Assessing Brand Equity of Affiliated Universities in Vietnam National
University, Hanoi
NGUYEN NGOC TRANG1, NGUYEN ANH TUAN2, LE NAM LONG3
1Nguyen Tat Thanh University,
Nguyen Tat Thanh Street, Ho Chi Minh City,
VIETNAM
2University of Education, Vietnam National University, Hanoi,
Xuan Thuy Road, Hanoi,
VIETNAM
3Thuongmai University,
Ho Tung Mau Road, Hanoi,
VIETNAM
Abstract: - This research aimed to assess the brand equity of affiliated universities in Vietnam National
University, Hanoi (VNU). There were 486 undergraduates and post-graduates from member universities in
VNU participating in the research. Exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, Delphi analysis,
and Structural Equal Modeling (SEM) were utilized to identify components of brand equity of the affiliated
universities. The findings show that brand equity consists of seven components: brand recognition, lecturer
quality, university reputation, brand association, facilities, loyalty, and perceived quality. Among these,
facilities have the biggest impact on brand equity with β=0.819, followed by brand recognition and lecturer
equity with β=0.783 and β=0.758. On the other hand, loyalty appears to be the factor with the least influence
with β=0.740. In short, strategies of investment in the teaching staff need greater attention and effective
enforcement; besides, it is also necessary to continuously supplement and upgrade technical facilities for
teaching and research activities and improve brand recognition in line with the university identity.
Key-Words: - brand equity, university, facilities, brand recognition, lecturer quality, affiliation.
Received: March 22, 2023. Revised: December 24, 2023. Accepted: January 19, 2024. Published: February 9, 2024.
1 Introduction
1.1 Overview of University Brand Equity
Brand equity is a marketing term referring to the
values of a brand. A brand represents a business
and best expresses its success. Successfully
branding, the business has built up its position in
customers’ minds as the brand reminds them of the
business. Brands can be considered an asset of a
business.
Brand equity is regarded as an added value to
products or services assessed by consumers and
representing a business’s competitiveness in the
market. It is an intangible asset that brings about
huge value, encouraging businesses to seek to
improve their brand equity. This may be a vague
concept related to values that a brand can offer to
customers, the community, or other direct
stakeholders such as employees or shareholders.
Factors contributing to brand equity include the
logo, slogan, and symbol of a company or a
product. Such factors are also the company’s assets
which help it thrive on success and direct access to
its customers. The factors are identified and
evaluated by customers through their awareness
and experiences with a brand. To be more specific,
if a business can provide its customers with
positive experiences and has good brand
recognition, it indicates that the company has
positive brand equity. On the contrary, if customers
are disappointed due to poor experiences with the
products or services, the company has negative
brand equity.
From a business perspective, brand equity is
identified based on financial and accounting
statistics. On the other hand, from the customers’
viewpoint, brand equity can be determined by
consumer behaviors and measured with various
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
656
Volume 21, 2024
marketing methods, [1].
In [2], the author confirmed that digital
transformation and global integration both play a
role in executing brand management activities in
universities, especially private universities in
Hanoi. The protocols and decisions made during
brand management, as well as the level of
interaction in brand management, greatly depend
on the effectiveness of digital transformation on
campus and the administrators’ willingness to
integrate globally. Her paper adds to the literature
on deploying brand management activities, with
theoretical and practical values for improving
understanding of the effect of digital transformation
and the need to integrate globally in university
brand management.
1.2 Introduction to Vietnam National
University, Hanoi
Vietnam National University, Hanoi, or VNU is a
hub of training, scientific research, and high-quality
multidisciplinary knowledge and technological
transfer. It has now reached the regional level and
is about to approach the global one, meeting the
nation’s needs of development and keeping up with
the advanced higher education development trends
worldwide.
VNU based in Hanoi is acknowledged as one
of the top 1000 highest-quality universities and
affiliated universities in the world. VNU has
implemented a high level of autonomy and
accountability. Its affiliated institutions are highly
autonomous organizations of training, scientific,
and technological research and serve as legal
entities equal to any independent university under
Law on Education and Law on Higher Education.
