This article was downloaded by: [138.25.229.131]On: 13 February 2014, At: 15:46Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Teaching in InternationalBusinessPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wtib20

An Empirical Study of StudentWillingness to Study AbroadKaylee Hackney a , David Boggs a & Anci Borozan ba Eastern Illinois University, School of Business , Charleston , Illinois ,USAb Eastern Illinois University, EDRO Engineering , Walnut , California ,USAPublished online: 03 Oct 2012.

To cite this article: Kaylee Hackney , David Boggs & Anci Borozan (2012) An Empirical Study ofStudent Willingness to Study Abroad, Journal of Teaching in International Business, 23:2, 123-144,DOI: 10.1080/08975930.2012.718705

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08975930.2012.718705

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 tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand 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 Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Teaching in International Business, 23: 123–144, 2012Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0897-5930 print / 1528-6991 onlineDOI: 10.1080/08975930.2012.718705

An Empirical Study of Student Willingnessto Study Abroad

Kaylee Hackney and David BoggsEastern Illinois University, School of Business, Charleston, Illinois, USA

Anci BorozanEastern Illinois University, EDRO Engineering, Walnut, California, USA

Companies wish for universities to provide business students with international education andawareness. Short- and long-term study-abroad programs are an effective method by which this isaccomplished, but relatively few American students study abroad. In response to these facts, thisstudy develops hypotheses that predict student willingness to study abroad and tests the hypothesesusing a survey of over 300 primarily business undergraduate students at a public Midwestern univer-sity. Results indicate a significant difference between student willingness to study abroad short-termversus long-term. Results also show that personal, situational, and location variables influence stu-dents’ willingness to study abroad, though completing an international business class had no effect.Implications for international business scholars are discussed.

Keywords: International business education, Study abroad, Student willingness, Short-term,Long-term

1. INTRODUCTION

Because business activities have become more interconnected globally, most companies nowexpect universities to train students in international business issues (Albers-Miller, Prenshaw,& Straughan, 1999). Business schools have responded to this expectation; programs remind stu-dents that they should be prepared to participate in a highly competitive and global economy upongraduation (Pineda, 2009). Moreover, business schools around the world place an ever-greateremphasis on global issues in their programs (Presley, Damron-Martinez, & Zhang, 2010). Thisincludes increasing international curriculum content and encouraging or requiring students to par-ticipate in an international experience, the most common approach being study-abroad programs(Presley et al., 2010).

Our calculations, based on the Institute of International Education (IIE, 2010a) and U.S. gov-ernment data sources (U.S. Department of Education, 2011), indicate that approximately 13%

Correspondence should be addressed to David Boggs, 3014 Lumpkin Hall, Eastern Illinois University, 600 LincolnAvenue, Charleston, IL 61920, USA. E-mail: kjbabbs2@eiu.edu; djboggs@eiu.edu; aborozan@eiu.edu

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

124 HACKNEY ET AL.

of business students study abroad over the course of 4 years of undergraduate study. Althoughbusiness is the second most represented field of study for students studying abroad, 13% is not avery large number (IIE, 2010a). In response to this relatively low participation rate, which per-sists despite high study-abroad interest by business firms, educators, scholars and students, thisresearch is undertaken to identify factors that influence students’ willingness to study abroad.A better understanding of student motives and program influences should provide internationalbusiness educators with information to build more successful programs and to increase studentparticipation in cross-border educational experiences. Increased awareness may also offer insightsinto the types of students most likely to pursue an international business career, and assist uni-versities in designing and marketing study-abroad programs (Goel, de Jong, & Schnusenberg,2010).

2. BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW

When compared with other countries, the United States ranks 15th in the number of students whostudy abroad (OECD, 2011). Perhaps because of this relatively low ranking, the Abraham LincolnStudy Abroad Commission was established by Congress with a goal to overcome Americans’lack of knowledge about the rest of the world (Durbin, 2006). The Lincoln Commission Reportof 2005 set a lofty goal of having 1 million Americans studying abroad in 2016–2017, a 284%increase from 2008–2009 (IIE, 2010a), and a figure that represents about 50% of the number ofcollege students graduating annually (Lincoln Commission, 2005). When measured by studentparticipation, study-abroad experiences have become more popular among university students inthe United States. According to the Institute of International Education in the past decade USAstudent participation in study-abroad programs has more than doubled (IIE, 2010a); in fact, it hasseen a 150% increase (Goel, et al., 2010). During the 2008-2009 academic year 260,327 U.S.students studied abroad for academic credit (IIE, 2010a). Although this is a slight decrease, ofless than 1% from the 2007–2008 academic year, a further survey conducted by the Institute ofInternational Education (IIE, 2010b) found that study abroad by U.S. college students was on therise again in 2009–2010.

As the number of students studying abroad has increased, so too has the literature seeking toexplain it. Salisbury, Umbach, Paulsen, and Pascarella (2009) focused their research on students’choice process of the intent to study abroad. They concluded that factors including socioeconomicstatus, social capital, and cultural capital influence student intent to study abroad, and these fac-tors influence males and females differently. Their findings were based on surveys distributedto freshmen at nineteen 2- and 4-year institutions, with a sample size of 2,772 students. Theyapplied student choice theory (Paulsen & St. John, 2002; St. John & Asker, 2001) and LauraPerna’s (2006) integrated model used by her to predict college choice. According to this modelthere are three decision-making stages of college choice, which the authors argue are nearlyidentical to the choice process for study abroad. These stages are (a) the development of the pre-disposition or intent to study abroad, (b) the search for a suitable program, and (c) the selectionof and departure for a specific location and program (Hossler & Gallagher, 1987). The studentchoice theory argues that students’ decisions are shaped by their socioeconomic background suchas home life and school environment. That is, long-lasting influences that an individual gains

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 125

through their home and school environments—such as beliefs, attitudes, aspirations, perceptions,and values—create a framework for individual decisions.

Based on 282 questionnaires administered to 1st-year students at a small liberal arts college inthe southwestern region of the United States, Kim and Goldstein (2005) identified characteristicsof students who intended to study abroad relative to those who did not. They examined factorsrelated to intercultural attitudes such as ethnocentrism, apprehension of intercultural communi-cation, interest and competence in languages, prejudice, ambiguity tolerance, and expectationsabout study-abroad programs. They concluded that students who had favorable expectationsof study abroad differed from their counterparts by having lower levels of ethnocentrism andintercultural communication apprehension along with greater interest in foreign languages. Basedon their findings, the authors suggested that universities could potentially increase interest instudy-abroad participation by seeking to reduce ethnocentrism and apprehension about commu-nicating with culturally different individuals, as well as creating programs that assist students tocomprehend the value of foreign language study.

