2.1. Digital transparency in universities

The necessity of online disclosure in higher education institutions has been investigated considering different theories. The public accountability perspective suggests that managers are more likely to engage in online disclosure because they have a greater commitment to public accountability and transparency (Coy et al., 2011Coy, D., Fischer, M., & Gordon, T. (2011). Public accountability: a new paradigm for college and university annual reports. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 12(1), 1-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/CPAC.2000.0416.). Second, according to legitimacy theory-based predictions (Suchman, 1995Suchman, M.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-606. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/258788.), increased online disclosure can be a strategic way for HEIs to demonstrate congruence with the goals and norms of the larger society (Chen and Roberts, 2010Chen, J.C., & Roberts, R.W. (2010). Toward a more coherent understanding of the organization society relationship: a theoretical consideration for social and environmental accounting research. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 651-665. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40929519.), with positive effects on institutional reputation, image, and public goodwill. In the Spanish context, the approval of the law on transparency, access to public information, and good governance in Spain has mandated certain reporting requirements for all public universities. Kansal et al. (2018)Kansal, M., Joshi, M., Babu, S., & Sharma, S. (2018). Reporting of corporate social responsibility in central public sector enterprises: a study of post mandatory regime in India. Journal of Business Ethics, 151(3), 813-831. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3253-0. noted that compliance with minimum reporting requirements is a prerequisite for legitimacy when disclosures are mandatory. Thirdly, according to the stakeholder theory, all stakeholders, both internal and external, have the right to access information about an organisation’s activities and results (Deegan and Samkin, 2009Deegan, C., & Samkin, G. (2009). New Zealand Financial Accounting, McGraw-Hill, Sydney.). Specifically, universities must meet the public’s demand for increased oversight and accountability. Providing online information enables stakeholders to satisfy their information requirements and be aware of the process of value creation. This can facilitate support and consent from various stakeholder groups, including students, parents, funding bodies, research councils, the government, employers, and employees (Manes et al., 2018Manes, F., Nicoló, G., & Targaglia, P. (2018). New trends in intellectual capital reporting. Exploring online intellectual capital disclosure in Italian universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(4), 814-835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-09-2017-0119.). Therefore, a greater degree of transparency will strengthen the legitimacy of universities in the eyes of key stakeholders, including students, parents, academic and administrative staff, ranking organisations, web agencies, and the general public (Ceulemans et al., 2015Ceulemans, K., Molderez, I., & Van Liedekerke, L. (2015). Sustainability reporting in higher education: A comprehensive review of the recent literature and paths for further research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 127–143. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.052.). Fourth, the resource dependence theory predicts that increased voluntary disclosure (Vidovich and Currie, 2011Vidovich, L., & Currie, J. (2011). Governance and trust in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 43-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903469580.) can assist HEIs in gaining access to vital resources, such as donations and funds, and reduce political costs through improved institutional image and reputation (Chen and Roberts, 2010Chen, J.C., & Roberts, R.W. (2010). Toward a more coherent understanding of the organization society relationship: a theoretical consideration for social and environmental accounting research. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 651-665. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40929519.).

Alternatively, with the consolidation of the Internet and the sustained increase in its penetration rates, websites were established as channels that provided citizens with access to information, technological applications, and a variety of resources (Luna, 2017Luna, D.E. (2017). Sitios web y portales de Gobierno. In: Gil-García, J.R., Criado, J.I., & Téllez, J.C. (Eds.), Tecnologías de Información y Comunicación en la Administración Pública: Conceptos, Enfoques, Aplicaciones y Resultados, INFOTEC, Ciudad de México.). The websites can be evaluated using a variety of models. Fath-Allah et al. (2017)Fath-Allah, A., Cheikhi, L. Idri, A, & Al-Qutaish, R. (2017). A best practice-based E-government portals’ maturity model - a case study. IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, Helsinki. evaluate 25 contemporary models proposed in specialised literature and identify four stages of digital maturity. The phases are as follows: (a) presence, where government agencies merely present information on the Internet; (b) interaction, where citizens can interact with the public administration; (c) transaction, where citizens can complete transactions and exchanges through the portals; and (d) integration, where different government agencies share information, including social networking applications and e-participation mechanisms. Following this approach, this paper uses a modified version of the global online transparency index developed by Saraite et al. (2018)Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004., which consists of four dimensions: E-information, E-Services, E-Participation, and Navigability, Design, and Accessibility (see Table I), to evaluate the online transparency of Spanish universities.

