Informatics in Medicine Unlocked 28 (2022) 100841

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Informatics in Medicine Unlocked

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/imu

Factors influencing service quality performance of a Saudi higher education

institution: Public health program students’ perspectives
Ola Ibrahim Ramzi a, *, Arun Vijay Subbarayalu b, Nouf Khalid Al-Kahtani c, Ahmed Al Kuwaiti d,
Turki M. Alanzi c, Amal Alaskar e, Sivasankar Prabaharan b, Vinoth Raman b,
Mohammed Suleiman M Gibreel f, Njoud Saleh Alameri g
a
College of Public Health & Accreditation Department, Deanship of Quality and Academic Accreditation, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), P.O. Box
1982, Dammam, 31441, Saudi Arabia
b
Quality Assurance Department, Deanship of Quality and Academic Accreditation, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982, Dammam, 31441, Saudi
Arabia
c
Department of Health Information Management and Technology (HIMT), College of Public Health, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982,
Dammam, 31441, Saudi Arabia
d
Department of Dental Education, College of Dentistry & Deanship of Quality and Academic Accreditation, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 40065,
Al-Khobar, 31952, Saudi Arabia
e
King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Nursing Administration Department, P.O. Box 964, Dahran, 31932, Saudi Arabia
f
Accreditation Department, Deanship of Quality and Academic Accreditation, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982, Dammam, 31441, Saudi Arabia
g
Prince Sultan Military College for Health Sciences (PSMCHS), P.O. Box 964, Dhahran, 34313, Saudi Arabia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study aimed to reveal the perception of students about the service quality performance of a Saudi university
Gulf culture using a modified CUL-HEdPERF scale and revealed the factors affecting students’ overall satisfaction towards
Higher education institutions service quality performance. An exploratory study design was adopted, and all students belonging to selected
Public health
public health programs (N = 3) at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU) were considered as the
Service quality performance
Students’ overall satisfaction
population for this study. All second, third, and fourth-year undergraduate students (N = 165) were administered
with a modified CUL-HEdPERF scale using the paper-based method. The scale consisted of three sub-scales
measuring factors related to (i) the Gulf culture area, (ii) professionalism in executing academic and non-
academic activities, and (iii) the institutional level, and overall satisfaction. One hundred thirty-three
completed questionnaires were received with the response rate of 80.6%. Overall, students’ satisfaction to­
wards service quality performance of IAU was acceptable (mean score 2.6–3.6). A multiple regression analysis
indicated that all three sub-scales were significant factors influencing students’ overall satisfaction (p < 0.05).
This study adds value to the existing literature by exploring the factors influencing students’ overall satisfaction
towards the service quality performance of a Saudi university. It would assist the policymakers in emphasizing
those factors related to the Gulf culture area along with others, thereby improve and maintain students’ overall
satisfaction towards service quality performance of universities in the Arab region.

1. Introduction achieving competitive advantage using service differentiation [1]. It is

defined as the difference between the customers’ expectations of service
In recent times, service quality has become as vital to all organiza­ and perceived service [2]. Moreover, it enhances customer satisfaction,
tions since it drives their marketing and financial performance. It has motivates the intention to return, and boosts recommendations [3].
turned as a critical element of competitiveness and acts as a source for Black et al. [4] stated that service quality performance information

* Corresponding author. College of Public Health & Accreditation Department, Deanship of Quality and Academic Accreditation, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal
University (IAU), P.O. Box 1982, Dammam, 31441, Saudi Arabia.
E-mail addresses: oiramzi@iau.edu.sa (O.I. Ramzi), ausubbarayalu@iau.edu.sa (A.V. Subbarayalu), nkalkahtani@iau.edu.sa (N.K. Al-Kahtani), akuwaiti@iau.edu.
sa (A. Al Kuwaiti), talanzi@iau.edu.sa (T.M. Alanzi), aalaskar@live.com (A. Alaskar), pbsankar@iau.edu.sa (S. Prabaharan), vrrangan@iau.edu.sa (V. Raman),
msgibreel@iau.edu.sa (M. Suleiman M Gibreel), n.alemeri@psmchs.edu.sa (N.S. Alameri).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imu.2021.100841
Received 5 November 2021; Received in revised form 29 December 2021; Accepted 29 December 2021
Available online 1 January 2022
2352-9148/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
O.I. Ramzi et al. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked 28 (2022) 100841

