.
1.1.3 Influence of institutional reputation on the loyalty an retention of university students
Institutional reputation, according to Akıllı (2023), is defined as “the overall impression and perception of an institution by various stakeholders, such as staff, service recipients, participants, the press, and the public.” So also, Kihl et al. (2018) describe it as “an enduring status categorization of an organization’s quality as perceived by external audiences and stakeholders.” In relation to student loyalty, Amegbe et al. (2019) add that it encompasses a psychological attachment based on feelings of identification and affiliation.
Whereas Chandra et al. (2019) and Nguyen et al. (2024) found that the reputation of the university, which is an important component of institutional reputation, has a significant impact on student satisfaction and loyalty. This suggests that a positive institutional reputation increases student loyalty.
What’s more, other authors have found that institutional reputation directly affects students’ loyalty to higher education institutions Bakrie et al. (2019) and Masserini et al. (2019). By the way, Dzimińska et al. (2018) emphasized that in the context of higher education, institutional reputation, which is usually based on strong branding, has become an important determinant of an institution’s competitiveness and status.
Above all, Wati et al. (2024) argue that students’ perceived service quality is positively related to the image of the institution, which reflects the academic and non-academic characteristics of the institution. In their research, Bowden et al. (2021) highlight that students’ emotional engagement determines an institution’s reputation. Besides, Khashab et al. (2022) also highlights that student engagement favors higher retention rates and contributes to institutional success. Along the same lines, Stein and Wei (2024) argue that increased satisfaction favors student retention.
Bowden et al. (2021) and Harymawan et al. (2023) found that emotional engagement, well-being, and learning had a significant impact on institutional reputation, which was a key factor in student retention. However, Dzimińska et al. (2018) in their study, suggest that institutional location is a factor in determining the competitiveness and recognition of an institutional brand. On the other hand, Wati et al. (2024) state that students relate the institutional image with their perception of the quality of service they receive. Along the same lines, (Stein and Wei, 2024) reinforce that increasing student satisfaction is a way to build institutional reputation. For their part, Proctor et al. (2018) identified the key strategies to promote student retention as favorable relationships with teachers and the various support systems offered by educational institutions.
And based on these questions, literature review was conducted, and hypotheses were developed regarding the influence of loyalty, social responsibility, and institutional reputation on student retention, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Figure 1. Proposed theoretical model.
2 Method
2.1 Methodological approach
The aim of this study is to develop an explanatory model through empirical research and examine the impact of corporate reputation, social responsibility and student loyalty on student retention in private educational institutions. We adopted a non-experimental, cross-sectional, quantitative design because it allows the collection and analysis of data at a specific point and allows easy identification of relationships between variables without manipulating the research environment of the study (Hair et al., 2019).
2.2 Research questions
Based on the literature previously mentioned, the following research questions were formulated:
1. How does social responsibility influence the loyalty and retention of university students, as well as their institutional reputation?
• What influence does loyalty have on student retention?
• What is the effect of institutional reputation on the loyalty and student retention of university students in their institutions?
Hypotheses were developed as shown in Figure 1.
2.3 Sample and its characteristics
The sample consisted of 409 students and graduates of Peruvian and foreign higher education institutions. Random convenience sampling was used to facilitate the data collection process, ensuring that participants were selected based on their immediate availability and accessibility. To mitigate possible biases, efforts were made to diversify the sample within logistical constraints, including data collection in different Peruvian and foreign university institutions and at different times of the year.
Of the participants, 44% (n = 180) were men and 56% (n = 229) were women; 37% (151) were students and 63% (258) were graduates. Regarding marital status, 39% (158) were single, 54% (213) were married, 26% (26) were cohabiting and 3% (12) were divorced. The mean age of the participants was 34.4 years, with ages ranging from 18 to 69 years. Regarding place of residence, 10% (42) were in Uruguay, 11% (43) in Ecuador, 8% (33) in Colombia and 71% (291) in Peru. As can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1
Table 1. Sociodemographic profile.
2.4 Instruments
The following measurement instruments were used.
2.4.1 Social responsibility (SR)
Social responsibility was measured using a questionnaire created by Quezado et al. (2022) and validated in the Peruvian context by Cabrera-Luján et al. (2023). It consists of 7 items on a Likert scale 1–5 (where 1 represents totally disagree; 2 disagree, 3 neither agree nor disagree, 4 agree and 5 totally agree). It reported good reliability (α = 0.938) and validity (CFI = 0.957, SRMR = 0.047, RSMEA = 0.071).
2.4.2 Institutional reputation (IR)
Questionnaire created by Jalilvand et al. (2017) and validated in the Peruvian context by Cabrera-Luján et al. (2023). It consists of 4 items on a Likert scale with 5 response options (where 1 represents totally disagree; 2 disagree, 3 neither agree nor disagree, 4 agree and 5 totally agree). It reported good reliability (α = 0.949) and validity (CFI = 0.957, SRMR = 0.047, RSMEA = 0.071).
2.4.3 Student retention (RT)
Questionnaire designed by Saleh et al. (2015) and validated in the Peruvian context by Cabrera-Luján et al. (2023). It consists of 2 items in a Likert scale with five response options (where 1 represents totally disagree; 2 disagree, 3 neither agree nor disagree, 4 agree and 5 totally agree). It reported good reliability (α = 0.904) and validity (CFI = 0.957, SRMR = 0.047, RSMEA = 0.071).
