Eastern Promises Fulfilled: The Differential Impact of Marketing-Focused Short-Term Study Abroad Programs in India and Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compares two marketing focused short term study programs in Asia (Indi a and Japan) and highlights reasons as to why students perceive that they learn more in one country than the other . Research to date has sparsely assessed the impact of study abroad programs on students’ perceived growth . The existing literature has rarely focused on short term study abroad programs while focusing mainly on undergraduate non business students studying in Europe in long term study abroad program s Short term study abroad programs (lasting less than eight weeks) are not considere d rigorous enough and several doubts exist as to their effectiveness as a pedagogical technique. This paper uses survey methodology and a sample of 92 undergraduate and graduate business students who have completed a short term study abroad program. The results show that students in these particular short term study abroad programs perceive greater personal, professional, and inter cultural growth than in a 10 week quarter long course. Students’ backgrounds could be a differential impact facto r, but more research needs to be done. Marketing educators, when designing short term study abroad programs, are encouraged to balance freedom and structure, and account for students’ backgrounds.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".