could be obtained from the main business factors which build up the non-academic activities” of the CUL-HEdPERF scale were combined into
strategic elements within the institution and key performance indicators a single item, followed by four new items were added in that sub-scale.
that aid in assessing quality. It also comprises the facts collected from Later, concerning the sub-scale, namely “Issues at the institutional level”
customers, including their comments and complaints. Apart from com­ of the CUL-HEdPERF scale, one item was deleted, one was modified, and
mercial sectors, service quality in higher education (HE) has been pro­ three new items were added. In addition to the above-said modification,
gressively recognized and gained more attention among policymakers of one global item was added to the scale. Accordingly, the modified
higher education institutions (HEIs) over the past decades since it plays version of the CUL-HEdPERF scale was developed, and it consisted of 05
a significant role in creating a necessarily qualified workforce for any items related to demographic information, 39 items measuring three
nation [5,6]. sub-scales, and one global item (see Appendix).
Moreover, the quality of the workforce is associated with the service In recent times, HEIs are paying more attention to evaluate and
quality of designing and delivering various services offered by HEIs [5]. improve their service quality performance to attract their stakeholders
Here, the term ‘service quality’ deals with students’ satisfaction since worldwide. HEIs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) are also
they are the primary stakeholders and customers of HEIs [6]. These HEIs becoming increasingly aware of the importance of quality in the
are intended to focus on measuring the service quality to attract and knowledge delivery due to increasing numbers of students are entering
retain the students by meeting their needs. Besides, significant service the educational institutions [9]. Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal Uni­
improvements in HE creates a competitive advantage for HEIs [3]. versity (IAU), formerly named as the University of Dammam (UOD) is a
On exploring the literature, researchers have utilized various scales leading academic and research university with 21 colleges serving the
such as SERVQUAL, SERVPERF, and HEdPERF to measure the service Eastern Province with a total student population of over 34,000. As a
quality in the HE sector [1,3,7]. Parasuraman et al. [2] a scale named renowned institution, it improves its curriculum and expands its aca­
SERQUAL in which the perceptions of service received is compared with demic capabilities in all disciplines. It also engages the public in
expectations (i.e.gaps) using five dimensions named tangibles, reli­ addressing environmental and community challenges. IAU provides
ability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. Subsequently, Cronin various programs under four clusters, namely, health, engineering, sci­
and Taylor [8] proposed a service quality scale termed SERPERF, which ence and management, and arts and education. Among these programs,
considers performance as the only measure of service quality, and it it offers programs, namely health information management and tech­
consists of 22 items and eliminates any consideration of expectations. nology (HIMT), public health, and environmental health under the
Firdaus [7] developed a performance-based measuring scale named College of Public Health. In addition, it offers various services to its
HEdPERF (higher education performance only) to assess the de­ stakeholders and meets their needs efficiently. Accordingly, this study
terminants of service quality in the HE environment. It consists of six was conducted with three-fold objectives: (i) to reveal the perception of
dimensions covering 41 items that include both academic & public health programs’ students about the service quality performance
non-academic aspects, reputation, access, program issues, and under­ of a Saudi university using a modified CUL-HEdPERF scale; (ii) to
