Skip to main content

Impact of country image on relationship maintenance: a case study of Korean Government Scholarship Program alumni

Place Branding and Public Diplomacy volume 18, pages 52–64 (2022)Cite this article

Abstract

Governments sponsor student-mobility programs with the expectation that students will build a more favorable and informed opinion of the host country which, in turn, will determine more favorable behavior towards the host country. Nevertheless, assessments of this logic are rare. Based on a survey of the Korean Government Scholarship Program’s alumni (n = 579), we analyze the alumni’s country image of South Korea and how this image determines their relationship maintenance behavior with South Korean people. Our findings show that the KGSP alumni’s image of South Korea partly explains the variance in their personal and professional relationship maintenance with South Koreans. Our findings show that the alumni’s emotions about South Korea influence their personal relationship maintenance behavior more than does each of the cognitive dimensions of the country image, while the functional dimension, which evaluates their beliefs about the country’s competencies and the competitiveness of its economic and political systems, has the highest influence on the alumni’s professional relationship maintenance.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  • Ajzen I. 1985. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action Control. SSSP Springer Series in Social Psychology, ed. J. Kuhl, and J. Beckmann. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. 2005. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Miadenhead, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., and M. Fishbein. 1980. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astfalk, T., and B. Müller-Hilke. 2018. Same same but different—A qualitative study on the development and maintenance of personal networks among German and international medical students. GMS Journal for Medical Education 35(5): Doc58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan, K.J. 2019. The boundaries of public diplomacy and non-state actors: A taxonomy of perspectives. International Studies Perspectives 20(1): 63–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayhan, K.J. 2020. A typology of people-to-people diplomacy. https://www.uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/typology-people-people-diplomacy. Accessed 23 June 2020.

  • Aziz, N., H. Ilhan, B.A. Friedman, N. Bayyurt, and İ. Keleş. 2016. Universities as stakeholders that influence students’ intention to visit a place. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 12(4): 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bachner, D., and U. Zeutschel. 2009. Long-term effects of international educational youth exchange. Intercultural Education 20(1): 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, R. 2011. A resource guide to public diplomacy evaluation. CPD perspectives on public diplomacy 19.

  • Bevis, T.B. 2013. A history of higher education exchange: China and America. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K.A. 1984. Multiple indicators: Internal consistency or no necessary relationship? Quality and Quantity. 18(4): 377–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, B.L., C. Giebler, M. Hince, Y. Liu, N. Mehta, R. Rash, and Y. Yanta. 2001. Does study abroad make a difference? An impact assessment of the international 4-H youth exchange program. Journal of Extension 39(5): n5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. 2013. The politics of relational public diplomacy. In Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy: The connective mindshift, ed. R.S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, and A. Fisher, 44–55. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhmann, A. 2016. Measuring country image. Fribourg: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buhmann, A., and D. Ingenhoff. 2015. The 4D Model of the country image: An integrative approach from the perspective of communication management. International Communication Gazette 77(1): 102–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byun, K., and M. Kim. 2011. Shifting patterns of the government’s policies for the internationalization of Korean higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education 15(5): 467–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, J., and T. Loo. 2014. Decision making in international tertiary education: The role of national image. Advances in Journalism and Communication 2(03): 109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, W.W. 1998. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research 295(2): 295–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • China Power Project. 2016. Is China both a source and hub for international students?https://chinapower.csis.org/china-international-students/. Accessed 14 Sept 2019.

  • Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behaviors science, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cull, N.J. 2013. The long road to public diplomacy 2.0: The internet in US public diplomacy. International Studies Review 15(1): 123–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, A., and H.M. Winklhofer. 2001. Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research 38(2): 269–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eder, J., W.W. Smith, and R.E. Pitts. 2010. Exploring factors influencing student study abroad destination choice. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism 10(3): 232–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., and I. Ajzen. 1975. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick, K.R. 2007. Advancing the new public diplomacy: A public relations perspective. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2(3): 187–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., and F. Bookstein. 1982. Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research. 19(4): 440–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., B.-D. Rhee, and Y. Yi. 1991. Direct regression, reverse regression, and covariance structure analysis. Marketing Letters 2(3): 309–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garson, D. 2016. Partial least squares (PLS-SEM). Asheboro, NC: Statistical Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, B. 2008. Public diplomacy: Sunrise of an academic field. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616(1): 274–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., G.T.M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2016. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J.F., J.J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, and C.M. Ringle. 2019. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review 31(1): 2–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingenhoff, D., T. Zhang, A. Buhmann, C. White, and S. Kiousis. 2018. Analyzing value drivers and effects of 4d country images on stakeholders’ behavior across three different cultures. In Bridging disciplinary perspectives of country image reputation, brand, and identity: Reputation, brand, and identity, ed. D. Ingenhoff, C. White, A. Buhmann, and S. Kiousis. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, J., and W. Shen. 2019. International mentorship and research collaboration: Evidence from European-trained Chinese PhD returnees. Frontiers of Education in China 14(2): 180–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S.B., and K.J. Kwon. 2018. Examining the relationships of image and attitude on visit intention to Korea among Tanzanian college students: The moderating effect of familiarity. Sustainability 10(2): 360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, P. 2013. French scientific and cultural diplomacy. Liverpool, UK: Liverpool University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, M., C. Stead, and C. Smewing. 2002. Public diplomacy. London, UK: Foreign Policy Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ley, P. 1972. Quantitative aspects of psychological assessment. London, UK: Duckworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., F. Liu, and J.I. Rojas-Méndez. 2013. How international students select offshore programs: The influence of image, attitude, subject norm, and perceived behavioral control. Asia Pacific Education Review 14(3): 381–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MOFA. 2016. 2016 diplomatic white paper. https://www.mofa.go.kr/eng/brd/m_5684/view.do?seq=317960&srchFr=&. Accessed 7 May 2019.

  • Nadeau, J., and A.H. Olafsen. 2015. Country image evaluations and migration intentions. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 11(4): 293–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NIIED. 2018. Korean Government Scholarship Program. https://www.studyinkorea.go.kr/en/sub/gks/allnew_invite.do. Accessed 2 Oct 2019.

  • Nye, J. 2004. Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York, NY: Public affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, J. 2008. The powers to lead. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahlavi, P.C. 2007. Evaluating public diplomacy programmes. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2(3): 255–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olberding, J.C., and D.J. Olberding. 2010. “Ripple effects” in youth peacebuilding and exchange programs: Measuring impacts beyond direct participants. International Studies Perspectives 11(1): 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pamment, J. 2018. Public diplomacy. In The encyclopedia of diplomacy, vol. 3, ed. G. Martel, 1–12. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pamment, J. 2014. Articulating influence: Toward a research agenda for interpreting the evaluation of soft power, public diplomacy and nation brands. Public Relations Review 40(1): 50–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pietsch, T. 2010. Wandering scholars? Academic mobility and the British world, 1850–1940. Journal of Historical Geography 36(4): 377–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, M.S., H. Hassan, A. Osman-Gani, F.A.M. Abdel Fattah, and M.A. Anwar. 2017. Edu-tourist’s perceived service quality and perception—The mediating role of satisfaction from foreign students’ perspectives. Tourism Review 72(2): 156–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott-Smith, G. 2008. Exchange programs and public diplomacy. In Routledge handbook of public diplomacy, ed. N. Snow and P. Taylor, 70–76. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sevin, E. 2017. Public diplomacy and the implementation of foreign policy in the U.S., Sweden and Turkey. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shafaei, A., and N.A. Razak. 2016. International postgraduate students’ cross-cultural adaptation in Malaysia: Antecedents and outcomes. Research in Higher Education 57(6): 739–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-015-9404-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, N. 2008. International exchanges and the US image. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616(1): 198–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, N. 2010. Public diplomacy: New dimensions and implications. In Global communication: Theories, stakeholders and trends, 3rd ed, ed. T.L. McPhail, 84–102. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunal, D.W., and C.C. Sunal. 1991. Professional and personal effects of the American Fulbright experience in Africa. African Studies Review 34(2): 97–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, A.E., B. Pflanzl, and A. Völkl. 2016. Broadening the mind: Beneficial effects of sojourn experiences and contact with visiting international students on prospective teachers’ motivation to avoid prejudiced behavior. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 50: 89–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ham, P. 2014. Social power in public diplomacy. In Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy, ed. R.S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, and A. Fisher, 31–42. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C.L., D. Li, B.R. Barnes, and J. Ahn. 2012. Country image, product image and consumer purchase intention: Evidence from an emerging economy. International Business Review 21(6): 1041–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, I. 2014. International education programs and political influence: Manufacturing sympathy?. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yiǧit Gülseven, A. 2017. Rethinking Russian pan-Slavism in the Ottoman Balkans: NP Ignatiev and the Slavic Benevolent Committee (1856–77). Middle Eastern Studies 53(3): 332–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yousaf, S., X. Fan, and F. Laber. 2020. Branding China through the internationalization of higher education sector: An international students’ perspective from China. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2019.1710890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yun, S.-H. 2006. Toward public relations theory-based study of public diplomacy: Testing the applicability of the excellence study. Journal of Public Relations Research 18(4): 287–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yun, S.-H., and E.L. Toth. 2009. Future sociological public diplomacy and the role of public relations: Evolution of public diplomacy. American Behavioral Scientist 53(4): 493–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yun, S.-H. 2014. Do international students’ direct experiences with the host country lead to strong attitude-behavior relations? Advancing public diplomacy research and beyond. International Journal of Communication 8: 787–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaharna, R.S. 2009. Mapping out a spectrum of public diplomacy initiatives: Information and relational communication frameworks. In Routledge handbook of public diplomacy, ed. N. Snow and P.M. Taylor, 86–100. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaharna, R.S. 2010. Battles to bridges: US strategic communication and public diplomacy after 9/11. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zaharna, R.S. 2011. The public diplomacy challenges of strategic stakeholder engagement. In Trials of engagement: The future of US public diplomacy, ed. A. Fisher and S. Lucas, 201–229. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaharna, R.S., A. Fisher, and A. Arsenault. 2013. Introduction: The connective mindshift. In Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy: The connective mindshift, ed. R.S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, and A. Fisher, 1–14. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project is supported by the 2018 and 2019 Korea Foundation Support for Policy-Oriented Research grants. We would like to thank Hyelim Lee and Tom Norris for invaluable research assistance; Moamen Gouda, Nancy Snow, Jeongnam Kim, Yeunjae Lee, Alexander Buhmann, Seong-Hun Yun, Rhonda Zaharna, and two anonymous reviewers for constructive feedback on earlier drafts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia

    Eriks Varpahovskis

  2. Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Kadir Jun Ayhan

Authors
  1. Eriks Varpahovskis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kadir Jun Ayhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kadir Jun Ayhan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendices

Appendix 1: Questionnaire

Formative dimension items How much do you agree with this statement? [Strongly disagree—1, Strongly agree—7]
functional1 South Korea’s economy is highly innovative and fit for the future
functional2 South Korea produces very high-quality goods and services
functional3 South Korea has highly competent entrepreneurs
functional4 South Korea is very wealthy
functional5 South Korea is technologically highly advanced
functional6 South Korea holds a strong position in the global economy
functional7 The labor markets in South Korea are equipped with highly competent people
functional8 South Korea has a globally influential culture
functional9 Athletes and sports teams from South Korea are internationally known for their success
functional10 Competent officials govern South Korean politics
functional11 South Korea has a very stable political system
functional12 South Korea has a well-functioning infrastructure
functional13 South Korea provides well-functioning welfare systems and pension plans
functional14 South Korea is highly innovative in science and research
functional15 South Korea provides great educational opportunities
functional16 The level of education in South Korea is very high
normative1 South Korea is very active in protecting the environment
normative2 South Korea is known for its strong commitment to social issues (e.g., development aid, civil rights)
normative3 South Korea has high ethical standards
normative4 South Korea is a socially responsible member of the international community
normative5 South Korea respects the values of other nations and peoples
normative6 South Korea takes responsibility for helping out in international crises
normative7 South Korea is a welcoming country
normative8 South Korea has excellent civil rights
normative9 South Korea has a very just welfare system
normative10 South Korea acts very fairly in international politics
aesthetic1 South Korea is home to beautiful cultural assets (e.g., arts, architecture, music, film etc.)
aesthetic2 South Korea has delicious foods and a wonderful cuisine
aesthetic3 South Korea has a very fascinating history
aesthetic4 South Korea has rich traditions
aesthetic5 South Korea has beautiful scenery
aesthetic6 South Korea has a lot of preserved nature
aesthetic7 South Korea has lots of charismatic people (e.g., in politics, sports, media, etc.)

Appendix 2: Supplementary data

See Tables 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10.

Table 5 Validation of the reflective components of the country image
Full size table
Table 6 Correlation with summary questions
Full size table
Table 7 Validation of the formative component of the country image
Full size table
Table 8 Validation of the personal relationship maintenance behavior construct
Full size table
Table 9 f2 scores of cognitive dimensions influence on emotional dimension
Full size table
Table 10 Q2 value score
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Varpahovskis, E., Ayhan, K.J. Impact of country image on relationship maintenance: a case study of Korean Government Scholarship Program alumni. Place Brand Public Dipl 18, 52–64 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-020-00177-0

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-020-00177-0

Keywords

  • Public diplomacy
  • Korean Government Scholarship Program
  • Student-mobility programs
  • Relationship management
  • Country image
  • PLS-SEM