Targeting business and accounting students, Presley et al. (2010) applied Ajzen’s Theory ofPlanned Behavior to study the factors that influence students’ intention to study abroad. TheTheory of Planned Behavior is a model based on social psychology that examines the connectionbetween attitudes and behavior. It argues that an individual’s likelihood of executing a specifiedbehavior depends on that individual’s behavioral intention to execute that behavior. Three predic-tors determine this behavioral intention: (a) attitude toward the behavior, (b) subjective norm, and(c) perceived behavioral control. Attitude toward the behavior refers to the degree to which anindividual positively or negatively evaluates the behavior in question. Subjective norm is a socialfactor that concerns the perceived peer pressure affecting whether or not the individual performsthe behavior. Perceived behavioral control pertains to the ease or difficulty with which the behav-ior can be completed. It represents both past experiences and foreseen obstacles. If these threefactors are strong, the individual is predicted to have a greater intention to perform that behavior.They concluded that students’ behavior belief and evaluation of the outcome combined to influ-ence their attitudes toward and their intention to study abroad. Secondly, normative beliefs andmotivation to comply significantly influenced the subjective norm. Thirdly, students’ perceivedbehavioral control was impacted by their perceived facilitators and control beliefs. They foundthat the intention to study abroad was influenced by all three factors: attitude toward the behavior,subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control.

Goel et al. (2010) expanded on the Theory of Planned Behavior by adding personality traits.They surveyed 125 business students at a Florida university and hypothesized that behavioralbeliefs, subjective beliefs, and control beliefs are positively associated with the intention to studyabroad. The authors defined behavioral beliefs as an individual’s perception that their behaviorwill result in a favorable outcome. In relation to study abroad, this could be students’ perceptionthat participation in study abroad will have a positive impact on their career goals. Subjectivebeliefs refer to an individual’s perception of a behavior that has been influenced by peers’ opin-ions. Control beliefs are an individual’s perceived ease or difficulty of performing a behavior(Goel et al., 2010). They also examined personality traits including conscientiousness, opennessto experience, and extraversion, and hypothesized that all three are positively related to behavioralbeliefs, while conscientiousness is positively related to subjective beliefs, and both conscientious-ness and extraversion are positively related to control beliefs. Results showed that behavioral

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

126 HACKNEY ET AL.

beliefs were positively associated with intention to study abroad, extraversion was positivelyassociated with behavioral beliefs, and both conscientiousness and extraversion were positivelyrelated to control beliefs. Although prior research has shown that family support and controlfactors such as academic support and cost are important, their results showed that these wereinsignificant when behavioral beliefs were considered. Furthermore, their results showed thatpersonality plays a role in beliefs relating to study abroad and different traits influence differentbeliefs to differing extents (Goel et al., 2010).

Relyea, Cocchiara, and Studdard (2008) specifically examined students’ motivations to studyabroad in regard to risk propensity and perceived value. Applying expectancy theory, they hypoth-esized that “risk propensity will have a direct relationship with the likelihood to engage in aninternational experience” (p. 350) and “the relationship between risk propensity and the likeli-hood of engaging in an international experience will be moderated by perceived career valuesuch that when students perceive the career value to be low, high risk takers will be less likely toparticipate in an international experience compared to when students perceive the career value tobe high” (p. 351). After conducting a study of 471 students enrolled in a summer undergraduatebusiness course, their results supported both hypotheses. This suggests that motivating studentscan be very complex and challenging. They imply that university administrators should attemptto mitigate risk and demonstrate that it is manageable. Furthermore, they suggest that it is theresponsibility of the university to educate its students on globalization and the value offeredthrough an international experience.

Toncar, Reid, and Anderson (2005) also examined students’ motivations to study abroad. Theycompared motivations and preferences of business students and non-business majors. The authorsutilized a combination of focus groups and a questionnaire. The sample consisted of 451 under-graduates; 295 business majors and 156 non-business majors. Their results showed a differencein the motivations between the two groups. Business students were more pragmatic, concernedabout financial costs, and concerned about the effects participation would have on graduationand future career opportunities. However, their results indicated that program preferences wererelatively equivalent for business and non-business majors. The authors suggested that althoughstudent motivations differed, universities might develop programs that simultaneously satisfy thewishes of business and non-business majors (Toncar et al., 2005).

Building on the extant research described above, we seek to explain theoretically and empiri-cally student willingness to study abroad, particularly in business students. While the previouslymentioned studies focus on student intention or choice to study abroad, we examine willingness,which is a precursor to intention or choice, and the most basic construct in the process of studyingabroad. Having the intention or choosing to study abroad suggests that one has already deter-mined that they have the resources to do so. Willingness on the other hand measures students’openness to participation in study abroad programs regardless of whether they have the resourcesor not. While other scholars have studied receptivity (Tharenou, 2003) and willingness (Wagner& Westaby, 2009) to relocate to another country, research is warranted that focuses specificallyon study abroad, as these programs are an important component of international business edu-cation at many universities. If one can predict and explain student willingness to study abroad,then business programs potentially may better identify and motivate students for participation,preparing them better for their anticipated careers. Better understanding of student willingnessmay also lead universities to tailor and market study-abroad programs more effectively.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 127

3. THEORY DEVELOPMENT AND DISCUSSION

Our first hypothesis is that successful completion of an international business (IB) course orcourses will increase willingness to study abroad. Students gain knowledge and exposure toglobal business concepts, news, geographical and cultural differences through IB courses, whichprovide them with the opportunity to develop openness. Pineda (2009) found that the major-ity of students have a positive attitude toward IB courses. Furthermore, Walton and Basciano(2006) found that students who completed an IB course were less ethnocentric than those whodid not. Kim and Goldstein (2005) found that lesser levels of ethnocentrism and prejudice wereincluded in predictors of study-abroad participation along with concerns about completing amajor, expectations about a study-abroad experience and an interest in learning a foreign lan-guage. Additionally, students who have taken an IB course showed greater cultural empathy thanthose who had not taken one (Pineda, 2009). This suggests that IB courses help students developa more global perspective, which we predict will increase their willingness to go abroad.

• H1: Willingness to study abroad is positively associated with having completed aninternational business course.

The foundation of expectancy theory is that individuals will be motivated to exert effort ifthey believe that doing so has valence or will result in a reward (Greenberg, 2010). Previousresearch has found multiple benefits resulting from study-abroad participation, but students mayperceive these benefits for themselves differently. Sánchez, Fornerino, and Zhang (2006) foundthat students’ motivations to participate in study-abroad programs varied based on their perceivedvalue of the experience.