A few prior empirical studies on web disclosure have focused on HEIs (e.g., Crawford, 2012Crawford, J. (2012). A link to the future: A pilot study look at how historically black colleges and universities with journalism and mass communications units use the internet in recruiting. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 5(2), 47–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v5i2.6919.; Díaz et al., 2015Díaz, J.M., Alfonso, J., & Panizo, L. (2015). Building up E-Participatory decision-making from the local to the global scale. Study case at the European Higher Education Area. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 26–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.004.; Kirchner et al., 2016Kirchner, N., Vasconcellos, M., João, R., & Alberton, L. (2016). An analysis of the level of transparency of federal universities’ websites in the south of Brazil. Public Administration Research, 5(2), 42–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/par.v5n2p42.; Saraite et al., 2018Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004.; Ramírez and Tejada, 2019Ramírez, Y. & Tejada, A. (2019). Digital transparency and public accountability in Spanish universities in online media. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(5), 701-732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2019-0039.). Among the existing studies, there are those that examine stakeholders’ perceptions of the importance of web transparency (Evgenievich et al., 2015Evgenievich, E., Evgenievna, T., Viktorovna, S., & Ivanovna, L. (2015). Some aspects of the implementation of the principle of transparency in Russian universities: Research, experience, perspectives. International Education Studies, 8(5), 191–2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n5p191.; Ramírez et al., 2016Ramírez, Y., Tejada, A., & Manzaneque, M. (2016). The value of disclosing intellectual capital in Spanish universities. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(1), 176-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-02-2015-0025.; Flórez et al., 2017Flórez, J.M., López, M.V., & López, A.M. (2017). Transparency and its determinants at Colombian universities. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(4), 674-687. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1239613.); those that examine the actual web transparency carried out by the university, albeit focusing on one specific dimension such as the information contained on the web page (Crawford, 2012Crawford, J. (2012). A link to the future: A pilot study look at how historically black colleges and universities with journalism and mass communications units use the internet in recruiting. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 5(2), 47–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v5i2.6919.; Flórez et al., 2014Flórez, J.M., López, M.V., & López, A.M. (2014). Corporate governance, analysis of the top 100 universities in the Shanghai ranking. Revista de Educación, 364, 170–196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2014-364-259.; Brusca et al., 2019Brusca, I., Cohe, S., Manes, F., & Nicoló, G. (2019). Intellectual capital disclosure and academic rankings in European universities. Do they go hand in hand? Meditari Accounting Research, 28(1), 51-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-01-2019-0432.; Son-Turan and Lambrechts, 2020Son-Turan, S., & Lambrechts, W. (2020). Sustainability disclosure in higher education. A comparative analysis of reports and websites of public and private universities in Turkey. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 20(7), 1143-1170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0070.), E-services (Kim et al., 2014Kim, N., Rahman, A., & Ahmed, M. (2014). E-service quality in higher education and frequency of use of the service. International Education Studies, 7(3), 1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n3p1.) or E-participation (Díaz et al., 2015Díaz, J.M., Alfonso, J., & Panizo, L. (2015). Building up E-Participatory decision-making from the local to the global scale. Study case at the European Higher Education Area. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 26–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.004.; Li and Zhao, 2020Li, X., & Zhao, G. (2020). Democratic involvement in higher education: a study of Chinese student E-participation in University Governance. Higher Education Policy, 33, 65-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0094-8.) and those that take a more synthetized approach to various dimensions (Pinto et al., 2009Pinto, M., Guerrero, D., Fernández, A., & Doucet, A. V. (2009). Information provided by Spanish university web pages on their assessment and quality processes. Scientometrics, 81(1), 265–289. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2123-7.; Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.; Manes et al., 2018Manes, F., Nicoló, G., & Targaglia, P. (2018). New trends in intellectual capital reporting. Exploring online intellectual capital disclosure in Italian universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(4), 814-835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-09-2017-0119.; Ramírez and Tejada, 2019Ramírez, Y. & Tejada, A. (2019). Digital transparency and public accountability in Spanish universities in online media. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(5), 701-732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2019-0039.). Similarly, a number of studies have examined accessibility and usability issues on university websites (Buenadicha et al., 2001Buenadicha, M., Chamorro, A., Miranda, F.J., & González, O.R. (2001). A new web assessment index: Spanish universities analysis. Internet Research, 11(3), 226-234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240110396469.; Hilera et al., 2013Hilera, J.R., Fernández, L., Suárez, E., & Vilar, E.T. (2013). Evaluación de la accesibilidad de páginas web de universidades españolas y extranjeras incluidas en rankings universitarios internacionales. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 36(1), e004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2013.1.913.; Casasola et al., 2017Casasola Balsells, L.A., Guerra González, J.C., Casasola Balsells, M.A., & Pérez Chamorro, V.A. (2017). La accesibilidad de los portales web de las universidades públicas andaluzas. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 40(2), 169-183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2017.2.1372.; İşeri et al., 2017İşeri, E.İ; Uyar, K., & İlhan, Ü. (2017). The accessibility of Cyprus Islands’ Higher Education Institution Websites. Procedia Computer Science, 120, 967-974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.333.; Acosta-Vargas et al., 2018Acosta-Vargas, P., Acosta, T., & Lujan-Mora, S. (2018). Challenges to Assess Accessibility in Higher Education Websites: A Comparative Study of Latin America Universities. IEEE Access, 6, 36500-36508.).

