Vegetarian Cafeteria Service Quality and Students’ Overall Satisfaction with University University experience is rite of passage for many young people. Students often leave their homes for the first time to live with their peers in another city or even a different country (Hendrickson, Rosen, Aune, 2011). With this coming of age experience, come many unique challenges and obstacles. One of the major adjustments to university life for many students is adjusting to the quality of the cafeteria services (Hartwell, Edwards, & Brown, 2011). Students have various eating habits and preferences and it is the responsibility of the cafeteria services of the university to attempt to provide both nutritious and palatable food for diverse student body. With little alternative to the food provided on-campus, students often have to rely on the cafeteria service to supply them with their daily caloric intake. Add to this the caveat of international students from all over the world and the problem becomes even more challenging A unique challenge is dealing with the adjusting to a diet that is based on principals foreign to the student. For example, a school that provides a vegetarian diet would be a unique experience for many international students. Living in such a context may be challenging for them. As such, how does this experience with such a diet impact the student’s perception of the food services? In addition, does such an experience with the food have any affect on the students’ satisfaction with the university? Student satisfaction is a critical component in students’ persistence to complete their degree (Schreiner & Nelson, 2014). Many studies have examined student satisfaction (Douglas, Douglas, McClelland, Davies, 2014; Gruber et al., 2014; Schreiner & Nelson, 2014). However, a closer examination of the impact of international students’ perceptions of vegetarian cafeteria service quality and their perception of satisfaction with university has not been examined as closely as other variables such as cross cultural intelligence, teaching characteristics, and or social integration (Douglas et al., 2014; Ramsey & Lorenz, 2014; Rienties, Beausaert, Grohnert, Niemantsverdriet, & Kommers, 2012). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine international students’ views of the quality of a vegetarian cafeteria service at their university and its affect on their overall satisfaction with their university.
Cafeteria Service Quality
Cafeteria service quality is defined as high quality food that is highly varied, convenient, and priced fairly (Liang & Zhang, 2009). Abdullah, Mansor, and Naba (2012) determined that the components for defining cafeteria services include food quality, price, and value. Cleanliness is another descriptor of cafeteria services used in other studies (Ismail & Abiddin, 2009; Kim, Lee, & Yuan, 2012). Food service offered on-campus could potentially influence health, which in part can play a role in academic performance (Ibrahim, Abedin, & Sharip, 2015). One study found that students’ food choice decline in nutritional quality over the course of their studies (Wansinka, Caoa, Sainia, Shimizua, & Just, 2013). This study did not explore if there was a corresponding change in the students’ satisfaction with their university or if their perception of the cafeteria service declined with their choice in food. In another study, it was found that there is little difference in the eating habits of students in relation to their academic standing as freshman, sophomore, junior or senior (Driskell, Kim, & Goebel, 2005). This indicates that students with similar eating habits may have similar perceptions of cafeteria services. These studies looked at cafeterias that offered both vegetarian and non-vegetarian food. The use of a vegetarian diet can be controversial, as it has led to students refusing to participate in school meals, eating less, and wasting more food (Lombardini & Lankoski, 2013). A vegetarian diet is extremely rare lifestyle choice with approximately only 5% of Americans adhering to such a diet (Newport, 2012). If such statistics hold at a university, many students may be surprised to have to live on a vegetarian diet during their university studies. Another factor to consider beside the challenge of a vegetarian diet is the lack of options for international dormitory students. Such students have few options in regards to what they can eat as they live on-campus and there are no alternatives to what the cafeteria is offering for meals. In other studies, students could choose to eat or not eat the cafeteria food as the either had transportation, lived off-campus, or there were competing restaurants on-campus (Driskell, Kim, & Goebel, 2005; Kimathi, Gregoire, Dowling, & Stone, 2009; Wansink, Cao, Saini, Shimizu, & Just, 2013). As such, for this group, the quality of the cafeteria services is more important than students who have other options for food. Therefore, examining their perception of cafeteria services is critical.
Student Satisfaction
Student satisfaction is the expectations that are met by the university the student studies (Hasan, Ilias, Rahman, & Razak, 2008; Kotler & Clark, 1987). For example, when students come to university, the make certain goal commitments and they expect the university to make certain commitments towards them (Tinto, 1999). By extension, students have certain expectations about cafeteria service quality; if these expectations are not met, satisfaction could plummet.
Cafeteria services influence in relation to student satisfaction is varied in the literature. For example, Sapri, Kaka, and Finch (2009) found that cafeteria service was moderalty important to university students in Malaysia. However, in the context of their study, many of the students commuted to school by car as parking was the top concern. In their study, Sapri et al. (2009) did not examine how dormitory students were specifically effect by cafeteria service.
In another study it was found that healthier food options impacted student satisfaction (Kimathi, Gregoire, Dowling, & Stone, 2009). When healthier options were available, students rated the cafeteria higher in terms of satisfaction. This is a key finding since the cafeteria service of this study provides a vegetarian diet, which is viewed as a much healthier diet in comparison to non-vegetarian diet (Orlich & Fraser, 2014). As such, it is possible that student satisfaction will be stronger because of the healthier diet. Off course, due to the unpopularity of a vegetarian diet, there may be no difference or there is potential that a healthier diet could be detrimental to student satisfaction.