standing. This scale is being evident specifically for measuring the ser­ compare the students’ overall satisfaction concerning gender and (iii) to
vice quality in the HE sector. reveal factors influencing the students’ overall satisfaction towards
Furthermore, Randheer [5] has recently developed a scale termed service quality performance, and to determine the association between
CUL-HEdPERF by adding Arab cultural aspects to the HEdPERF scale. the factors of the modified CUL-HEdPERF scale and students’ overall
Since various issues of the Gulf culture have been rooted in Saudi higher satisfaction.
education system, the CUL-HEdPERF scale is utilized to measure the
service quality of HE in Gulf cultural context. This scale was designed 2. Methodology
with 39 items in which 19 of them are related to Gulf cultural & insti­
tutional aspects linked to higher education, 12 items are derived from 2.1. Study design
HEdPERF [7], and 08 items are from original SERPERF scale [8]. Apart
from this, there are 06 items to cover the demographic information of The exploratory study design was adopted to study the perception of
the students. After confirmation factor analysis, the total number of students about the service quality performance of IAU using the modi­
items in the CUL-HEdPERF scale was reduced from 39 to 34. Thus, fied CUL-HEdPERF scale. This study was conducted between January
CUL-HEdPERF scale was observed with three sub-scales and 34 items, and March 2020.
namely “Issues related to the Gulf culture” (14 items), “Professionalism
in executing issues related to academic and non-academic activities” (13 2.2. Participants
items), and “Issues at the institution level” (07 items). Further research
was conducted to compare this CUL-HEdPERF scale with HEdPERF and All second, third, and fourth-year undergraduate students (N = 165)
SERVERF scales using the students’ perceptions towards HE perfor­ belonging to selected public health programs (N = 3) of the College of
mance. The results showed that the CUL-HEdPERF scale is significantly Public Health, IAU, were considered as the population for this study.
fit enough than others in assessing the service quality in HE in the Gulf Those selected public health programs include HIMT, public health, and
region [5]. However, this study was only limited to include the Arab environmental health. The authors physically visited the College of
cultural aspects to HEdPERF Scale and find out the fitness of three scales, Public Health for the data collection and distributed the modified CUL-
such as CUL-HEdPERF, HEdPERF, and SERVPERF in Saudi HE envi­ HEdPERF scale to all the participants (N = 165) using the paper-based
ronment. Further, that study considered the business students as its method. All the participants were explained about the questionnaire
study population, and it did not report the students’ perception of ser­ and requested to respond after filling the informed consent form. A
vice quality performance of their universities and the factors influencing stipulated period was provided for the participants to complete the
their satisfaction towards service quality performance. questionnaire. The ethical considerations were adhered to, informed
Based on this research gap, this study adopted the CUL-HEdPERF consent was obtained, and confidentiality and anonymity were assured
scale with addition, modification, and deletion of some items pre­ before collecting the data from the participants. Out of 165, 133
sented under its three sub-scales to develop a modified CUL-HEdPERF completed questionnaires were received with a response rate of 80.6%.
scale and assess the service quality performance in Saudi higher edu­
cation environment. While developing the modified version, three items 2.3. Instrument
under the sub-scale entitled, “Issues related to the Gulf culture” of the
CUL-HEdPERF scale were modified. Next, two items under the sub-scale, This study has modified the CUL-HEdPERF scale developed by
namely “Professionalism in executing issues related to academic and Randheer [5] with some alteration of items under the three factors. The