Therefore, there is a need for research that examines the information provided by universities on their websites and the factors that explain this transparency practice.

2.2. Explanatory factors of online disclosure by universities

This study concentrates on some factors that have been considered in previous research in the context of the corporate and public sectors, as well as some factors that are unique to the higher education sector (Saraite et al., 2018Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004.; Larrán et al., 2019Larrán, M., Andrades, F.J., & Herrera, J. (2019). An analysis of university sustainability reports from the GRI database: an examination of influential variables. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(6), 1019-1044. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2018.1457952.; Segura-Mariño et al., 2020bSegura-Mariño, A.G., Piñeiro-Naval, V., & Moreira-Cedeño, C.M. (2020b). Metodología para evaluar la comunicación institucional en sitios web universitarios. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 26(3), 1217-1228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5209/esmp.65418.; Garde et al., 2021Garde, R., Rodríguez, M.P., & López, A.M. (2021). Which are the main factors influencing corporate social responsibility information disclosures on universities’ websites. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 524-548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020524.). Seven variables have been chosen in particular: private funding, internationality, gender, academic performance, social media presence, university age, and university size.

3.1. Sample and data collection

Our sample is based on the total population of Spanish universities as of December 31, 2019 (50 public universities and 26 private universities).

We collected two primary categories of secondary data: university characteristics such as size, age, funding, internationality, presence on social media, leverage, and the Chancellor’s gender, and the global online transparency index (GOTI). In 2019, these data were collected from each university’s website.

