The impact of social influence on university choice

764 THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL INFLUENCE ON UNIVERSITY CHOICE Nguyen Thi Hai Hanh [email protected] Nguyen Thi Lan Anh [email protected] Tran Thi Huyen Dieu [email protected] Doan Thi Nhu Uyen [email protected] Faculty of Human Resources Economics and Management, National Economics University, Hanoi, Vietnam Abstract This study explores the relationship between social influence and students’ university choice. We will statistically examine relationships between herding, informational social influence, normative social influence and the decision to choose a university. We borrowed the scale adjustments of Baddeley (2010), Burnkrant and Cousineau (1975), and Ajzen (1991). Our sample of 502 students was collected from seven universities in Hanoi, Vietnam. After running regression, the results of our study indicate that there is an effect between social influence and university choice. Our findings also suggest high levels of herding, informational social influence, and a low level of normative social influence will positively impact students’ university choice. Keywords: Social Influence, University Choice, Herding, Informational Social Influence, Normative Social Influence 1. Introduction Nowadays, the competition among universities has been increasing, that creates both opportunities and difficultites for students’ university selection. According to statistics of the Ministry of Education and Training, in 2016, Vietnam has 223 universities, of which 163 public universities and 60 non-public universities, especially the formation of private sector in education creates competition among universities. In addition, the method of enrollment as well as the number of major are very diverse, the total number of enrollment quotas in universities over the total number of candidates is increasing year by year. That means candidates have more 765 university choice. The decision to choose a university is not only an unimaginable decision but also a complex process which is affected by many different factors. There are many reasons for students to make wrong university decisions, because they do not know what they are capable of and what they like. In fact, specifically, lots of high school students choose majors because of their family, their friends, the studying trend. That’s why many freshman and sophomore leave their universities to follow another one. There have been a few studies about factors affecting university choice but the number of studies is still quite limited. That shows university choice is a relatively new topic, has not much exploited yet. Most of the previous suggest influences from other people have an impact on the student's choice of university (Briggs and Wilson, 2007; Semela, 2010; Johnston, 2010; Joseph, Mullen, and Spake, 2012). However, the researches about influences from other people on university selection have only been mentioned, there is no in-depth study. Therefore, the research of the impact of social influence on the decision to choose a university is extremely necessary and makes sense. This research aims to explore how social influence affects students’ university choice as well as which the strongest factor of social influence affects students’ university selection is. We sought to answer the following questions: How does social influence affect students' decision to choose a university? Among the components of social influence, which factor has the strongest impact on the student's choice of university? From the research results, the authors will propose some solutions to make better university selection as well as to improve the quality of outputs for current universities. 2. Literature review Social influence Social influence is an important topic in experimental social psychology (Kelman, 1958). Kelman's theory of social influence (1958) proposes the attitudes, beliefs and behaviors of a person are affected by the attitudes, views and behaviors of others. Social influence occurs when a person’s awareness and actions are affected by others. This effect is intentional through mechanisms such as persuasion, obsession, imitation, psychological spread, and homogenization. Social influence occurs when a person's emotions, opinions or behaviors are affected by others intentionally or unintentionally. Social influence brings changes in attitudes and actions and those changes can be at different levels (Kelman, 1958). Social influence refers to the process of an individual adapting to their behavior, emotions or opinions as a result of interaction with others (Raven 1965; Abrams & Hogg, 2011). Cialdini 766 and Goldstein (2003) propose that in human effort on accuracy, alignment and maintaining a positive concept, people extend the influence of society and their surroundings. Social influence has many forms, each of which can affect psychological change in a particular way (Dishion, Piehler, and Myers, 2008). Social influence can be seen in relevance, socialization, peer pressure, obedience, leadership, persuasion, sales and marketing (Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson, 2003). When finding a university to enroll or making a decision to attend a university, students are easily affected by people around them. This social phenomenon prevails in many different forms and is the center of social interaction, personal identity and in identifying individual actions. Informational social influence Informational social influence is an influence to accept information from others as evidence of reality (Deutsch and Gerard, 1955). The influence of information is the acceptance and use of information from others to serve as evidence in a vague