Carlson and Widaman (1988) established that participation in study abroad programs increasedstudents’ concern for international politics, cross-cultural interest, and broadened their world-view. In a survey of 3,500 study abroad alumni, Dwyer and Peters (2004) found that study abroadresulted in benefits such as increased maturity, self confidence, tolerance of ambiguity, and lan-guage competency. This is consistent with Salisbury et al’s (2009) results. Study abroad can alsoprovide students with an opportunity to develop emotional resilience, flexibility, and greater inde-pendence (Kitsantas, 2004). Additionally, study abroad provides students with the opportunity toenhance their understanding of different cultures, races, customs, and business practices—whichincreases tolerance, respect, and open mindedness (Praetzel, Curcio, & Dilorenzo, 1996). Drews,Meyer, and Peregrine (1996) found that students who studied abroad were more able to think ofnational groups in terms of individual characteristics instead of solely in terms of non-personalattributes such as cultural traditions, food, and famous people from that country.

Students who spend time abroad develop “a deeper understanding and respect for globalissues, more favorable attitudes toward other cultures, stronger intercultural communicationskills, improved personal and professional self image, and better foreign language skills”(Salisbury et al., 2009, p. 120). All of these factors together can make a student more marketableto future employers. In the 2003 Rand Corporation Study “What Makes a Successful CareerProfessional in an International Organization,” managers were asked to rank desirable qualifi-cations in order of their importance. Out of 19 qualifications, cross-cultural competence, or theability to work well in different cultures and with people of different origins, was ranked fifth.Associated competencies such as “interpersonal and relationship skills” and “ambiguity toleranceand adaptability” ranked second and third, respectively (Matherly, 2005).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

128 HACKNEY ET AL.

In sum, there are many personal and professional benefits that accrue to students who studyabroad, and we predict that the more that students perceive the personal and/or professionalbenefits of study abroad, the more willing they will be to participate in a study-abroad program.

• H2a: Willingness to study abroad is positively associated with perceived personal benefit.• H2b: Willingness to study abroad is positively associated with perceived professional

benefit.

Self-efficacy can be defined as an individual’s belief about his or her ability to successfullyperform specific tasks (Greenberg, 2010). In other words, it is the extent to which an individual isconfident that he or she can execute a project, plan, or idea. We predict that self-efficacy—definedas student confidence in his or her knowledge, skills, and abilities to study abroad successfully—isassociated positively with willingness to study abroad. Our hypothesis follows.

• H3: Willingness to study abroad is positively associated with self-efficacy (belief that onepossesses the knowledge, skills, and ability to succeed).

People are influenced, whether positively or negatively, by their family and friends. When tak-ing others’ opinions into consideration, students especially value their parents’ opinions (Presleyet al., 2010). Additionally, studies have found that students’ receptivity to international careersis positively related to the extent to which their parents’ jobs require international travel (Wang& Bu, 2004). Accordingly, we predict that students’ willingness to study abroad will be posi-tively related to the extent to which their family members have had international experiences.Furthermore, we predict that having close friends with international experience will increasewillingness to study abroad. The people we interact with daily, share personal interests with andcommunicate with are likely to impact our decisions. For these reasons we propose that familyand friends with international experience will be positively related to willingness to study abroad.

• H4: Willingness to study abroad is positively associated with having family and/or friendswith international experience.

Fear of the unknown is likely to influence some to avoid study abroad. In contrast, havingpreviously obtained international experience through activities such as study abroad, workingabroad or traveling abroad is expected to have a positive impact on students’ willingness to studyabroad. This previous experience can be expected to create more confidence and less fear of theprocess. Lewis and Niesenbaum (2005) provide an example of this; after surveying students whoparticipated in a 2-week study-abroad trip to Costa Rica, they found that half of those studentsstudied abroad again. Furthermore, those students made a clear connection from their second tripback to their first experience in Costa Rica (Lewis & Niesenbaum, 2005). Students’ willingnessmay also depend on whether their experience was a positive or negative one, but it is the authors’contention that positive international travel experiences are far more common that negative ones.

• H5: Willingness to study abroad is positively associated with having previous internationalexperience.

Willingness to study abroad is expected to be lower for students whose other universitycommitments require their time and energy. Students may have commitments such as a var-sity athletics, student government, fraternity or sorority membership, or involvement in other

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 129

student organizations. We predict that having other university commitments negatively influenceswillingness to study abroad.

• H6: Willingness to study abroad is negatively associated with other university commitments.

For our purposes, committed personal relationships are considered to be marital status, beingin a committed relationship, or being a parent. In our survey personal relationships were measuredas: “are you a parent,” “married,” “in a relationship,” “single,” and “divorced.” Albers-Milleret al. (1999) found that married students had different preferences and expectations of studyabroad. Married students seemed to be less likely to consider study abroad a practical opportunity(Albers-Miller et al., 1999). Additionally, married students showed a preference for short-termstudy abroad, in particular, programs that are less than a month (Albers-Miller et al., 1999).We predict that personal relationship commitments (e.g., spouse, child, significant other) reducewillingness to study abroad.

• H7: Willingness to study abroad is negatively associated with having committed personalrelationships locally/domestically.

Study abroad has long been associated with foreign language. One of the many benefits ofstudy abroad is increased language proficiency (Kim & Goldstein, 2005; Salisbury et al., 2009).Many students who study abroad do so hoping to enhance their language skills (Holland & Kedia,2003; Dwyer & Peters, 2004; Presley et al., 2010), and students who have language training maydesire to put into practice the language skills that they have acquired. Accordingly, we predictthat foreign language competence is positively associated with willingness to study abroad.

• H8: Foreign language ability is positively associated with willingness to study abroad.

Many studies have shown that females are more likely to study abroad than males.In 2008–2009, 64.2% of the students who studied abroad were female compared to 35.8% male(IIE, 2010a). This number has remained relatively constant since 1999–2000 (IIE, 2010a). Thisgender gap in study-abroad participants was replicated in Thomas and McMahon’s (1998), Kimand Goldstein’s (2005), and Salisbury et al.’s (2009) studies. Kim and Goldstein (2005) found thatlevels of language interest, low ethnocentrism, and low intercultural communication apprehen-sion were significant when trying to predict interest in study abroad. Furthermore, females werefound to have significantly lower levels of ethnocentrism and intercultural communication appre-hension and higher levels of language interest than males (Kim & Goldstein, 2005). We predictthat our sample will be consistent with previous research and females are more willing to studyabroad than males.

• H9: Females are more willing to study abroad than males.

