Circulating East to East

Table 1.
Descriptive Characteristics of the Sample.
Variables
n
%
Gender
Male
368
58.1
Female
265
41.9
Major
Arts and humanities
99
15.7
Social science
378
59.7
Science and engineering
87
13.7
Fine arts and physical education
27
4.3
Korean language level
No skill
61
9.6
Beginner
124
19.6
Average
196
31.0
Slightly above average
172
27.2
Advanced
62
9.8
Father’s academic background
Primary education
22
3.5
Middle or high school
230
36.3
Two- to 3-year college degree
158
25.0
Bachelor’s degree
217
34.3
Other
6
0.9
Mother’s academic background
Primary education
20
3.2
Middle or high school
287
45.3
Two- to 3-year college degree
158
27.0
Bachelor’s degree
151
23.9
Other
4
0.6
Current academic program
Language institutions
114
18.0
Undergraduate
404
63.8
Graduate
80
9.0
Other
35
9.2
Region
Seoul Metropolitan Area
376
59.4
Rural area
233
36.8
Utilized Recruitment Agency
Yes
430
67.9
No
203
32.1

---

Lee 
179
Using the information from the survey, this study conducted descriptive analysis to 
determine how much each distinctive push–pull factor influenced students’ decisions 
to study in Korea. In addition, to examine the influence of push–pull factors on stu-
dents’ study-abroad satisfaction, this study conducted multiple regression analysis.
The dependent variable in the multiple regression model was the self-reported item 
of students’ satisfaction with the study-abroad experience. Students were requested to 
indicate the extent of their satisfaction with studying in Korea on a 5-point Likert-type 
scale. An example item was “My study-abroad experience in Korea lives up to my 
expectations.” The study also controlled for a variety of influential covariates to miti-
gate any possible bias and to provide meaningful information regarding the relations 
between students’ push–pull factors and their satisfaction. Specifically, the study 
accounted for students’ background information such as gender, proficiency in Korean, 
socioeconomic status (measured by parents’ education level), and the institution’s 
location.
In addition, because satisfaction is a multidimensional concept and is likely to be 
influenced by other experiences (such as the relationship with faculty and institution 
facilities), to account for these factors, the study conducted an exploratory factor anal-
ysis on five satisfaction survey items. Using a principal components analysis with 
varimax rotation (Comrey & Lee, 1992), two latent constructs emerged. The first con-
struct identified in the analysis was interpreted as “satisfaction with institution’s facili-
ties.” This index comprises the average of two items measuring (on a 5-point scale on 
which high values indicate a higher level of satisfaction) students’ reported satisfac-
tion with their institution’s facilities. Questionnaire items included (a) I am satisfied 
with the overall facilities in my institution and (b) I am satisfied with the classroom 
and library facilities in my institution (α = .79). The second factor identified in the 
analysis was interpreted as “satisfaction with institution’s experience.” This index 
comprised the average of three items measuring (on a 5-point scale) students’ reported 
satisfaction with their experience at the institution. The questionnaire included (a) I am 
satisfied with my relationship with my peers at the institution, (b) I am satisfied with 
my relationship with the faculty at my institution, and (c) I am satisfied with the 
counseling and consultation services offered by the International Office at my institu-
tion (α = .74). By including students’ perceived satisfaction with their institutional 
experience and institutional facilities, this study was able to better capture the relation 
between push–pull factors and students’ overall study-abroad satisfaction. Detailed 
information is presented in Table 2.
In sum, using multiple regression analyses, this study examined the association 
between push–pull factors and students’ satisfaction while accounting for various 
covariates. The analytic equation utilized in this study is as follows:
Y
i
=
+
+
+
+
+
+
β
β
β
β
β
β
ε
0
1
2
3
4
5
X
i
i
i
i
i
i
PUSH
PULL
SF
SE
.
Y
i
is a dependent variable, and 
X
i
includes the basic demographic and socioeco-
nomic information of Student 
i
. The term 
PUSH
i
indicates Student 
i
’s push factors, 
PULL
i
represents Student 
i
’s pull factors, 
SF
i
represents the student’s satisfaction 

---

180
 
Journal of Studies in International Education 21(2)
with the institution’s facilities, 
SE
i
represents the student’s satisfaction with the insti-
tution’s experience, and 
ε
i
is an error term.
Finally, this study conducted multiple imputation techniques to adequately address 
missing values in the analyses. The multiple imputation approach is known to effec-
tively address missing values in the data set (Royston, 2005).
Results
Qualitative Findings
The majority of the traditional push–pull factors were observed to be significant influ-
ences on Chinese students’ choice to study in Korea. Notably, throughout the interview 
phase, students expressed more pull factors than push factors in the decision to study in 
Korea. In other words, from the students’ perspective, Korea’s pull factors more strongly 
influenced their decisions to study in Korea than China’s push factors. After making con-
nections among ideas and analyzing the interviewees’ responses, the study identified 
three key themes that were not mentioned in the traditional push–pull literature as sig-
nificant factors but were important to the respondents. These consistently occurring 
themes included the Korean Wave, institutional selectivity, and recruitment agencies.
Korean Wave (Hallyu).
Many of the students first learned of or became interested in 
Korea through its movies, dramas, and music. For more than 20 years, there has been