The Pennsylvania State University

The Graduate School

College of Health and Human Development

RAIL-RO, AN EMERGING RAIL TRAVEL PHENOMENON: A STUDY OF DOMESTIC TOURISM, RAILROAD, AND CULTURE AMONG YOUTH IN KOREA

A Dissertation in

Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management

by

So Young Bae

 2013 So Young Bae

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

December 2013

The dissertation of So Young Bae was reviewed and approved* by the following:

Garry Chick Chair of Committee Professor of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management Dissertation Advisor

Deborah Kerstetter Graduate Program Chair Professor of Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management

Alan Graefe Professor of Recreation, Park and Tourism Management

Robert Schrauf Professor and Head of Applied Linguistics

*Signatures are on file in the Graduate School

iii

ABSTRACT

Rail-Ro (Railo1) is the name of a rail pass in Korea that allows passengers of 25 or under to enjoy an unlimited amount of travel for 7 consecutive days. While the original intention of Railo was to increase train use, it has become a popular travel culture phenomenon among youth since its inception in 2007. Passengers traveling with a Railo pass call themselves Rail-ers (Railers2) and identify themselves as a cultural group. It has not only increased the number of rail users, but also strongly influenced domestic tourism by adding an inflow of young travelers into local areas and changing their perception of domestic tourism. It is remarkable that a distinct youth culture has been created through

Railo, considering the lack of healthy leisure opportunities for youth in Korea.

Although Railo has influenced various aspects of travel and culture, few researchers have given this phenomenon a closer look. The purpose of this dissertation is to provide insight to the Railo experience and Railers’ travel behaviors in order to understand this emerging cultural phenomenon and its influences. In more detail, this study (a) provides a rich and in-depth description of the Railo culture, (b) demonstrates a coherent profile of the Railo culture and documents the degree to which Railers agree on it, and (c) examines the relationships between Railers’ motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment to the country.

1 Railo is the most important keyword for this dissertation. Considering the extremely frequent use of this term, I transcribed it as “Railo” instead of using the official English term, “Rail-Ro” for better readability. 2 For the same reason, I used the word, “Railer” to indicate the official term, “Rail-er” to ensure readability.

iv

This dissertation is composed of five chapters including an introductory chapter

(Chapter 1), the three interrelated studies on Railo (Chapters 2-4), and a final, concluding chapter (Chapter 5). I collected the data during two phases, phase I (June-August 2012;

Railo summer 2012) and phase II (December 2012-March 2013; Railo winter 2013) using multiple data collection methods: ethnographic tools (e.g., interviews, observations, free listing surveys) and questionnaires (e.g., cultural consensus survey, structural equation modeling survey). The population for the first data collection was Railers who were traveling during the summer of 2012 or who had experienced Railo since its introduction in 2007. The population for the second phase of data collection was limited to Railers who made Railo trips between December 2012 and March 2013.

Chapter 2 provides an ethnography of Railo. For the purpose of exploring the nature of the phenomenon, it offers a rich and detailed description about Railo experiences from the perspective of cultural insiders. Although the three main chapters

(Chapters 2-4) in this dissertation could be read regardless of order, I recommend reading this chapter first to have the fundamental background of Railo.

Chapter 3 discusses a shared cultural domain of Railo experiences among Railers and their agreement on it based on cultural consensus theory and method. The results demonstrated that Railers understand Railo as a coherent culture. But there was no difference in cultural knowledge in Railo experiences by subgroups (i.e., gender, age, and years of experience).

Chapter 4 focuses on a series of hypotheses about several predictors of Railers’ behaviors: motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment to the country (i.e., place

v

identity & place dependence). Using structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis, the modified theoretical model was found acceptable and the results provided support for the proposed hypotheses. Motivation to “experience Korea and feel Koreanness” was a significant predictor of satisfaction and place identity. Satisfaction was a predictor of attachment to the country (i.e., place identity and place dependence) while being an antecedent of loyalty to Railo which, in turn, significantly influenced loyalty to domestic tourism and loyalty to train. Loyalty to domestic tourism was also predicted by place dependence, but not by place identity.

