International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice

2010 4(1)

STUDY ABROAD: VALIDATING THE FACTOR

ANALYSIS OF STUDENT CHOICES
Douglas W. Naffziger
Ball State University
2000 W. University Ave., Muncie, IN 47306

Jennifer P. Bott
Ball State University
2000 W. University Ave., Muncie, IN 47306

Carolyn B. Mueller
Stetson University
421 N. Woodland Blvd., DeLand, FL 32723

As universities seek to increase enrollment in study abroad programs, nationally less than 2
percent of all students participate. Understanding how university students view study abroad
opportunities will help program developers and promoters to design programs that draw more
students. This study seeks to validate results from an earlier factor analytic study into the causes
of, and obstacles to students’ study abroad participation. Emergent factors in the current study,
which accounted for approximately 50 percent of the variance, included Fear of the Unknown,
Curricular Issues, and Financial Concerns. Results were similar to those of the earlier study.

Telephone: (765) 285-5312

Email: dnaffzig@bsu.edu

72
Naffziger, Bott & Mueller Study Abroad: Student Choices

INTRODUCTION
A recent paper by the current authors (Naffziger, Bott, and Mueller, 2008)
surveyed college business students to determine the specific factors that influence
study abroad decisions by students. Statistical analyses indicated that the decision
to participate is influenced by several factors. Furthermore, the results suggest
that a number of potential barriers might be overcome through planning and
individualized treatment of students.

In the earlier study, 471 undergraduate business students at a mid-sized

Midwestern university completed a 66-item survey, and a factor analysis identified
six acceptable factors that explained 54 percent of the variance of two dependent
variables: interest in, and openness to study abroad opportunities. In order to
determine whether this six-factor solution is generalizable to a larger student
population, an additional sample was surveyed at a small private university in the
Southeastern U.S.

SAMPLES AND DATA COLLECTION

PHASE ONE
To answer questions about why students do or do not include studying
abroad as part of their college curriculum, a survey of students was conducted at
a mid-sized Midwestern university. Students were introduced to the project
during classroom visits by the researchers, and data were collected via a web-
based survey software package. Participation was voluntary and the students were
assured that all responses would be confidential and would be reported only in
aggregate form. After the classroom information sessions, students received e-
mails with brief reviews of the instructions and a web-link to the survey. As
mentioned, the survey instrument included 66 items. Nine were standard
demographic items such as age, year in school, and major field of study. The
survey also included other factors identified as relevant by previous researchers of
the topic, such as frequency of parental and personal travel, level of parents’
education, and students’ educational aspirations beyond an undergraduate degree.
The survey also included 57 items that were developed from conversations with
faculty who were experienced in developing or leading study abroad experiences,
with international program directors, and with students themselves. The group
of 57 items included questions that dealt with issues relating to finances,
curriculum, family, safety, and cultural concerns. The dependent variables and
survey items contained Likert-type response continua ranging from not at all
(response score = 1) to, to a very great extent (response score = 5).

Sample One
To briefly review the 2008 study, self-report data were collected from 471
undergraduate business students at a medium-sized Midwestern university. In
most cases, professors of appropriate classes offered an extra credit incentive for

73
International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2010 (4)1

student participation in the online survey. The majority of the respondents was
male (53 percent), Caucasian (87 percent), spoke no foreign languages (61
percent), and had visited one to three other countries (51 percent). The largest
group of respondents were sophomores (35 percent), followed closely by juniors
(31 percent), and freshman (21 percent). Only 12 percent of the respondents
were seniors. Household income for respondents most frequently fell between
$50,001 and $75,000 (31 percent), followed by incomes over $100,000 (26
percent). The same percentage of respondents (21 percent) identified their family
incomes as either under $50,000 or between $75,001 and $100,000.

PHASE TWO
Sample Two
Self-report data were collected from 224 undergraduate business students
at a small private university in the Southeastern U.S. As in the first sample, most
professors offered an extra credit incentive for student participation in the online
survey. The participants in the second sample were directed to a separate page
on the same survey website used in the first study. They were not aware of the
earlier study. In fact, students from each group saw a home page with their
respective school logo and a tailored welcome message. The majority of
respondents in the second sample were male (60 percent) and Caucasian (71
percent). Respondents typically had visited one to three other countries (43
percent) and either were partially fluent in one other language (42 percent) or
spoke no foreign language (41 percent). The largest group of respondents were
sophomores (42 percent), followed closely by juniors (40 percent). Only 17
percent of the respondents were seniors; no freshmen were included in this
sample. The level of household income for respondents was most frequently
greater than $100,000 (37 percent), and 29 percent of respondents‘ parents both
had graduated from college.