At present, VNU has 10 member universities,
namely the University of Natural Sciences,
University of Social Sciences and Humanities,
University of Languages and International Studies,
University of Engineering and Technology,
University of Economics and Business, University
of Education, Vietnam Japan University, University
of Medicine and Pharmacy, School of Law and
International School.
VNU is a high-quality multidisciplinary hub of
training and technological and scientific research
which is greatly supported by the State. It is
currently implementing several training programs
in natural sciences, social sciences, humanities,
languages, technology, economics, and education.
To be more specific, there are 140 undergraduate
training programs, 187 post-graduate ones, and 115
doctoral training ones, 32 of which have been
accredited by AUN and 26 of which are
internationally cooperated.
1.3 Overview of the Teaching Staff in VNU
According to VNU, its teaching staff is considered
the best in both quantity and quality in the
university system nationwide. The number of staff
on the payrolls with social insurance covered is
3,476, which consists of 1,876 scientific officers
and 1,719 lecturers including 44 professors, 274
associate professors, 872 doctors, and 1,330
masters. There are several leading researchers with
high prestige within and without the country in the
fields of natural sciences, social sciences,
humanities, languages, technology, law, economics,
and education. The percentage of scientific officers
(lecturers and researchers) with doctoral degrees
and scientific doctoral degree has made up 44%,
while which that of professors and associate
professors is more than 17%, triple the average
percentage of the country. In certain units, the
percentage of scientific officers with doctoral
degrees or more accounts for 55%. The exact
percentage at University of Economics and
Business, University of Education, University of
Engineering and Technology, University of Natural
Sciences, and the School of Law is respectively
77%, 70.8%, 60.5%, 58.6%, and 55.6%.
Additionally, the percentage of staff with
bachelor’s degrees in some units, who are sources
for master's and doctoral training, is only 15%.
Moreover, VNU also has a team of guest
lecturers who are foreign scientists engaged in
teaching and research. 250 lecturers and scientists
working at VNU have been assigned to work as
guest lecturers and researchers in universities and
research centers in developed countries. A lot of
scientific officers in VNU have received
outstanding rewards including 15 Ho Chi Minh
Prize winners, 10 National Prize winners and some
other prestige scientific awards in the world.
2 Theoretical Background
2.1 Concepts of Brand Equity
Brand equity can be defined in different ways. In
general, it refers to the added value that a brand
brings to the branded product(s). Such value is
perceived by consumers so it is also known as
customer-based brand equity (CBBE). According
to [3], CBBE consists of four components: brand
recognition, perceived quality, brand association,
and brand loyalty.
In [4], it is pointed out that the majority of the
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
657
Volume 21, 2024
studies around the world only deal with the
exploration of scales measuring brand equity, but
set aside the relations between these scales and
brand equity as a whole.
According to [5], findings from global research
projects have revealed two groups of factors that
can measure a university’s brand equity, namely
core factors (brand recognition, lecturer quality,
university reputation, brand loyalty, and language
competence) and supporting factors (library
services, students’ life, career development and
facilities).
In [5], the author has proved that the factor of
loyalty has impact of the overall brand equity of a
university. In her research, she has adopted Aaker’s
four components constituting brand equity
including brand recognition, perceived quality,
brand image, and brand loyalty.
2.2 Characteristics of Brand Equity
Brand equity is a collection of attributes governing
consumers’ choices, namely (1) brand recognition,
(2) consumers’ attitudes to the brand, and (3)
business activities, [4].
It has also been pointed out that brand equity
is a product’s attractiveness originating from
factors that are not its features and created by the
producer including (1) brand recognition, (2) brand
association, (3) attitudes, (4) engagement and (5)
operations, [4].
Brand equity consists of three fundamental
components: consumers’ awareness, positive or
negative impacts, and result values, [5]. First,
consumers’ awareness includes knowledge and
experiences of a brand, its products, and brand
building. Such awareness has direct impacts which
can be either positive or negative. To be more
specific, if brand equity is positive, its producer,
products, and financial status are beneficial; while
if it is negative, the reverse scenario takes place.
