College Students' Decision-Making for Study Abroad

This article was downloaded by: [Dr Jonathon Day] On: 07 March 2015, At: 12:31 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttt20

College Students’ Decision-Making for Study Abroad – Anecdotes from a U.S. Hospitality and Tourism Internship Program in China a

a

b

Liping A. Cai , W. Wei , Ying (Tracy) Lu & Jonathon J. Day

a

a

School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University,West Lafayette, IN, USA b

Click for updates

Department of Retailing and Tourism Management, School of Human Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture, Food & Environment, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA Published online: 21 Jan 2015.

To cite this article: Liping A. Cai, W. Wei, Ying (Tracy) Lu & Jonathon J. Day (2015): College Students’ Decision-Making for Study Abroad – Anecdotes from a U.S. Hospitality and Tourism Internship Program in China, Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, DOI: 10.1080/15313220.2014.999735 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2014.999735

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Downloaded by [Dr Jonathon Day] at 12:31 07 March 2015

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions

Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 00:1–26, 2015 Copyright © Taylor & Francis ISSN: 1531-3220 print/1531-3239 online DOI: 10.1080/15313220.2014.999735

College Students’ Decision-Making for Study Abroad – Anecdotes from a U.S. Hospitality and Tourism Internship Program in China LIPING A. CAI and W. WEI Downloaded by [Dr Jonathon Day] at 12:31 07 March 2015

School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University,West Lafayette, IN, USA

YING (TRACY) LU Department of Retailing and Tourism Management, School of Human Environmental Sciences, College of Agriculture, Food & Environment, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA

JONATHON J. DAY School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University,West Lafayette, IN, USA

This study attempts to understand how the hospitality and tourism students in the United States make decisions for study abroad participation. Through the analysis of textual data from focus groups and in-depth interviews, this study has identified three sequential phases of a decision-making process by study abroad participants. The first phase is pre-evaluation, including initial awareness and information search. The second phase is decision-making that consists of pull and push motivational factors, influencers, and barriers. The third phase is postparticipation, including the elements of program evaluation, impacts, and future behavior. The implications of this study’s findings are discussed in relation to the design, recruitment, administration, and curricula integration of study abroad programs.

Note: These authors contributed equally to this research and should be considered co-first authors. Received September 6, 2012; accepted February 28, 2014 Address correspondence to Ying (Tracy) Lu, PhD, Assistant Professor, Hospitality Management and Tourism, School of Human Environmental Sciences, University of Kentucky, 121 Erikson Hall, Lexington, Kentucky, USA 40506. E-mail: [email protected] 1

2

Cai et al.

KEYWORDS study abroad, international internship, decisionmaking, China


INTRODUCTION In 2009, President Obama of the United States declared a “100,000 strong” initiative to send 100,000 students to China over the next four years. Secretary Clinton called upon leaders of the U.S. institutions of higher learning and study-abroad providers to double the number of students who study in China by 2014. Serious challenges remain, however, on the U.S. campuses to realize this and other ambitious goals of study abroad programs (SAPs) set by universities themselves (e.g., Holland & Kedia, 2003; IIE, 2007). Among them is the optional or even extracurricular nature of SAPs in most academic programs. For achieving the goal of encouraging more U.S. students to study abroad in China, understanding how the U.S. college students make a study abroad decision becomes a timely and practical research topic for the country. A review of the literature about study abroad indicated that both topics of motivations for SAPs (e.g., Brislin & Kim, 2003) and the impacts of SAPs (e.g., Anastasia, 2004) have been investigated. Yet, there is a lack of a holistic framework that describes students’ decision-making process of participating in SAPs, including various stages and potential factors at each stage of the decision-making process. SAPs are created as dual-purpose learning experiences by their designers and providers (e.g., Carr, 2003; Toncar & Cudmore, 2000). Both touristic and educational characteristics must be taken into consideration in research inquiries. With regard to touristic characteristics, SAPs are typically destinations that require traveling to different places (e.g., Anastasia, 2004; Deutsch, 1970). Educationally, the participants are primarily undergraduate students in a cohort age group who are prone to be influenced by their families and/or peers in making significant decisions, such as decisions of pursuing further education, career, and traveling. Academic and cultural components are usually intertwined by program developers to provide students with a more meaningful educational experience (Carr, 2003). Therefore, a comprehensive framework to understand the decision-making process for SAPs presents itself as an area that requires further exploration. The purpose of the present study is to provide a better understanding of the U.S. college students’ decision-making process for SAP participation using a study abroad program in hospitality and tourism management as a case for the investigation. Specifically, this study is aimed at (1) identifying the factors, stages, and influential parties in the dynamic decision-making process for hospitality and tourism students to participate in SAPs and (2) providing a holistic framework delineating how a SAP is explained, chosen, and evaluated.

College Students’ Decision-Making for Study Abroad

3

Understanding of how students make a decision on study abroad participation is expected to help educators and administrators to gain a deeper insights into the issues that influence students’ decision-making process, to formulate targeted strategies for effectively facilitating students’ participation in SAPs, and to deliver a positive and impactful study abroad experience.

LITERATURE REVIEW


Study Abroad Programs (SAPs) Previous literature has implied that SAPs are a form of special interest tourism by embracing both touristic and educational characteristics. One of the most frequently cited definitions of SAPs can be found in the early work by Coelho (1962) and Deutsch (1970). SAPs are defined as the programs that students participate in to study in a foreign country for an extended period of time with a goal of enhancing levels of international understanding and concern. Similarly, Anastasia (2004) considered SAPs as educational activities that take place outside the geographical boundaries of the country of origin. By synthesizing the definitions of previous studies, SAPs in the present study can be defined as a form of programs for student participants to study and enhance their international understanding outside the geographical boundaries of their country of origin for an extended period of time. SAPs have been integrated by colleges and universities into their higher education curriculum plans (Carr, 2003), including multi-location tours (Gordon & Smith, 1992; Schuster, 1993), summer programs in collaboration with host schools, international exchange programs for cultural experience, and internships that provide real-world experience in students’ fields of study (Toncar & Cudmore, 2000). Regardless of the diverse forms of SAPs, in general, SAPs have been investigated in extant literature from two perspectives. One perspective is concerned with students’ motivations to participate in SAPs, such as seeking a new adventure or experience, building long-term cross-cultural friendships, and improving the academic achievements (Anastasia, 2004; Yu, 2008). The second perspective focuses on the impacts of SAPs. Such impacts are directed at three parties: sponsoring institutions and communities, faculty and host colleges, and participants. Sponsoring institutions and communities will benefit from cultural exposure and enhanced connection with the public (Murphy-Lejeune, 2002). Impacts on faculty and the host colleges include faculty’s personal development, the internationalized campus, and a better use of facilities beyond the academic terms of the year (Armstrong, 1984; Toncar & Cudmore, 2000). For students, the impacts include academic/language learning, cultural exposure, career development, and personal growth (Anastasia, 2004; Yu, 2008).