RESULTS
Prior to conducting the factor analyses, we were interested in examining
demographic differences for two dependent variables: openness to and interest in
study abroad opportunities. Nine demographic variables were evaluated, with
four yielding significant results. Interestingly, gender, race, family income,
parental education, previous travel experience, and age were not related to either
dependent variable.

Sample Two
Three items were related to interest in study abroad experiences:
knowledge of other languages, amount of extracurricular activities, and intent to
study beyond undergraduate education. The profile of someone in this group is a
student who has some foreign language skill (F [3, 221] = 5.94, p < .001), who has
a moderate level of extracurricular commitment (F [4, 221] = 4.99, p < .001) and

74
Naffziger, Bott & Mueller Study Abroad: Student Choices

work obligations (F [4, 218] = 2.97, p < .05), and who plans to study beyond
his/her undergraduate degree after working for a few years (F [2, 211] = 3.21,
p < .05). Similarly, the profile of an individual who is open to the idea of
studying abroad is a student who has fluency in a language other than his/her
primary language of English (F [3, 221] = 2.60, p < .06), who has a moderate
commitment to extra-curricular activities (F [4, 221] = 2.91, p < .05) and work
(F [4, 218] = 2.58, p < .06), and who also plans to study beyond an undergraduate
degree after working for a few years (F [2,221] = 4.40, p < .05). In the previous
study, the profiles for openness and consideration were very much the same as
here except those more open and more considering were likely to be younger
students and more likely female in the current sample.

FACTOR ANALYSIS AND VALIDATION OF THE MEASURE

As part of the validation effort, the authors were interested in replicating
relationships between factors and the two dependent variables: interest in, and
openness to study abroad.

In this effort, the authors were primarily concerned with confirming a

previously derived factor structure; therefore a Principal Axis Factoring
confirmatory factor analysis was employed. Using Varimax rotation and
common methods of extraction (i.e., Scree plot, eigenvalues greater than 1.0), six
factors were confirmed which explained 48 percent of the variance. Factor
loadings for each question are presented in Table 1.

Factor 1 was named Fear of the Unknown and contained 16 items. This
factor explained 14.73 percent of the variance. As can be seen in Table 1, this
factor included items that indicated a fear of the unknown, fear of anti-American
sentiment, fear of mixing with other ethnicities, and nervousness about
interacting with foreigners. Factor 2, Curricular Issues, included 15 items that
linked study abroad to academic credit in a student’s major or minor field of
study or promoted career development or personal goals. This factor accounted
for 13 percent of the variance. Factor 3, labeled Financial Considerations,
accounted for 7 percent of the variance and included items that involved financial
aid and program cost. Factor 4 contained four items that represented
incompatibilities with major and lifestyle (e.g., work, housing). We called this
factor Commitments, which accounted for an additional 6 percent of the
variance. The fifth factor, Previous Travel Experience, included five items and
accounted for 4 percent of the variance. The sixth factor, Social Obligations and
Concerns, accounted for an additional 4 percent of the variance and included
three items that represented social roadblocks to traveling abroad. Reliability
analyses (coefficient alpha) were conducted; alphas are located on the diagonal of
Table 2. As can be seen in the table, all reliabilities were greater than the
recommended threshold of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978).

75
International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2010 (4)1

76
Naffziger, Bott & Mueller Study Abroad: Student Choices

77
International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2010 (4)1

78
Naffziger, Bott & Mueller Study Abroad: Student Choices

Based on these factors, three survey items were eliminated from analysis.
These items failed to load on any of the six factors and included course credit but not
toward major, programs too short and extracurricular commitments.

In many cases, this information was gathered in similar items throughout

the questionnaire. The overlap in factor structure between the two samples of
respondents is high (see Table 3). In many cases, the same factors emerged
completely; in other cases, factors identified in the first sample were collapsed
into a single factor in the second sample (i.e., Factor 1 with this sample.) Based
on the similarities between factor structures derived from the two samples, we
conclude that this measure of interest in, and openness to study abroad is
generalizable and provides usable information about what factors contribute to
students’ levels of openness and interest in study abroad experiences.