These impacts can turn into tangible or intangible
values. Tangible values are achieved and revenue
or profits increase when business performance is
positive. On the other hand, in the case of negative
impacts, neither tangible nor intangible values are
positive. For example, this can happen when a
company has a notable product recall or causes
widely-known environmental consequences.
2.3 Importance of Brand Equity
In general, have concluded that brand is a
company’s asset, [5], [6]. Brand equity tends to
generate remarkable values for companies. To be
more specific, companies can charge insurance fees
for products with high positive brand equity.
Positive brand equity can be added to another
product line, increasing the company’s revenue and
profits. Besides, positive brand equity also helps
them gain more market shares as the brand(s) is
known to, acknowledged, and loved by more
consumers.
3 Research Model, Methodology and
Sample
3.1 Research Model
Based on findings from previous research projects,
the author has come up with the research model as
illustrated in Figure 1 below.
Fig. 1: Components of brand equity
Source: Authors’ research
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
658
Volume 21, 2024
In this model,
Brand recognition (variable coded as NDTH).
Brand recognition refers to cases when customers
can memorize and name a brand and associate it
with a specific product(s), [3], [5]. To improve
brand recognition, companies often resort to digital
marketing, billboard advertising, or OOH.
Generally, any channel can be utilized and the most
decisive factor is the content and messages
delivered.
Lecturer quality (variable coded as CLGV):
Lecturer quality is acquired from lecturers’
teaching, training, research, and social services and
illustrated through students’ learning and training
outcomes. It is assessed based on how they satisfy
requirements for their positions and of their
university, [7].
University reputation (variable coded as DT):
According to [5], theories on university reputation
have mainly been developed based on existing
research on business reputation and greatly
influenced by studies on education marketing.
There is a lack of a consistent definition of business
reputation as several scholars still have mixed
opinions on the subject matter. This is partly
because service providers, such as universities,
stand a higher chance of losing reputation if their
service quality is not effectively managed, and
reputation has a strategic role in the sustainable
future of higher education institutions, [5]. In
education service management, reputation, and its
related terms are widely used as an orientation tool
that greatly affects students’ choice of university,
[5]. Students may have already been aware of the
university and its training curricula. Reputation
management is considered crucial to attract and
retain students. It is undeniable that an institutions’
reputation is the factor with the strongest impact on
students’ choice of university, [7].
Brand association (variable coded as LTTH):
Positive brand association must be a strong,
convenient, and unique brand, [1]. Brand
association can be customers’ imprints on one or
more characteristics of a product when it is
mentioned through visualization of its product look
or features, [8], [9]. Therefore, brand association is
considered a fundamental factor in deciding
consumers’ purchasing decisions, [6]. In general,
consumers’ brand association is a component
constituting brand equity, [10].
Facilities (variable coded as CSVC): According to
[5], the university’s technical facilities are
necessary means allowing students to conveniently
and easily study by themselves, acquire knowledge
faster, and retain it longer. They also help lecturers
reduce time spent on presentation and lecturing and
have more time to carry out interactive tasks and
activities that allow the students to get access to,
experience and proactively search for and be
creative in knowledge acquisition and skill training.
Additionally, other modern means are also helpful
in reducing theory-based lectures and facilitating
more interactive lessons. As a result, students can
easily and quickly understand and memorize the
lessons.
Loyalty (variable coded as LTT): According to [3],
customers’ loyalty has a vital role in a business as it
affects its success and sustainability. Customers’
loyalty can be defined as their level of satisfaction,
trust, and engagement in a brand, product, or
service. Loyal customers tend to repurchase the
product or service of a supplier, recommend it to
others and are hardly lured by a competitor’s
product or service. A brand with high loyalty stands
a high chance of bringing such benefits as lower
marketing costs, improved negotiation power, new
customer attraction, and more time to address
competition risks, [11]. Loyal customers are
regarded as the biggest asset or the heart of a brand.
Therefore, it is a part of brand equity, [3].