2
O.I. Ramzi et al. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked 28 (2022) 100841

modified CUL-HEdPERF scale used in this study consists of 45 items, in reported ‘True sometimes’ towards the factors related to the Gulf culture
which the first 05 items deal with the demographic information of the area; professionalism in executing academic and non-academic activ­
samples. The next 39 items were intended to capture three sub-scales ities; and institutional level as well as overall satisfaction are observed as
viz., (i) factors related to the Gulf culture area (14 items), (ii) factors 36.1%, 40.6%, 39.1%, and 34.6% respectively.
related to professionalism in executing academic and non-academic Further, in this study, Cronbach’s alpha reliability test was applied to
activities (16 items), and (iii) factors related to the institutional level find out the internal consistency of the modified CUL-HEdPERF scale
(09 items). In this study, these sub-scales were designated as factors used for data collection. The overall alpha coefficient value is observed
influencing students’ overall satisfaction towards the service quality as 0.96, in which the variables that measured the core element of this
performance. The 45th item is a global one designed to capture the questionnaire can be rated ‘excellent’ and are therefore considered
students’ overall satisfaction towards the service quality performance of reliable [12]. Besides, Cronbach’s alpha value for each sub-scale is
their respective universities. Each item consists of a statement with five described in Table 3. Furthermore, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) value
response options requiring the respondents to indicate their degree of of 0.903 denotes that the sample size was statistically significant for
agreement with it in ascending order: (i.e., Strongly disagree-1, confirmatory factor analysis with the principal component method.
Disagree-2, True sometimes-3, Agree-4, Strongly agree-5). Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (value = 3159.643) was also observed to be
significant (p < 0.05), indicating the adequacy of sample size. It is
2.4. Statistical analysis observed that the total variance explained the sum of squared loadings
as 66.088% after the varimax rotation method. Factor analysis extracted
The responses were subjected to statistical analysis using appropriate 39 factors, which conjointly explained 66.088% of the variance in the
statistical tools. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was students’ responses towards service quality performance of IAU.
evaluated using the Cronbach alpha reliability test. Descriptive statistics Based on performance grading criteria, the mean score of the sub-
were used for demographic data and the level of students’ satisfaction scale “factors related to the Gulf culture area” is observed as 3.62 and
towards each sub-scale. Further, the mean scores of responses over each graded as high quality. However, the mean score of sub-scale, such as
sub-scale in the questionnaire were categorized using a performance “factors related to professionalism in executing academic and non-
grading criterion used by Al Rubaish [10] and Al Rubaish et al. [11]. As academic activities” and “factors related to the institutional level” is
per this criterion, the mean score is classified as follows (i). High quality observed as 3.05 and 3.38, respectively, and graded as acceptable.
(3.6 & above), (ii). Acceptable (2.6–3.6), (iii) Improvement required Further, students’ overall satisfaction towards service quality perfor­
(below 2.6). An independent t-test was used to compare the students’ mance of IAU is found with a mean score of 3.40 and graded as
overall satisfaction concerning gender. A Chi-square test was applied to acceptable (Table 4). Besides, an independent t-test showed that there is