2.4.4 Loyalty (LY)
Questionnaire was developed by Dagger et al. (2011) and validated by Zhang et al. (2021) in Chinese university students. It consists of 3 Likert-scale items with five response options (where 1 represents strongly disagree; 2 disagree, 3 neither agree nor disagree, 4 agree, and 5 strongly agree). It reported good reliability (α = 0.904) and validity (χ 2/df = 4.09, CFI = 0.929, RSMEA = 0.068).
2.5 Data collection and methods of analysis
Given that the loyalty scale was validated in English, it was back translated and adapted to the Peruvian context by means of two focus groups (Beaton et al., 2000). First, a certified translator oversaw the initial translation of the research instrument. Then, adjustments were made to ensure its adaptation to the local environment through focus groups conducted on two occasions, the first for the adaptation of the semantics and the second resulted in the validation of the modifications of the first one, leaving the questionnaire ready for application. The reliability of the scale, as well as its psychometric properties, was tested using the Partial Least Square PLS-SEMB (Hair et al., 2017).
Data collection was carried out using a Google Form, via email and social networks, such as WhatsApp. Once collected, the data were processed and subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS v.26 and AMOS v.24.
In the data analysis, Partial Least Square PLS-SEM was used to test the hypotheses. PLS- SEM is a comprehensive multivariate statistical analysis approach that includes measurement and structural components to simultaneously examine the relationships between each of the variables in a conceptual model, which has the characteristic of multivariate analysis, i.e., it involves a number of variables equal to or greater than three (Hair et al., 2013). In addition, PLS-SEM was employed in the present study because it facilitates theory building (Hair et al., 2017). WarpPLS version 8.0 was used to perform the PLS-SEM analysis. This software was used because according to Kock (2014), WarpPLS provides options to use different algorithms for external and internal models in the calculation of latent variable scores, such as the path coefficient and the parameters associated with the p-value, identifying and considering nonlinear relationships in the structural model.
3 Results
The evaluation of a model using PLS-SEM is a two-step process that involves the evaluation of the measurement and structural models (Chin, 2010; Hair et al., 2011).
3.1 Evaluation measurement model
To assess the quality of reflective constructs, the convergent validity and reliability of the construct, i.e., internal consistency, must be assessed (Chin, 2010; Hair et al., 2011; Kock, 2015), and the indicators presented must be met (see Table 2).
Table 2
Table 2. Indicators for assessing convergent validity and reliability of constructs.
Table 3 shows that all the indicators evaluated are met. First, all loadings exceed the value of 0.7. Additionally, the construct shows good results overall, as both Cronbach’s Alpha and CR exceed the 0.7 threshold. Similarly, the AVE also meets the requirements, with all values being above 0.681. In addition, the values of the VIF Total Collinearity are below 3.632, which is within the acceptable range. Therefore, since all indicators are satisfactory, we proceed to the discriminant evaluation.
Table 3
Table 3. Results of the evaluation of the measurement model.
Discriminant validity provides an indication of the extent to which each construct is distinct from other constructs in the model (Chin, 2010). To meet discriminant validity the square root of the AVE for each construct must be greater than the highest correlation between the construct and other constructs in the model (Chin, 2010; Hair et al., 2011; Kock, 2014). Table 3 indicates that the square root of the AVE for all constructs is higher than the correlation with the other constructs, suggesting that the model exhibits adequate discriminant validity.
3.2 Evaluation of structural model
To evaluate the structural model, it is essential to verify and report two preliminary criteria: the significance of the path coefficients and the value of the R2 coefficient for the endogenous constructs. Each hypothesis is linked to a causal relationship in the structural model, representing the interactions between pairs of constructs. Path coefficients have been calculated for each relationship in the model, along with their respective p-values. While the path coefficients should be significant, the value of the R2 coefficient is highly dependent on the area of investigation. Chin (1998) suggests values of 0.67, 0.33 and 0.19 as, respectively, substantial, moderate and weak measures of R. In behavioral studies, a value of 0.2 for R2 is generally considered acceptable (Hair et al., 2014; Kock, 2013).
3.3 Influence of social responsibility on institutional reputation, loyalty and student retention
The findings indicate a significant positive effect of SR on LY (β = 0.2; p < 0.01), a significant positive effect of SR on RT (β = 0.12; p < 0.01) and a significant positive effect of SR on IR (β = 0.53; p < 0.01). This shows the importance of the social responsibility of higher education institutions in student retention and loyalty, as well as to improve their reputation in the community.
3.4 Impact of student loyalty on college student retention
The findings indicate a significant positive effect of LY on RT (β = 0.77; p < 0.01). In the global model, this is the relationship that presented the largest effect size indicated by the standardized β coefficient with a high statistical significance, which indicates that a higher student retention will be obtained in those university institutions whose students present a high loyalty.
3.5 Influence of institutional reputation on university student loyalty and student retention
The results indicate that institutional reputation exerts a small but statistically significant effect on student retention among university students (β = 0.02; p < 0.38). This finding suggests that a university’s reputation influences students’ decisions to continue their enrollment at the institution. Although the effect size is modest, its statistical significance positions it as one of the contributing factors to student retention.
