RUNNNG HEAD: KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Analysis of Perception of Korea and U.S.A’s Nation Brand in Perception in Extended GLP Community Heiwon Shin Bugil Academy GLP
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Table of Contents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Introduction……………………………………………..3 Hypotheses……………………………………………...5 Methodology……………………………………………8 Procedure……………………………………………...14 Results ……………………………………………… 18 Conclusion ……………………………………………24 References …………………………………………….28
2
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Introduction In 1996, Simon Anholt coined the term “nation branding” – expanding the theory that each nation has a brand image like companies and that such image influences the overall value of that nation. Together with GfK Roper, Anholt refined an index to measure nation brand based on 6 factors: tourism, people, culture and heritage, investment and immigration, governance, and exports. Experts at GfK Roper collect various data from all nations – which range from quantifiable data such as export results to qualitative data such as relative evaluation of governance, people, and investment potentials. Anholt’s index is important to the general field of soft power and cultural diplomacy because it gives clear, quantifiable data and results to an otherwise vague and abstract field. With Anholt index, perception can be measured in numbers and nations can be ranked accordingly. Inspired by Anholt’s “nation branding” initiative –which was made for evaluating on a large scale, pulling data and sources from people, progress reports on a global level, a similar index adapted for a smaller pool (from less than 300 individuals) of sample population was created to measure how individuals view nations. Under the assumption that the fact that each individuals chose GLP, a program taught by foreign faculty for students preparing to go to universities abroad (particularly those in USA) because the students and the parents view US education system (AP), or investment in foreign education positively and that the faculty members are all relatively positive about living in Asia, or at least in Korea for having chosen to live in Korea for a length of time, this project aims to look at a biased sample of population and see if there is any difference in how individuals 3
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
generally perceive Korea and USA – two nations strongly related to the core of GLP goals and future. The driving question of this project is: if there is any incongruence between perception of Korea and USA in the extended GLP community, where does this incongruence occur and what factors are related to this phenomenon?
4
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Hypothesis Given that μKOR stands for mean of the evaluation for a given category for Korea and μUSA stands for mean of the evaluation for a given category for USA, At 0.05 significance level, For 2 Sample T-Test testing Education H0: μKOR - μUSA=0 Ha: μKOR - μUSA≠0 The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated education level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. The alternative hypothesis is that there is a statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated education level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. For 2 Sample T-Test testing Development Potential H0: μKOR - μUSA=0 Ha: μKOR - μUSA≠0 The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated development potential level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. The alternative hypothesis is that there is a statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated development potential level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. For 2 Sample T-Test testing Culture and Heritage H0: μKOR - μUSA=0 Ha: μKOR - μUSA≠0
5
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated culture and heritage level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. The alternative hypothesis is that there is a statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated culture and heritage level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. For 2 Sample T-Test testing Governance H0: μKOR - μUSA=0 Ha: μKOR - μUSA≠0 The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated governance level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. The alternative hypothesis is that there is a statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated governance level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. For 2 Sample T-Test testing Product/Service H0: μKOR - μUSA=0 Ha: μKOR - μUSA≠0 The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated product/service level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. The alternative hypothesis is that there is a statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated product/service level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. For 2 Sample T-Test testing Touristic Attraction H0: μKOR - μUSA=0 Ha: μKOR - μUSA≠0 The null hypothesis is that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated touristic attraction level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level. 6
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The alternative hypothesis is that there is a statistically significant difference between the mean evaluated touristic attraction level for Korea and USA at a 0.05 significance level.
7
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Methodology General Direction An anonymous survey was used to collect the data for perception of nation brand for Korea and USA from GLP students, faculty, parents, and friends. This survey was not simple random sample but a convenience sample. Everyone in this population was distributed the survey and had a choice of submitting or not. While if applied to a different population interest, a convenience sample would not have been effective or efficient, because the GLP community is comprised of a small number of people, it was deemed most appropriate in receiving all the diverse opinions regarding nation brand perception. The possibility that there would be a non-response bias is considered; however, the most active people’s voices can be heard and may represent the general atmosphere of opinions. The data for each of the category will be subject to paired t-test to see if there is a statistically significant difference between perception for Korea and USA. The data will be analyzed for the perception of each category of nation brand for both Korea and USA based on different blocking: gender, age, nationality, and whether the respondent has lived abroad or not.