Program length is an important factor for many who consider studying abroad. We define ashort-term program as less than a semester long whereas a long-term program is a semester orlonger. In 2008–2009, 54.6% of the students who studied abroad participated in programs lasting8 weeks or less (IIE, 2010a). In a survey conducted by Holland and Kedia (2003), 61% of study-abroad professionals agreed that programs less than 12 weeks long are the most attractive forbusiness students. Students face multiple barriers when choosing to study abroad such as thefear of leaving the United States, financial constraints, and perceived or real lack of flexibility

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

130 HACKNEY ET AL.

within their academic program (Lincoln Commission, 2005; Holland & Kedia, 2003; Albers-Miller et al., 1999; Salisbury et al., 2009). A short-term study-abroad program is a good option toconsider when faced with these barriers. It not only fits more easily into students’ schedules, butalso can provide a cheaper and less threatening experience for students (Lewis & Niesenbaum,2005). For these reasons, we predict that students will be more willing to study abroad short-termthan long-term.

• H10: Students are more willing to study abroad on short-term programs than on long-termprograms.

Foreign language study in American universities has greatly decreased since an all time high in1960 of 16%. Today, only 8.6% of college students study a foreign language (Furman, Goldberg,& Lusin, 2010). This partially explains why in 2008–2009, 55% of U.S. students studying abroadstudied in Europe, almost a fourth of which studied in Great Britain (IIE, 2010a). In a surveyconducted by Holland and Kedia (2003), 68% of study-abroad professionals agreed that studentsprefer to study abroad in English-speaking locations. Additionally, they found that 74% of theuniversities surveyed did not require business students to take foreign language courses. Althoughforeign language acquisition is often promoted along with study abroad, almost one-third ofstudents who participate in study-abroad programs enroll in programs that are located in English-speaking countries or that use English instruction (Lewis & Niesenbaum, 2005). Accordingly, wehypothesize the following.

• H11: Students are more willing to study abroad in English-speaking locations than non-English-speaking locations.

For many students, study abroad can be the first time that they have left the country. Thismight prove very uncomfortable and threatening (Lewis & Niesenbaum, 2005). If a program islocated relatively close geographically, this may mitigate some of the discomfort students feel.For this reason, we predict that students are more willing to study abroad in a county that isgeographically close to home.

• H12: Students are more willing to study abroad in geographically close countries.

An important component of study abroad for many students is getting to see attractions andcities that one has only heard about. Many of the “exciting” destinations are urban areas that havenotable attractions to offer an international traveler. Large cities also are often important centersof global commerce, which may attract business students, and they tend to have more exten-sive technological, communications, and transportation infrastructure. Lastly, most Americansare raised in medium or large cities and may be unfamiliar with what to expect in rural locations.Due to all of these factors, we predict that students will be more willing to study abroad in urbanlocations than in rural locations.

• H13: Students are more willing to study abroad in urban locations than rural locations.

Finally, students at many American universities are provided opportunities to study abroadboth in circumstances where they would travel alone and in circumstances where they wouldtravel with others, such as friends or students from the same program or university. Hollandand Kedia (2003) found that study-abroad professionals agreed that students were more likelyto participate if a business faculty member from their home university taught the courses while

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 131

abroad. Because of this and the fact that traveling alone for the first time can be intimidating, wepredict that students will be more likely to study abroad with a group than individually.

• H14: Students are more willing to study abroad with others than alone.

4. METHODOLOGY

4.1. Sample

A survey instrument (see Appendix for sample questions) was distributed to undergraduatebusiness students at a public Midwestern university in 2011. The university has approximately11,000 students, and the business and accounting programs are AACSB accredited. The uni-versity’s ethnic diversity approximates national demographics. Three hundred thirty-one usablesurvey responses were received from students including responses from freshman-, sophomore-,junior-, and senior-level students. Eighty-nine percent of respondents were business school stu-dents, 14% were studying various other majors, and 4% of students were double-majors; less than2% were unknown. Business students were 15% accounting, 16% finance, 26% management,33% marketing, 10% MIS, and 4% business administration majors. Numbers do not add to 100%because of double and undecided majors. Sixty-four percent of respondents were males, and 36%were females. Only the responses of U.S. citizens were examined for this research, though sur-veys were collected from 14 non-American students as well. The average age of respondents was21.3 years and the range was from 18 to 48 years of age. Statistical tests showed no statisticallysignificant differences between the responses of students from different academic years or majors.

4.2. Instrument

The survey instrument was designed after a thorough literature review and input from multi-ple management, marketing, and international business scholars with study abroad experience.It consisted of four parts. The first section posed questions addressing socio-biographical factorsand demographics such as age, gender, personal relationships, major of study, and highest degreeobtained. The second section consisted of a rating of proficiency in foreign languages. This pro-ficiency was rated on a scale of 0 to 5; 0 representing no ability and 5 representing a fluent andnative speaker. Additionally, the second section included questions of quantity such as “Howmany foreign countries have you visited?” or “How many of your close friends have lived, stud-ied, or worked abroad?” The third section questioned agreement with items related to willingnesssuch as “I am willing to study abroad short-term (less than a semester program).” Respondentswere asked to rate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a specific statement using a6-point Likert scale as follows: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = somewhat disagree, 4 =somewhat agree, 5 = agree, and 6 = strongly agree. A 6-point scale was used, which preventedneutral responses. The questions were clear and unambiguous, and therefore suitably measuredwith single-items measures (Wanous, Reichers & Hudy, 1997). The fourth section of the surveyinstrument included four open-ended questions asking students to list countries in which they hadpreviously lived, worked, studied, or visited. Before being given to the undergraduate students,the survey was administered to MBA students who were graduate assistants to test its reliability

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

132 HACKNEY ET AL.

and validity. Questions were easy to understand and asked straightforwardly. Sample questionsare shown in the Appendix.

4.3. Procedure

The data were analyzed with version 18.0 of PASW (SPSS) Statistics the Statistical Package forSocial Sciences Software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) using statistical techniques of multipleregression and ANOVA. We report the results for each hypothesis below. Our two regressionmodels, one for short-term (Table 1) and one for long-term (Table 2), identify the factors thatpositively or negatively influence willingness to study abroad, whereas paired samples t-testswere used to identify differences between student willingness to study in different contexts.

The variable Perceived Benefit is the sum of perceived personal benefit and perceived profes-sional benefit. We merged these two due to high co-linearity and theoretical relatedness. Secondly,

TABLE 1Willingness to Study Abroad Short-Term

UnstandardizedCoefficients

StandardizedCoefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) −2.954 .767 −3.854 .000Perceived benefit (personal & professional) 2.072 .253 .495 8.182 .000Personal relationships −0.468 .139 −.176 −3.361 .001Language proficiency (other) 0.675 .195 .182 3.455 .001Major (other) −0.669 .245 −.141 −2.727 .007Perceived efficacy 0.26 .08 .194 3.234 .001Male −0.581 .184 −.183 −3.16 002Town size 0.19 .086 .115 2.221 .028

Note. R2 = .571; F = 30.76; p-value = .000.