4

Cai et al.


SAPs for hospitality and tourism students SAPs for hospitality and tourism students have, particularly, received increasing attention (Mills, 2010). Since the late 1980s, the internationalization in higher education and global growth of the tourism industry have resulted in a subsequent increase in study abroad opportunities for hospitality and tourism students, as well as a high demand of research interest in the phenomenon (e.g., Bosselman, Fernsten, Manning, & Kisseleff, 1989). A number of SAPs were offered by the U.S. hospitality and tourism programs for students to study in Europe, China, Latin America and other countries, and at the same time to get credit by paying the prevailing rates of their university (Adler, Behnke, & Lu, 2008). Hospitality and tourism programs that have established SAPs are more likely to enhance their position in the industry and in their own educational institution (Bosselman et al., 1989). Several studies also have provided great insights into the great values of SAPs to the hospitality and tourism students. For instance, according to a review article by Barron (2002), international hospitality and tourism management students choose to study abroad for a quality education experience (e.g., Zhao, 1991). Kim, Guo, Wang, and Agrusa (2007) pointed out that East Asian students majoring in hospitality and tourism programs desire to study abroad for job opportunity, experience in practical field and foreign country, scholastic achievement, apparent attraction, and ease in studying. More recently, Lee, Kim, and Lo (2008) investigated the motivations of college students in Hong Kong in choosing hospitality and tourism management and studying abroad. The results indicated that hospitality and tourism students are driven by self-actualization, job opportunity, field attractiveness, ease of study, and scholastic achievement. These studies highlight the motivations of participating in SAPs among hospitality and tourism students, which further signify hospitality and tourism management students’ strong interest in studying abroad. While hospitality and tourism SAPs are drawing a greater interest from the program leaders and student affair authorities (Gordon & Bonner, 1998), only a handful of research studies have been conducted by hospitality and tourism educators and researchers.

Decision-making process of SAP participation Previous studies have examined some components of students’ study abroad decision-making process, centering on the post-evaluation experiences and influences. For instance, Busby and Gibson (2010) focused on the experiences of hospitality, tourism, and cruise management students who participated in a 12-month overseas internship away from the UK. Their findings center on the problems the UK students have encountered throughout their experience, such as difficulties of communication, culture, keeping in touch with family, friends, and University. Douglas and Jones-Rikker (2001) studied the change in



5

worldmindedness (i.e., the extent to which students value global perspectives on various issues) among business students who participated in SAPs. They identified that students’ participation in an SAP and the cultural difference between a student’s home origin and the SAP destination have a positive effect on the development of students’ worldmindedness. Van’t Klooster, van Wijk, Go, and Van Rekom (2008) focused on the influence of cultural distance on students’ perceived learning outcomes of overseas internship programs, such as cross-cultural competencies and management skills. They found that asymmetric cultural distance and psychic distance are negatively associated with students’ learning of management skills and interaction with locals. Regardless of the wealth of studies investigating students’ study abroad experiences and outcomes, relatively little is known about the factors that impact students’ decision-making in participating in SAPs (Goldstein & Kim, 2006; Salisbury, Umbach, Paulsen, & Pascarella, 2009) with a few exceptions. One of the handful studies investigated the role that Australian students’ personality (i.e., openness and tolerance of ambiguity) plays in their decision-making of studying abroad (Bakalis & Joiner, 2004). Another study identified that the factors predicting liberal arts students’ participation in study abroad programs included students’ expectation of study abroad, ethnocentrism, intercultural communication apprehension, prejudice, competence in nonnative languages, intolerance for ambiguity, and previous travel experience. Salisbury et al. (2009) applied an integrated model of college choice to explore the factors that influence students’ predisposition to study abroad. The factors included financial, human, social, and cultural capital. While the above-mentioned SAPs studies discussed the motivational factors (as input) and experiences and outcomes of SAP participation (as output), the dynamic and intermediate “process” component is lacking. The “black box” (Smallman & Moore, 2010) between the input and output remains less explored, which should shed light on explaining the “how” of actions, such as how students process the information associated with SAPs or how different information sources affect their final decisions. Along with an increasing recognition of the fluidity and complexity of decision-making processes (e.g., Cant, Bink, & Brijball, 2006; Crozier & McLean, 1997; Harren, 1979; Salisbury, Paulsen, & Pascarella, 2010), students’ decision-making of SAPs participation may not be a “simple” input-output stage. The present study, therefore, was aimed at bridging the “process” gap of the U.S. college students’ decision-making in SAP participation by developing an integrated framework for this unique decision-making process.

METHODOLOGY As hospitality and tourism educators consider developing more customized programs for specific target audiences, the present study focuses on one type


6

Cai et al.

of SAPs: a semester-long hotel internship program offered by a U.S. university. The destination of the program was China. The program started in 2000. This particular SAP was chosen for the study for three reasons. First, according to the 2010 Open Doors study of the U.S. campuses conducted in cooperation with the Forum on Education Abroad (IIE, 2010), among the reported top five destinations of SAPs, China was the only one that showed an increase in the number of students participating for 2008/2009 (13,674, up 4%). Second, there was an increase of 37% in the number of students participating in practical work experiences as part of their study abroad, with 18,715 students now receiving academic credits at the U.S. colleges and universities for internships (IIE, 2010). Third, while all the declines of participants were seen in short-term programs (eight weeks or less during the academic year), participation rose in mid-length programs – one semester, one quarter, or two quarters (IIE, 2010). Such programs are perceived to encourage a deeper immersion into host cultures and to increase opportunity for language acquisition (Quraeshi, Luqmani, & Veeck, 2012; Wright & Clarke, 2010). The three reasons provide a justification for the selection of a semester-long hotel internship program in China over general SAPs as a first attempt to explore the decision-making process. A Grounded Theory approach was adopted in this study as the primary method to develop a framework to understand the decision-making by the U.S. college students in participating in SAPs. Grounded Theory has been regarded as one of the most advanced inductive research methods (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Instead of aiming to synthesize and generalize findings to a broader population, this method seeks to develop or discover how people act and react to this phenomenon (Creswell, 1998). While the data reliability in deductive and quantitative methods largely relies on the sample size, the Grounded Theory method does not require a specific number of data for theory development. Instead, Grounded Theory emphasizes the depth and quality of the data (Eisenhardt, 1989). Previous researchers suggest that in Grounded Theory, the reliability issue can be well addressed by using multiple sources of data (Berg & Smith, 1988; Eisenhardt, 1989). One such example can be found in the study of McAdam, Leonard, Henderson, and Hazlett (2008). In the present study, the qualitative data was from two different sources: two focus groups and three in-depth personal interviews. Among 15 undergraduate students who had participated in the semester-long study abroad and internship program in China in the previous year, 10 of them were successfully recruited with the help of the program director via email invitations to attend focusgroup sessions. Seven attended the first focus group and three attended the second focus group. Individual in-depth interviews were decided to be conducted by the researchers with the students who agreed to participate in and did not show up at the focus group interviews due to time conflicts, considering that different sources of data would enhance the reliability and richness of the findings. Three students were individually interviewed. The general