Constructing the Survey The survey was constructed for Korean speakers and English speakers. The two pages of survey was printed on one page, double sided so one person would receive one survey paper.
8
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS This survey is for AP Statistics project and serves no other purpose than academics. 다음 설문지는 AP 통계학 프로젝트를 위핚 질문으로서 교육적 목적을 제외핚 다른 용도로는 사용되지 않습니다.
Please fill in the following as appropriate. 다음 내용을 알맞게 기재해주세요.
American Age 맊 나이 Gender 성별 Profession 직업
Female (여자) Student (학생)……….□
□
Male (남자)
□
Teacher (교사)……….□
Government Official (공무원)…….□ Work for a company (회사원) …...□
Private business (사업)……..□ Housewife (가정 주부)…….□
Other (please specify) (기타 직업 (구체적으로 적어주세요))…….□ _________________________________ Nationality 국적 Have you lived abroad? 외국 체류 경험이 있으신가요?
Yes
□
No
□
외국 체류 경험이 있다 외국 체류 경험이 없다 If so please specify the nation and duration (YR) 있다면 해당 국가와 체류기갂을 모두 순서대로 기재해주세요 If more than 1 nation, please list all in order Nation (국가)
Duration (기갂)
Please turn to the back page and rate each category of nation branding for Korea and USA. 뒤쪽으로 넘겨서 핚국과 미국의 각 항목을 평가해 주세요. 9
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Please evaluate each category for both Korea and U.S.A. on a scale of 0 -10 in the blank next to each category. (0 for low, 10 for high) 핚국과 미국의 각 항목들에 대핚 점수를 0-10 사이의 숫자로 평가 주세요. 각 항목 옆에 있는 공갂에 적어 주시면 됩니다. (0 은 “낮음”, 10 은 “높음”)
CATEGORY EXPLANATION 항목 설명
Education/ 교육: Please evaluate education holistically. In evaluating, the following could be considered (but not limited to): achievement, efficiency, education ethics, method, applicability, creativity, depth, skills; education includes both public and private education/ 교육에 대핚 총체적 평가를 해주세요 (고려 측면 예시: 성취도, 효윣성, 교육 윢리, 방법, 응용력, 창의성, 깊이, 기능). 교육은 공교육, 사교육을 모두 포함합니다.
Development Potential/발전 가능성: perception on how optimistic the future for each nation/ 각 국가의 미래 발전 가능성에 대핚 평가
Culture and Heritage/ 문화& 유산: traditional and contemporary culture, including film, music, art, sport and literature/여기서 문화란 고대, 현대 문화를 막론하며 문화에는 영화, 음악, 미술, 스포츠, 문학 등을 포함합니다.
Governance/국정운영: opinion regarding the level of national government competency and fairness and describes individuals’ beliefs about the country’s government, as well as its perceived commitment to global issues such as democracy, justice, poverty and the environment/각 해당 국가 정부의 역량과 공정성에 대핚 의견; 각 국가의 정부에 대핚 믿음, 또핚 민주주의, 정의, 가난, 환경과 같은 글로벌 이슈에 얼맊큼 헌신하는 지에 대핚 평가
Product/Services / 제품/서비스: measuring how actively products/ services from each country are sought ( how does “Made in (COUNTRY NAME)” appeal to you in general? / 해당 국가의 제품 및 서비스를 얼맊큼 지지합니까? (”Made in (해당 국가 이름)” 가 얼마맊큼 그 제품/서비스를 어필하는 지)
10
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Touristic Attraction/관광 매력: considering its natural and artificial attractions/ 자연적, 인적 매력을 고려했을 때 관광에 대핚 평가
Data Analysis Methodology The results of the survey was analyzed using excel and 2 sample t-test. Paired T – Test The paired t-test was determined as the most appropriate to see if there was any difference in how each category of nation brand was perceived for Korea and USA. When the conditions are met, paired t-test can be used to test whether the mean of paired differences is significantly different zero. In paired T-test, the hypothesis H0: μd =Δ0 Is tested where the d’s are the pairwise differences and Δ0 is 0. The following statistics is used Δ
Where
SE(
is the mean of the pairwise differences, n is the number of pairs, and
is the ordinary standard error for the mean applied to the differences.