TABLE 2Willingness to Study Abroad Long-Term

UnstandardizedCoefficients

StandardizedCoefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

(Constant) −2.601 .857 −3.034 .003Perceived benefit (personal & professional) 1.673 .297 .362 5.636 .000Personal relationships −0.605 .176 −.205 −3.437 .001Previous international experience 0.167 .06 .171 2.797 .006Language (other) 0.747 .244 .182 3.061 .003Perceived efficacy 0.252 .098 .169 2.571 .011Family with international experience 0.182 .091 .121 2.008 .046

Note. R2 = .451; F = 22.01; p-value = .000.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 133

the variable Personal Relationships is a sum of relationships with a spouse or significant otherand children. A zero represents a respondent who is not married or a parent, and is not romanti-cally involved with a significant other. A one represents a respondent who either has a child ora marriage or significant-other relationship; a two represents a respondent who both has a childand a marriage or significant-other relationship.

5. EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

After observing, in support of Hypothesis 10 (Table 3), that students displayed a statistically sig-nificant preference for short-term (i.e., less than one semester), as opposed to long term (i.e.,one semester or longer), study-abroad programs, we conducted separate regression models for“Willingness to Study Abroad Short-Term” and “Willingness to Study Abroad Long-Term.”These were used to test our first nine hypotheses. Our findings show some similarities but alsodifferences between willingness to study abroad long-term versus short-term. Short-term study-abroad programs can be considered as theoretically distinct from long-term programs in thatshort-term programs generally do not require a student to arrange housing or to “settle” in thevisited destination. Also, long-term programs generally require a higher level of independenceby participants, and typically have greater implicit or explicit expectations for language studyand cultural immersion. A student might live out of a suitcase and maintain domestic residen-tial arrangements while participating in a short-term program, but a long-term program typicallyinvolves, or at least intends, a more distinct “connect” with the host country and “disconnect”from one’s home-country. Relationships, employment and housing circumstances all experiencea more distinct disconnect for long-term programs than for short-term programs.

Our multiple regression model predicting Willingness to Study Abroad Short-Term found sup-port for H2 (perceived benefit of study abroad), H3 (self-efficacy with respect to study abroad),H7 (committed personal relationships), H8 (foreign language ability in a non-traditionally-studied language), and H9 (gender). As control measures, we tested for differences in willingnessto study abroad based on students’ major, GPA, age, class standing, and rural versus urbanbackground. None of the controls were significant in our model of long-term study abroad.However, two of the controls were significant in the model of short-term study abroad.Specifically, business majors were more willing to study abroad short-term than non-business

TABLE 3Short-Term Versus Long-Term Paired Samples t-Test

Paired Differences

95% Confidence Intervalof the Difference

MeanStd.

DeviationStd. Error

Mean Lower Upper t dfSig.

(2-tailed)

Willingness to studyabroad long-term—Willingness to studyabroad short-term

−.64798 1.21863 .06802 −.78179 −.51416 −9.527 320 .000

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

134 HACKNEY ET AL.

majors, and students from urban environments were more willing to study abroad short-term thanstudents from rural environments (many respondents originated from Chicago or from small,rural communities).

Our second model, “Willingness to Study Abroad Long-Term,” produced support for six of ourhypotheses—specifically H2 (perceived benefit of study abroad), H3 (self-efficacy with respect tostudy abroad), H4 (family and friends with international experience), H5 (previous internationalexperience personally), H7 (committed personal relationships), and H8 (foreign language abilityin a non-traditionally studied language).

For Hypotheses H10 through H14, we ran paired samples t-tests to compare the means of thetwo variables in order to measure whether the average difference is significantly different fromzero. Our first paired samples t-test (Table 3), testing H10, showed that students exhibit a statisti-cally significant preference for short-term, as opposed to long-term, study abroad programs; thatis, students are more willing to study abroad short-term (i.e., shorter than a semester) than they areto study long-term (i.e., a semester or longer). Figure 1 illustrates the mean willingness to studyabroad based on the duration of the trip. This could be due to the fact that short-term study-abroadprograms allow greater flexibility, as they can occur in between semesters or during the summer,and they typically cost less than long-term study-abroad programs (Evans, Finch, Toncar, & Reid,2008). This mitigates two of the most common barriers students face; interruption of academiccurriculum and cost.

We also identified which regions students are most willing to travel to, as shown in Figure 2.Europe is the most popular destination of choice followed closely by Australia and New Zealand,then by Latin America, Asia, and Africa.

The paired samples t-test for H11 also proved to be significant (Table 4); American students aremore willing to study where English is spoken than to study in non-English-speaking countries.Figure 3 shows the mean willingness to study abroad where English is or is not spoken. Thiscould be explained by a low proficiency in languages. Figures 4 and 5 give more informationabout the language abilities of our respondents. Foreign language proficiency was measured byrespondents rating their ability to speak on a scale of 0 to 5; 0 = no ability at all, 1 = basicability, 2 = moderate ability, 3 = high ability, 4 = fluent non-native speaker, and 5 = fluentnative speaker. The majority of respondents rated an ability to speak Spanish. However, most of

4.46

3.81

11.5

22.5

33.5

44.5

55.5

6

Long TermShort TermStro

ngly

Dis

agre

e -S

tron

gly

Agr

ee

Duration of Trip

FIGURE 1 Willingness to Study Abroad.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 135

4.214.08

3.24 3.232.81

1.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.505.005.506.00

Europe Australia/NewZealand

Latin America Asia AfricaStro

ngly

Dis

agre

e -S

tron

gly

Agr

ee

Region

FIGURE 2 Willingness to Live in Different World Regions.

TABLE 4English Is Spoken Versus English Is not Spoken Paired Samples t-Test

Paired Differences

95% ConfidenceInterval of the

Difference

MeanStd.

DeviationStd. Error

Mean Lower Upper t dfSig.

(2-tailed)

English-speaking location—Non-English-speakinglocation

−1.93519 1.40723 .07818 −2.08899 −1.78138 −24.753 323 .000

these were rated as basic or moderate ability (Figures 4 and 5). This explains why individuals aremore willing to study where English is spoken; they do not feel comfortable going somewherethey cannot understand or communicate in the native language.

Our third paired samples t-test was conducted to test H12 (Table 5), that students are morewilling to study abroad in geographically close countries than in geographically far countries.This hypothesis was supported. Figure 6 provides an illustration of the mean willingness.