Perceived quality (variable coded as CLCN):
Perceived quality has a direct impacts on
customers’ purchasing decisions and loyalty as it
offers a reason for a person to buy the product of
one brand rather than another, [9], [10]. This is the
factor for customers to compare products between
brands, [12]. Hence, it is also a component of brand
equity, [8].
3.2 Research Methodology
In this research, the author has adopted the
following research methods: exploratory factor
analysis to identify component factors constituting
a university’s brand equity, confirmatory factor
analysis, Delphi, to identify component factors in
brand equity and variables in each component
factor, and structural equal modeling (SEM).
3.3 Research Sample
To collect necessary data, the researcher
administered a survey to 525 undergraduates and
post-graduates from VNU’s universities with 486
returned, accounting for 92.57%. The collected data
was then analyzed using SPSS version 2022.
The following are details of the research sample:
Gender:
Male respondents: 275/486, accounting for 56.58%
Female respondents: 211/486, accounting for
43.42%
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
659
Volume 21, 2024
Respondent structure:
Undergraduates: 318/486, accounting for 65.43%
Post-graduates: 168/486, accounting for 34.57%
Student allocation:
University of Social Science and Humanities:
58/486, accounting for 11.9%
University of Languages and International Studies:
59/486, accounting for 12.1%
University of Engineering and Technology: 66/486,
accounting for 13.5%
University of Economics and Business: 67/486,
accounting for 13.7%
University of Education: 53/486, accounting for
7.4%
Vietnam Japan University: 34/486, accounting for
10.9%
University of Medicine and Pharmacy: 40/486,
accounting for 8.2%
School of Law: 58/486, accounting for 11.9%
International School: 51/486, accounting for 10.4%
4 Research Findings
4.1 Scale Testing with Confidence
Coefficient and Exploratory Factor
Analysis
Table 1 showed the Cronbach’s Alpha results of all
scales. It can be seen that the results of all factors
were above 0.6 and their corrected item-total
correlation values were above 0.3, indicating all
scales in the author’s recommended research model
ensured reliability and met the standards to be used
in the next analysis.
Based on exploratory factor analysis,
independent variables can be categorized into seven
groups with KMO = 0.847 > 0.5, Sig. = 0.000 <
0.05, and total variance explained = 61.319% >
50%. The analysis for dependent variables can be
derived into one group with KMO = 0.825 > 0.5;
Sig. = 0.000 < 0.05, (Kaiser 1988), and total
variance explained = 68.466% > 50%. Generally,
EFA revealed that all independent and dependent
variables met the standards. The Factor loading of
all factors coded as independent variables,
including Brand recognition, Lecturer quality,
University reputation, Brand association, Facilities,
and Loyalty, ranges from 0.875 to 0.892, which
indicates that they all satisfied the testing indices.
This allowed the authors to confirm that the
research model was in line with the research goals
and objectives and could be used for further
analysis without adjustments. The detailed results
of the exploratory factor analysis of independent
and dependent variables are illustrated in Table 2.
Table 1.
Cronbach’s
Alpha of all scales
Factors
Number of variables
Cronbach’s
alpha
Means
Brand recognition
4
0.812
3.29
Lecturer quality
6
0.895
3.14
University Reputation
5
0.811
3.75
Brand association
4
0.828
3.48
Facilities
6
0.817
3.32
Loyalty
5
0.861
3.19
Perceived quality
6
0.882
3.39
Source: SPSS version 2022
Table 2. Exploratory factor analysis of independent and dependent variables
Independent variables
KMO
Sig
Total variance explained
Factor loading
Brand recognition
0.847
0.000
61.319%
0.711-0.802
Lecturer quality
0.698-0.814
University Reputation
0.705-0.859
Brand association
0.722-0.819
Facilities
0.717-0.825
Loyalty
0.780-0.839
Perceived quality
0.763-0.816
Dependent variable (overall brand equity)
0.825
0.000
68.466%
0.875-0.892
Source: SPSS version 2022
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
660
Volume 21, 2024
4.2 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
CFA testing results of each component in the scales
showed that all chi-square had P-value >5%;
CMIN/df≤2, GFI>0.8, TLI and CFI≥0.9, which
means CFA for all components were unidirectional,
ensuring convergent validity, reliability, and
discriminant validity.