The conditions for the paired t-test are as follows:
Paired data assumption: all the data must be paired
11
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Independence assumption: If the data are paired, the groups are not independent. In other words, it is the differences that must be independent of each other. The independence assumption is usually followed by randomization condition: The pairs may be a random sample, and the 10% Condition: the sample collected is not more than 10% of that population. However, given the nature of the study – focusing only on a particular group, GLP, rather than attempting to generalize to the overall population, and given the small number of pool, this condition will be made an exception to the general rule for the sake of a convenience sample.
Normal Population Assumption: The population of differences follows a Normal model. This assumption can be made if the following condition is satisfied: nearly normal condition. Using a histogram or Normal probability plot of the data could help check this or the differences of the data could be nearly normal.
Each of the following assumptions as satisfied except with the special exception to GLP convenience sample being the population which is not random. However, considering the study all the necessary conditions have been satisfied. For each category, there was a paired category (KOREA-USA) to get the differences. The mean of those values were calculated. Then the standard deviation of the mean differences for each category was calculated. That standard deviation was divided by the square root of the number of participants to produce the standard error. Based on these values the calculated t value was calculated using the formula specified above.
12
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Also the
was found using technology where n is the number of participants. Since the
number of data for each category was consistent, the same number was used. Using the t-value the P-value was calculated for the circled regions using technology.
P-value=2P (
>calculated t-value)
13
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Procedure Part 1: Constructing Survey The survey was constructed as specified in the methodology.
Part 2: Collecting Data The data was collected over two time periods to capture two different groups of respondents: new incoming students, parents and visitors, and current GLP students and faculty. To capture the first group of sample, the survey was distributed to the new incoming GLP students, parents, and visitors to GLP Festival on November 19, 2011 after the announcement of where the survey was made. To capture the second group of sample, the survey was distributed during morning meeting period of November 22, 2011. During meeting period of November 22, 2011, the survey was distributed to the faculty.
Part 3: Organizing Data Once the data is collected, each survey results were put in the excel file. One line constituted one survey. Each of the factors asked to be evaluated and the blocking factors were put in a horizontal row. Only the data that followed all the directions – filling every category correctly – were reflected in the data. Those that did not were not reflected.
14
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
15
KOREANANDAMER ICANNAT IONBRAND INGPERCEPT IONSINTHEGLP :ASTAT IST ICAL ANALYS IS
P a r t4 :An a l y z in gD a ta
1 . MeanVa lueo feachfac to rfo r Ko reav s .U .S . Edu c a t io n(교육) D e v e lo p m e n t P o t e n t i a l ( 발전
Ed u c a t io n(교육) D e v e lo p m e n t P o t e n t i a l ( 발전
To u r i s t i c a t t r a c t io n ( 관광 매력)
가능도)
가능도)
Ko r e a Cu l tu r e and H e r i t ag e ( 문화와 유산)
G o v e rn an c e ( 국정운
C u l tu r e and H e r i t ag e ( 문화와