In sum, this study provides various insights into Railo and its influences on the domestic travel behavior of Korean youths. It also presents implications for Korail

(Korean Railroad Corporation), local governments, and tourism organizations who are responsible for creating sustainable strategies for operating Railo and encouraging domestic tourism. Avenues for future research also were discussed in an effort to expand knowledge about travel, transportation, and culture.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures ...... ix

List of Tables ...... x

Acknowledgements ...... xii

Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1

The Encounter with a Number of Young Domestic Travelers ...... 1 Railo and Its Influences on Domestic Tourism and Youth Culture...... 2 Research Purpose ...... 3 Theoretical Grounding and Research Hypotheses ...... 4 Railo at the Intersection of Domestic Tourism, Youth Tourism, and Rail Travel ...... 4 Ethnography ...... 6 Cultural Domains and Cultural Consensus Theory ...... 7 Attachment in the Context of Domestic Tourism ...... 8 Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty ...... 9 Research Overview ...... 11 References ...... 14

Chapter 2 An Ethnography of an Emerging Korean Youth Culture: Domestic Train Backpackers in Korea ...... 19

Abstract ...... 19 Introduction ...... 20 Domestic Tourism in Korea ...... 21 Youth Tourism ...... 23 The Spring Break Phenomenon ...... 24 Backpacking Tourism ...... 25 Data Collection ...... 28 A Review of the Online Community, By Train ...... 30 Meeting with a Key Informant ...... 31 Semi-structured Interviews with Korail Employees and Train Station Staff Members ...... 31 Participant Observation and Unstructured Interviews with Railers ...... 32 Free Listing Surveys ...... 33 Semi-structured Interviews with Railers, Travel Writers, and By Train Staff Members ...... 36 Data Analysis ...... 38 What is Railo? ...... 39 An Online Community for Train Travelers, By Train ...... 43

vii

My Travel Experience with Railers ...... 45 Free Listing Survey Results: Railers’ Perceptions of Railo ...... 59 Meanings of Railo ...... 63 A Perfect Opportunity for the First Travel Experience (A Travel Enabler) .. 63 An Exclusive Right of Youth ...... 66 Rediscovery of Korea ...... 69 Becoming Skilled and Thoughtful Travelers ...... 72 Conclusion ...... 74 References ...... 78 Appendix A Free Listing Questionnaire (English/Korean) ...... 88

Chapter 3 Using Cultural Consensus to Identify an Emerging Korean Youth Culture, Railo ...... 91

Abstract ...... 91 Introduction ...... 92 Literature Review ...... 93 What is Culture? ...... 93 Cultural Domains and Ad hoc Categories ...... 94 Cultural Consensus Theory ...... 95 Transport, Tourism, and the Railroad ...... 97 Railo ...... 98 Research Purpose and Questions ...... 100 Data Collection ...... 101 Observations & Interviews ...... 101 Free Listing Survey ...... 102 Cultural Consensus Questionnaire ...... 105 Data Analysis ...... 110 Results...... 111 Railo Experiences ...... 111 Cultural Consensus Analysis Results ...... 117 Discussion ...... 125 Managerial Implications ...... 128 Limitations and Directions for Future Research ...... 130 References ...... 132 Appendix A Cultural Consensus Questionnaire (English/Korean) ...... 139

Chapter 4 Railo, An Emerging Domestic Travel Phenomenon in Korea: An Examination of Motivation, Satisfaction, Attachment, and Loyalty Using Structural Equation Modeling ...... 142

Abstract ...... 142 Introduction ...... 143 Literature Review ...... 144

viii

Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty ...... 144 Attachment to the Country ...... 146 Railo ...... 148 Research Purpose and Questions ...... 150 Data Collection ...... 153 Measurement ...... 154 Motivation ...... 154 Satisfaction ...... 155 Loyalty ...... 156 Attachment ...... 157 Data Analysis ...... 158 Results...... 158 Sample Characteristics ...... 158 Measurement and Structural Modeling ...... 161 Discussion ...... 173 Study Limitations, Future Research Directions, and Practical Implications ...... 176 References ...... 179 Appendix A Questionnaire (English/Korean) ...... 187