7

questions used for the focus group interviews were used for the individual interviews. Same as the process of focus group interviews, probe questions were further asked based on participants’ responses. All participants were in their junior year when they joined the internship program. The interviews were terminated at the point of conceptual saturation (i.e., at the point when categories are fully accounted for, the relationships among constructs are well established and tested, leading to the emergence of a framework (Green & Thorogood, 2004). The data from two sources, focus group and individual interviews, was then integrated for developing the decision-making framework. The focus group sessions were moderated by one researcher and aided by two others. Several leading questions were prepared based on previous literature on decision-making process in general area. These leading questions were to guide the overall flow of the focus-group discussion and control the scope of the discussion within the interest of the study, centering on (1) students’ initial exposure to the program and their information search afterwards; (2) how and why students decided to participate in this program; and (3) students’ post-evaluation and expected future behavior after their study abroad experience. Probe questions were further asked based on participants’ responses. Participants were given the freedom to openly and freely express their thoughts. To the extent that both researchers and participants were from the same academic program, their acquaintance helped to facilitate open discussions by creating a comfortable and informal interactive environment. The same procedure used for the focus-group sessions was used for the three interviews. To ensure the consistency, both focus groups took place in the same conference room and all three interviews were conducted in a private office on campus. Focus groups lasted approximately two hours and interviews lasted about 40 minutes. Both focus groups and interviews were audiotaped, with written notes taken to capture the emphasis and mode of participants’ discussions. The audio scripts were transcribed into text. Results of the textual data analysis of focus groups were merged with the findings of three in-depth interviews. During both focus group discussions and interviews, the researchers went back and forth to double check with participants for the accuracy of their interpretations of participants’ descriptions. Inconsistencies were addressed in the written notes. Data analysis of the present study followed the systematic process used in typical grounded theory research, such as Creswell (1998) and Graneheim and Lundman (2004). The researchers followed an inductive approach (e.g., Creswell, 1998) and used line-by-line open coding to disaggregate the mass of text into meaningful and related parts (Strauss, 1987). The next step involved the development of categories and subcategories guided for structure and aim of the present research. Finally, based on these categories and subcategories grounded on the textual data provided by the participants, the researchers

8

Cai et al.

developed a logic diagram that illustrates causal conditions influencing the phenomenon and delineates the consequences for the phenomenon (see Figure 1). Then the diagram was modified as the researchers conducted several runs of re-categorization by revisiting the original dataset guided by

Phase I: Pre-evaluation

Awareness

Information Search

• Pre-admission tour

• Official: program, school,

• Professor recommendation

• Study abroad fair


destination websites • Social: former participants,

• Class promotion

parents, professors

Pull Factors

Influencers:

• Attractiveness of SAP

• Primary decision-maker: self

• Attractiveness of the destination

• Indispensable supporter: parents • Facilitator: friends

Phase II: Decision-making

Decided

Motivated

Push Factors

Barriers

• In-depth international cultures

• Feeling of uncertainty

• Anticipated impact on self

• Parents’ concerns with safety and

• Escape from the current life

health • Real and opportunity costs • Implied pressure from peers/romantic relationship

• Overall evaluation • Specific evaluation Evaluation

Impacts • Personal/professional development

Phase III: Post-participation

• Attitudes change towards Future

international culture/students • Attitude change towards own culture, value system, and college

• Spreading word-of-mouth • Planning for more SAPs • Going back for employment

FIGURE 1. Study Abroad Program Decision-making Framework.


9

an approach of Berg (2009), during which the commonalities among categories/subcategories were converged and the labels were updated.


RESULTS Coupled with the review of previous literature, the analysis of the textual data has resulted in a conceptual decision-making framework for an SAP as shown in Figure 1. Three sequential phases of decision-making are identified: Phase I: Pre-evaluation; Phase II: Decision-making; and Phase III: Post-participation. Such three-phase decision-making process for SAP participation is grounded in and highly consistent with the three components in the widely cited decision-making models: input, process, and output (Schiffman & Kanuk, 2007; van der Merwe, Kempen, Breedt, & de Beer, 2010). The awareness of an SAP opportunity and the pre-purchase information search, which are coined as Pre-evaluation in the present study, resembles the input component in the general consumer decision-making models. The process component, termed as Decision-making in the present study, is represented by factors affecting students’ decision-making, which include push and pull factors, influencers, and barriers. The Post-participation reflects the output component in the general consumer decision-making models. This phase presents students’ reactions after their participation in the SAP. More details for each of the three phases are illustrated in Figure 1 and elaborated below. Some verbatim provided by the students are quoted to substantiate the various parts of the proposed framework. Phase I. Pre-evaluation

Awareness The Pre-evaluation phase flows from Awareness to Information Search. In the present study, Awareness refers to how participants initially learn of the SAP, which is termed as need recognition in general consumer decision-making models (Cant et al., 2006). Five major sources are identified as contributors to the construct of Awareness. They are pre-admission tour (i.e., the tour organized by each school before students join the major), professor recommendation, class promotion, study abroad fair, and pre/current participants’ word-ofmouth (WOM). After the initial exposure to the study abroad opportunity, participants are motivated by an overall impression of the program: highly selective, overwhelming, extensive, and challenging. Very intensive, not something that you can do here in the U.S., because you will have the language barriers, cultural barriers, all the barriers you don’t have here. I assume it will be challenging and I will have a lot to do. (Student A, focus group 1)

10

Cai et al.

It will be a bit of work. We will be doing research project, working, and taking classes. I was thinking it will be a little challenging. (Student A, focus group 2)

Although participants perceive the program as challenging or even overwhelming, such perception actually increases their desire of going as they will be doing something that nobody else can do. They expect themselves to overcome the challenges.