situation with the expectation that the decisions to be accepted are correct. The impact of informational social influence is effective when people are uncertain, vague or have a social disagreement. The impact of informational social influence is to accept information from others as evidence of reality, because the nature of the information given is ambiguous or due to social disagreement, the effect of information is effective when people are not sure. With regard to their decision, they are afraid of the decision to make the groundless and unacceptable by the people around them, and they assume that the people around have more knowledge about the implementation situation than they are. Kelman (1958) points out that informational social influence leads to privacy acceptance. Cialdini (1984) suggests that informational social influence describes the psychological and social phenomenon in which people copy the actions of others in an effort to perform behavior in one certain situations. When a person is in a situation where they are not sure about proper behavior, they will often look to others to find clues related to correct behavior. Normative social influence The normative social influence is an influence to meet other people's positive expectations (Deutsch and Gerard, 1955). The normative social influence occurs when the behavior of a person tries to be suitable, and loved or accepted by others. The demand of being approved and socially accepted is a part of our human life. The normative social influence often leads to public compliance, doing or saying something without believing in it (Kelman, 1958). Kelman (1958) shows that normative social influence is a behavior to match other people's positive expectations. 767 Individuals often make decisions according to existing standards or a similar situation that has happened and are accepted by that other people. In terms of choosing a university, when a student like vocational training because of his/her strength, but studying in a vocational college is not popular in society, so instead of deciding to choose the university a student likes, he/ she will choose a university which is in a current trend or are highly appreciated. Herding According to Keynes's theory (1930), herding can be defined as the phenomenon of individuals deciding to follow others and imitate group behaviors instead of making decisions by themselves on the basis of information. Keynes (1930) conceived that the decision to follow the crowd as a response to the uncertainty and personal awareness of their own ignorance: people could follow the crowd because they thought following crowd would be the best decision. The crowds are always unconsciously affected, they behave like primitive people, cruel people, unable to think, but only feel by image, by linking ideas, they are not steadfast and capricious. Besides, due to their physical condition, a crowd needs a leader who can give them instructions and teach them how to act. The impact of social influence on making a decision There are many studies which use social influence theory in their research model and the results show there is a positive or negative effect of social influences on decisions (Hui and Buchegger, 2009). Correll, Park, Judd, and Wittenbrink (2007) suggest the assessment of students’ sisters or brothers who study in the university is very important for students to make a decision about choosing a university because students believe in his/ her brother/sister’s experience. Chapman's (1981) model has divided two groups of major factors that influence a student's decision to choose a university. These are (1) individual student characteristics including: the student's educational level, desire to attend; and (2) external influences such as the advice of meaningful people to students (influential individuals, college costs, efforts to communicate with students of universities). Chapman (1981) with his research model has shown that factors in these two areas are available before students choose universities and apply for admission to the University. Chapman (1981) in his research model, based on the results of descriptive statistics he showed that individuals influence the decision to choose a student's university, the author thinks that students are strongly affected by persuasion, advice from their own friends and family. The influence of these individuals can be done in three ways: (1) Friends and family expect students to attend a specific school, (2) Friends and family will Directly recommend students to study for that reason, (3) In 768 the case of a close friend, it is the place where the best friend decides to take the exam will affect the decision of the individual student. In addition, a number of other studies have used the results of Chapman (1981) and developed on other research models on factors affecting students' university choice. The research of Cabera and La Nasa (2000) based on the school choice model of Chapman (1981) suggest the desire of others are also important factors affecting students' choice of university choice. Stage and Hossler (1989) show in addition to strong influence from parents, friends also have a significant influence on the students’ decision to choose a university. Besides, not only parents, siblings, friends but also individuals in the university have a strong influence on the decision to choose a student's university (Stage and Hossler, 1989). In the context of Vietnamese education, the opinion of high school teachers may also affect the students' decision to choose a university. The greater the orientation of the important people (who have a big impact on the students' decisions such as parents, friends, teachers, etc ...) is, the higher the tendency to choose that university is (Stage and Hossler, 1989). Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: Herding has a positive impact on students' university choice. Hypothesis 2: Informational social influence has a positive impact on students' university choice. Hypothesis 3: Normative social influence has a positive impact on students' university choice. 3. Method Instrumentation Our study used the Likert scale of 5 points from 1 - "absolutely not agree" to point 5 - "absolutely agree" for both dependent and independent variables based on the scale listed in Table 1. Table 1 below gives a summary of the variable list and the derived scale of variables used: Table 1: Variable Factor Variable Content References Herding UT1 I chose my university because it is a learning trend today. Applied scale adjustments of Baddeley (2010) UT2 I choose my university because of its reputation. UT3 I feel more confident and dignified when I am a student of my university. 769 Factor Variable Content References BC1 I chose my university because most of the successful people I know were my university’s students. BC2 I chose my university because most of my friends also chose this university. BC3 I chose my university because most of my relatives also attended this university. Information al social influence LK1 The advice of my parents influenced my decision to choose a university. Applied scale adjustments of Burnkrant and Cousineau (1975) LK2 The advice of family members (not parents) influenced my decision to choose a university. LK3 The advice of my friends influenced my decision to choose a university. LK4 The advice of my teachers influenced my decision to choose a university. LK5 The advice of my brothers/ sisters influenced my decision to choose a university. LK6 The advice of university counselor influenced my decision to choose a university. MM1 My parents' wishes influenced my decision to choose a university. MM2 My family members (not parents)’ wishes influenced my decision to choose a university. MM3 My friends' wishes influenced my decision to choose a university. MM4 My teachers' wishes influenced my decision to choose a university. NX1 The comments of individuals on books, newspapers, paper magazines influenced my decision to choose my university. NX2 The comments of individuals on the Internet or the university’s website influenced my decision to choose a university. 770 Factor Variable Content References NX3 The comments of individuals on radio and television influenced my decision to choose a university. Normative social influence QC1 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university, my parents would scold/ blame/ laugh at me. Applied scale adjustments of Burnkrant and Cousineau (1975) QC2 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university, my relatives (not parents) would scold/ blame/ laugh at me. QC3 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university, my friends would scold/ blame/ laugh at me. QC4 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university, my teachers would scold/ blame/ laugh at me. QC5 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university, my older generation would scold/ blame/ laugh at me. QC6 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university I am afraid I will not have a job after graduation. QC7 I chose my university because if I did not choose this university I am afraid I will have low income after graduation. QC8 I chose my university to study because if I did not choose this school, I could miss university. University choice QD1 The decision to choose this university to study is absolutely right. Applied scale adjustment s of Ajzen (1991) QD2 I am ready to recommend my university for younger generation. QD3 I would still decide to choose my university if I had another chance to decide. 771 Sampling and data collection We obtained our sample from freshmen in some Hanoi universities in Vietnam. This is the group of students who are most qualified for the survey about the decision to choose a university because freshmen are who have just passed the university entrance exam and have just decided to which university they choose. Therefore, a freshman can reminisce and recall his/ her university chose behavior more quickly and accurately. The surveys are taken at seven universities, they are National Economics University, Hanoi University of Technology, University of Construction, University of Commerce, University of Transport, Thuyloi Universtiy and University of Economics - Engineering Arts - Industry. We employed Hair, Anderson, Tatham, and William’s method (1998) in determining the target sample size. Hence our target sample size was 150. In the end, we collected 502 completed surveys. With primary data (collected through surveys), we analyzed the data by using SPSS software version 25.0. 