FACTOR CORRELATIONS
Scores for the six factors were created by averaging responses on items
within each factor. These factor scores were then correlated with the dependent
variables of interest: openness to, and interest in study abroad. Table 3 presents these
correlations. Four of the six factors were significantly correlated with interest in
study abroad programs. Curricular Issues (r = .20, p < .01), and Previous Travel
Experience (r = .25, p < .01) were positively related to interest, and Fear of the
Unknown (r = -.18, p < .01) and Social Obligations (r = -.36, p < .01) were
negatively related. These relationships were all in directions that confirm intuitive
thinking; that is, if a study abroad program fits with students’ degree progress and
they have travel experience, they are more likely to consider study abroad
programs as a beneficial part of their educational experience. However, if
students are fearful of the unknown and feel their social obligations are too great,
they are less likely to consider studying abroad. In terms of openness to the idea
of study abroad, four of the six factors were predictive. Interestingly, the
relationships between those four factors and openness were stronger in some
cases than the relationships between those four factors and interest in study
abroad. Curricular Issues (r = .22, p < .01) and Previous Travel Experience
(r = .29, p < .001) were positively related to openness to study abroad programs.
Fear of the Unknown (r = -.21, p < .01) and Social Obligations (r = -.40, p < .01)
were negatively related. These findings support those discussed earlier for
interest in study abroad programs.

FINAL FACTOR STRUCTURE

Based on the two sets of analyses, the first in 2008 and the current study, a
common set of factors emerged that explains approximately 50 percent of the
variance in the dependent variables: openness to, and interest in study abroad (see
Table 3). Although the extraction patterns were slightly different, we are
confident that most survey items are generalizable across the two different
sample populations. At a surface level, the students at the Southern private

79
International Business: Research, Teaching and Practice 2010 (4)1

university are very different demographically from students at the larger

Midwestern university. As expected, the students at the private school tend to
come from families with higher income levels and a higher percentage of college-
educated parents. The generalizability of the factor structure across these two
samples is noteworthy and indicates that these factor structures will likely remain
predictive across future samples. We recommend, therefore, that the six factors
composed of 35 items be retained and tested across larger and more diverse
samples of students to confirm predictability as well as to determine if these
factors are unique to U.S. students.

Table 3. Comparison of Factor Structures between Two Samples

Variance
Number
Factor Name Explained
of Items
(%)
Sample 1: Curricular/Career Issues 15 15
Mid-sized Fear of the Unknown/Travel 13 9
Public Incompatibilities 9 7
University Financial Concerns 8 3
Previous Travel Experience 5 4
Social Obligations 4 5

Sample 2: Fear of the Unknown/Travel 15 16

Small Curricular/Career Issues 13 15
Private Financial Concerns 7 3
University Commitments 6 4
Previous Travel Experience 4 5
Social Obligations 4 6

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study have both empirical and practical implications.
Empirically, we have demonstrated that students hold a relatively consistent view
of the factors that influence decisions as to why they do or do not study abroad.
Many factors, such as cost and time away, have been regarded as influential
factors over the years; however there exists little empirical evidence to support
such regard. The two studies (2008 and the current study) have identified a fairly
consistent factor structure when using the same 57-item survey instrument. The
important factor to note here is the difference between the two samples, one
being a mid-sized Midwestern public institution and the other being a small,
private Southern school. Although the differences between the backgrounds of
the samples are significant in terms of international exposure, parental income
and education, and language skills, the results of the factor analyses are strongly

80
Naffziger, Bott & Mueller Study Abroad: Student Choices

similar. Financial considerations, curricular and career concerns, fear of the

unknown, and travel are substantial concerns of students at both universities.
With that in mind, the current results have practical implications and significance
for faculty and university officials to consider and incorporate into their program
development, design, and marketing. For both samples, the top three factors
dealt with fear of the unknown and travel, financial considerations, and curricular
issues, though not in the same order. Previous travel experience and exposure to
study abroad and social obligations were also consistent across the samples.

As universities work to increase their study abroad participation,

administrators, directors, and faculty need to be cognizant of how students view
these opportunities. Study abroad programs compete with numerous activities
for the students’ time, energy, and finances. While the perspective of age and
experience give the former group one view, the latter group may be looking at the
idea entirely differently. In that case, the issue is not that students will view the
study abroad opportunity negatively, but that their reservations need to be
understood and dealt with appropriately.

REFERENCES

Naffziger, D., Bott, J. & Mueller, C. (2008). Factors influencing study abroad
decisions among college of business students, International Business: Research,
Teaching and Practice 2(1), 39-52.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. McGraw Hill: New York.

81