In this study, the R2 for the IR, LY and RT coefficients were 0.28, 0.48 and 0.70, respectively. Therefore, all R2 values had relatively high and acceptable values. The values in this study suggest that the variables (SR, IR, and LY) account for a high percentage of the variance in RT. Table 4 and Figure 2 present the results of hypothesis testing and evaluation of path coefficients. For the overall model fit index, the six goodness-of-fit indices (Kock, 2014) were considered, with a confidence level of 95%, the efficiency indices are as follows:
• Average Path Coefficient (APC) and p < 0.05.
• Average R-squared (ARS) and p < 0.05.
• Adjusted Average Root Mean Square (AARS) > 0.02 and p < 0.05.
• Average block VIF (AVIF), acceptable si ≤ 5, ideally≤3.3.
• Average full collinearity (AFVIF), acceptable si ≤ 5, ideally≤3.3.
• Tenenhaus GoF (GoF), small≥0.1, medium≥0.25, large≥0.36.
Table 4
Table 4. Discriminant validity.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Structural model results.
In the case of the present study the six fit indices suggested that the model fit was more than acceptable: average path coefficient (APC) = 0.368, p < 0.001; average R2 (ARS) = 0.488, p < 0.001; average adjusted average R2 -squared (AARS) = 0.486, p < 0.001; average block variance inflation factor (AVIF) = 1.645 (acceptable if ≤5, ideally ≤3.3); average full collinearity variance inflation factor (AFVIF) = 2.541 (acceptable if ≤5, ideally≤3.3); and Tenenhaus GoF (GoF) = 0.629 (small ≥0.1, medium ≥0.25, large ≥0.36). The predictive validity of a construct can be confirmed when the value of the associated R2 coefficient is greater than zero. In this study, all the values of the endogenous variables in the model meet this criterion, suggesting acceptable predictive validity for the entire model.
4 Discussion
4.1 Effect of social responsibility on student loyalty, retention, and institutional reputation
According to the results of the first hypothesis (H1), social responsibility influences the loyalty of students in private educational institutions, these results are in agreement with those of Latif et al. (2021) who showed that university social responsibility (USR) positively predicts student loyalty, with perceived service quality, student satisfaction and trust in the university as key mediators. Similarly, Mostafa and Hamieh (2021) found that SR activities have a significant impact on students’ attitudinal and behavioral loyalty in the Lebanese education sector.
Also, Suranta and Rahmawati (2024) highlighted that higher education image and service quality measured the effect of SR on student loyalty in Indonesia. In the same vein, Wong et al. (2023) added that an institution’s brand reputation acts as a mediator between SR and student loyalty, suggesting that a positive perception of SR initiatives enhances loyalty through the institution’s reputation. So also, (Hossain et al., 2019). Research on the impact of CP on the health sector has shown that CP practices increase patient satisfaction and loyalty. These results are consistent with the notion that SR practices can increase loyalty among various stakeholders, including students at private institutions. The results of this study show that social responsibility plays an important role in motivating students in private educational institutions.
Social responsibility influences student retention in private institutions. There are several studies that have examined factors associated with student retention in higher education, such as (Thai and Tho, 2024) study that examined the impact of university service quality, student satisfaction, and change resistance on student privacy. Higher education institutions. Emphasizes service quality and student satisfaction in student retention. Similarly, Xuerong and Kanjanapathy (2024) indicated that the financial burden on students in higher education institutions indicated that student tuition fees and fees are the main cost of these institutions. Similarly, Al Hassani and Wilkins (2022) discussed the impact of organizational identification and institutional reputation on student satisfaction and behavior, noting that these factors play an important role in student retention. In terms of social responsibility, Nirmalasari et al. (2024) emphasized the social and emotional power of students to increase their concentration, attendance and learning ability. This suggests that creating a socially responsible environment in educational institutions can have a positive impact on student retention.
On the other hand, the results indicate states that social responsibility influences the institutional reputation of private educational institutions. This is consistent with the study by Rasoolimanesh et al. (2023) who found that demonstrating social responsibility practices not only contributes to the welfare of society, but also enhances the image and reputation of higher education institutions. In the same vein, Azeem et al. (2019) identified a positive relationship between the social responsibility of institutions and their reputation, indicating a strong link between these two factors. Besides, Chen et al. (2020) argued that maintaining social responsibility requires building and maintaining external social capital, which improves corporate reputation. In addition, Taamneh Mohammad et al. (2022) found various corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices, including ethical, philanthropic, and legal aspects, significantly improve the reputation of universities, especially in developing countries such as Jordan. Furthermore, other authors believe that the implementation of social responsibility in universities and involvement in student misconduct and humanitarian activities helps to improve the institution’s reputation (Berei, 2020; Jie and Huam, 2019). Furthermore, Prodanova et al. (2021) emphasized that perceived organizational support has a significant impact on student satisfaction, which affects the reputation of the institution.
