Posted at FHSU

1. Campus Environment Matters: A Survey of Student Cultural Diversity Awareness in Four Kansas Public Universities
Dr. Q. J. Yao (Communication Studies) & Dr. Mary Martin (Management & Marketing)
Literature Review
Universities are working on branding. Examples include Cornell
University’s “rebranding” program, University of Texas-Austin’s
“integrated communication initiative”, University of Huston’s 5-year
and $5 million “image” campaign, and Point Park University’s $1
million “branding campaign”. Internal branding is also critical.
Diversity and multiculturalism are normally part of the branding
campaign, as a response to the change of the population or as a strategy
to stand ahead (Howard-Hamilton, Cuyjet, & Cooper, 2011).
University internal branding campaigns can be measured with
two fundamental indictors:
 Brand Identification, which means how much the public identifies
themselves with the organizational image ( Bergami & Bagozzi,
2000; Mael, 1988)
 Mass media coverage is critical to build university image
(Zivnuska, 2003) or evaluate its external performances
(Alessandri, Yang, & Kinsey, 2006)
 Social media is particularly effective to build organizational
culture and brand identification (Naslund, 2010)
 Organizational citizenship behaviors, which means supports beyond
formal requirements (Hughes & Ahearne, 2010; Podsakoff,
Mackenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990), are consequences of brand
identification
Method
Sampling procedure:
Complete student listings from Fort Hays State University,
Kansas State University, Pittsburg State University, and University of
Kansas (including KU Medical Center) were obtained. Using systematic
sampling with a sampling interval of 7, 8844 students were taken in the
sample and contacted for four waves from Oct 19 to 28, 2012. The
survey eventually collected 1299 completed responses, with a response
rate of 14.9%, which is in the lower middle range for email surveys.
Age of respondents ranges from 18 to 63 (M = 24.6, SD = 7.7).
Females count for 59.1%; males count for 40.9%. A weight based on
campus population percentage, campus-wide undergraduate/graduate
ratio, and campus-wide gender ratio was calculated and applied to the
analyses.
Dependent Variables:
University Brand Identification (α= .83, M = 8.74, SD = 3.22):
containing two questions. Q1 asked respondents to indicate on a scale of
1 to 7 how much their self-image overlaps with their university image.
Q2 asked them to circle on the graph to show how much their own
image overlaps with the university image.
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (α = .92, M = 23.66, SD = 8.7
): asked how often respondent used the university’s name or logo at
home, public setting, or parties, recommended the university to friends
or other people, defended it from criticism, encouraged other people to
protect the university image, or protected its image in personal time.
Cultural Diversity Awareness: The Miville-Guzman Universability-
Diversity Scale (Fuertes, Miville, Mohr, Sedlacek, & Gretchen, 2000;
α= .85, M = 67.23, SD = 10.16) is used.
Ethnic Identity: The Multigroup Ethic Identity Measure (Phinney,
1992; α= .90, M = 39.78, SD = 8.67) is used.
Independent Variables:
Campus Diversity Index (α= .97, M = 24.17, SD = 5.68): six questions
asked respondents how many people on their campus are from different
ethnic, racial, and cultural backgrounds and how many different ethnic,
racial, and cultural backgrounds are presented.
Living Environment Diversity Index (α= .92, M = 25.46, SD = 7.30):
six questions asked respondents how many people from different
cultural, ethnic, and racial background and how many backgrounds
were presented in the most diversified community that they had lived .
One question asked how long the respondent lived in the community.
Social Media Use (α= .78, M = 12.90, SD = 4.46): three questions
asked how often respondents checked and posted messages and photos.
Informational Media Use (α= .69, M = 25.35, SD = 8.83): six
questions asked how often respondents consume info from TV, radio,
newspaper, magazine, Internet/web, mobile devices (0 = never; 8 =
multiple times a day)
Diversity course taken: 0 = taking no, 1 = taking one required; 2=
taking one elective, and 3 = taking more than one
Other controlling variables: Age and Family income
Research Questions
RQ1: How do campus and living environment diversities influence
cultural diversity awareness?
RQ2: How do campus and living environment diversities influence
ethnic identity?
RQ3: How do diversity and media-use variables predict Brand
identification?
RQ4: How do diversity and media use variables predict organizational
citizenship behaviors?
Reference
Alessandri, S. W. (2007). Retaining a legacy while avoiding trademark infringement: A case study of one university’s attempt to develop a
consistent athletic brand identity. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 17 (1), 147-167.
Alessandri, S, W., Yang, S, & Kinsey, D. F. (2006). An integrative approach to university visual identity and reputation, Corporate
Reputation Review, 9 (4), 258-270.
Bergami, M & Bagozzi, R. P (2000). Self-categorization, affective commitment, and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity
in the organization”, British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(4), 555-77.
Fuertes, J. N., Miville, M. L., Mohr, J. J., Sedlacek, W. E., & Gretchen, D. (2000). Factor structure and short form of the Miville-Guzman
Universality-Diversity Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 157–169.
Howard-Hamilton, M., Cuyjet, M., & Cooper, D. (2011). Understanding multiculturalism and multicultural competency among college
students. In M. Cuyjet., M. Howard-Hamilton., & D. Cooper (eds.) Multiculturalism on Campus : Theory, Models, and Practices for
Understanding Diversity and Creating Inclusion.Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing
Hughes, D. E. & Ahearne, M. (2010). Energizing the Reseller’s Sales Force: The Power of Brand Identification. Journal of Marketing, 74,
81-96.
Naslund, A. (2010, September - October). Social media from the inside-out. Communication World, 36 – 39.
Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research,
7, 156–176.
Discussion
The study finds that encouraging students taking diversity courses
or using social media may cultivate cultural diversity awareness. Also,
diversified campus and social and informational media use may
cultivate ethnic identity. Ethnic identity and the volume of using mass
media for informational purpose positively predict students’ brand
identification with the university. Brand identification, cultural diversity
awareness, ethnic identity, and informational media use may lead to
supporting, promoting, and protecting the university's name, logo, and
image
Cultural Diversity Awareness Ethnic Identity Brand Identification Org Citizen Behaviors
B SD β B SD β B SD β B SD β
Campus Diversity Index .12 .07 .06 .45 .05 .29*** .01 .01 .04 -.07 .05 -.05
LEDI*Yeas .01 .01 .05 .01 .01 .07 -.003 .002 -.06 <.001 .005 -.001
Ethnic Identity .04 .04 .03 – – – .08 .01 .22*** .07 .03 .07*
Cultural Diversity Awareness – – – .03 .03 .03 .01 .02 .01 .07 .03 .09**
Informational Media Use -.03 .04 -.03 .07 .04 .07* .06 .01 .16*** .14 .03 .15***
Social Media Use .23 .09 .10** .22 .07 .11** .04 .03 .06 .12 .06 .06
Diversity Course Taken 1.97 .29 .24*** .36 .25 .05 -.03 .10 -.01 .35 .21 .05
Age .12 .05 .08* .003 .04 .002 -.03 .02 -.08* -.12 .04 -.10**
Income -.57 .15 -.13*** .18 .12 .05 .04 .05 .03 .08 .11 .02
Brand Identification – – – – – – – – – 1.36 .08 .51***
Model Info R2 = .09 R2 = .12 R2 = .10 R2 = .38
Notes: *** = “p < .001”; ** “p < .01”; * = “p < .05”. LEDI = Living Environment Diversity Index.
Results