Fig. 2: CFA results of all components in brand equity
Source: Authors’ research
The model had 699 free tiers with chi- square =
1306.219, P-Value = 0.000 and chi-square/df =
1.764 < 2 and other figures showing that the model
is suitable for market data (GFI = 0.819, CFI =
0.909, TLI = 0.933, and RMSEA = 0.036). Besides,
the values of all observed variables met the
standard (>= 0.5); and with P value of 0.000, they
were proved to be statistically significant. The
detailed CFA results are exhibited in Figure 2 as
follows.
In general, based on confirmatory factor
analysis, all variables were unidirectional, ensuring
convergent validity, reliability, and discriminant
validity. The model was shown to be suitable for
market data. The above CFA results are similar to
what has been drawn in [2] in the identification of
independent variables (including CSVC, LTT,
CLGV, and NDTH) and the dependent one
(TSTH).
4.3 Hypothesis Testing and Regression
Analysis
The estimated results (which have been
standardized) of the research model had chi-square
= 14990.230 with P value = 0.000, chi-square/df =
1.865 < 2, and other indices (GFI= 822, CFI = 906,
TLI = 941 and RMSEA = 0.041), which indicated
that the research model is suitable for market data
and data collected for the research. All hypotheses
in the research were proved to be statistically
significant as even the highest P value was below
0.05 at a reliability rate of 95%. In other words, all
hypotheses were acceptable. Among the seven
surveyed factors, lecturer quality had the biggest
impact on VNU’s member universities’ brand
equity (β=0,268). In general, this leads to the need
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
661
Volume 21, 2024
for continued lecturer investment strategies which
are to be carried out effectively.
Table 3. Hypothesis testing and regression coefficient of the research model
Hypotheses
Coefficient
Standardized coefficient
S.E.
C.R.
P
Conclusion
Brand recognition is in a proportional correlation
with brand equity
0.188
0.149
0.0459
17.076
0.000
Hypothesis
accepted
Good lecturer quality leads to higher brand
quality
0.108
0.122
0.0469
17.619
0.000
Hypothesis
accepted
Brand association is
in a proportional correlation
with brand equity
0.101
0.126
0.0488
17.673
0.000
Hypothesis
accepted
Loyalty is
in a proportional correlation with brand
equity
0.154
0.149
0.0476
17.599
0.000
Hypothesis
accepted
Source: SPSS version 2022
In [2], the author also pointed out the
correlation among the factors and assessed similar
hypotheses to those in this particular research
which are (1) Good lecturer quality leads to higher
brand quality, (2) Brand association is in a
proportional correlation with brand equity and (3)
Loyalty is in a proportional correlation with brand
equity. The hypothesis testing and regression
coefficients of the research model are shown in
Table 3.
4.4 Correlation among Factors
The collected data showed that all factors were
closely correlated and had mutual impacts. This
proved that the research model was appropriate and
all measuring scales were accurate, reliable, and
able to confirm the possibility of the factors’
impacts on universities’ brand equity. Figure 3
below illustrated the standardized weights of all
components in brand equity.
Fig. 3: Standardized regression weights of all components in brand equity
Source: SPSS version 2022
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
662
Volume 21, 2024
5 Conclusions, Implications for
Administration, and future
Research Approaches
5.1 Conclusion
This particular research has identified seven factors
constituting brand equity of affiliated universities
in VNU, Hanoi, including brand recognition,
lecturer quality, university reputation, brand
association, facilities, loyalty, and perceived
quality. Among these factors, facilities have the
biggest impact on universities’ brand equity
β=0.819, followed by brand recognition with
β=0.783 and lecturer quality with β=0.758); and
loyalty has the least influence on brand equity with
β=0.740.