4.2 Effect of college student loyalty on student retention
The research results support that student loyalty affects student retention (Bakrie et al., 2019; Lee and Seong, 2020; Ong et al., 2023; Sugiharto et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2024; Xuerong and Kanjanapathy, 2024). These authors analyzed this relationship in detail and concluded that the relationship between the factors was associated with student loyalty and subsequent student retention. Likewise, in higher education, factors such as the quality of student instructors, institutional involvement, and reputation play an important role in increasing student loyalty (Bakrie et al., 2019; Snijders et al., 2020). Likewise, the commitment-trust theory positively supports student loyalty, promoting the development of strong relationships and a positive institutional image (Bakrie et al., 2019; Snijders et al., 2020). Furthermore, an institution’s reputation, along with service quality and student satisfaction, has a significant impact on student loyalty and retention (Bakrie et al., 2019; Sugiharto et al., 2021). The financial burden on students in the country is high, as tuition fees are the primary source of revenue for private institutions (Xuerong and Kanjanapathy, 2024). Thus, strategies to increase student loyalty by improving service quality, satisfaction, and engagement are critical to the sustainability and success of these institutions (Jie and Huam, 2019; Wang et al., 2024). Furthermore, the recognition of training and development programs for teachers and staff as a tool to enhance satisfaction, loyalty, and retention underscores the importance of investing in human resources to enhance the overall student experience (Mampuru et al., 2024).
4.3 Influence of institutional reputation on university student loyalty and retention
This result is supported by Bakrie et al. (2019) who found in their study that there is a statistically significant relationship between university reputation and student loyalty, emphasizing the role of the reputation of institutions in fostering student loyalty. Besides, Wong et al. (2023) argue in their findings that institutional reputation is an influence on student loyalty, as well as satisfaction and service quality. Undoubtedly, Mulyono et al. (2020) found that reputation is an important predictor of loyalty in higher education, emphasizing its mediating role in shaping student loyalty. These results support the idea that an institution’s reputation plays an important role in shaping student loyalty. Indeed, Hasan and Hosen (2022) emphasized the relationship between university reputation and service quality, satisfaction, and student loyalty.
Finally, the findings shown that institutional reputation influences student retention in private educational institutions. Various studies carried out support this rejection since the important factors for student retention are service quality, student satisfaction and loyalty, and not only institutional reputation (Al Hassani and Wilkins, 2022; Forid et al., 2022; Moslehpour et al., 2020; Tan et al., 2022). Although institutional reputation can influence student loyalty (Raja, 2023), it does not determine student retention, suggesting the involvement of other intervening variables in this relationship. Furthermore, higher organizational reputation could instill high expectations in students, which they might not meet, resulting in higher dissatisfaction and lower organizational retention (Sears et al., 2017).
Private higher education institutions must retain recruited students in order to maintain their institutional budgets (Le et al., 2021). In addition, it has been highlighted that low student retention can have a negative impact on the reputation of the institution (Adeola Atobatele et al., 2024). However, studies have shown that student satisfaction, service quality, and barriers to change mediate the relationship between service quality and student behavioral intentions in private universities (Tan et al., 2022). So also, Forid et al. (2022) suggest that institutions that fail to ensure student retention jeopardize their reputation, financial gains, and possibly their survival. On the other hand, Moslehpour et al. (2020) indicate that student satisfaction mediates the influence of service quality on institutional reputation. Likewise, Varol and Catma (2021) and (Wade, 2019) noted that institutional selectivity and governance structures are also significant predictors of student retention.
4.4 Theoretical implications
The research expands the comprehension of quality management theory (Grönroos, 1984), incorporating variables pertaining to educational quality, such as social responsibility, institutional reputation, and student loyalty as significant factors in the retention of university students. This approach offers a more comprehensive perspective on the dynamics that influence student retention. The findings substantiate the theoretical significance of social responsibility, not only as an ethical practice but also as a strategic factor that directly impacts student loyalty and retention. This suggests the necessity to integrate social responsibility more prominently into theoretical models of university management. Furthermore, the study elucidates a more complex relationship between institutional reputation and retention than previously postulated, challenging certain prior theoretical assumptions and indicating the need to re-evaluate existing models of institutional reputation within the context of higher education.
The mediating role of student loyalty between various institutional factors and retention emerges as a significant theoretical finding. This contributes to a more nuanced understanding of how student retention is developed and maintained, underscoring the importance of considering loyalty as a central construct in retention models. These theoretical insights provide a solid basis for future research and the development of more accurate models in the field of higher education management.
4.5 Practical implications
Educational institutions should prioritize and integrate USR practices into their overall strategies, not only as an ethical obligation, but as an effective tool to improve student loyalty and retention. It is crucial to implement specific programs to cultivate student loyalty, such as student experience improvements, mentoring programs, and opportunities for participation in the university community. Effective communication about social responsibility initiatives and other factors that influence reputation and loyalty is critical, making sure students are aware of and value these efforts. Take a more holistic approach to their retention strategies, considering the interplay between MSW, reputation, loyalty, and other institutional factors. In addition, it is crucial to train academic and administrative staff on the importance of SR and its role in fostering student loyalty and retention. In addition, institutions can develop more personalized services and programs that address the specific needs of their student population, based on an understanding of the factors that influence loyalty and retention.