I guess it is challenging, working 40 hours a week and taking Chinese; but challenging in a fun way. (Student B, focus group 1) [It is] exciting, because I really don’t know anyone else in the family and all my friends I know would even consider going there. (Student C, focus group 1)

Information search After hearing of the study abroad opportunity, participants initiate Information Search, which refers to the venues and sources that participants seek for more and detailed information in the current study. Instead of the conventional external-internal information source dichotomy documented in previous literature (Cant et al., 2006; Schiffman & Kanuk, 2007), the information sources in the present study can be grouped into official (program/school and destination websites) and social sources (former participants in the similar programs/parents/professors). Official: [I used] the website page. (Student A, focus group 1) I think I went to the link and read about it. (Student B, focus group 2)

Social: I asked a former participant in this program a lot of information about it. (Student A, focus group 2) Yeah, actually my mom is [my source].She did a lot of research of Purdue. (Student D, focus group 1) I heard it in my freshman year. I think Dr. A was talking about it. He mentioned that it was going to be 6 months. I am like “Oh my god that sounds amazing”. (Student E, focus group 1)

With the researched information at hand, participants then proceed to process the information and activate their cognitive analysis for making a more informed decision.


11

Phase II. Decision-making The Decision-making phase describes how different forces jointly drive participants’ decision-making after their information search. Such a decision-making process is affected by four forces: (1) Push Factors of Motivation, (2) Pull Factors of Motivation, (3) Influencers, and (4) Barriers.

Push Factors of Motivation


The first push factor is desire for in-depth international cultures. The majority of participants stress the importance of their desire for exposure to in-depth international culture. I want to learn international culture. I want to get out of America and just experience the world. I have been to Europe and Mexico, and I want to go out and explore another culture. (Student C, focus group 2) Being in the study abroad [program] generally gives you an opportunity to be in the country to experience the country. (Student A, interview)

The second push factor is one’s desire for the anticipated impacts on self. One such desire is gaining independence. Another desire is gaining global competitiveness over peers by adding industry experience. Participants realize that an experience of other cultures has impacts on one’s approaches to work and life, and they desire the opportunity to gain different perspectives and experience. Therefore, they are very specific in the sense that they want different things in the professional field to demonstrate that they are better than what they are perceived. The independence. I have never really lived on my own. This is a way that I want to test myself. (Student F, focus group 1) I want to have more challenging internships, because I did my first internship in Chicago. I really want to get a different work in the hotel industry. I know how it works here, [but] it will be different elsewhere and that will be a huge challenge. (Student A, focus group 2) I just think that, like I said, it makes me apart from my competitors, especially like colleagues at this university and a lot of people in the community. They don’t want to leave. (Student B, focus group 1)

Participants also want to impress their peers and feel proud of themselves by joining a selective and challenging program distinctive from other generic study abroad programs. That is something they would not imagine they could do. I heard about ten to fifteen times “Where did you study abroad?” “Italy”. “Where did you study

12

Cai et al.

abroad?” “Australia”. You know they are very typical programs [that] every university offers. If you apply you get it. (Student F, focus group 1)

Need for escaping from the current life is the third push factor of motivation. A few participants mention that due to some setbacks they have experienced in life, they want to escape from the current situation by studying abroad. I think my favorite thing is to pull myself out of my room. (Student B, focus group 2)


It was a means to escape. I lived in a fraternity and I wasn’t really happy. I will be living there next year as well, but it [this program] actually saves me. It is a very positive thing for me. (Student B, focus group 1)

Pull Factors of Motivation The attractiveness of the study abroad program and the attractiveness of the destination jointly pull participants to select the program. Participants describe the program as “highly selective,” “providing real working/industry experience,” “engaging professors’ personal involvement and University’s brand name,” and “offering good opportunities to go somewhere that is hard to achieve by individuals.” I jumped at the longest and the most intensive [program]. I am pretty sure this will be the most extensive study abroad experience that I can have at the university. (Student B, focus group 1) This actually is a working experience. Other study abroad [programs] are only a three-month tour. We will be working in a foreign country. We are not tourists anymore. (Student B, interview) I like the fact that I will be working 40 hours a week at an international hotel. I mean it is good because it is more about career. (Student G, focus group 1) My professor works very closely with the hotel. The professor knows them personally. It obviously is going to be trustworthy. (Student C, focus group 2)

With regard to the destination, participants note that the unique culture, value system, people, politics, and tourism attractions motivate them to “experience personally” and “find out the truth.” I hear [about] China all the time in newspaper and on TV. It just becomes so powerful. I definitely want to go there and figure out how that will necessarily be so different and how I would adapt to their culture. (Student A, focus group 1)


13

I really want to see how much they actually push. Everybody is talking about it is such a Communist country and it is really strict and tight. I want to see how tight it actually is. Everybody told me what their value will be and how nobody can say anything. (Student C, interview) So you knew what is different culturally and politically. You want to find out how practical the difference is and to examine the difference. You also have a doubt about what the media says, so you want to seek by yourself. (Student A, focus group 1)


The knowledge from China. Everything is new. I mean there is no English. It is about how they try to go over the top of the American style. (Student C, focus group 2) China is a world leader, the super power, the established reputation of running everything. I definitely know I want to be in China. (Student D, focus group 1) I really want to see all the sites in Beijing: Tiananmen Square, Forbidden City, Great Wall, all of those things. I think it is very cool. (Student A, interview)

Influencers Participants also report that three influencers – themselves, parents, and friends –contribute to their decision-making and play different roles. Participants are exposed to the opportunity first. They are the primary decision-makers and play the most active role in the whole process. Parents are important in decision-making. Financial and emotional supports from parents are needed by the participants to confirm their decision. I talked with my parents, the only thing they talked about was [that] they want to make sure I will graduate on time, because that will take one more semester and they are paying for it. (Student E, focus group 1) I think I emailed my parents and included the link to the website. (Student C, focus group 1) I called my mom and told her I am going to China. She said “Ok, how much is that?” (Student A, focus group 2) I know my parents will support me. Even if we are short of money, we will get a loan. They know I am going and they make it happen. (Student D, focus group 1) It is mainly because [of] financial [concerns]. And also when you make a decision, it is a long-term repercussion. (Student C, focus group 2)

In the event of lacking support from parents, participants indicate that they try their best to convince parents. They want to respect parents instead of

14

Cai et al.

running the risk of losing financial support for the trip and damaging their bonding with parents. They use their wisdom, information, and knowledge to present factual evidence to their parents to show that those concerns could be addressed. I have to put myself in their shoes and make them understand how time has changed, how they set up this program, [and] how we will be in the whole community in the hotel. We are living in the hotel. The program will be at an international chain hotel. (Student C, focus group 2)