Our fourth paired samples t-test was conducted to test H13, that students are more willing tostudy in urban than in rural destinations. Support was found using this test (Table 6), indicatingthat students are more willing to study in cities abroad than in rural locations. Figure 7 illustratesthe mean willingness associated with these variables.

Finally, H14, that students are more willing to study abroad with others as opposed to alone,was also supported by a paired samples t-test. The results indicate that students are much morewilling to study abroad with other students than to go alone (Table 7). Figure 8 demonstratesthe difference in the mean willingness. This preference could be a result of students’ being morewilling to study abroad short-term since short-term programs are typically with a group fromthe same university and led by a faculty member. On the other hand, long-term programs oftenconsist of the student traveling by themselves.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

136 HACKNEY ET AL.

4.67

2.74

1.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.505.005.506.00

No EnglishEnglishStro

ngly

Dis

agre

e -S

tron

gly

Agr

ee

Language

FIGURE 3 Willingness to Live Where English Is Spoken.

26

131 126

37

7 40

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

No ability Basic ability Moderateability

High ability Fluent; non-native speaker

Fluent; nativespeaker

Num

ber

of R

espo

nden

ts

FIGURE 4 Rate of Language Proficiency by Respondents.

273

44 44

9 729

30

50

100

150

200

250

300

Spanish French German Arabic Chinese Other 1 Other 2

Num

ber

of R

espo

nden

ts

FIGURE 5 Languages Rated Most Frequently.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 137

TABLE 5Geographically Close Versus Geographically Far Paired Samples t-Test

Paired Differences

95%Confidence

Interval of theDifference

MeanStd.

DeviationStd. Error

Mean Lower Upper t dfSig.

(2-tailed)

Geographicallyclose—Geographically far

.59317 .97907 .05456 .48582 .70051 10.872 321 .000

4.19

3.61

1.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.505.005.506.00

FarClose

Stro

ngly

Dis

agre

e -S

tron

gly

Agr

ee

Distance to the United States

FIGURE 6 Willingness to Live in a Geographically Close or FarLocation.

TABLE 6Urban Location Versus Rural Location Paired Samples t-Test

Paired Differences

95% ConfidenceInterval of the

Difference

MeanStd.

DeviationStd. Error

Mean Lower Upper t dfSig.

(2-tailed)

Rural location—Urban location

−1.11585 1.37873 .07613 −1.26562 −.96609 −14.658 327 .000

Taken together, our findings provide a useful outline for international business pro-grams specifically, and business programs generally, to consider when designing study-abroadprograms. Our findings indicate that students prefer short-term study-abroad trips to urbanlocations relatively close to home, where English is spoken, and which include traveling in agroup. However, students become more willing to participate in study abroad generally if they

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

138 HACKNEY ET AL.

4.35

3.24

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

5.50

6.00

RuralUrban

Stro

ngly

Dis

agre

e -S

tron

gly

Agr

ee

FIGURE 7 Willingness to Live in Urban Versus Rural Locations.

TABLE 7Travel with Others Versus Travel Alone Paired Samples t-Test

Paired Differences

95% ConfidenceInterval of the

Difference

MeanStd.

DeviationStd. Error

Mean Lower Upper t dfSig.

(2-tailed)

Go alone— Go with others −.98466 1.47901 .08191 −1.14581 −.82351 −12.021 325 .000

FIGURE 8 Willingness to Travel with Others Versus Alone.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 139

TABLE 8Summary of Hypotheses and Findings

Hypothesis Variable Direction Significance

H1 Completion of IB Course + NSH2a Perceived Personal Benefit + SH2b Perceived Professional Benefit + SH3 Perceived Self-Efficacy + SH4 Family and/or Friends with International Experience + S(long-term SA)H5 Previous International Experience + S(long-term SA)H6 University Commitment – NSH7 Personal Relationships – SH8 Language Proficiency + PSH9 Female + S(short-term SA)H10 Short-Term Study-Abroad Trips + SH11 English Is Spoken + SH12 Geographically Close + SH13 Urban Location + SH14 With Others + S

have previous international experience, or if their family or friends have international experience.If more programs can be offered that match students’ preferences, study-abroad participation willlikely increase, and it follows that after students complete near, easy, and safe programs that thismay lead them to participate in other more ambitious programs in the future.

Table 8 summarizes each of our 14 hypotheses and the predicted relationship to the depen-dent variable, willingness to study abroad. Hypotheses 1–9 were tested using multiple regression,and Hypotheses 10–14 were tested using paired samples t-tests. A plus sign (+) indicates a pos-itive predicted correlation whereas a minus sign (−) indicates a negative predicted correlation.Variables that were significant in the predicted direction in our long- and short-term study-abroadmodels are indicated with a capital “S” while “NS” indicates no significance and “PS” indicatespartial significance. Some variables were significant in both the long-term and short-term models(S), some were significant only in one or the other (PS) of the two models, and there are somevariables that showed no significance (NS) in either model.

After running both models and conducting our paired samples t-tests, all but two of ourhypotheses received partial or full support—Hypothesis 1 (completion of an IB course) andHypothesis 6 (University commitments) were not supported. Two variables, language proficiencyand female, were partially significant. For the gender variable, we ranked it partially significantbecause it was only significant for predicting “Willingness to Study Abroad Short-Term.” Asfor language proficiency, we ranked it partially significant because our results indicate thatspeaking a non-traditional language is positively associated with willingness to study abroad.However, we saw no significance for the traditionally studied languages such as French, Spanish,and Chinese. In their study of intercultural attitudes, Kim and Goldstein (2005) suggested thatlanguage proficiency was essential for intercultural communication and predicted that greatercompetence would lead to more positive expectations of study abroad. Their results showed thatstudents who viewed language study to be beneficial had a more positive view of study abroad.However, they did not find language competence to be a predictor of positive expectations (Kim& Goldstein, 2005).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

140 HACKNEY ET AL.

Two of our variables were statistically insignificant—completion of an IB course and univer-sity commitments. Albers-Miller et al. (1999) found that only 35.2% of the students surveyedclaimed they would take an international course if it was not mandatory. At the university wherethe study was conducted, all business majors are required to take an IB course. This couldexplain why a predicted positive relationship was not observed. University commitments wasnot significant, but in other testing conducted it was observed that varsity sports participation cor-related negatively with willingness to study abroad, perhaps due to the demands placed on varsityathletes’ schedules.

6. DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS, AND CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that predicting study-abroad participation is a complex process that is influ-enced by personal and situational factors, as well as the study-abroad program characteristics. TheCouncil on International Exchange’s 2006 publication states that the “influences in preferenceselection are so complex that isolating them is challenging—yet it is precisely the complexity ofvariables and process that makes the need for data so important” (Salisbury et al., 2009, p. 121).First, this study attempts to measure willingness instead of student intent or choice to study abroadas measured in previous research. This is important because willingness is a precursor to intent.Second, this study reveals several factors that affect study-abroad willingness. Third, as hypothe-sized, it reveals a significant difference between students’ willingness to study abroad short-termand their willingness to study abroad long-term.