Chapter 5 Summary ...... 196

Summary of Key Findings ...... 196 Meanings of Railo ...... 196 Railo Experience as a Coherent Culture ...... 197 The Interrelationships among Motivation, Satisfaction, Loyalty, and Attachment ...... 197 Theoretical Implications ...... 198 Managerial Implications ...... 200 Limitations and Directions for Future Research ...... 202 References ...... 204

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2-1. Data Collection Process ...... 29

Figure 2-2. A Train Map in Korea ...... 40

Figure 2-3. Railo (for 25 or younger) and Hanaro Pass (for 26 or older) ...... 46

Figure 2-4. Seoul Station ...... 47

Figure 2-5. Inside of the Seoul Station ...... 47

Figure 2-6. Inside of the Train ...... 48

Figure 2-7. The Monitor in the Train ...... 48

Figure 2-8. Train ...... 49

Figure 2-9. Railers’ Typical Planning Process of Railo Trips ...... 52

Figure 2-10. The Author Collecting the Stamp Marks ...... 54

Figure 2-11. One Railer’s Stamp Collection Book ...... 54

Figure 2-12. The Lounge of the Jjim-jil-bang ...... 56

Figure 2-13. A Snack Bar in Jjim-jil-bang ...... 57

Figure 2-14. A City Tour Bus in Suncheon ...... 58

Figure 3-1. Railo Experiences (listed in time sequence) ...... 108

Figure 4-1. A Hypothetical Research Model ...... 153

Figure 4-2. An Eigenvalue Comparison between Research Data and Random Matrix in PA ...... 162

Figure 4-3. An Eigenvalue Comparison between Research Data and Random Matrix in PA (Graph) ...... 162

Figure 4-4. Theoretical Model and Modified Model ...... 170

Figure 4-5. Results of Testing Hypothetical Model...... 172

x

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1. Comparison of Fare and Travel Time among Major Trains in Korea ...... 28

Table 2-2. Interview Guide for Korail/Train Station Employees ...... 32

Table 2-3. Demographic Information of Free Listing Survey Participants ...... 35

Table 2-4. Interview Guides for Railers, Writers, and By Train staff ...... 37

Table 2-5. The Number of Railo Passes Sold from 2007 to 2012 ...... 41

Table 2-6. Comparison of Train Passes ...... 42

Table 2-7. 20 Categories for Free List Items ...... 60

Table 2-8. Frequently-Mentioned Items (Items mentioned by at least 20 respondents) ...... 62

Table 3-1. Interview Participants ...... 102

Table 3-2. Demographic Information of Free Listing Survey Participants ...... 103

Table 3-3. Frequently-Mentioned Items about Railo (Items mentioned by at least 20 participants) ...... 104

Table 3-4. The Development of Cultural Consensus Questionnaire Items Based on Free Listing ...... 105

Table 3-5. Additional Items Derived From the Interviews for a Cultural Consensus Questionnaire ...... 107

Table 3-6. Demographic Information of Cultural Consensus Questionnaire Participants ...... 109

Table 3-7. Consensus Findings from 30 Randomly-Chosen Participants (Cronbach’s alpha= .95) ...... 117

Table 3-8. Consensus Findings from 30 Male and 30 Female Random Participants .. 118

Table 3-9. Cultural Answer Keys of Each Item (by gender) ...... 119

Table 3-10. Correlation Analysis Result (by gender) ...... 120

xi

Table 3-11. Consensus Findings from Randomly-Chosen Participants (by age) ...... 120

Table 3-12. Cultural Answer Keys of Each Item (by age) ...... 121

Table 3-13. Correlation Analysis Result (by age) ...... 123

Table 3-14. Consensus Findings from 30 First-time Railers and 30 Repeat Railers .. 123

Table 3-15. Cultural Answer Keys of Each Item (by years of experiences) ...... 124