4. Data analysis Table 2: Regression Model Summaryb Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin- Watson 1 .340a .116 .110 .77524 1.802 a. Predictors: (Constant), TT, QC, ĐĐ b. Dependent Variable: QĐ Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Collinearity Statistics B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF 1 (Constant) 2.310 .216 10.694 .000 QC -.253 .048 -.240 -5.224 .000 .843 1.186 ĐĐ .242 .058 .200 4.149 .000 .763 1.310 TT .314 .067 .211 4.672 .000 .874 1.145 a. Dependent Variable: QĐ The adjusted R square value of 0.11 indicates that the independent variable affects 11% of the variation of the dependent variable, the rest is 89% due to the out- 772 of-model variables and random errors. Durbin-Watson coefficient = 1,802, is in the range of 1.5 to 2.5, so there is no first-sequence autocorrelation phenomenon. Sig test F equals 0.00 <0.05, thus, multiple linear regression models are suitable for data sets and can be used. Table 2 illustrates the relationship between herding, informational social influence, normative social influence and university choice was found to be significant at (sig < 0.05, R-square = 11.60%), thus university choice is dependent on social influence and 11.60 % of the variance university choice can be explained by the changes in social influence. High herding is a predictor of higher university choice. For every incremental increase in herding index, we expect 0.242 of university choice index. High informational social influence is a predictor of higher university choice. For every incremental increase in informational social influence index, we expect 0.314 of university choice index. Low normative social influence is a predictor of higher university choice. For every incremental decrease in normative social influence index, we expect 0.253 of university choice index. Among the components of social influence, informational social influence has the strongest impact on the student's choice of university. 5. Discussion and conclusion The aim of our study was to explore how social influence affects students’ university choice. After testing 502 students, we found that social influence takes an impact on students’ university choice. There is a positive significant between herding and the decision to choose a university. Informational social influence affects university selection positively. In contrast, normative social influence have a negative effect on university selection. Our findings are the same to the results of many researchers (Gardner & Steinberg, 2005; Paez & Scott, 2007; Orth and Kahle, 2008; Scott-Parker, Watson, King, & Hyde, 2012). The number of universities has been increasing which makes student difficult to choose a good university. Because of social influence, students sometimes make wrong decisions. Therefore, students should think carefully about a university or a major they want to follow, believe in themselves, study hard and choose their suitable university regardless of opinions from people around. 6. References 1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211. 2. Baddeley, M. (2010). Herding, social influence and economic decision-making: socio-psychological and neuroscientific analyses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365(1538), 281-290. 773 3. Briggs, S., & Wilson, A. (2007). Which university? A study of the influence of cost and information factors on Scottish undergraduate choice. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(1), 57-72. 4. Burnkrant, R. E., & Cousineau, A. (1975). Informational and normative social influence in buyer behavior. Journal of Consumer research, 2(3), 206-215. 5. Cabera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2000). Understanding the College Choice Process New Directions for Institutional Research. Josey Bass, San Francisco. 6. Cialdini, R. B. (1984). The psychology of persuasion. New York: Quill William Morrow. 7. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 55, 591-621. 8. Correll, J., Park, B., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2007). The influence of stereotypes on decisions to shoot. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(6), 1102-1117. 9. Dishion, T. J., Piehler, T. F., & Myers, M. W. (2008). Dynamics and ecology of adolescent peer influence. 10. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The journal of abnormal and social psychology, 51(3), 629. 11. Gardner, M., & Steinberg, L. (2005). Peer influence on risk taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: an experimental study. Developmental psychology, 41(4), 625. 12. Gudjonsson, G. H., & Sigurdsson, J. F. (2003). The relationship of compliance with coping strategies and self-esteem. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19(2), 117. 13. Johnston, T. C. (2010). Who and what influences choice of university? Student and university perceptions. American Journal of Business Education, 3(10), 15-24. 14. Joseph, M., Mullen, E. W., & Spake, D. (2012). University branding: Understanding students’ choice of an educational institution. Journal of Brand Management, 20(1), 1-12. 15. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C. (1998). Black (1998), Multivariate data analysis. 16. Hui, P., & Buchegger, S. (2009, July). Groupthink and peer pressure: Social influence in online social network groups. In 2009 International Conference on Advances in Social Network Analysis and Mining (pp. 53-59). IEEE. 17. Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change. Journal of conflict resolution, 2(1), 51-60. 774 18. Orth, U. R., & Kahle, L. R. (2008). Intrapersonal variation in consumer susceptibility to normative influence: toward a better understanding of brand choice decisions. The Journal of social psychology, 148(4), 423-448. 19. Páez, A., & Scott, D. M. (2007). Social influence on travel behavior: a simulation example of the decision to telecommute. Environment and Planning A, 39(3), 647-665. 20. Scott-Parker, B., Watson, B., King, M. J., & Hyde, M. K. (2012). “They’re lunatics on the road”: Exploring the normative influences of parents, friends, and police on young novices’ risky driving decisions. Safety science, 50(9), 1917-1928. 21. Semela, T. (2010). Who Is Joining Physics and Why? Factors Influencing the Choice of Physics among Ethiopian University Students. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 5(3), 319-340. 22. Stage, F. K., & Hossler, D. (1989). Differences in family influences on college attendance plans for male and female ninth graders. Research in Higher Education, 30(3), 301-315.