determine the association between the sub-scales of the modified no significant difference in overall satisfaction between male and female
CUL-HEdPERF scale and students’ overall satisfaction. Furthermore, the students towards service quality performance of IAU (p > 0.05)
influence of three sub-scales of the modified CUL-HEdPERF scale on (Table 5).
students’ overall satisfaction was assessed using multiple regression The results of the Chi-square test showed that there is a significant
analysis. association between all three sub-scales and students’ overall satisfac­
tion towards service quality performance of IAU (Table 6).
3. Results Multiple regression analysis represented that all three sub-scales of
the modified CUL-HEdPERF scale explained 47.9% of the total variation
Among respondents, 42.1% were male and 57.9% female. Concern­ in students’ overall satisfaction. The value of R (0.692) indicated a
ing nationality, all were Saudis, and 75.9% of them were between the positive relationship between the three sub-scales and the students’
age group of 19–21 years. The distribution of students in the selected overall satisfaction. All three sub-scales of the modified CUL-HEdPERF
programs was observed as 46.6% (HIMT), 30.8% (Environmental scale are observed to be the significant predictors influencing stu­
health), and 22.6% (Public health) (Table 1). Table 2 shows the re­ dents’ overall satisfaction towards service quality performance of IAU (p
sponses to the items concerned with students’ satisfaction towards the < 0.05) (Table 7).
service quality performance of IAU. The cumulative percentage of
‘Strongly Agree’ and ‘Agree’ towards the three sub-scales such as factors 4. Discussion
related to the Gulf culture area; factors related to professionalism in
executing academic and non-academic activities; and factors related to This study examined the perception of public health program stu­
the institutional level are observed as 58.6%, 54.8%, and 46.6% dents about the service quality performance of a Saudi university using a
respectively. Overall, 47.4% of students are satisfied with the service modified CUL-HEdPERF scale. From the findings, it is observed that only
quality performance of IAU. Only a very few percentages of students a few respondents have reported their disagreement towards all three
have reported ‘Strongly Disagree’ towards three sub-scales of the scale factors and the overall satisfaction with service quality performance.
used and overall satisfaction. However, the percentage of students Specifically, 58.6% of respondents (i.e., a cumulative percentage of
‘strongly agree’ and ‘agree’) have positively perceived the factors
Table 1 related to the Gulf culture area’ when compared to the remaining two
Demographic data. factors. Overall, 47.4% of public health program students are satisfied
Demographic Variables Frequency Percentage with service quality performance offered at IAU. On the contrary, it is
essential to focus on the percentage of respondents ranging from 34.6%
Age 19–21 101 75.9
22–24 32 24.1
to 40.6% who were found to be neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (i.e.,
Gender Male 56 42.1 True sometimes) with all three sub-scales and overall satisfaction.
Female 77 57.9 Further, this study observed that the students’ overall satisfaction
Nationality Saudi 133 100 towards service quality performance at IAU is graded as acceptable. This
Non-Saudi 00 00
finding is in accord with the results of previous studies in which the
Program HIMT 62 46.6
Public health 30 22.6 students’ satisfaction towards their university service quality was re­
Environmental health 41 30.8 ported as medium level [13,14]. Among three sub-scales, ‘factors related
Year 2nd year 55 41.4 to the Gulf culture’ is the only sub-scale graded as high quality by public
3rd year 47 35.3 health program students of IAU, since Saudi higher education is asso­
4th year 31 23.3
ciated with Islamic principles [15,16]. Moreover, students prefer the