So from day one, I have decided to work with my parents to hear their concerns, and try to convince them to support me. (Student E, focus group 1)

Friends’ concern affects the decision-making process to a certain extent. Perceived encouragement from friends can facilitate the participants’ decisionmaking and make their life easier. Opinions from friends, however, do not change participants’ decisions even with someone in a relationship. My friends back home are like “Why? You will be gone for the whole summer!” It is very personal, I mean it feels better if they approve. (Student A, focus group 1) I and my girlfriend have been together for almost four years, but I want to do what I want. I think it depends on the person. (Student A, interview)

Barriers Participants report four major concerns when considering the SAP. The most frequently mentioned concern is feelings of uncertainty, including safety, medical issues, language, transportation, unfamiliar environment, and potential emergency. I think living in a strange country was the concern. I am a girl, having things you used to have. Being there, where am I going to buy things and where are those things that I need? (Student A, focus group 1) I was kind of concerned medically. I was thinking what medicine they are going to have [in China]. (Student A, focus group 2) Concern would be more of: here whatever happened, you call 911, you trust them, you trust, you know, their authority, you trust you will be helped. So when I go to China, I don’t speak Chinese, not even once, [911 is] probably not the number in China, I don’t know what I am going to do. (Student C, focus group 1)

In addition to participants’ own concerns with the unknowns, parents’ concern with safety and health is reported as another barrier. Some


15

participants reveal that their parents have tried to overcome such concerns by actively searching information. My dad actually called the hotel in China one time to ask them a lot of questions. I didn’t even know he did [it].I think he tried to help himself to be more confident in the decision-making. (Student A, interview)


My dad worried about the swine flu. I know my parents were really concerned about that because we have read about it. (Student A, interview)

The third barrier is the real and opportunity costs related to the trip. Such costs include finances, academics, and friendships. Yet participants’ desire to go overcomes these barriers. Lastly, implied pressure from peers/romantic relationship is found to be a potential barrier but is not powerful enough to surpass participants’ preference. I am really sad, I am like “Oh I will miss my friends and they will be completely different when I come back”. But I think it is a good thing. So the fact is [that] I kind of miss our friendship but we do not have that much in common anymore [when I came back]. People fell off. (Student G, focus group 1)

Phase III. Post-participation The Post-participation phase comprises the three components of Evaluation, Impacts, and Future Behavior. The three components are indicative of decision-making process for the future.

Evaluation The participants’ evaluation clusters at overall evaluation and specific evaluation. They vote that the SAPs met their expectation but there are clearly aspects of the program they like and others they do not like. On one hand, they enjoy the people, sightseeing, industry experience, and professional networking. On the other hand, they encounter some difficulties, including planning the travel, feeling lost at workplace but over-controlled or overprotected in private time, and missing the English-language environment. I love the people I worked with. They are all incredible: the employees are so friendly; I hang out with them a lot. And I love traveling; it is a lot of fun. (Student A, focus group 1) I obviously enjoyed the people and the culture. It is classic. (Student A, focus group 2) I love working there. I love that company. (Student C, focus group 1)

16

Cai et al.

I am a student and I am an international, so sometimes it was frustrating to even be on a job rotation. (Student F, focus group 1) I don’t like that after about five months, I missed English. Because even people there speak good English, I am still missing [English] words. When you speak with them, you have to speak a little slower. (Student B, interview)


I do think it could be more beneficial to students if they were more supported in traveling. China is a place that you might not go back again. I mean I was there once in my entire life, I really wanted to go to the Great Wall while I was in China. I [also] wanted to go to Beijing or Shanghai. If it was more structured, it would be easier for everyone. (Student E, focus group 1)

Impacts The present research identifies three unique impacts of the SAP for the participants. First important impact describes their personal/professional development. They get a better sense about their career and feel more certain about their future. After five months’ working experience in another country, they know the industry and their personal growth has given them more confidence. Now I realize I can go anywhere. And now my friends are all over the world. So the network has been a huge impact. (Student A, focus group 1) Like how much I actually learned about the industry and the fact that I know I have much better direction about what I want to do in my life than I had before. (Student C, interview) Now I feel I can go anywhere. I can do any other study abroad. (Student A, focus group 2)

The second group of impacts centers on their attitude change toward international culture/students. The participants indicate that such a long-term international experience help them gain a broader world-view and diverse cultural perspectives. They are better prepared to look at some issues from different perspectives; and become more open-minded and empathetic, and at the same time less ignorant of other cultures and students. We encounter a lot of Asian people at the university and at home. And now, it just changes your outlook. Before I left, I don’t understand why they wear what they wear, why they say what they say, or [why they] eat what they eat. I know anytime I have a TA, I am frustrated, because I don’t understand what they are saying. Then I come back, I am like, I can’t believe I was so ignorant to [other people]. Now I want to talk with


17

them more because when I was in China, I did not speak Chinese and I did not know the language, [but] everyone was so nice to me. (Student F, focus group 1)


I am more accepting of other cultures and other people. I used to be a dirty American when I was hearing people talking in the hallway in different languages. They were being loud and they were talking on the phone in different languages. To me, it was so terrible. Now I understand … And am more accepting. I just appreciate more what they are going through. (Student C, focus group 2)

Another key impact refers to the students’ attitude change toward own culture, value system, and college education. First, they challenge their own culture and value system. After extensive exposure to other cultures, they are more aware of their own cultural challenges. I think other countries have better value systems. I will definitely make my kids study abroad. (Student D, focus group 1) After I came back to America, I am more embarrassed. I am in a country that people here are hardheaded, they don’t want to learn other cultures, they are not open to anything like that, and people are so ignorant and racist. Why are we entitled to do that? Why are we so much better than anyone else? It is just sour. Like the way we do business, everything is about money. (Student B, focus group 2)

Second, they observe their classroom experience differently. They become more critical of coursework after gaining in-depth working experience in the real industry and are eager to start their careers. I have learned so much at the hotel that I could never ever learn from a textbook. I want to use my energy in something that is worth more than being in the classroom. (Student G, focus group 1) The coursework is still valuable. The question is I have to pick what is valuable. (Student B, interview) It is kind of looking through all the things that they teach you to find what is necessary and why. (Student C, focus group 1)

Future Behavior The participants’ future behavior takes the form of spreading word-of-mouth, planning for more SAPs, or going back for employment. They find themselves enjoying sharing their experience about people, food, and the industry experience with others. Some participants encourage other students to join an SAP.

18

Cai et al.