Table 3-16. Correlation Analysis Result (by years of experiences) ...... 125

Table 4-1. Railers’ Motivations Derived from the Initial Data Collection...... 155

Table 4-2. Items for Satisfaction and Loyalty ...... 156

Table 4-3. Items for Attachment ...... 157

Table 4-4. Demographic Information of Questionnaire Respondents ...... 159

Table 4-5. The Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (Railers’ Motivation) ...... 164

Table 4-6. The Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (Railers’ Attachment to Country) ...... 165

Table 4-7. Factor Loadings for Measurement Model ...... 167

Table 4-8. The Comparison of Fit Statistics between the Theoretical Model and the Modified Model ...... 169

xii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My graduate school journey would not have been possible without the support and prayers from my teachers, family, and friends over the last five years. First and foremost, I would like to express my greatest gratitude towards my advisor, Dr. Chick.

Thank you so much for your guidance and advice. Your strong encouragement and faith in me made me move forward throughout the years. I especially appreciate the fact that you have led me to bravely jump into the intersection of tourism and anthropology. You are a wonderful mentor to me as an advisor, teacher, and scholar. I will always remember the “KISS” (Keep It Simple, Stupid) method you told me in my first year.

Also, I always felt so blessed to have such great committee members: Drs.

Kerstetter, Graefe, and Schrauf. Deb, many thanks to you for your caring advice and warm encouragement. You are one of the best listeners I have ever met in my life. Your feedback on my ideas and academic thoughts has shaped my perspectives as a tourism researcher. You are my role model as a female professor. Dr. Graefe, I would not have been able to begin my research using statistical methods without your help and guidance.

I really enjoyed the conversations with you about research design and my statistical concerns. Thank you very much for your time and willingness to meet me when I needed your advice. Dr. Schrauf, I want to thank you for introducing the world of cross-cultural research and sharing your knowledge with me. I will never forget what I learned from your class (APLNG 597), which was very eye-opening and inspiring. It really broadened my perspectives on cultural research associated with my area of interest.

xiii

I also want to express my gratitude to my wonderful teachers in Korea. Dr. Jong-

Gu Lee, there are no words adequate enough to express my thankful heart to you. I would never have imagined being a researcher if I had not met you in the fall of 2002. Thank you so much for being the most sincere and reliable mentor over the last 10 years. You are the source of my inspiration, motivation, and encouragement. Dr. Jin-Su Han, I always left your office with a pounding heart after a long conversation with you about my research and career. Thank you so much for your honest advice and encouraging feedback. Every time I met you during school breaks, I could picture myself five years later and kept moving forward. Dr. Wun-Ho Kim, God allowed me to meet you when I asked Him for a Christian mentor on my academic path. Your life deeply rooted in your faith in God has been an incredible inspiration to me. Thank you for being my role model as a Christian professor.

I could enjoy my graduate life and learn so much because I had such wonderful friends, colleagues, and staff members in RPTM. I always felt so happy and proud to be a part of this amazing group. I want to thank everyone for making me feel at home by being so friendly and supportive.

I also want to thank a number of Railers (including my key informant, Jun-Young

Jang), Korail staff members, By Train staff members, train station employees, and travel writers (Da-Hyun Kwon, Sol-Hee Park, & Eun-Kyung Choi) for their voluntary willingness to participate in my research and provide me countless insights about Railo.

They have been the best teachers for my Railo research. Plus, the positive energy and enthusiasm from these young travelers were such an amazing bonus.

xiv

My appreciation also goes to all my brothers and sisters at the State College

Korean Church. I want to thank the prayer team and young adult group members for their prayers and fellowship that gave me much encouragement. Pastor Kim and Samonim, I am indebted to you for your sincere love and trust. I am so blessed to have had fellowship and served SCKC with you. In addition, thank you for the food and the real food – spiritual food – that made me grow.