3
O.I. Ramzi et al. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked 28 (2022) 100841

Table 2
Percentage of respondents towards sub-scales of modified CUL-HEdPERF scale.
Factors Sub-scales Strongly Disagree True Agree Strongly Total
disagree sometimes agree

1 Factors related to the Gulf culture area 0.8% 4.5% 36.1% 49.6% 9.0% 100%
2 Factors related to professionalism in executing Academic and Non-Academic 0.8% 3.8% 40.6% 45.8% 9% 100%
activities
3 Factors related to the Institutional level 1.5% 12.8% 39.1% 39.1% 7.5% 100%
Overall satisfaction 3% 15% 34.6% 33.8% 13.6% 100%

Table 3 Table 7
Reliability statistics. Multiple Regression analysis.
Factors Sub-scales Cronbach’s Number of Model R R Adjusted R Standard F value
alpha items Square Square Error of
Estimation
1 Factors related to Gulf culture area 0.90 14
2 Factors related to professionalism in 0.92 16 Students’ 0.692 0.479 0.467 0.730 39.512a (p
executing Academic and Non-Academic Overall = 0.000)
activities satisfaction
3 Factors related to Institutional level 0.89 09 a
Overall satisfaction 0.96 39 Significant at 0.05 level (p < 0.05).

students’ perception towards the non-academic and academic aspects of

Table 4 a university is found as above average.
Level of Students’ satisfaction towards service quality performance of IAU.
4.1. Gender difference in students’ overall satisfaction towards service
Factors Sub-scales Mean Standard Level
Deviation quality performance

1 Factors related to the Gulf 3.62 0.746 High

culture area Quality
Besides, this study found that there is no significant difference in
2 Factors related to 3.05 0.650 Acceptable students’ overall satisfaction towards service quality performance
professionalism in executing offered at IAU in terms of their gender. This finding might be due to the
Academic and Non-Academic uniformity adhered to the quality of services offered by IAU to both
activities
genders in terms of the Gulf culture, academic and non-academic ser­
3 Factors related to the 3.38 0.859 Acceptable
Institutional level vices, and facilities. In conformance with this finding, previous re­
Overall 3.40 1.000 Acceptable searches observed that there was no significant difference in students’
perception towards service quality in higher education in terms of
gender [18,19].
Table 5
Gender-wise comparison of students’ overall satisfaction towards service quality 4.2. Association between the sub-scales and the students’ overall
performance of IAU. satisfaction towards service quality performance
Category Mean Standard Deviation ‘t’ value p-value
Furthermore, all three sub-scales of the modified CUL-HEdPERF
Gender Male 3.45 0.952 2.642a 0.080 (p > 0.05)
scale showed a significant association with students’ overall satisfac­
Female 3.36 1.038
tion towards service quality performance offered at IAU. Factors related
a
Non-Significant at 0.05 level (p > 0.05). to professionalism in executing issues related to academic and non-
academic activities as well as factors related to the institutional level
is found to be linked with students’ satisfaction. These findings are in
Table 6
line with the earlier study done by Azam [20]. Notably, the Gulf culture
Association between sub-scales of the modified CUL-HEdPERF scale and stu­
dents’ overall satisfaction.
incorporated in Saudi higher education is found to be related to stu­
dents’ satisfaction towards service quality performance of IAU.
Factors Sub-scales Chi-square Degrees of p-
value freedom value
4.3. Influence of various factors on students’ overall satisfaction with the
1 Factors related to the Gulf culture 83.806a 16 0.000
service quality performance
area
2 Factors related to professionalism 82.282a 16 0.000
in executing Academic and Non- This study reveals that all sub-scales of the modified CUL-HEdPERF
Academic activities scale are found to be significant predictors of students’ overall satis­
3 Factors related to the 106.060a 16 0.000 faction towards the service quality performance of IAU. First, the factors
Institutional level
related to the Gulf culture area is observed as one of the significant
a
Significant at 0.05 level (p < 0.05). factors influencing students’ overall satisfaction towards service quality
performance of IAU. Accordingly, in the Arab region, the students’
language of instruction, communication, and content to be the Arabic perceptions towards service quality own its transformation as a result of
language [15]. On the other hand, public health program students of the commonness of the Islamic culture in educational institutions
IAU perceived the remaining sub-scales such as “factors related to pro­ [21–23]. Moreover, Al-Atiqi and Alharbi [21] stated that the quality in
fessionalism in executing academic and non-academic activities” and education combines the social fabric, the culture, the economy, and the
“factors related to institutional level” as acceptable. This finding is in politics of the community in which it functions. Next, the factors related
contrast to the results of Karatas et al. [17] who observed that the to professionalism in executing academic and non-academic activities
showed a significant influence on students’ overall satisfaction towards