3.2. Research design

This paper’s research is structured in two phases. First, a content analysis of all 76 Spanish universities’ websites was performed between September and December of 2019. The purpose of content analysis is to analyse collected data in a systematic, objective, and reliable manner (Guthrie, 2014Guthrie, J. (2014). In defence of disclosure studies and the use of content analysis: a research note. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 291-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-03-2014-0029.; Krippendorff, 1980Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. The Sage CommText Series, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.; Guthrie et al., 2004Guthrie, J., Petty, R., Yongvanich, K., & Ricceri, F. (2004). Using content analysis as a research method to inquire into intellectual capital reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 282-293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930410533704.). According to Krippendorff (1980, p. 21)Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. The Sage CommText Series, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA., content analysis is “a research technique for drawing replicable and valid conclusions from data based on their context”. Moreover, according to McMillan (2000)McMillan, S.J. (2000). The microscope and the moving target: the challenge of applying content analysis to the World Wide Web. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(1), 80-98. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/107769900007700107., the benefits of content analysis can also be applied to web content analysis. In addition, the content analysis typically yields a disclosure index, which is a numerical indicator that reflects the quantity of information disclosed in order to demonstrate the level of disclosure on the analysed communication channel (Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.; Lacy et al., 2015Lacy, S., Watson, B.R., Riffe, D., & Lovejoy, J. (2015). Issues and Best Practices in Content Analysis. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(4), 791-811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990156073.). This study employs a modified version of the global online transparency index (GOTI) developed by Saraite et al. (2018)Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004. to quantify and evaluate the level of online transparency in Spanish universities. This index consists of 76 items divided into four dimensions: E-Information (it refers to the inclusion of information on the Internet about the main aspects of the university), E-Services (online services that optimise the process of learning and administrative services), E-Participation (online participatory democratic process in order to obtain the involvement of their heterogeneous stakeholders), and Navigability, Design, and Accessibility (characteristics of the webpage that facilitate the involvement of their diverse stakeholders). The E-Information dimension is comprised of seven subcategories: university overview, university organization and governance, financial items, general services: input (of students and resources), teaching services: process, teaching services: output, research services, and community services.

After delineating the information to be included in the disclosure index, a comprehensive analysis of the content of Spanish university websites was conducted. Specifically, the accumulation of data was conducted manually by two researchers who analyzed the websites of the 76 universities in Spain. The authors collected the data between September 2019 and December 2019. These researchers conducted the content analysis, which, according to previous scholars (Guthrie et al., 2004Guthrie, J., Petty, R., Yongvanich, K., & Ricceri, F. (2004). Using content analysis as a research method to inquire into intellectual capital reporting. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 5(2), 282-293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930410533704.; Striukova et al., 2008Striukova, L., Unerman, J., & Guthrie, J. (2008). Corporate reporting of intellectual capital: evidence from UK companies. The British Accounting Review, 40(4), 297-313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2008.06.001.), contributes to the precision and dependability of the coding procedure. Initially, a meeting was held to establish the strategy for each indicator. In particular, the researchers coded a sample of websites from ten universities. After discussing the differences and determining the final set of coding principles, the two researchers conducted the analysis independently. In conclusion, the results were reviewed to resolve any discrepancies and eliminate any potential bias. No significant discrepancies were reported, indicating that the coding was reliable. In instances where there was disagreement regarding the score ascribed to a particular item, a third researcher was consulted to determine the appropriate value. Krippendorf’s Alpha was calculated for the purpose of calculating the intercoder reliability test. The average value should be αk ≥ 0.70 (Krippendorff, 2011Krippendorff, K. (2011). Agreement and information in the reliability of coding. Communication Methods and Measures, 5, 93-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2011.568376.). The αk = 0.9 was obtained. This is likely due to the fact that there was no significant confusion during the contributor’s training or during the final data collection.

As GOTI is a numerical indicator with the purpose of quantifying the amount of information that is disclosed (Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.), a dichotomous scoring method was selected in accordance with previous research that suggests an item’s presence is not correlated with its importance (Wood, 2000Wood, G. (2000). A cross-cultural comparison of the contents of codes of ethics: USA, Canada and Australia. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(4), 287–298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006034209956.) and those with comparable research objectives (Buenadicha et al., 2001Buenadicha, M., Chamorro, A., Miranda, F.J., & González, O.R. (2001). A new web assessment index: Spanish universities analysis. Internet Research, 11(3), 226-234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240110396469.). Thus, a specific item (di) was assigned a “1” if the information was available on the webpage and a “0” otherwise. The quotient between the aggregates of all item scores (di) and the total number of items observed (76 items) determines the GOTI. In order to convey this as a percentage, this was multiplied by 100.