As such the following questions are examined in this study
1. What are the perceptions of international students about cafeteria services at the university of their studies?
2. What are international students’ perceptions of their student satisfaction at the university of their studies?
3. What is the relationship between perception of cafeteria service and student satisfaction among international university students? Understanding the role of food services in relation to student satisfaction among international students can potentially help administrators with assisting students to adjust to university life away from their own culture. In addition, a study that examines this phenomenon could also provide clues in regards to the significance of cafeteria service among international students as it relates to their satisfaction with their school.

Methodology
Sampling
The participants of this study were students at a university whose cafeteria offered only a vegetarian diet. Non-random sampling was employed in this study. Specifically, the sampling approach was convenience sampling. A more systematic approach to sampling was not possible due to the nature of this study. As such, when convenience sampling is employed it is recommended to include demographic data of the participants (Frankel, Wallen, & Hyun, 2012). In this study, 44% of the participants were sophomore, 21% Freshman, 19% were seniors, and 15% were Juniors. For gender, 70% of the participants were female and 30% were male. The marjoity of the participants were education majors at 49%. English majors made up 33% followed by religion, science, and business at 7%, 6%, and 4% respectively. The majority of the students were from the Southeast Asia region with 78% indicating this. The remaining participants North and South Asia at 7% each and America/Europe and Africa at 2%. The majority of student ate two (42%) or three meals (33%) a day in the café with 21% of the respondents eating only one meal.
Research Design A cross-sectional survey design was employed in this study. The participants responded to 24 items on the instrument that assessed the participants’ perception of the cafeteria service as well as their perception of their satisfaction with the university. In addition, the instrument also included demographic items for the purpose of describing the population.
The instrument, containing the items in relation to the two variables and demographics, was distributed at the university by the researcher as well as by several lecturers at the campus. Students completed the instrument and returned them either to the researcher or to the lecturers who were assisting the researcher.
Cafeteria Service Quality Scale
The Cafeteria Service Quality scale was adapted from Abdullah, Mansor, and Naba (2012). The components of this scale were statements that assessed food quality, food variety, convenience, and pricing. Sample statements from this scale include ‘‘Most of the food served by the university cafeteria taste good.’’ and ‘‘The price of food the is acceptable in the university cafeteria.’’ A Lickert scale scaled was employed with 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree.
The confirmatory factor analysis found four factors that explains 57% of the variance. Factor one described taste, attractiveness of the food and variety. Items loaded to factor one include “most of the food served by the university cafeteria taste good” and “there is a wide variety of food available in the cafeteria.” Factor two describe food quality. Items that loaded to factor two include “most of the food served in the university cafeteria is of high quality” and “the ingredients used to prepare the food are fresh.” Factor three described portion size and price. Items loaded to factor three include “the food prices are reasonable for the size of the portions served” and “the price of the food is acceptable in the university cafeteria.” Lasgtly, factor four described specifically price only in relation to fairness. Items loaded on factor four include ‘the food is cheap in the university cafeteria” and “the price of the food is fair value for the quality of food that is served. The Cronbach Alpha for the modified 16-item scale was .82.
Student Satisfaction Scale
The Student satisfaction scale was adapted from Hasan et al. (2008). The components of this scale were statements that assessed happiness with decision to enroll at their current university. Sample statements from this scale include ‘‘my choice to enroll in this University was a wise one’’ and ‘‘I am happy that I enrolled in this University.’’ A Lickert scale scaled was employed with 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree.
The confirmatory factor analysis found one factor that explains 70% of the variance. All items in this factor related to the student’s perception of their decision to study at their current university. The Cronbach Alpha for the modified 8-item scale was .93
Data Analysis
Descriptive data was collected in the study. Items such as the mean of the variables as well as individual items were included. In addition, t-test were conducted to see if there was any differences across groups. Lastly, an assessment of the correlation between cafeteria service quality and student satisfaction was performed.
Protection of Human Rights Permission from the university was obtained before data collection began. Students were invited to participate in this study with the knowledge that their participation was optional. This procedure is expected when practicing informed consent (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007). Lastly, this is a low risk study as there were no concerns of physical or mental harm of those who were a part of the study (Shamoo & Resnik, 2009).
Data Analysis
Table 1 indicates the descriptive results of the study. In relation to cafeteria service quality, the respondents of this study had significant concerns with the pricing of the food. The respondents indicate in item 15 that food they disagree that food is cheap in the university cafeteria (M = 1.69, SD = .78). Respondents also disagreed with item 13 and 14 that the price of food is acceptable (M = 1.99, SD = .96)and that food prices were reasonable (M = 1.99, SD = .88). The majority of the other items related to cafeteria quality were neutral. For example, respondents were neutral in relation to item 11 about the taste of food (M = 2.92, SD = .98) and item 2 which assess the attractiveness of the food (M = 2.72, SD = .96). In addition, there was no difference in the means of any items related to cafeteria service quality when comparing by year in program (freshman, sophomore, junior, and senior), gender, major (Business, education, English, Religion, and Science), and meals eaten in the cafeteria each day (1, 2, or 3). Overall, students are midly satisified with cafeteria service quality but generally dissatisfied with the price of food. Since the majority of respondents were from Southeast Asia the means for region were not compared.