Perceptions of the effectiveness of twitter as a crowdfunding communication tool for raising university fees

Salusiwe Qomfo, Norman Chiliya, Tinashe Chuchu, Eugine Tafadzwa Maziriri, Tinashe Ndoro

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


Twitter as a communication medium has revolutionised the way in which messages are sent and received due to its immediacy and reach. This study investigated the extent to which Twitter was utilised as an effective communication tool for raising tuition funds at a selected university in South Africa. The research was quantitative in nature, adopting the survey methodology, were willing, randomly selected participants completed a questionnaire on campus. Non-probability sampling was used in selecting these participants due to the difficulty of obtaining a sampling frame. A total of 380 surveys were returned and used for analysis and insights. Descriptive statistics and structural equation modelling were conducted to generate results using SPSS 25 and AMOS 25 respectively. A key finding established that ‘perceived ease of use Twitter’ and ‘perceived usefulness Twitter’ were the most correlated constructs regarding its effectiveness in raising funds. Based on the findings, implications emerged as well as interesting insights into how students perceive Twitter as a viable tool for raising tuition fees. The limitations of the study were highlighted. Lastly, further research suggestions were proposed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-17
Number of pages17
Publication statusPublished - 2019
Externally publishedYes


  • Crowdfunding
  • Digital marketing
  • Funding
  • Marketing communication
  • Online communication
  • Social media
  • Twitter
  • University tuition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Communication
  • Linguistics and Language


Dive into the research topics of 'Perceptions of the effectiveness of twitter as a crowdfunding communication tool for raising university fees'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this