5 Conclusion
The results of this study highlight the importance of SR in university educational institutions. SR practices had a significant impact on student acceptance. They aspire to sustain a lasting connection with the institution. Furthermore, the identification of SR as a factor influencing student retention holds significant implications for institutional strategy, student experience management, and competitive positioning in the education market. Researchers discovered that student loyalty significantly predicts retention, highlighting its importance in retention strategies and institutional reputation. Research indicates that while an institution’s reputation may not directly correlate with retention, it positively impacts student trust and satisfaction, thereby enhancing institutional loyalty. Finally, specific SR activities such as community projects, environmental sustainability programs, and commitment to social causes can significantly contribute to enhancing an organization’s image and reputation. These results highlight the importance of integrating SR into a CSO’s overall strategy. This is not only an ethical obligation but also a critical element for the success and long-term sustainability of institutions of higher learning.
5.1 Limitations and recommendations
It is known that selecting a convenience sample comes with limitations, including a lack of representativeness and potential bias in participant selection. To minimize these effects, we implemented the following steps: We ensured quality control in both data collection and analysis by providing a variety of data collection centers by institution and country. Moreover, the cross-sectional nature of data collection can be a limiting factor in establishing causal relationships between variables (Finkel, 1995). Future studies should conduct longitudinal investigations of these variables. Because the variables are self-reported measures, the results may be biased (Podsakoff et al., 2003). This comprehensive study lays the groundwork for future research on the influence of various factors. Future research would benefit from expanding the analysis to include more institutional and cultural contexts, as well as using longitudinal methods to better understand how the influence of these factors changes over time. We also recommend examining potential mediators or moderators of the relationship, including quality of education, institutional support, and socioeconomic factors.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by the study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Peruvian Union University with a protocol code (2023-CE-EPG-00115). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
RA-T: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. RM-H: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Writing – original draft. SH-C: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Writing – original draft. CA-R: Investigation, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Akıllı, C. (2023). Scale development for school administrators’ corporate reputation building studies. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 37, 147–163. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-06-2022-0219
Al Hassani, A. A., and Wilkins, S. (2022). Student retention in higher education: the influences of organizational identification and institution reputation on student satisfaction and behaviors. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 36, 1046–1064. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-03-2022-0123
Alshamsi, A., and Mohebi, L. (2022). Academic advising policy and procedure in a selected Federal University in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educ. Res. 21, 197–218. doi: 10.26803/ijlter.21.7.11
Amegbe, H., Hanu, C., and Mensah, F. (2019). Achieving service quality and students loyalty through intimacy and trust of employees of universities. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 33, 359–373. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-09-2017-0251
Atobatele, F. A., Kpodo, P. C., and Obiageli Eke, I. (2024). Strategies for enhancing international student retention: A critical literature review. Open Access Research Journal of Science and Technology 10, 035–045. doi: 10.53022/oarjst.2024.10.2.0050
Azeem, M., Taib, C. A. B., and Lazim, H. M. (2019). A study on mediating effect of institute reputation on relationship between institute social responsibility and student loyalty: Exploring concerns in Pakistani private HEIs. Management Science Letters, 2093–2104. doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2019.6.024
Bakrie, M., Sujanto, B., and Rugaiyah, R. (2019). The influence of service quality, institutional reputation, students’ satisfaction on students’ loyalty in higher education institution. Int. J. Educ. Vocat. Stud. 1:1615. doi: 10.29103/ijevs.v1i5.1615
Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., and Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25, 3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Berei, E. B. (2020). The Social Responsibility among Higher Education Students. Education Sciences 10:66. doi: 10.3390/educsci10030066
Bowden, J. L.-H., Tickle, L., and Naumann, K. (2021). The four pillars of tertiary student engagement and success: a holistic measurement approach. Stud. High. Educ. 46, 1207–1224. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1672647
Cabrera-Luján, S. L., Sánchez-Lima, D. J., Guevara-Flores, S. A., Millones-Liza, D. Y., García-Salirrosas, E. E., and Villar-Guevara, M. (2023). Impact of corporate social responsibility, business ethics and corporate reputation on the retention of users of third-sector institutions. Sustainability 15:781. doi: 10.3390/su15031781
Cardona, T., Cudney, E. A., Hoerl, R., and Snyder, J. (2023). Data mining and machine learning retention models in higher education. J. Coll. Stud. Retent. 25, 51–75. doi: 10.1177/1521025120964920
Chandra, T., Hafni, L., Chandra, S., Purwati, A. A., and Chandra, J. (2019). The influence of service quality, university image on student satisfaction and student loyalty. BIJ 26, 1533–1549. doi: 10.1108/BIJ-07-2018-0212
Chen, Z., Chen, D., Peng, M. Y.-P., Li, Q., Shi, Y., and Li, J. (2020). Impact of Organizational Support and Social Capital on University Faculties’ Working Performance. Frontiers in Psychology 11. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.571559
Chin, M. G. (1998). “The partial least squares approach to structural formula modeling” in Modern methods for business research. ed. G. A. Marcoulides (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 295–336.
Chin, W. W. (2010). “How to write up and report PLS analyses” in Handbook of partial least squares. eds. V. E. Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, and H. Wang (Berlin: Springer), 655–690.