Taking these factors into account, the GOTI is calculated as follows:

where ${\sum }_{i=1}^{76}di$ is the score obtained in the sub-group of 76 items. The maximum value of the GOTI is 1 and the minimum is 0.

Using Cronbach’s alpha as recommended by Feldt (1969)Feldt, L. S. (1969). A test of the hypothesis that Cronbach’s alpha or Kuder-Richardson coefficient twenty is the same for two tests. Psychometrika, 34(3), 363-373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289364., the internal consistency of the GOTI index was calculated to be αc = 0.68, which is an acceptable value for exploratory research (Hair et al., 2014Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7a.). Pearson Education Limited.).

In the second phase, we employed the ordinary least squares (OLS) regression technique to determine the extent to which the selected explanatory variables could affect the level of online transparency.

To analyse the determinants of online transparency, the following model is proposed for both of them:

where GOTI is the global online transparency index of university; β0 is the constant; β1-β7 is the coefficient of the explanatory variables (size, age, funding, internationality, presence in social media, leverage, and gender of Chancellor); εi is the error or disturbance terms of university.

Table II summarizes the hypothesis, definitions of variables, proxies and expected signs.

4.1. Content analysis results: web transparency of universities

Globally, the analysis of university websites revealed an online transparency level of 53.64 percent (see Table I). This result is consistent with the assertion that, despite the fact that the web can be an effective and useful tool for disclosing information to the broad range of stakeholders involved in university activities, its use by Spanish universities is below the desired level (Brusca et al., 2019Brusca, I., Cohe, S., Manes, F., & Nicoló, G. (2019). Intellectual capital disclosure and academic rankings in European universities. Do they go hand in hand? Meditari Accounting Research, 28(1), 51-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-01-2019-0432.; Ramírez and Tejada, 2019Ramírez, Y. & Tejada, A. (2019). Digital transparency and public accountability in Spanish universities in online media. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(5), 701-732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2019-0039.).

Regarding subindexes, this study demonstrates that universities do not place equal emphasis on all aspects. In particular, it was observed that “Navigability, Design, and Accessibility” and “E-participation” had higher values than “E-Information” and “E-Services”. This result is consistent with the findings of Saraite et al. (2018)Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004., who found that the top 100 universities in the world are aware of the importance of having a website with adequate “Navigability, Design, and Accessibility”, while “E-Information” was the least valued dimension.

Focusing on categories, the mean value of “E-Information” is 51.39 percent, indicating that, on average, Spanish universities do not disclose many of the items that should be disclosed in accordance with stakeholder theory. Specifically, Spanish universities are more likely to disclose items related to “General services: Input of students and resources”: (73.50%) and “Teaching services: Process” (64.74%), which is not surprising given that teaching appears to be the primary mission of most universities. In addition, the subtopic University organisation and governance (73.19%) are extensively accessible online. The lowest scores pertain to financial items (31.39%), highlighting the dearth of transparency regarding the financial performance statement and financial ratios. Additionally, the subsection “Community services” registered a low result, achieving an average value of 34.21%, indicating that despite the emerging third mission, characterised by synergy with the external community of industries and research centres, Spanish universities disclose a low quality and quantity of this information on their websites. Previous studies (Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.; Católico, 2012Católico, D. (2012). Revelación y divulgación de la información financiera y no financiera de las Universidades Públicas en Colombia. Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, 20(1), 57–76.; Flórez et al., 2017Flórez, J.M., López, M.V., & López, A.M. (2017). Transparency and its determinants at Colombian universities. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(4), 674-687. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1239613.; Saraite et al., 2018Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004.; Ramírez and Tejada, 2019Ramírez, Y. & Tejada, A. (2019). Digital transparency and public accountability in Spanish universities in online media. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(5), 701-732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2019-0039.) have highlighted the need for higher education institutions to exert more effort on E-information.