They recommend the SAP to fellow students whom they feel would be successful. I think, for the rest of my life, I will brag about it. (Student A, focus group 1) While describing it, I always bring up Chinese people and how genuine Chinese people are. I am so jealous about that my home country can’t have such talented people. People in China are so much more genuine and they care so much more about you. (Student B, focus group 2)


It depends on the audience. For students majoring in hospitality, I definitely will talk about this program. (Student C, focus group 1) I know some of them won’t be up to that level and I know some of them will be, so I told this program to people who I know would meet the level and I would go more depth and pay the time to suggest. (Student A, interview)

Most participants also indicate that if time permits and they can graduate on time, they would like to join more SAPs. A few participants share that they are planning to go back to the destination for their future career development.

DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION As the “100,000 strong” initiative continues, students in the United States are provided opportunities to learn about different cultures and acquire global skills by studying abroad. With this trend as a backdrop, the present study presents a framework of a group of U.S. college students’ decision-making process for their participation in one sub-type of SAPs. The framework contributes to the knowledge on international learning by providing a students’ perspective of how SAPs are informed, chosen, and evaluated. Based on the analysis of the textual data from focus groups and in-depth interviews, three sequential phases of decision-making are identified: Pre-evaluation (initial awareness and further information search), Decision-making (motivational factors, influencers, and barriers), and Post-participation (evaluation, impacts, and future behavior). Phase I flows from Awareness to Information Search. Five major sources that create Awareness indicate that formal introduction (class promotion and study abroad fair) and interpersonal recommendations (professor recommendation and pre/current participants’ WOM) play central roles in informing participants of the study abroad opportunity. Promotion activities before students entered college (pre-admission tour) are also found to create a strong impression of the SAP. In Information Search, the participants seem to only rely on external sources (e.g., websites) when making a decision. Internal sources, such as personal experience, are not identified in the present study.



19

This finding implies that the participants have limited previous exposure to information about the SAP destination. Phase II describes how four forces – Pull Factors, Push Factors, Influencers, and Barriers – jointly drive the decision-making process. Concerning why participants were interested in participating in this SAP, participants’ personal descriptions centered on what they expected to achieve by participating in this SAP and what particulars of this SAP that strengthened their interest. Such findings well reflect the push-pull duality as discussed in previous motivation literature (e.g., Crompton, 1979; Kim, Lehto, & Morrison, 2007). In a travel setting, push factors are defined as the inner desires within a traveler that make one want to travel, which are mainly social-psychological motives (You, O’Leary, Morrison, & Hong, 2000). In the present study, the coded Push Factors are the participants’ desire for in-depth international culture, desire for the anticipated impacts on self, and desire for escaping from the current life (e.g., Yu, 2008). Among these inner desires, a noteworthy one is participants’ desire to impress peers and demonstrate that they are better than how they are perceived. Such desire can be understood through the impression management strategy in sociology and social psychology (Schlenker, 1980). One main motive of the strategy is to construct one’s image to claim personal identity and present oneself in a manner consistent with that image. In this study, it was found that participants may aim to construct a self-identity highlighting their “independence” by participating in such a highly selective and challenging SAP. Participants’ interest in this SAP also can be driven by their inner desire for self-enhancement or self-actualization, which works to make people feel good about themselves and improve their self-esteem. Through active engagement that usually requires additional capacities, one can feel a greater sense of fullness and wholeness and satisfy the need for growth. Within the context of this study, the acknowledged challenges of this SAP are therefore expected to offer participants opportunities to engage, to achieve, and to further improve their self-esteem. Pull Factors in the present study are related to the perceived attributes of the program, composed of the attractiveness of the SAP and the attractiveness of the destination. Attractiveness of SAP content in the present study lies in the high selectivity, long-term and long-haul traveling, and extensive working experience associated with this SAP, which jointly increase both the challenges and the uniqueness of this SAP. The participants aim to present and enhance personal identity by joining this challenging and unique SAP. Destination factors, such as people, food, culture, recreation facilities, and historic resources, also are part of the participants’ consideration. Such findings are consistent with previous studies about travel motivation that suggested that the destination (country) image plays an essential role in the decision-making process (Morley, 1992). While Pull Factors and Push Factors both elicit the participants’ willingness to join the program, participants are affected by social influences prior to


20

Cai et al.

making a final decision. Different parties holding a variety of roles are identified as Influencers and Barriers. Parents are perceived as avid supporters. As the participants in the present study were in their junior year when they joined the program, they may not be financially independent from their family. In the event of their parents’ opposition, however, participants tried their best to convince their parents instead of passively following their parents’ opinions. Such a finding corresponds to the different parent–child relationships across cultures. In the United States, good parenting behaviors include displays of warmth and closeness balanced with monitoring and control (Baumrind, 1971), while Asian parents tend to be more controlling of their children (Lu & Adler, 2009). For those participants who were in face of disagreement by parents, they unanimously indicate that, while they do not want to go against their parents’ opinions, they express their disagreement and try to convince their parents by providing a greater amount of positive information. Other concerns about uncertainty and opportunity costs also are taken into consideration, but they fail to deter the participants’ eagerness to go. Such findings are not consistent with previous literature. Specifically, from the perspective of relational behavior and the role theory in social psychology, Simon (1959) suggested that social influences should determine the role of the actor. In the present study, the participants remain the primary decision-maker for their participation in this SAP. Phase III is comprised of three components: Evaluation, Impacts, and Future Behavior. Different from previous studies that stressed the impacts of SAPS on academic/language learning, cultural exposure, and career development (e.g., Anastasia, 2004), the impacts of the SAP in the present study highlight the participants’ improved self-confidence and professional development in the future, echoing participants’ inner desire for the construction of self-identity, self-enhancement and self-esteem that pushed them to consider this SAP. Another unique finding is in the participants’ future word-of-mouth behavior: while participants enjoy sharing their experience, they like to target “right” people for further recommendation. “Right” people denote those who are perceived capable to overcome all the challenges throughout the program. The findings of the present study yield practical implications for hospitality educators and administrators at the institutional level, as well as for thirdparty SAP providers. Generally, all three groups need to recognize that SAPs have gone beyond just a cultural experience (e.g., a trip to somewhere special during college) for students. Instead, SAPs have become an important strategy that students are using to gain competitive advantages in a global economy. In the following section, specific implications are presented for each phase of the decision-making framework developed in the present study. First, understanding the factors that influence students’ decision-making for participating in SAPs is valuable for educators and administrators in SAP recruitment and program management. For example, professors’ recommendation is