As hypothesized, students are more willing to study abroad if they have a higher perceivedpersonal and professional benefit, previous international experience, fewer committed personalrelationships, and if the program is in English. Also, consistent with previous research, we foundthat students were more willing to study abroad on short-term programs and females were morewilling to study abroad short-term than males. In addition to these variables, our model indicatesthat students are more willing to study abroad if they have higher levels of self-efficacy, havefamily or friends with international experience, if the program is in a geographically close andurban location, and if participants go as a group rather than alone.

One important contribution of this article is its identification of distinct factors that affectwillingness to study abroad short-term versus long-term. Whereas being a business major, female,and the size of town a student came from affected willingness to study abroad short-term, itdid not have a significant effect on willingness to study abroad long-term. Conversely, havingfamily with international experience and having previous personal experience internationally hadpositive impacts on willingness to study abroad long-term but were not significant for willingnessto study abroad short-term.

6.1. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

One important limitation of our study is that our survey was administered to undergradu-ate students at a public Midwestern university. While students at the university are generallyrepresentative of traditional American college students in terms of demographics and academicachievement, they may have characteristics and attitudes that are not representative of studentsfrom other countries, or of graduate students. It is premature to generalize to students from other

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 141

countries on the basis of our findings, and more study is needed of willingness to study abroad inEuropean, Asian, and other countries.

As the number of IB study-abroad programs increases, it is important for universities to haveinsight into which types of students study abroad and what types of programs they prefer. Oneway to tackle this issue would be to look at personality traits. Individuals differ greatly; fac-tors that make one student willing to study abroad may also differ from factors for another.Personality has been defined as “a unique and relatively stable pattern of behavior, thoughtsand emotions showed by individuals” or a “lasting way in which one person differs from allthe others” (Greenberg, 2010, p. 68). Goel et al. (2010) looked at personality traits such as con-scientiousness, openness to experience, and extroversion. However, we believe that traits suchas agreeableness, neuroticism, materialism, ethnocentrism, need for achievement, risk aversion,etc., could also affect students’ willingness to study abroad.

Interestingly, and somewhat perplexing to at least one of this article’s authors—who teaches IBand study-abroad courses—our findings showed that taking an IB course produced no discernibleinfluence on a student’s willingness to study abroad. IB courses are excellent opportunities forfaculty to increase student interest in global affairs, but it would be useful to understand more fullyhow required IB classes influence students, beyond strictly providing students with informationabout the world. Given a recognition among IB scholars and practitioners that study abroad isbeneficial to professional and personal advancement, it may be valuable to understand if thereexists or should exist any linkage between traditional IB courses and study abroad.

One of the main criticisms of short-term programs is the fact that students do not get immersedin the culture of the country they visit. Since short-term study-abroad programs are becomingmore popular and, as our findings suggest, could lead to future long-term programs, one couldresearch how to increase the cultural impact provided in such a short time. Also, based on ourfindings and other studies, it appears that non-traditional students, such as students with spousesor children, have different study-abroad concerns and desires than traditional students. It couldbe worthwhile to investigate what these needs are and how they can be addressed. Lastly, femaleshave far outnumbered males in study-abroad participation historically. Since our results indicategender as only being significant on short-term programs, perhaps there is an underlying barrierfor males. It would be beneficial to investigate what holds males back from studying abroad morethan females.

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES

Kaylee Hackney is a multilingual, research-option MBA student at Eastern Illinois Universitywho has lived and studied internationally. She has previously presented her research at the AIB-Midwest Annual Conference, and plans to complete her PhD in Organizational Behavior.

David Boggs is Associate Professor and Assistant Chair of Management at Eastern IllinoisUniversity. He completed his PhD in International Management from the University of Texasat Dallas, and has taught and presented his research in Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Hehas published in the Journal of International Management, Journal of International Marketing,Multinational Business Review, and other journals.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

142 HACKNEY ET AL.

Anci Borozan, originally from Croatia, is part of the management team for EDRO Engineering,Inc., in California. She completed her undergraduate and MBA degrees from Eastern IllinoisUniversity. Her research has been presented at the Academy of International Business and otherscholarly meetings.

REFERENCES

Albers-Miller, Nancy, Penelope J. Prenshaw, and Robert D. Straughan, (1999), “Student perceptions of study abroadprograms: A survey of U.S. colleges and universities”, Marketing Education Review 9 (1), 29–36.

Carlson, Jerry S., and Keith F. Widaman, (1988), “The effects of study abroad during college on attitudes toward othercultures”, International Journal of Intercultural Relations 12 (1), 1–17.

Drews, David R., Lia L. Meyer, and Peter N. Peregrine, (1996), “Effects of study abroad on conceptualizations of nationalgroups”, College Student Journal 30 (4), 452–461.

Durbin, Richard J., (2006), “The Lincoln Commission and the future of study abroad”, International Educator, retrievedfrom http://www.nafsa.org/_/File/_/InternationalEducator/FrontlinesJanFeb.pdf

Dwyer, Mary M., and Courtney K. Peters, (2004), “The benefits of study abroad: New study confirms significant gains”,Transitions Abroad 27 (5), 56–57.

Evans, Joel, Janel Finch, Mark F. Toncar, and Jane S. Reid, (2008), “Student perceptions of and preferences for a shortoverseas study tour”, Contemporary Issues in Education Research 1 (3), 11–18.

Furman, Nelly, David Goldberg, and Natalia Lusin, (2010, December), “Enrollments in languages other than English inUnited States institutes of higher education”, retrieved from http://www.mla.org/pdf/2009_enrollment_survey.pdf

Goel, Lakshmi, Pieter de Jong, and Oliver Schnusenberg, (2010), “Toward a comprehensive framework of study abroadintentions and behaviors”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 21 (4), 248–265.

Greenberg, Jerald, (2010), “Managing Behavior in Organizations”, (Prentice Hall; Boston, MA).Holland, Kenneth M., and Ben L. Kedia, (2003), “Internationalizing business students through the study abroad

experience: Opportunities and challenges”, Advances in International Marketing 13, 115–139.Hossler, Don, and Gallagher, Karen S., (1987), Studying college choice: A three-phase model and the implications for

policymakers. College and University 2, 207–221.Institute of International Education, (2010a), “Open doors 2010 fast facts”, retrieved from http://www.iie.org/Research-

and-Publications/~/media/Files/Corporate/Open-Doors/Fast-Facts/Fast%20Facts%202010.ashxInstitute of International Education, (2010b). “Campuses report early indication that study abroad is rising”, [Press

Release], retrieved from http://www.iie.org/en/Who-We-Are/News-and-Events/Press-Center/Press-Releases/2010/2010-11-15-Fall-2010-Study-Abroad-Snapshot-Survey

Kim, Randi I., and Susan B. Goldstein, (2005), “Intercultural attitudes predict favorable study abroad expectations of U.S.college students”, Journal of Studies in International Education 9, 265–278.