The results, however, indicate that there is a high level of interest in “Navigability, Design, and Accessibility” (the mean value is 60.53%). Specifically, the obtained values indicate that the websites of Spanish universities have a high level of navigability and accessibility but not interactivity. The item with the highest usage rate was the presence of a section used specifically to access each category of information (92.11%). Similarly, the majority of cases included a search function on their pages, and the internal links of the university were distinguished from external links in 85.52 percent of instances. However, only a few cases (10.53%) included hyperlinks as a tool alongside the supplied information. These findings are consistent with those of other studies (Hilera et al., 2013Hilera, J.R., Fernández, L., Suárez, E., & Vilar, E.T. (2013). Evaluación de la accesibilidad de páginas web de universidades españolas y extranjeras incluidas en rankings universitarios internacionales. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 36(1), e004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2013.1.913.; Casasola et al., 2017Casasola Balsells, L.A., Guerra González, J.C., Casasola Balsells, M.A., & Pérez Chamorro, V.A. (2017). La accesibilidad de los portales web de las universidades públicas andaluzas. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 40(2), 169-183. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2017.2.1372.; İşeri et al., 2017İşeri, E.İ; Uyar, K., & İlhan, Ü. (2017). The accessibility of Cyprus Islands’ Higher Education Institution Websites. Procedia Computer Science, 120, 967-974. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.333.; Acosta-Vargas et al., 2018Acosta-Vargas, P., Acosta, T., & Lujan-Mora, S. (2018). Challenges to Assess Accessibility in Higher Education Websites: A Comparative Study of Latin America Universities. IEEE Access, 6, 36500-36508.), indicating that there is still work to be done before the entire university community is fully accesible.

The “E-Participation” subindex represented 55.26 percent of the total items. It was striking to discover that only 10.53 percent of universities offered online opinion polls when analysing this category. Also receiving a low score was the student complaints and suggestions box (23.68%). In contrast, it was observed that contact information for those in command of the services was abundant, with a value of 81.58%. These results indicate that the mechanisms implemented by Spanish universities to improve e-participation are still in their infancy, which is consistent with the findings of Díaz et al. (2015)Díaz, J.M., Alfonso, J., & Panizo, L. (2015). Building up E-Participatory decision-making from the local to the global scale. Study case at the European Higher Education Area. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 26–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.004. and Li and Zhao (2020)Li, X., & Zhao, G. (2020). Democratic involvement in higher education: a study of Chinese student E-participation in University Governance. Higher Education Policy, 33, 65-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0094-8., who assert that higher education institutions need to pay more attention to facilitating the e-participation process and providing the necessary channels to receive feedback from the public.

Finally, “E-Services” dimension received the lowest score (47.37%). In terms of this category of information, it is important to note that 65.79 percent of the studied universities offered downloadable forms and applications for managing official study procedures. In only 26.32 percent of all cases, it was possible to complete the entire process online, including payment, for unofficial studies.

Therefore, despite the fact that the Internet can be an effective and useful tool for disseminating information to the vast array of stakeholders engaged in university activities, its use by Spanish universities falls short of expectations. In this regard, these results demonstrate the need for universities in Spain to make greater efforts to disseminate pertinent information and establish interaction mechanisms that facilitate effective communication. Moreover, our findings are consistent with those of Ramírez and Tejada (2019)Ramírez, Y. & Tejada, A. (2019). Digital transparency and public accountability in Spanish universities in online media. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 20(5), 701-732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-02-2019-0039., Brusca et al. (2019)Brusca, I., Cohe, S., Manes, F., & Nicoló, G. (2019). Intellectual capital disclosure and academic rankings in European universities. Do they go hand in hand? Meditari Accounting Research, 28(1), 51-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-01-2019-0432., and Andrades et al. (2021)Andrades, J., Martínez-Martínez, D., & Larrán, M. (2021). Corporate governance disclosures by Spanish universities: how different variables can affect the level of such disclosures? Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(1), 86-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2020-0766., who discovered that Spanish universities are attempting to create websites with the properties recommended by the literature. Moreover, if we compare our results with those of Gallego et al. (2011)Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423., we can see that, despite the 2013 implementation of the law on transparency, access to public information, and good governance, the situation regarding the characteristics of the websites of Spanish universities has not changed after ten years.