21

found to be important in both stages of awareness and information search. This specific finding indicates that faculty’s roles in hospitality SAP promotion should not be limited to presenting at study abroad fairs, making announcement of SAPs in class, and assisting in particular events for SAP recruitment. Their recommendations of SAPs could be provided during their various interactions with students in both formal and informal settings, such as meetings, individual talks, and class discussions. Faculty’s familiarity with and knowledge of SAPs are, therefore, critical in the sense that they not only disseminate SAP information but, more importantly, exert an influence (e.g., igniting students passion, giving courage and confidence to students in elevating themselves) at the first stage of students’ decision-making for participating in an SAP. While faculty are well positioned to promote SAP they should also be well informed on the challenges to students of these programs in order to provide balanced advice. As suggested by the present study, students are still looking upon their professors for inspiration and assurance. Second, factors identified in the present study such as the attractiveness of SAPs, destination features, and students’ interests and dislikes are informative for designing SAPs. On one hand, the knowledge of these identified factors can be used to help administrators of SAPs develop attractive programs, targeting their recruitment efforts to secure students wanting to know what SAP programs have to offer. One the other hand, knowing what students deem important and comparing that to what SAP programs offer can be helpful to adjust program offerings and match students’ needs with appropriate contents of SAPs. For instance, findings about students’ interest in the destination culture and in the expected difficulty of an SAP program suggest that hospitality educators and SAPs administrators could communicate to students the in-depth cultural experience and selective features of the SAPs, as well as the escape and challenge aspects. Particularly, given that students are found to be most concerned about what they will get out of the SAP, exclusiveness and high levels of challenge can be promoted as an advantage if there is added value in the program, which further encourages hospitality educators and administrators to highlight the substantial learning experiences of an SAP program – not just a “pleasure trip.” In addition to the desire for a better cultural understanding, results of this study indicate that hospitality and tourism students are looking for programs that also significantly impact their career prospects in the hospitality and tourism industry. In programs similar to the one investigated in the present study, students expect a “complete” internship experience besides the experiences traditionally associated with study abroad. As such, programs should expose students to experiences that have immediate application to their chosen field in addition to general cultural experiences. Educators need to take a holistic approach to the study abroad experience dealing not only with the specific program but the whole cultural experience and work experience, beyond the time on the trip or tour itself.


22

Cai et al.

Third, findings regarding students’ concerns and barriers when making a decision, such as the feeling of uncertainty, suggest that hospitality educators and SAP administrators need to work with their university to provide more assistance and services for students to better overcome difficulties during their decision-making process and enhance the value of the educational experience abroad. A variety of potential initiatives and methods are recommended to achieve this goal. First of all, diverse and comprehensive orientations on SAPs can be provided prior to the departure. According to specific concerns reported by students in this study, such orientations need to include life skills, cultural awareness, work expectations, and work practices. Organizing training activities on cultural diversity and cultural awareness of both the destination country and the United States can help to assist in processing the experience. Particularly, students’ reported concern about parents’ support indicates that significant involvement of parents in the orientation and communication process is also desirable. Parents are a key component of students’ decision-making process and need to be addressed specifically to maximize the benefits of the experience for students. Lastly, as students stressed the influence of previous participants in the same SAP program, inviting previous participants to assist potential students and their parents is another approach to address students’ concerns during their decision-making process. Meanwhile, great efforts are called for to improve the SAP alumni relationship management, through which actions will be undertaken in the “re-entry” following the SAP to ensure that students are able to process others’ post SAP experience in a productive manner. Fourth, the three-dimensional impacts of SAPs generated in this study provide university administrators and educators with students’ own perspective about SAPs’ influences and a strong reason why SAPs should be further promoted. As participants in this study reported great interest in their future career development after an SAP program, the U.S. universities should recognize that SAPs are not just a “nice to have” for hospitality and tourism students but a deliberate strategy for students to create competitive advantages in their future career. To this end, efforts should be directed to helping students frame their experience in ways that will assist them in achieving career goals. Administrators and educator alike should also promote the benefits of SAPs to key stakeholders, such as recruiters, to ensure that they appreciate the rigor and benefits for the students’ professional career development. Fifth, the integration of SAPs into academic curricula, particularly for hospitality and tourism programs, is strongly recommended. In this study, SAPs are recognized as not just an “add-on” but are a purposeful decision that students are making to develop their career. This specific finding indicates that adding global business and cultural awareness elements in students’ coursework in addition to the field portion of SAPs can be quite beneficial. Educators must question if the existing curricula are current with the needs and desires of the students when it comes to the international learning experience. Is it



23

time to consider such experience as a requirement in their plan of study? How does such experience affect students’ retention and graduation? A deeper and more thorough understanding of SAPs’ impacts would enable institutions of higher learning to formulate effective and targeted strategies to facilitate students’ evaluation of available SAPs and, thus, to deliver positive and impactful study abroad experiences as an integral part of their college education. Lastly, the findings of this study also offered strategic suggestions for designing and marketing China as an emerging international destination of higher learning and study abroad programs, especially in response to the “100,000 strong” initiative declared by President Obama. The U.S. 2009 “100,000 Strong” initiative is the recognition of the strategic importance of the U.S.–China relationship. It is a national effort designed to increase dramatically the number and diversify the composition of American students studying in China. The study is based on the sample of students in a sixmonth long internship characterized by a close academic and industry partnership. As such, the findings are limited in their applicability to other types of SAP. Yet, they should be informative to the SAP who wishes to develop similar programs, thus making a unique contribution to the national initiative. Additionally, China is not a traditional destination for faculty in U. S. institutions of higher educations to take their students overseas for international educational experience. Its distance from the United States, both geographical and cultural, often concerns SAP organizers for a tough sell. The findings of both the destination’s attractiveness and the barriers for the students are expected to provide a holistic guide for the program design and promotion. The findings of this study need to be interpreted with cautious due to a few limitations. First, this study only dealt with 13 students from one institution for the framework development. Future studies are encouraged to test the framework in substantive areas. Second, this study only focused on one particular type of SAPs. While the findings provide insights into college students’ decision-making process of choosing an SAP that involves longterm and long-haul traveling, future studies are suggested to compare the differences in decision-making process for different types of SAPs. Further, the findings resulted from this research included student participants who had decided to participate in the SAP. Their decision-making process cannot be readily applied to a larger population. Future studies may address students who choose not to study abroad. Comparative studies also can be conducted between decision-making processes of SAPs and those of education or careerrelated plans for college students. Future research, including qualitative and quantitative studies, should also examine the relationships among constructs and identify the relative importance of each factor at different phases of the decision-making process.

24

Cai et al.