4
O.I. Ramzi et al. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked 28 (2022) 100841

service quality performance of IAU. This finding is in line with Azam the students’ perception of service quality performance between public
[20], who observed that academic and administrative aspects of service and private universities in Saudi Arabian context using the modified
quality had significantly influenced the satisfaction of students in a CUL-HEdPERF scale. This study also recommends the HEI administra­
higher education environment. Leonnard [24] also found that appro­ tors to develop and implement appropriate strategies to enhance the
priate academic services provided by the university are among the fac­ service quality performance of their universities, thereby improve
tors of service quality influencing the students’ satisfaction. Another overall students’ satisfaction towards it.
study done by Ali et al. [25] reported that the HEdPERF’s service quality
factors, such as academic and non-academic aspects, showed a positive Ethical statement
impact on international students’ satisfaction in Malaysian public uni­
versities. In contrast, Darawong and Sandmaung [26] stated that pro­ The ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Institu­
fessionalism had no significant influence on students’ satisfaction. An tional Review Board (IRB) of Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University
earlier study by Keeley et al. [27] stated that professional competency, (IRB-2021-20-196), Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
embracing knowledge, communication skills, and the personality fea­
tures of faculty could improve effective teaching and serve student Informed consent statement
preferences.
Lastly, this study observed the factors related to issues at the insti­ Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the
tutional level as a significant predictor that influence the students’ study.
overall satisfaction towards service quality performance of IAU. This
finding is in accord with the results of previous studies that revealed the Data availability statements
student satisfaction towards university services such as academic pro­
grams offered, library and parking facilities, safety and security, and The data presented in this study are available on request from the
opening hours of the institution [24,28–31]. corresponding author.
Even though this study was conducted at a single public university, it
differs from the previous study by Randeer [5] that too done in Saudi
Sources of funding
higher education environment with the following facets: i) the current
study used a modified CUL-HEdPERF scale, ii) the responses are graded
Nothing to Report.
utilizing a performance grading criteria proposed by Al Rubaish [10]
and Al Rubaish et al. [11], iii) it addressed both the students’ perception
Author contribution
towards service quality performance and factors influencing their stu­
dents’ overall satisfaction towards service quality performance. Further,
Dr. Ola Ibrahim Ramzi (OIR) proposed the conception and design of
an association between the three sub-scales and students’ overall satis­
the study questionnaire. Dr. Ola Ibrahim Ramzi (OIR) and Dr. Nouf
faction was found. A gender-specific comparison of students’ overall
Khalid Al-Kahtani (NKA) contributed to acquisition of data. Dr Nouf
satisfaction towards service quality performance was performed.
Khalid Al-Kahtani (NKA), Dr Turki M Alanzi (TMA), Dr Amal Alaskar
(AA) and Njoud Saleh Alameri (NSA) prepared the original draft. Dr.
5. Conclusion
Ahmed Al Kuwaiti (AAK), Dr. Arun Vijay Subbarayalu (AVS), Dr. Siva­
sankar Prabaharan (SP) reviewed and edited the draft. Dr. Vinoth
This study developed a modified CUL-HEdPERF scale with three sub-
Raman (VR) and Dr. Mohammed Suleiman M Gibreel (MSG) carried out
scales, such as factors related to the Gulf culture area, professionalism in
the analysis and interpretation of data. Dr. Ola Ibrahim Ramzi (OIR)
executing academic and non-academic activities, and institutional level
approved of the final version of the manuscript.
and overall satisfaction. Among these factors studied, only “factors
related to the Gulf culture area” was graded as ‘high-quality’ by the
students of the selected public health programs at IAU, and the other two Declaration of competing interest
factors are graded as ‘acceptable’. Overall, the students’ satisfaction
towards service quality performance of IAU was graded as ‘acceptable’. The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
Further, there is no significant gender difference in students’ overall interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
satisfaction towards the service quality performance of IAU. All three the work reported in this paper.
sub-scales of the modified CUL-HEdPERF scale were significantly asso­
ciated with students’ overall satisfaction, and all are observed to be Acknowledgements
significant predictors of factors influencing students’ overall satisfaction
towards the service quality performance of IAU. Based on these findings, Nothing to Report.
this study suggests the policymakers could utilize the Gulf culture sub-
scale to be included in the service quality performance scale to assess Appendix A. Supplementary data
the students’ satisfaction towards service quality performance of HEIs in
the Gulf region. Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.imu.2021.100841.
Limitations and recommendations
References
The conclusion of this study is based on those responses of the stu­
dents from selected public health programs offered at a public university [1] Smith G, Smith A, Clarke A. Evaluating service quality in universities: a service
run by the Ministry of Higher Education, Saudi Arabia. Even though it is department perspective. Qual Assur Educ 2007;15(3):334–51. https://doi.org/
10.1108/09684880710773200.
claimed that the university chosen in this study is a public university and
[2] Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL. SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for
all the public universities have the same uniform regulations, it is rec­ measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. J Retailing 1988;64(1):12–40.
ommended to reveal the satisfaction of similar program students from [3] Nadiri H, Kandampully J, Hussain K. Students’ perceptions of service quality in
other universities to reach generalization. Future work should cover the higher education. Total Qual Manag 2009;20(5):523–35.
[4] Black S, Briggs S, Keogh W. Service quality performance measurement in public/
students of all colleges belonging to several public universities in Saudi private sectors. Manag Audit J 2001;16(7):400–5. https://doi.org/10.1108/
Arabia. Further, a comparative study could be conducted to ascertain EUM0000000005715.