Chrysikos, A., Ahmed, E., and Ward, R. (2017). Analysis of Tinto’s student integration theory in first-year undergraduate computing students of a UK higher education institution. Int. J. Comp. Educ. Dev. 19, 97–121. doi: 10.1108/IJCED-10-2016-0019
Cole, M. T., Shelley, D. J., and Swartz, L. B. (2014). Online instruction, e-learning, and student satisfaction: a three year study. The international review of research in open and distributed. Learning 15:1748. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i6.1748
Dagger, T. S., David, M. E., and Ng, S. (2011). Do relationship benefits and maintenance drive commitment and loyalty? J. Serv. Mark. 25, 273–281. doi: 10.1108/08876041111143104
Dzimińska, M., Fijałkowska, J., and Sułkowski, Ł. (2018). Trust-based quality culture conceptual model for higher education institutions. Sustain. For. 10:2599. doi: 10.3390/su10082599
Egbes, N. L., and Ajaja, O. P. (2023). Effects of guided discovery and problem-solving instructional strategies on achievement and retention of biology students in delta central senatorial district, Nigeria. Eur. J. Educ. Stud. 10:4793. doi: 10.46827/ejes.v10i4.4793
Forid, M. S., Hafez, M., and Khan, W. (2022). Student Satisfaction and Retention: Impact of Service Quality and Digital Transformation. Marketing and Management of Innovations 13, 152–163. doi: 10.21272/mmi.2022.4-14
Grönroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. Eur. J. Mark. 18, 36–44. doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000004784
Hair, J. W., Babin, B., and Anderson, R. (2013). Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th Edn: Pearson Prentice Hall. Pearson Education.
Hair, J. F., Hult, M., Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M., Castillo Apraiz, J., Cepeda Carrión, G. A., et al. (2019). Manual de partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd Edn: Sage.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling. Cham: Sage.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 19, 139–152. doi: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., and Kuppelwieser, G. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Eur. Bus. Rev. 26, 106–121. doi: 10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128
Harymawan, I., Minanurohman, A., Nasih, M., Shafie, R., and Ismail, I. (2023). Chief financial officer’s educational background from reputable universities and financial reporting quality. J. Account. Organ. Change 19, 566–587. doi: 10.1108/JAOC-12-2021-0195
Hasan, M., and Hosen, Z. (2022). Influence of University Service Quality on Student Satisfaction and Loyalty in Bangladesh. The Journal of Quality in Education 12, 169–181. doi: 10.37870/joqie.v12i19.319
Hossain, M. S., Yahya, S. B., and Khan, M. J. (2019). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) health-care services on patients’ satisfaction and loyalty – a case of Bangladesh. Soc. Responsib. J. 16, 145–158. doi: 10.1108/SRJ-01-2018-0016
Iqbal, S., Ashfaq, T., Taib, A. B., and Rizal Razalli, M. (2023). The effect of quality culture on service quality of public and private universities: a comparative analysis. PLoS One 18:e0283679. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283679
Jalilvand, M. R., Nasrolahi Vosta, L., Kazemi Mahyari, H., and Khazaei Pool, J. (2017). Social responsibility influence on customer trust in hotels: mediating effects of reputation and word-of-mouth. Tour. Rev. 72, 1–14. doi: 10.1108/TR-09-2016-0037
Jie, C. T., and Huam, H. T. (2019). Predictors of Reputation Through University Social Responsibility Practices in a Malaysian Private University: The Customer’s Perspective. Journal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication 35, 316–333. doi: 10.17576/JKMJC-2019-3503-19
Kanduri, S., and Radha, B. (2023). Study on the impact of services offered on student satisfaction and the satisfaction led word of mouth by students pursuing management education. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 37, 526–538. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-04-2022-0158
Khashab, B., Gulliver, S., Ayoubi, R., and Strong, C. (2022). Analysing enterprise resources for developing CRM framework in higher education institutions. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 35, 1639–1657. doi: 10.1108/JEIM-09-2021-0421
Kihl, L. A., Ndiaye, M., and Fink, J. (2018). Corruption’s impact on organizational outcomes. Soc. Responsib. J. 14, 40–60. doi: 10.1108/SRJ-12-2016-0217
Kock, N. (2013). Warp PLS 4.0 user manual (script warp systems). Available at: https://www.scriptwarp.com/warppls/#User_Manual
Kock, N. (2014). Advanced mediating effects tests, multi-group analyses, and measurement model assessments in PLS-based SEM. Int. J. E Collab. 10, 1–13. doi: 10.4018/ijec.2014010101
Kock, N. (2015). A note on how to conduct a factor-based PLS-SEM analysis. Int. J. E Collab. 11, 1–9. doi: 10.4018/ijec.2015070101
Ladyshewsky, R. K. (2013). Instructor presence in online courses and student satisfaction. Int. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn. 7:113. doi: 10.20429/ijsotl.2013.070113
Latif, K. F., Bunce, L., and Ahmad, M. S. (2021). How can universities improve student loyalty? The roles of university social responsibility, service quality, and “customer” satisfaction and trust. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 35, 815–829. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-11-2020-0524