4.2. Linear regression model: empirical finding of ols model

Table III contains the principal descriptive statistics of the independent variables used in the regressions.

To test the seven hypotheses, an OLS regression model was performed with web transparency as the dependent variable (i.e., the global online transparency index, GOTI).

The results of the OLS regression model used to test the seven hypotheses are presented in Table IV. Multicollinearity (variance influence factor test) and heteroscedasticity were evaluated as hypotheses underlying the regression model (Hidalgo et al., 2011Hidalgo, R.L., García-Meca, E., & Martínez, I. (2011). Corporate governance and intellectual capital disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 483-495. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-010-0692-x.). To evaluate multicollinearity issues, the variance inflation factor (VIF) score was calculated for each independent variable. In this instance, the maximum VIF for variable leverage is 3.176, eliminating multicollinearity issues. In addition, White’s and Breusch-Pagan’s heteroscedasticity analyses were conducted with negative outcomes (Table IV). With an adjusted R-Squared of 0.45, the regression model is statistically significant (P-value 0.01).

Three out of seven variables are statistically significant in general: internationality, size, and leverage.

Internationality specifically has a positive coefficient and is statistically significant at the 1% level (p-value 0.01). This conclusion can be derived from the fact that a higher level of information disclosed by universities can attract more international students, for whom university websites are the primary source of information regarding the activities, services, and financial condition of the universities. Previous research on the level of online information disclosure in universities (Manes et al., 2018Manes, F., Nicoló, G., & Targaglia, P. (2018). New trends in intellectual capital reporting. Exploring online intellectual capital disclosure in Italian universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(4), 814-835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-09-2017-0119.; Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.) has found a positive relationship between internationality and online information disclosure. Some features, such as an English-language website and audio and video files, offer international students friendlier and more accessible disclosure.

Similarly, we discovered a correlation between size and voluntary disclosure. The coefficient for size is positive and statistically significant at the 5% level (p-value 0.05). This result confirms, in accordance with stakeholder theory and political costs theory, that large universities disclose more information to satisfy the information needs of a growing number of stakeholders (taxpayers, governments, students, research centres, and external funders) who demand high levels of transparency and to reduce external pressure and political costs (White et al., 2007White, G., Lee, A., & Tower, G. (2007). Drivers of voluntary intellectual capital disclosure in listed biotechnology companies. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 8(3), 517-537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930710774894.). According to the legitimacy theory, larger universities are more visible and subject to public scrutiny, which may prompt them to disclose more information in order to enhance their legitimacy (Andrades et al., 2021Andrades, J., Martínez-Martínez, D., & Larrán, M. (2021). Corporate governance disclosures by Spanish universities: how different variables can affect the level of such disclosures? Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(1), 86-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2020-0766.). In addition, the findings are consistent with those of previous research on universities (Maingoth and Zeghal, 2008Maingot, M., & Zeghal, M. (2008). An analysis of voluntary disclosure of performance indicators by Canadian universities. Tertiary Education and Management, 14(4), 269-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880802481666.; Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.; Saraite et al., 2018Saraite, L., Gálvez, M.M., & Haro, A. (2018). Exploring determining factors of web transparency in the world’s top universities. Spanish Accounting Review, 21(1), 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2017.07.004.; Católico, 2012Católico, D. (2012). Revelación y divulgación de la información financiera y no financiera de las Universidades Públicas en Colombia. Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, 20(1), 57–76.; Garde et al., 2013Garde, R., Rodríguez, M.P., & López, A.M. (2013). Online disclosure of university social responsibility: A comparative study of public and private US universities. Environmental Education Research, 19(6), 709–746. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.749976.; Andrades et al., 2021Andrades, J., Martínez-Martínez, D., & Larrán, M. (2021). Corporate governance disclosures by Spanish universities: how different variables can affect the level of such disclosures? Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(1), 86-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2020-0766.).