REFERENCES Adler, H., Behnke, C., & Lu, Y. (2008, October 11–14). The international component to hospitality education: Study abroad programs. The 2008 EuroCHRIE Congress, Dubai, the United Arab Emirates. Anastasia, K. (2004). Studying abroad: The role of college students’ goals on the development of cross-cultural skills and global understanding. College Student Travel, 38(3), 87–96. Armstrong, G. K. (1984). Life after study abroad: A survey of undergraduate academic and career choices. The Modern Language Journal, 68(1), 1–6. Barron, P. (2002). Issues surrounding Asian students hospitality management in Australia: A literature review regarding the paradox of the Asian learner. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 2(3/4), 23–45. Bakalis, S., & Joiner, T.A., (2004). Participation in tertiary study abroad programs: The role of personality. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(5), 286–291. Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monographs, 4(1, Part 2), 1–103. Berg, B. L. (2009). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Berg, D., & Smith, K. (1988). The self in social inquiry: Research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Bosselman, R. H., Fernsten, J. A., Manning, P. B., & Kisseleff, M. (1989). The international study abroad experience and its effects on hospitality students. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 13, 287–297. Brislin, R. W., & Kim, E. S. (2003). Cultural diversity in people’s understanding and uses of time. Applied Psychology, 52(3), 63–382. Busby, G. D., & Gibson, P. (2009). Tourism and hospitality internship experiences overseas: A British perspective. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 9(1), 4–12. Cant, M. C., Bink, A., & Brijball, S. (2006). Consumer behavior. Juta: Cape Town. Carr, N. (2003). University and college students’ tourism. In B. W. Ritchie, N. Carr, & C. Cooper (Eds.), Managing educational tourism (pp. 181–225). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Coelho, G. (1962). Personal growth and educational development through working and studying abroad. Journal of Social Issues, 18, 55–67. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(4), 408–424. Crozier, D. A., & McLean, F. (1997). Consumer decision-making in the purchase of estate agency services. Service Industry Journal, 17(2), 278–293. Deutsch, S. (1970). International education and exchange: A sociological analysis. Cleveland, OH: Press of Case Western Reserve University. Douglas, C., & Jones-Rikker, C. G. (2001). Study aboard programs in American student worldmindedness. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 13 (1), 55–66.



25

Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 44, 532–550. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine. Goldstein, S. B., & Kim, R. I. (2006). Predicators of US college students’ participation in study abroad programs: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 507–521. Gordon, S., & Bonner, F. (1998). Best practices in diversity: The student affairs perspective. College Student Affairs Journal, 18(1), 40–51. Gordon, P., & Smith, D. K. (1992). Planning, organizing and executing short term international exposures for U.S. students of marketing and business. Marketing Education Review, 2, 47–56. Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105–112. Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2004). Qualitative methods for health research. London: Sage Publications. Harren, V. A. (1979). A model of career decision making for college students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14(2), 119–133. Holland, K. M., & Kedia, B. L. (2003). Internationalizing business students through the study abroad experience: Opportunities and challenges. Advances in International Marketing, 13, 115–139. Institution of International Education (IIE). (2007, May). Meeting America’s global education challenge. IIE Study Abroad White Paper. Institute of International Education (IIE). (2010). Open doors 2010: Study abroad by U.S. students slowed in 2008/09 with more students going to less traditional destinations. Washington, DC: Author. Kim, S., Guo, Y., Wang, K., & Agrusa, J. (2007). The study motivations and study preferences of student groups from Asian nations majoring in hospitality and tourism management program. Tourism Management, 28(1), 140–151. Kim, D. Y., Lehto, X. Y., & Morrison, A. M. (2007). Gender differences in online travel information search: Implications for marketing communications on the internet. Tourism Management, 28(2), 423–433. Lee, M., Kim, S., & Lo, A. (2008). Perceptions of hospitality and tourism students towards study motivations and preferences: A study of Hong Kong students. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport, & Tourism Education, 7(2), 45–58. Lu, Y., & Adler, H. (2009). Career goals and expectations of hospitality and tourism students in China. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 9(1–2), 63–80. McAdam, R., Leonard, D., Henderson, J., & Hazlett, S-A. (2008). A grounded theory research approach to building and testing TQM theory in operations management. The International Journal of Management Science, 36, 825–837. Mills, R. J. Jr. (2010). An investigative account on study abroad models for business students concentrating in hospitality and tourism management. American Society of Business and Behavioral Sciences, 6(1), 79–86. Morley, C. L. (1992). A microeconomic theory of international tourism demand. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 250–226. Murphy-Lejeune, E. (2002). Student mobility and narrative in Europe – The new strangers. London: Routledge.


26

Cai et al.

Quraeshi, Z. A., Luqmani, M., & Veeck, A. (2012). Advancing the participation of business students in study abroad programs. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 12(11), 81–91. Salisbury, M., Paulsen, M. B., & Pascarella, E. T. (2010). To see the world or stay at home: Applying an integrated student choice model to explore the gender gap in the intent to study abroad. Research in Higher Education, 51(7), 615–640. Salisbury, M. H., Umbach, P. D., Paulsen, A., & Pascarella, E. T. (2009). Going global: Understanding the choice process, going global: Understanding the choice process of the intent to study abroad. Research in Higher Education, 50, 119–143. Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2007). Consumer behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Schuster, C. P. (1993). Planning and implementing overseas travel classes for executive MBA students. Marketing Education Review, 3, 54–62. Simon, H. A. (1959). Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. American Economic Review, 49, 253–283 Smallman, C., & Moore, K. (2010). Process studies of tourists’ decision-making. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(2), 397–422. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Toncar, M. F., & Cudmore, B. V. (2000). The overseas internship experience. Journal of Marketing Education, 22(1), 54–67. Van der Merwe, D., Kempen, E. L., Breedt, S., & de Beer, H. (2010). Food choice: Student consumers’ decision-making process regarding food products with limited label information. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 34(1), 11–18. Van’t Klooster, E., Can Wijk, J., Go, F., & Van Rekom, J. (2008). Educational travel the overseas internship. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 690–711. Wright, N. D., & Clarke, I. (2010). Preparing marketing students for a global and multicultural work environment: The value of a semester-long study abroad program. Marketing Education Review, 20(2), 149–162. You, X., O’Leary, J., Morrison, A., & Hong, G. (2000). A cross-cultural comparison of travel push and pull factors: United Kingdom versus Japan. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 12, 1–25. Yu, H. (2008). An examination of the effects of participation in a college study abroad program (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (3336154). Zhao, J. L. (1991). A current look at hospitality and tourism education in China’s colleges and universities. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 10 (4), 357–367.