Leary, M., Tylka, A., Corsi, V., and Bryner, R. (2021). The effect of first-year seminar classroom design on social integration and retention of STEM first-time, full-time college freshmen. Educ. Res. Int. 2021, 1–9. doi: 10.1155/2021/4262905
Lee, H. J., and Seong, M. H. (2020). A study on the effects of business service quality on satisfaction, commitment, performance, and loyalty at a private university. J. Asian Finance Econ Bus. 7, 439–453. doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no9.439
Mampuru, M. P., Mokoena, B. A., and Isabirye, A. K. (2024). Training and development impact on job satisfaction, loyalty and retention among academics. SA Journal of Human Resource Management 22. doi: 10.4102/sajhrm.v22i0.2420
Masserini, L., Bini, M., and Pratesi, M. (2019). Do quality of services and institutional image impact students’ satisfaction and loyalty in higher education? Soc. Indic. Res. 146, 91–115. doi: 10.1007/s11205-018-1927-y
Massucci, F. A., and Docampo, D. (2019). Measuring the academic reputation through citation networks via page rank. J. Informet. 13, 185–201. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2018.12.001
Moslehpour, M., Chau, K. Y., Zheng, J., Hanjani, A. N., and Hoang, M. (2020). The mediating role of international student satisfaction in the influence of higher education service quality on institutional reputation in Taiwan. International Journal of Engineering Business Management 12:184797902097195. doi: 10.1177/1847979020971955
Mostafa, R. B., and Hamieh, L. (2021). How CSR activities affect student attitudinal and behavioral loyalty in the Lebanese educational sector? Int. J. Custom. Relationsh. Mark. Manag. 13, 1–17. doi: 10.4018/IJCRMM.290416
Mulyono, H., Hadian, A., Purba, N., and Pramono, R. (2020). Effect of Service Quality Toward Student Satisfaction and Loyalty in Higher Education. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business 7, 929–938. doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.929
Nguyen, H. V., Vu, T. D., Saleem, M., and Yaseen, A. (2024). The influence of service quality on student satisfaction and student loyalty in Vietnam: the moderating role of the university image. J. Trade Sci. 12, 37–59. doi: 10.1108/JTS-12-2023-0032
Nirmalasari, N., Wahyudin, D., and Darmawan, D. (2024). Development of alternative thinking strategy curriculum design to improve academic, social and emotional competence. Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educ. Res. 23, 48–66. doi: 10.26803/ijlter.23.3.3
Ong, A. K. S., Prasetyo, Y. T., Dangaran, V. C. C., Gudez, M. A. D., Juanier, J. I. M., Paulite, G. A. D., et al. (2023). Determination of loyalty among high school students to retain in the same university for higher education: an integration of self-determination theory and extended theory of planned behavior. PLoS One 18:e0286185. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286185
Osman, A. R., Joarder, M. H. R., Hoque, M., and Jakowan, K. (2024). Student engagement, brand image and loyalty relationships: the mediating role of student satisfaction. J. Educ. E Learn. Res. 11, 311–321. doi: 10.20448/jeelr.v11i2.5553
Osman, A. R., and Saputra, R. S. (2019). A pragmatic model of student satisfaction: a viewpoint of private higher education. Qual. Assur. Educ. 27, 142–165. doi: 10.1108/QAE-05-2017-0019
Panda, C. K., Christopher, K., Paswan, A., Patel, D., and Sohane, R. K. (2020). Students perception on enrolment factors in their retention in higher agricultural education. Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2020, 107–113. doi: 10.9734/cjast/2020/v39i630565
Phuengrod, S., Wannapiroon, P., and Nilsook, P. (2021). The student relationship management system process with intelligent conversational agent platform. High. Educ. Stud. 11:147. doi: 10.5539/hes.v11n2p147
Proctor, S. L., Nasir, A., Wilson, T., Li, K., and Castrillon, P. (2018). Retention and persistence of African-American students in school psychology programs. Psychol. Sch. 55, 506–522. doi: 10.1002/pits.22124
Prodanova, J., San-Martín, S., and Jerónimo Sánchez-Beato, E. (2021). Quality Requirements for Continuous Use of E-learning Systems at Public vs. Private Universities in Spain. Digital Education Review 40, 33–50. doi: 10.1344/der.2021.40.33-50
Quezado, T. C. C., Fortes, N., and Cavalcante, W. Q. F. (2022). The influence of corporate social responsibility and business ethics on brand Fidelity: the importance of brand love and brand attitude. Sustain. For. 14:2962. doi: 10.3390/su14052962
Raja, E. D. O. (2023). Building student loyalty in higher education: the role of corporate reputation. F1000Research 12:1102. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.129077.3
Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Shafaei, A., Nejati, M., and Tan, P. L. (2023). Corporate social responsibility and international students mobility in higher education. Soc. Respons. J. 19, 1632–1653. doi: 10.1108/SRJ-12-2021-0505
Rumahlatu, D., and Sangur, K. (2019). The influence of project-based learning strategies on the metacognitive skills, concept understanding and retention of senior high school students. J. Educ. Learn. 13:104. doi: 10.11591/edulearn.v13i1.11189
Saleh, M. H. T., Ebeid, A. Y., and Abdelhameed, T. A. (2015). Customers’ perception of corporate social responsibility (CSR): its impact on word-of-mouth and retention. Innov. Mark. 11, 49–55.
