The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1 - 56

Heather L Servaty-Seib • Deborah J. Taub • Ji-Yeon Lee • Carrie Wachter Morris
• Donald Werden • Susan Prieto-Welch • Nathan Miles

Correlational analyses were performed to
examine the relationships among variables (see
Table 2). All correlations among the predictor
variables were below .70, indicating minimal
likelihood that multicollinearity existed among
the variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007).

sample was .82.

Procedure
The office of residential life provided the
emails of all 275 current RAs to serve as the
participant pool. RAs were emailed about the
study and directed to a website that contained
an information form describing the nature
and purpose of the study, demographic items,
and the TpB quantitative questionnaire regarding referral-related beliefs and intentions. The
response rate for the investigation was 23.3%
(N = 64). However, calculating response rate
is challenging as there is no way to determine
how many of the RAs actually received the requirement email. The final sample used was N
= 60 due to missing data (n = 1) and the elimination of outliers (n = 3).

Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)
was performed to determine if the demographic
variables (sex, race, years as an RA) were related
to “intention to refer.” Although we did not
have research questionnaires related to these
variables, we wanted to assess for possible associations between these variables and intention to refer prior to our primary analysis. For
the purpose of analysis, race was dichotomized
as White and non-White. The MANOVA results
indicated no significant differences on the variables based on sex, F(4, 53) = .51, p > .05, year in
the university, F(16, 212) = .79, p > .05, or the
length of time working as RAs, F(16, 220) = 1.01,
p > .05. There was, however, a significant difference in the variables based on race, F(4, 55) =
4.56, p < .01, Ƞp2 = 0.25. As indicated in Table 3,
non-White RAs (seven Asian international stu-

RESULTS
Upon completion of the data screening process
(e.g., replacement of random missing data,
normality checks), means and standard deviations were obtained for scores on all measures
(see Table 1).

Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations (N = 60)
Variable

M

SD

Intention to refer

5.53

1.24

Subjective norms

6.01

0.68

Attitude toward referral

5.18

0.79

Perceived behavioral control:
self-efficacy

2.63

1.29

Note. Intention, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control: self-efficacy items were rated based on a 7-point scale (1 =
strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree). Attitude was also based on a 7-point scale but with unique anchors for each item (see
Appendix). Higher scores were indicative of greater intention, supportive subjective norms, and positive attitudes, whereas higher
scores on “perceived behavioral control: self-efficacy” were indicative of less self-efficacy.

56

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENT HOUSING
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 39, No. 2 & Volume 40, No. 1
