IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v46y2014i01p1-19_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Online versus Face-to-Face: Students' Preferences for College Course Attributes

Author

Listed:
  • Mann, John T.
  • Henneberry, Shida R.

Abstract

The objectives of this article were to determine: 1) students' preferences for college course attributes; and 2) how the amount of course attribute information impacts enrollment. Results indicate students had the highest preferences for face-to-face (F2F) courses offered late morning and early afternoon and two to three days per week. Students selected online over F2F courses depending on course makeup; for example, course topic, online course design technology, and when the F2F version was offered. Additionally, students selected online courses more frequently when additional online course attribute information was available during course selection.

Suggested Citation

  • Mann, John T. & Henneberry, Shida R., 2014. "Online versus Face-to-Face: Students' Preferences for College Course Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:46:y:2014:i:01:p:1-19_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070800000602/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    2. Nicholas Flores & Scott J. Savage, 2007. "Student Demand for Streaming Lecture Video: Emprical Evidence from Undergraduate Economics Classes," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 6(2), pages 57-78.
    3. Byron W. Brown & Carl E. Liedholm, 2002. "Can Web Courses Replace the Classroom in Principles of Microeconomics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 444-448, May.
    4. Boyer, Tracy A. & Briggeman, Brian C. & Norwood, F. Bailey, 2009. "Demand for Multimedia in the Classroom," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Jayson L. Lusk & Ted C. Schroeder, 2004. "Are Choice Experiments Incentive Compatible? A Test with Quality Differentiated Beef Steaks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(2), pages 467-482.
    6. Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.
    7. Levin, Irwin P & Gaeth, Gary J, 1988. "How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information before and after Consuming the Product," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(3), pages 374-378, December.
    8. Jayson L. Lusk & Jutta Roosen & John A. Fox, 2003. "Demand for Beef from Cattle Administered Growth Hormones or Fed Genetically Modified Corn: A Comparison of Consumers in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 16-29.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ioulia Solomou & Fofi Constantinidou, 2020. "Prevalence and Predictors of Anxiety and Depression Symptoms during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Compliance with Precautionary Measures: Age and Sex Matter," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-19, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mann, John T. & Henneberry, Shida Rastegari, 2012. "Undergraduate Students’ Preferences and Willingness to Pay for College Course Attributes," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124946, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. repec:ags:joaaec:163229 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Grace Melo & Gregory Colson & Octavio A. Ramirez, 2014. "Hispanic American Opinions toward Immigration and Immigration Policy Reform Proposals," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 36(4), pages 604-622.
    4. William Bosshardt & Eric P. Chiang, 2016. "Targeting Teaching Lecture Capture Learning: Do Students Perform Better Compared to Face‐to‐Face Classes?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(3), pages 1021-1038, January.
    5. Christoph, Inken B. & Peter, Guenter & Rothe, Andrea & Salamon, Petra & Weber, Sascha A. & Weible, Daniela, 2011. "School Milk Consumption in Germany - What are Important Product Attributes for Children and Parents?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114294, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Jennjou Chen & Tsui-Fang Lin, 2016. "microeconomics courses: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design experiment," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(4), pages 2094-2116.
    7. He, Chenyi & Gao, Zhifeng, 2015. "The Impact of Customer Review on Consumer Preference for Fresh Produce: A Choice Experiment Approach," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205807, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    9. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    10. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    11. Caputo, Vincenzina & Loo, Ellen J. Van & Scarpa, Riccardo & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr & Verbeke, Wim, 2014. "“Using Experiments to Address Attribute Non-attendance in Consumer Food Choices”," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 177173, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Levan Elbakidze & Rodolfo M. Nayga Jr. & Hao Li & Chris McIntosh, 2014. "Value elicitation for multiple quantities of a quasi-public good using open ended choice experiments and uniform price auctions," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 253-265, March.
    13. Jacques Raynauld, 2005. "New Evidence on the Determinants of Absenteeism Using Linked Employer-Employee Data," Cahiers de recherche 05-06, HEC Montréal, Institut d'économie appliquée.
    14. Britwum, Kofi & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2019. "Consumer willingness to pay for food safety interventions: The role of message framing and issue involvement," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Adalja, Aaron & Hanson, James & Towe, Charles & Tselepidakis, Elina, 2015. "An Examination of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 253-274, December.
    16. Loureiro, Maria L. & Umberger, Wendy J., 2007. "A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 496-514, August.
    17. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    18. Darren Hudson & Karina Gallardo & Terry Hanson, 2005. "Hypothetical (Non)Bias In Choice Experiments: Evidence From Freshwater Prawns," Experimental 0503003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alfnes, Frode & Steine, Gro, 2005. "None-of-These Bias in Stated Choice Experiments," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24761, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole & Wolf, Christopher, 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 713-730, December.
    21. Nannan Kang & Erda Wang & Yang Yu, 2019. "Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(5), pages 711-733, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:46:y:2014:i:01:p:1-19_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.