This paper also pointed out the typical features
of universities’ brand administration amid the
strong digitalization and autonomy implementation
in Vietnam. The findings theoretically and
practically serve as references in brand
administration for learners of different levels
including undergraduates, graduates, and research
students, as well as practitioners and professionals
in the field. All of the factors considered in the
research were proved to be valid as shown in Table
4 below.
Table 4. Validity analysis of all components in
brand equity
Source: SPSS version 2022
5.2 Implications for Administration
Since established, affiliated universities in VNU
have always placed great focus on developing their
teaching staff and making policies and an
ecosystem for them to devote to their best and be
acknowledged. Judging from the current situation
in the universities, lecturer quality is a significant
prerequisite for VNU’s development in general,
and brand equity in particular. In short, there is a
need for continued lecturer investment strategies in
the member universities with effective enforcement
mechanisms. More importantly, it is necessary to
continuously supplement and upgrade technical
facilities for teaching and scientific research and
improve brand recognition in association with
university's identity.
5.3 Future Research Approaches
In the coming time, there should be an overall
assessment of the brand equity of all universities in
Vietnam, paving the way for specific policy
consultations for the Government and these
universities. Shortly, the authors plan to carry out
studies comparing and contrasting the current
situation of brand administration between
universities in Vietnam and those in the Top 100 in
THE ranking system, providing insights into more
modern and effective brand administration
methods.
References:
[1] Pham Thi Lan Huong & Nguyen Thi Mai
Trang. (2014). Factors affecting young
consumers’ attitudes towards SMS
advertising. Journals of digital development,
286, 80-108.
[2] Hoang Thi Minh Hue. (2021). Managing
University Brands In The Context Of Digital
Transformation And Global Integration - A
Case Study On Private Universities In Hanoi,
Vietnam, [Online].
https://repository.vnu.edu.vn/handle/VNU_1
23/139926 (Accessed Date: March 15, 2023).
[3] Aaker, D.A. (1991). Managing Brand Equity.
New York: The Free Press.
[4] Pinar, M. & Trapp, P. (2013). University
brand equity: an empirical investigation of its
dimensions, International Journal of
Educational Management, USA, 28(6):616-
634, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-04-
2013-0051.
[5] Hoang Anh Vien. (2014). Assessing brand
equity of Central universities. Journals
Education Sciences, vol.138, pp.106-109.
[6] Pham Thi Minh Ly. (2014). University brand
equity as perceived by students in Ho Chi
Minh City universities. Journals of
Economics and Development, vol.200, pp.79-
87.
[7] Black, J. (2008). The branding of higher
education, [Online]
https://www.semworks.net/papers/wp_The-
Branding-of-Higher-Education.pdf
(Accessed Date: March 15, 2023).
[8] Bunzel, D. (2007). Universities sell their
brands. Journal of Product and Brand, 16(2),
152-153.
[9] Joseph, M., Mullen, E.W. and Spake, D.
(2012). University branding: understanding
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
663
Volume 21, 2024
students’ choice of an educational institution.
Journal of Brand Management, 20(1), 1-12.
[10] Nguyen Anh Tuan. (2023). Assessing
lecturers’ satisfaction in teaching and
researching at VNU, Hanoi. Journals of
Education Sciences, 2615-8957.
[11] Teh, M. G. & Mohd, S. A. H. (2010). Impact
of Brand Meaning on Brand Equity Of
Higher Educational Institutions in Malaysia.
Malaysia: Research Conference.
[12] Nguyen Dinh Tho & Nguyen Thi Mai Trang.
(2011). Marketing research: Application of
Structural Equal Modeling SEM. Labor
Publisher.
Contribution of Individual Authors to the
Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting
Policy)
- Nguyen Ngoc Trang studied previous research
papers related to the topic, identified the research
gap and came up with the research model.
- Nguyen Anh Tuan designed, tested and
administered the questionnaires, quantitatively
analysed the data and discussed the findings.
- Le Nam Long translated the manuscript,
reviewed all references and made the final
edition.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
No funding was received for conducting this study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.e
n_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2024.21.54
Nguyen Ngoc Trang, Nguyen Anh Tuan, Le Nam Long
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
664
Volume 21, 2024