Kitsantas, Anastasia, (2004), “Studying Abroad: The role of college students’ goals on the development of cross-culturalskills and global understanding”, College Student Journal 38 (3), 441–452.

Lewis, Tammy L., and Richard A. Niesenbaum, (2005), “The benefits of short-term study abroad”, Chronicle of HigherEducation 51 (39), B20.

Lincoln Commission, (2005), “Global Competence and National Needs: One Million Americans Studying Abroad. FinalReport from the Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Fellowship Program”, (Lincoln Commission; Washington,DC).

Matherly, Cheryl, (2005), “Effective marketing of international experiences to employers”, Impact of Education Abroad,American Institute for Foreign Study 1 (1), 9–10.

OECD, (2011), “Education at a glance 2011: Highlights”, retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2011_eag_highlights-2011-en

Paulsen, Michael B., and St. John, Edward P. (2002), “Social class and college costs: Examining the financial nexusbetween college choice and persistence”, The Journal of Higher Education 73(2), 189–239.

Perna, Laura W. (2006) “Studying college access and choice: A proposed conceptual model”, In J. C. Smart (Ed.), HigherEducation: Handbook of Theory and Research 21, 99–157, (Springer Press; New York).

Pineda, Rodley C., (2009), “What motivates U.S. business students to take international business courses?”, Journal ofEducation for Business 84 (3), 177–182.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

STUDENT WILLINGNESS TO STUDY ABROAD 143

Praetzel, Gary D., James Curcio, and Joseph Dilorenzo, (1996), “Making study abroad a reality for all students”,International Advances in Economic Research 2 (2), 174–182.

Presley, Adrien, Datha Damron-Martinez, and Lin Zhang, (2010), “A study of business student choice to study abroad:A test of the theory of planned behavior”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 21 (4), 227–247.

Relyea, Clint, Faye K. Cocchiara, and Nareatha L. Studdard, (2008), “The effect of perceived value in the decision toparticipate in study abroad programs”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 19 (4), 346–361.

Salisbury, Mark H., Paul D. Umbach, Michael B. Paulsen, and Ernest T. Pascarella, (2009), “Going global: Understandingthe choice process of the intent to study abroad”, Research in Higher Education 50, 119–143.

Sánchez, Carol M., Marianela Fornerino, and Mengxia Zhang, (2006), “Motivations and the intent to study abroad amongU.S., French, and Chinese students”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 18 (1), 27–52.

St. John, Edward P., and Asker, Eric H. (2001), “The role of finances in student choice: A review of theory and research”,In M. B. Paulsen & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The Finance of Higher Education: Theory, Research, Policy, & Practice,419–438, (Agathon Press; New York).

Tharenou, Phyllis, (2003), “The initial development of receptivity to working abroad: Self-initiated internationalwork opportunities in young graduate employees”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 76,489–515.

Thomas, Scott L., and Mary E. McMahon, (1998), “Americans abroad: Student characteristics, pre-departure qualifica-tions and performance abroad”, International Journal of Educational Management 12 (2), 57–64.

Toncar, Mark F., Jane S. Reid, and Cynthia E. Anderson, (2005), “Perceptions and preferences of study abroad: Dobusiness students have different needs?”, Journal of Teaching in International Business 17 (1–2), 61–80.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, (2011), “Postsecondary education”, in Digestof Education Statistics, 2010, (NCES 2010-015), (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for EducationStatistics; Washington, DC).

Wagner, Michael R., and James D. Westaby, (2009), “The willingness to relocate to another country: The impactof cultural similarity, destination safety, and financial incentive”, International Journal of Psychology 44 (4),257–265.

Walton, James, and Peter Basciano, (2006), “The internationalization of American business education: Are U.S. businessstudents less ethnocentric?”, The Business Review, Cambridge 5 (1), 282–287.

Wanous, John P., Arnon E. Reichers, and Michael J. Hudy, (1997), “Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-itemmeasures?”, Journal of Applied Psychology 82 (2), 247–252.

Wang, Bruce, C.-Y., and Nailin, Bu, (2004), “Attitudes toward international careers among male and female Canadianbusiness students after 9–11”, Career Development International 9, 647–672.

APPENDIX: SAMPLE SURVEY QUESTIONS

Section 1

Which best describes where you were mostly raised? Rural / Small town / Mediumtown / Large cityYour current class standing: Freshman / Sophomore / Junior / Senior / Graduate /

Post-GraduateHighest degree you have already completed: None / High School / Associate /

Bachelors / Masters / DoctorateUndergraduate major: Accounting / Finance / Management / Marketing / MIS /

OtherIf you circled Other, please indicate major: _______________________________________

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4

144 HACKNEY ET AL.

Section 2

Please circle appropriate numbers below to indicate your proficiency in these languages. (0 =No ability at all, 1 = basic ability, 2 = moderate ability, 3 = high ability, 4 = fluent non-nativespeaker, 5 = fluent native speaker)

Spanish 0 1 2 3 4 5

French 0 1 2 3 4 5

German 0 1 2 3 4 5

Chinese 0 1 2 3 4 5

Arabic 0 1 2 3 4 5

Other (1)_____________________ 0 1 2 3 4 5

Please circle the number on the right that best answers the following questions

How many of your close family members have lived, studied or worked abroad? 0 1 2 3 4 5+How many of your close friends have lived, studied or worked abroad? 0 1 2 3 4 5+How many times have you studied abroad short-term (less than a semester)? 0 1 2 3 4 5+How many times have you studied abroad long-term (a semester or more)? 0 1 2 3 4 5+

Section 3

Please indicate how much you disagree oragree with the following statements.

StronglyDisagree

Disagree SomewhatDisagree

SomewhatAgree

Agree StronglyAgree

International experience is beneficial forprofessional and career development

1 2 3 4 5 6

International experience is beneficial forpersonal development

1 2 3 4 5 6

I am willing to study abroad short-term (lessthan a semester program)

1 2 3 4 5 6

I am willing to study abroad long-term(semester or longer)

1 2 3 4 5 6

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

138.

25.2

29.1

31]

at 1

5:46

13

Febr

uary

201

4