Sears, C. R., Boyce, M. A., Boon, S. D., Goghari, V. M., Irwin, K., and Boyes, M. (2017). Predictors of student satisfaction in a large psychology undergraduate program. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie Canadienne 58, 148–160. doi: 10.1037/cap0000082
Snijders, I., Wijnia, L., Rikers, R. M. J. P., and Loyens, S. M. M. (2020). Building bridges in higher education: student-faculty relationship quality, student engagement, and student loyalty. Int. J. Educ. Res. 100:101538. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101538
Stein, G., and Wei, Y. (2024). Evaluating student satisfaction: a small private university perspective in Japan. High. Educ. Stud. 14:27. doi: 10.5539/hes.v14n2p27
Sugiharto, N. A., Hurriyati, R., and Gaffar, V. (2021). Creating student loyalty through reputation of higher education: an empirical study of Polytechnic in Bandung. Int. J. Bus. Rev. 4, 165–174. doi: 10.17509/tjr.v4i2.41080
Suranta, S., and Rahmawati, R. (2024). The role of higher education image and service quality on the effect of university social responsibility (USR) on student loyalty in Indonesia. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 16, 378–390. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-11-2022-0338
Taamneh Mohammad, M., Albdareen Rokaya, Q., Aladwan, S. A., and Taamneh Abdallah, M. (2022). The impact of corporate social responsibility on the reputation of universities within developing countries: Evidence from Jordan. Journal of Public Affairs 22. doi: 10.1002/pa.2807
Tan, P. S. H., Choong, Y. O., and Chen, I.-C. (2022). The effect of service quality on behavioral intention: the mediating role of student satisfaction and switching barriers in private universities. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 14, 1394–1413. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-03-2021-0122
Tekel, E., and Korumaz, M. (2020). School culture as a predictor of student loyalty in a turkish university. J. High. Educ. Sci. 10:205. doi: 10.5961/jhes.2020.382
Thai, T. T. O., and Tho, A. (2024). The impact of service quality on student retention: the mediating roles of student satisfaction and switching barriers in private universities. Sci. Technol. Dev. J. 14, 1394–1413. doi: 10.32508/stdj.v27i1.4240
Tóth, Z. E., and Surman, V. (2019). Listening to the voice of students, developing a service quality measuring and evaluating framework for a special course. Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci. 11, 455–472. doi: 10.1108/IJQSS-02-2019-0025
Vander Schee, B. A. (2008). The utilization of retention strategies at church-related colleges: a longitudinal study. J. Coll. Stud. Retent. 10, 207–222. doi: 10.2190/CS.10.2.f
Varol, S., and Catma, S. (2021). Assessing the Impact of a Distance-Based Spatial Factor on Retention in the U.S. Colleges. Education Sciences 11:508. doi: 10.3390/educsci11090508
Wade, N. L. (2019). Measuring, Manipulating, and Predicting Student Success: A 10-Year Assessment of Carnegie R1 Doctoral Universities Between 2004 and 2013. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 21, 119–141. doi: 10.1177/1521025119831456
Wang, S., Phawitpiriyakliti, C., and Terason, S. (2024). Exploring the link: how service quality influences student satisfaction and fosters loyalty in educational institutions. J M M R 11, 47–63. doi: 10.60101/mmr.2024.270680
Wati, L., Dharma, S., Jadmiko, P., and Sugiarti, T. (2024). Measurement of higher education SERVIVE quality using HEDPERF and HIEDQUAL importance performance analysis methods. J. Apresiasi Ekonomi 12, 1–9. doi: 10.31846/jae.v12i1.700
Wong, L. J., Ling, P. S., and Ling, T. H. Y. (2023). A conceptual framework for higher education student loyalty from the green marketing perspective. High. Educ. Skills Work Based Learn. 13, 387–402. doi: 10.1108/HESWBL-08-2022-0165
Xuerong, Z., and Kanjanapathy, M. (2024). The relationship between service quality and student retention in private higher education institutions in Malaysia. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 14:525. doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i1/20525
Zhang, D., Mahmood, A., Ariza-Montes, A., Vega-Muñoz, A., Ahmad, N., Han, H., et al. (2021). Exploring the impact of corporate social responsibility communication through social media on banking customer E-WOM and loyalty in times of crisis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18:4739. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18094739
Keywords: students retention, university students, institutional reputation, social responsibility, student loyalty
Citation: Albornoz-Toyohama RH, Mendigure-Hachircana R, Haro-Casildo S and Abanto-Ramírez CD (2025) Factors influencing student retention university students: an analysis of institutional reputation, social responsibility and loyalty. Front. Educ. 10:1499518. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1499518
Edited by:
Luis Portales Derbez, Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education (ITESM), MexicoReviewed by:
Francis Thaise A. Cimene, University of Science and Technology of Southern Philippines, PhilippinesNicoleta Dospinescu, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Romania
Copyright © 2025 Albornoz-Toyohama, Mendigure-Hachircana, Haro-Casildo and Abanto-Ramírez. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Carlos D. Abanto-Ramírez, Y2FybG9zYWJhbnRvQHVwZXUuZWR1LnBl