Leverage is negative and statistically significant at the 10% confidence level (p-value 0.10). This demonstrates that leverage has a negative effect on the extent of web-based disclosure by universities as the quantity of information to disseminate decreases in proportion to leverage. This finding is consistent with Gallego et al. (2011)Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423., who noted that Spanish universities with greater leverage disclose less information on their websites than universities with minimal leverage. In contrast to the findings of other studies (Gordon et al., 2002Gordon, T., Fischer, M., Malone, D., & Tower, G. (2002). A comparative empirical examination of extent of disclosure by private and public colleges and universities in the United States. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 21, 235-275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4254(02)00051-0.; Ntim et al., 2017Ntim, C.G., Soobaroyen, T., & Broad, M.J. (2017). Governance structures, voluntary disclosures and public accountability: The case of UK higher education institutions. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 30(1), 65-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2014-1842.; Nicoló et al., 2020Nicoló, G., Manes, F., Christiaens, J., & Aversano, N. (2020). Accountability through intellectual capital disclosure in Italian universities. Journal of Management and Governance, 24, 1055-1087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-019-09497-7.), we find that leverage has no significant effect on the extent of disclosure in the context of higher education.

On the other hand, there were no significant associations between web transparency and the variables “age, funding, social media presence, and gender of the Chancellor.” Specifically, age and funding have negative coefficients that are not statistically significant, whereas social media presence and the gender of the Chancellor have positive coefficients that are not statistically significant. These results are consistent with previous studies that found no relationship between public or private funding and online transparency (Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.; Flórez et al., 2017Flórez, J.M., López, M.V., & López, A.M. (2017). Transparency and its determinants at Colombian universities. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(4), 674-687. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1239613.; Brusca et al., 2019Brusca, I., Cohe, S., Manes, F., & Nicoló, G. (2019). Intellectual capital disclosure and academic rankings in European universities. Do they go hand in hand? Meditari Accounting Research, 28(1), 51-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-01-2019-0432.); studies that found no significant relationship between university’ age and online transparency (Gallego et al., 2011Gallego, I., Rodríguez, L., & García, I.M. (2011). Information disclosed online by Spanish universities: content and explanatory factors. Online Information Review, 35(2), 360-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14684521111151423.; Bisogno et al., 2014Bisogno, M., Citro, F., & Tommasetti, A. (2014). Disclosure of university websites. Evidence from Italian data. Global Business and Economics Review, 16(4), 452-471. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2554040.; Manes et al., 2018Manes, F., Nicoló, G., & Targaglia, P. (2018). New trends in intellectual capital reporting. Exploring online intellectual capital disclosure in Italian universities. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(4), 814-835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-09-2017-0119.; Garde et al., 2021Garde, R., Rodríguez, M.P., & López, A.M. (2021). Which are the main factors influencing corporate social responsibility information disclosures on universities’ websites. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18, 524-548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020524.); and studies that found that gender of the Chancellor is not a factor affecting the online transparency in higher education institutions (Garde et al., 2020Garde, R., Flórez, J.M., López, M.V., & López, A.M. (2020). Corporate governance and disclosure of information on corporate social responsibility: an analysis of the top 200 universities in the Shangai Ranking. Sustainability, 12, 1549-1571. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041549.; Andrades et al., 2021Andrades, J., Martínez-Martínez, D., & Larrán, M. (2021). Corporate governance disclosures by Spanish universities: how different variables can affect the level of such disclosures? Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(1), 86-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2020-0766.).

In conclusion, internationality, size, and leverage appear to be three appropriate factors on which universities can act to develop strategies that positively influence the level of online information transparency. While it appears that the trend regarding the greater or lesser implementation of transparency best practices via the Internet is not influenced by the “age, funding, social media presence, and gender of the Chancellor,” these factors do appear to play a role.