P ro d u c t / S e rv i c e Ex p o r t ( 수출)
유산)
영)
To u r i s t i c a t t r a c t io n ( 관광 매력)
USA G o v e rn an c e ( 국정운
P ro d u c t / S e rv i c e Ex p o r t ( 수출)
영)
M e a n Edu c a t ion D e v e lopm e n t Cu l tu r e P rodu c t /S e rv i c e Tou r i s t i c V a lu e Po t en t i a l a nd Gov ern a n c e Expo r t A t t r a c t ion Coun t ry H e r i t ag e Ko r e a USA 2 .T -Te s t Compa r ingEach MeanVa luetoseei fthe rei sd i f fe renceinove ra l l Ko reav s . US Edu c a t io n(교육) D e v e lo p m e n t P o t e n t i a l ( 발전
Ed u c a t io n(교육) D e v e lo p m e n t P o t e n t i a l ( 발전
To u r i s t i c a t t r a c t io n ( 관광 매력)
가능도)
가능도)
Ko r e a Cu l tu r e and H e r i t ag e ( 문화와 유산)
G o v e rn an c e ( 국정운
C u l tu r e and H e r i t ag e ( 문화와
P ro d u c t / S e rv i c e Ex p o r t ( 수출)
유산)
영)
To u r i s t i c a t t r a c t io n ( 관광 매력)
USA G o v e rn an c e ( 국정운
P ro d u c t / S e rv i c e Ex p o r t ( 수출)
영)
3 . Ana ly zeeach6fac to r sfo rbo th Ko reaand USAba sedonb lock s : On c eth eov e r a l lm e a nv a lu e sf o re a c ho fth e6f a c to r sw e r ed e t e rm in e d ,th ed a t aw e r eo rg a n i z e d a c c o r d ingtoth eb lo ck s :n a t ion a l i ty ,wh e th e ron el iv eda b r o a do rno t ,a ndag eb lo c k . a .N a t ion a l i ty i .Ko r e a i i .USA i i i .S ing a po r e b . Wh e th e ron el iv e da b r o ado rn o t i .YES 1 6
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
ii. NO c. Age block i. 10s ii. 20s iii. 30s iv. 40s
17
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Results There were, in total, 107 respondents. However, out of those 107 respondents, sixty five answered all questions in the correct form and forty two did not. The data was organized using only the sixty five that correctly answered. The rest were disregarded.
Mean Value without blocking Mean Value Country Korea USA
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.225806 (2.3030080) 7.435484 (1.4803196)
7.854839 (1.7756363) 6.612903 (2.1190527)
7.911203 (1.7462184) 6.548387 (1.8543089)
4.806452 (2.3946053) 6.5 (2.1362260)
7.822582 (2.1569431) 6.919355 (2.1528157)
6.790323 (1.9564980) 7.983846 (1.8864394)
*In the parentheses are standard deviation for that category.
Mean Evaluation of Korean and American Nation Branding by category in GLP Community 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2
1 0
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage Korea
18
Governance USA
Product/Service
Touristic Attraction
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
T-Test Comparing Each Category for Korea and USA Education T=-3.66697 P Value=0.000501 Reject Null Hypothesis
Development Potential T= 19.6925 P Value = 7.39322E-29 Reject Null Hypothesis
Culture and Heritage T=4.92798 P Value = 0.000006 Reject Null Hypothesis
Governance T=-5.23285 P Value = 0.000002 Reject Null Hypothesis
Product/Service Export
19
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
T=2.86692 P Value = 0.005605 Reject Null Hypothesis
Touristic Attraction T=-3.95286 P Value =0.000196 Reject Null Hypothesis
20
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Analyze 6 Factor Blocking In the parentheses are the standard deviation values for each mean. Gender Female Mean Value Country Korea USA
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.36364 (1.933555) 7.63636 (1.616674)
8.06061 (1.456438) 7.0303 (2.038456)
8.04545 (1.830145) 6.15152 (1.481579)
4.63636 (2.103838) 6.9697 (2.083939)
7.87879 (2.102938) 6.66667 (2.231405)
6.87879 (1.916337) 7.60606 (1.836086)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.21875 (2.660759) 7.375 (1.338029)
7.5625 (2.046831) 6.1875 (2.146828)
7.875 (1.680054) 6.96875 (2.117277)
4.9375 (2.687336) 6.125 (2.136473)