5
O.I. Ramzi et al. Informatics in Medicine Unlocked 28 (2022) 100841

[5] Randheer K. Service quality performance scale in higher education: culture as a [18] Okumus A, Duygun A. Egitim hizmetlerinin pazarlanmasinda hizmet kalitesinin
new dimension. Int Bus Res 2015;8(3):29–41. ölçümü ve algiilanan hizmet kalitesi ile ögrenci memnuniyeti arasindaki iliski.
[6] Ada S, Baysal ZN, Erkan SSS. An evaluation of service quality in higher education: Anadolu Üni Sos Bilim Derg 2008;8(2):17–38.
marmara and Niğde Omer Halisdemir Universities’ department of education [19] Güzel-Sahin G. A research on expectation and perception of service quality in
students. Univ J Educ Res 2017;5(11):2056–65. https://doi.org/10.13189/ tourism education at university level in Ankara. Islet Arast Derg 2011;3(4):49–65.
ujer.2017.051122. http://www.hrpub.org. [20] Azam A. Service quality dimensions and students’ satisfaction: a study of Saudi
[7] Firdaus A. The development of HEdPERF: a new measuring instrument of service Arabian private higher education institutions. Eur Online J Nat Soc Sci 2018;7(2):
quality for the higher education sector. Int J Consum Stud 2006;30(6):569–81. 275–84.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2005.00480.x. [21] Al-Atiqi IM, Alharbi LM. Meeting the challenge: quality systems in private higher
[8] Cronin JJ, Taylor SA. Measuring service quality: reexamination and extension. education in Kuwait. Qual High Educ 2009;15(1):5–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/
J Market 1992;56(3):55–68. 13538320902741814.
[9] Al Kuwaiti A, Subbarayalu AV. Appraisal of students experience survey (SES) as a [22] Parahoo SK, Tamim RM. Determinants of student satisfaction in higher education:
measure the quality of higher education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: an an empirical study in Dubai. Int J Serv Econ Manag 2012;4(4):282–97. https://doi.
institutional study using six sigma model. Educ Stud 2016;41(4):430–43. https:// org/10.1504/ijsem.2012.050949.
doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2015.1043977. [23] Malarvizhi CA, Nahar R, Manzoor SR. The strategic performance of Bangladeshi
[10] Al Rubaish A. On the contribution of student experience survey regarding quality private commercial banks on post implementation relationship marketing. Int J
management in higher education: an institutional study in Saudi Arabia. J Serv Sci Emerg Trends Soc Sci 2018;2(1):28–33.
Manag 2010;3(4):464–9. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2010.34052. [24] Leonnard. The performance of SERVQUAL to measure service quality in private
[11] Al Rubaish A, Wosornu L, Dwivedi SN. Appraisal of using global student rating university. J Effic Responsib Educ Sci 2018;11(1):16–21. https://doi.org/10.7160/
items in quality management in higher education in Saudi Arabian university. eriesj.2018.110103.
iBusiness 2012;4(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.4236/ib.2012.41001. [25] Ali F, Zhou Y, Hussain K, Nair PK, Ragavan NA. Does higher education service
[12] George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference quality effect student satisfaction, image and loyalty? A study of international
11.0 update. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 2003. students in Malaysian public universities. Qual Assur Educ 2015;24(1):70–94.
[13] Eren D, Özgül E, Çullu-Kaygisiz N. Lisans düzeyinde turizm egitimi alan [26] Darawong C, Sandmaung M. Service quality enhancing student satisfaction in
ögrencilerin egitim memnuniyetlerinin belirlenmesi: Nevsehir Üniversitesi Örnegi. international programs of higher education institutions: a local student
Sos Bilim Enst Derg 2013;35(2):15–27. perspective. Mark High Educ 2019;29(2):268–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/
[14] Eskicumali A, Demirtas Z, Arslan S, Yarar I. Investigating university students’ level 08841241.2019.1647483.
of service quality in higher education. Online J Qual Higher Educ 2015;2(2): [27] Keeley J, Smith D, Buskist W. The teacher behaviors checklist: factor analysis of its
95–100. utility for evaluating teaching. Teach Psychol 2006;33(2):84–91.
[15] Abuhamdia Z. Speech and language unity: Arabic as an integrating factor. In: [28] Cardona MM, Yjj Bravo. Service quality perceptions in higher education
Luciani G, Salame G, editors. The politics of Arab integration. New York: Croom institutions: the case of a colombian university. Estud Gerenciales 2012;28(125):
Helm; 1988. p. 33–53. 23–9.
[16] Alsuood YA, Youde A. An exploration of cultural factors and their influence on [29] Farahmandian S. Perceived service quality and student satisfaction in higher
Saudi Arabian University Deans’ leadership perceptions and practices. Educ Sci education. IOSR J Bus Manag 2013;12(4):65–74. https://doi.org/10.9790/487x-
2018;8(2):1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8020057. 1246574.
[17] Karatas H, Alci B, Balyer A, Bademcioglu M. An examination of students’ [30] Khosravi AA, Poushaneh K, Roozegar A, Sohrabifard N. Determination of factors
perceptions of service quality dimensions in higher education. Anthropol 2016;24 affecting student satisfaction of Islamic Azad University. Procedia Soc Behav Sci
(1):389–98. 2013;84(2013):579–83.
[31] Berkoz L, Celik O. Campus satisfaction determinants of university students: case of
ITU. Int J Adv Res 2016;4(4):830–44.