7.84375 (2.244842) 7.1875 (2.070336)
6.6875 (2.023053) 8.28125 (1.904737)
Male Mean Value Country Korea USA
Nationality (Korea vs. USA vs. Singapore vs. Others) Korea Mean Value Country Korea USA
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.173913 (2.302697) 7.782609 (1.298085)
7.826087 (1.63713) 6.326087 (2.022697)
7.902174 (1.51151) 6.282609 (1.893416)
4.347826 (2.368472) 6.782609 (2.096696)
7.847826 (2.240708) 7 (2.139574)
6.717391 (1.746909) 7.956522 (1.562854)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.714286
7.714286
7
5.571429
7.571429
5.571429
USA Mean Value Country Korea
21
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (2.13809) 6.571429 (2.299068)
USA
(1.603567) 7.142857 (2.035401)
(2.380476) 6.142857 (1.214986)
(2.878492) 5.142857 (2.115701)
(3.047247) 6.714286 (3.039424)
(2.878492) 7.428571 (3.309438)
Dual Citizenship (Korea + USA) Mean Value Country Korea USA
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
5 (2.94392) 6.75 (0.957427)
6.75 (3.304038) 7.75 (1.707825)
9 (1.154701) 8.5 (1.914854)
5.25 (1.258306) 7.25 (0.957427)
8.75 (0.5) 7.25 (0.957427)
7.5 (3.109126) 9.25 (0.957427)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
7.25 (2.12132) 7.125 (1.552648)
8.375 (1.92261) 7.25 (2.815772)
8.625 (2.386719) 7.5 (1.309307)
6.375 (1.92261) 6.125 (2.531939)
7.75 (1.28174) 6.5 (2.070197)
7.875 (0.991031) 7.625 (2.386719)
Others Mean Value Country Korea USA
Experience living abroad or not? YES Mean Value Country Korea USA
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.125 (2.302866) 7.5 (1.571014)
7.729167 (1.842057) 6.625 (2.208542)
7.84375 (1.669999) 6.625 (1.817468)
4.604167 (2.266684) 6.270833 (2.257277)
8.041667 (2.010169) 7 (2.103695)
6.5625 (2.092603) 8 (2.021165)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.764706 (2.305684) 7.529412
8.058824 (1.599632) 6.588235
8.294118 (1.961017) 6.352941
5.294118 (2.733238) 7.352941
7.352941 (2.52342) 6.705882
7.411765 (1.371989) 7.764706
NO Mean Value Country Korea USA
22
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS (1.230734)
(1.905873)
(1.998161)
(1.538716)
(2.338929)
(1.480262)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.052632 (2.56744) 7.263158 (1.223292)
7.473684 (1.996441) 6.131579 (2.232088)
7.986842 (1.953814) 6.578947 (2.087693)
4.684211 (2.651927) 6.236842 (2.283125)
7.763158 (2.247331) 6.763158 (2.019288)
6.894737 (1.997153) 7.736842 (1.912748)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
7.666667 (2.516611) 6.333333 (3.785939)
6.666667 (1.527525) 8.333333 (2.081666)
6.666667 (3.05505) 5.666667 (1.154701)
4.333333 (4.041452) 3.333333 (1.527525)
6.666667 (4.932883) 5 (4.358899)
5.333333 (4.163332) 6.666667 (4.932883)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6 (2) 7.666667 (1.527525)
8.666667 (1.527525) 7 (3)
7.333333 (2.886751) 6.666667 (1.527525)
5 (1) 7.666667 (1.527525)
8 (1) 8.666667 (0.57735)
6 (2.645751) 7.333333 (2.081666)
Education
Development Potential
Culture and Heritage
Governance
Product/Service Export
Touristic Attraction
6.571429 (1.804756) 8.095238 (1.374946)
8.47619 (1.123345) 7.190476 (1.600595)
8.190476 (0.749603) 6.619048 (1.564487)
5 (1.870829) 7.428571 (1.325573)
8.190476 (1.631534) 7.238095 (2.047065)
6.904762 (1.410842) 8.571429 (0.978337)
Age Block 10s Mean Value Country Korea USA
20s Mean Value Country Korea USA
30s Mean Value Country Korea USA
40s Mean Value Country Korea USA
23
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Conclusions Results compared to the hypothesis
On a 0.05 significance level, based on the t-test result, there was a significant difference
for all six categories: education, development potential, culture and heritage, governance, product/services and touristic attraction.
Ways to improve the research techniques Error Analysis
Although most of the survey population returned the survey, almost half of the respondents did not fully complete the survey. Some people did not answer sections of personal information while some others did not answer the back page, on evaluating the categories for Korea and USA, and others did both. About the personal information such as age, it may be possible that people did not want to write their age because it would be too revealing, or it may be because as the first block, people often did not see it. Sometimes people neglected the nationality section perhaps thinking it not important, or missed out. For the back sheet, it was probably because no specific oral instructions on turning to the back side of the paper were announced individually. Improvement Methods Designing the survey
Directions Several individuals missed the second page, which demonstrates that such individuals did not fully read the directions or failed to follow such directions. Two individuals chose one country to evaluate the nation brand for, which further demonstrates the lack of care for 24
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
directions. Therefore, for future reference if this survey were to have been conducted again, the survey directions should be repeated both orally and literally, emphasized over several times and on paper, emphasize the survey directions by bolding them or making it bigger. Revealing Age Revealing age was the one factor that went most unanswered. Some respondents answered everything but their age. Of those people, the majority revealed that they were females. This perhaps suggests that females do not want to reveal their age. Therefore, in designing a better survey, asking for the age could be modified to something less direct but still useful by creating age range with 10 years as an interval. Distributing the survey Explaining the context Distributing the survey, the context of the survey could have been explained better. Some parents thought that if one of the spouse does the survey then the other spouse does not have to do the survey. Some individuals who did not live abroad asked if they were qualified for taking the survey. Many things that were taken for granted were, apparently, not obvious to many individuals. Choosing the right moment Because the GLP festival was the only time when the new-incoming students and all of the parents would be present, the surveys were distributed then. However, because it is a festival and many people are easily distracted by the entertainments, there may have been a higher rate of non-response or high rate of making mistakes or factors leading to failure to follow directions. Instead of distributing the surveys after the performances were finished, if the surveys were
25
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
distributed while waiting for the performances to start in the auditorium then the surveys may have been answered by more people and more fully as the directions instruct to do so. Consider the characteristics of the sample population In surveying the GLP student body, one thing must be noted: students do not want to be woken up. Many students said out loud that they will refuse to do the surveys, which may have influenced other individuals to not do the survey altogether because it seemed acceptable to do so. Because this survey was distributed to everyone who knows the investigator personally and very closely, there might have been different factors that led to biases and different responses or pranks. Several individuals had fun in creating “outliers” and contributing to “non-response bias” because there was personal acquaintance with the investigator. For example, one individual said that he/she wanted to give outliers and told the surveyor that individual wrote Indonesia for nationality and wrote that that individual lived in North Korea for seven years (which could be a possibility but a very low probability that there is anyone who actually did in GLP community besides the reported details created only for the fun of it). Therefore, in deciding the sample population, one must consider whether knowing the subjects personally will have impact, and whether that impact is negligible or not. If it is not negligible, one should consider if there are ways to prevent such influences. For example, one possibility could be that using random number generator, only select individuals may be asked to do the survey which could have actually increased the response rate, because selected individuals may feel more the responsibility to answer it as compared to when they know everyone will do it and it is okay that some people do not answer it. Going along the same lines, such random 26
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
sampling may have actually given sufficient number of responses and also reduce the impact of response bias because the individuals who gave up on answering the surveys because a number of other people did so too may not have if no one around was giving up because only select people were given the survey.
Suggested Further Experiments
Another experiment that can be done is applying the same concept but using modified
survey –simpler version – on a larger scale using SRS, a data that can be applied in general. Based on the original frame, one can add t-test to determine which perception is higher rather than finding that a difference exists. Another interesting experiment that could be done is using the categories of data not provided, see what the factors in determining or related to whether one follows all directions or not. For example are women more likely to follow directions better than men? Are Korean more likely to follow directions better than Americans or other nationalities? Are students more likely to follow directions better than teachers or businessmen? Such questions may be answered based on the sample collected but not reflected in the survey which made up around the same number of samples that did correctly follow the direction.
27
KOREAN AND AMERICAN NATION BRANDING PERCEPTIONS IN THE GLP: A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS References
Bock, D., Velleman, P. &De Veaux R. (2007). Stats Modeling the World. Boston: Pearson/AddisonWesley GfK Custom Research North America (2011). The Anholt-GfK Roper Naiton Brands Index. http://www.gfkamerica.com/practice_areas/roper_pam/nbi_index/index.en.html
28