My heartfelt thanks go to my family. Above all, I am very much grateful to my parents for their unconditional love and support. Mom and Dad, your trust and prayers made my journey possible. Thank you so much for being my mom and dad. Thank you, thank you again, and I love you. I am very proud to be your daughter. I also want to thank my brother, Moon-oh for always inspiring me with his faithful life as a doctor in Christ.

I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my husband, Bonghyun. I cannot thank you enough for your love, patience, and support over the last five years. It is just unbelievable that we have been through all these years being so far away from each other, and are now finally together. Thank you so much for always being there for me with open arms when I needed you the most. You are the most precious gift that God has given me.

I am very excited to share the rest of my life with you.

Lastly, I thank you God for all the blessings you have poured out into my graduate life. I cannot wait to continue my exciting life journey with you, my Lord Jesus.

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

The Encounter with a Number of Young Domestic Travelers

Throughout the fall semester of 2011, I spent a fair amount of time exploring previous research and current news about Korean tourism in an effort to search for my dissertation topic. With my interest in cultural heritage and domestic tourism, I first became curious about the roles of cultural interpreters at one of the popular Korean traditional folk villages, Hahoe. So, I decided to visit the village to do some preliminary research in December 2011.

Upon my arrival, an interesting scene grabbed my entire attention although the village itself was attractive, and the meeting with interpreters was great. Despite the inclement weather and severe cold at the temperature of 0°F, I found a large group of young tourists visiting the village with huge backpacks. I asked some of the students why on earth they were traveling in this cold weather. “We are doing ‘Railo.’ We are

Railers!” said one of the travelers. In no time, the other travelers responded exactly the same thing with a thrilling voice. Considering the popular trend of ‘international’ backpacking rather than domestic travel, and limited travel and leisure experiences among college students in Korea, it was astonishing to encounter a large number of young travelers in rural areas in the middle of the winter. It was the very first time I’d ever heard about Railo and it represented my two year long journey for my dissertation research.

2

Railo and Its Influences on Domestic Tourism and Youth Culture

Railo is the name of a rail pass that was introduced in 2007 by Korail (Korean

Railroad Corporation). Similar to the Eurail pass in Europe or Seishun 18 ticket in Japan,

Railo provides an unlimited number of rail rides for seven consecutive days on all of

Korea’s trains except for KTX (Korea Train Express). However, it is limited to passengers who are under age 26, and is offered during two seasons only: June to

September (Railo summer) and December to March (Railo winter).

Railo was developed to increase residents’ use of ordinary trains which had been decreasing since KTX was introduced in 2004. Traveling by train was neither familiar to nor frequently-used by young adults in Korea unless they attended college far away from their home region. Railo has been greatly welcomed by Korean youths who welcome the opportunity to travel all around the country with a relatively small budget because (a) many students do not own personal vehicles and (b) they are not used to planning a trip themselves. This special rail pass was based on a well-established railroad system in

Korea that enables individuals to travel from major cities to the farthest rural areas in a week. The passengers traveling with a Railo pass have identifed themselves as “Railers” and consider themselves a cultural group who enjoys this leading travel culture among

Korean youths.

Railo has had a considerable influence on domestic tourism. The remarkable increase in the number of Railers (from 7,868 in 2007 to 173,654 in 20123) has changed the “culturescape” of local regions in Korea. The Korean government considers domestic tourism an important element of overall tourism in Korea since the success of domestic

3 Source: Korail Statistics.

3

tourism leads to the improvement of the tourism infrastructure and ultimately contributes more inbound tourists (Kim, 2010). Considering the importance of domestic tourism in

Korea (Kim, 2010; Shim, 2007), it is encouraging that many Railers have become more interested in domestic travel through Railo trips.

Moreover, Railo has strongly influenced the youth travel culture in Korea. In general, Korean teenagers are not used to enjoying leisure experiences because of the fierce competition for college admission (Korea Youth Violence Prevention Institute,

2002). Further, they are often embarrassed when they have to decide what to do with their free time in college because they have never had to make such decisions. As a result,

Railo may have had the unintended effect of contributing to college students’ healthy use of leisure time during their breaks.

Research Purpose

Railo is an emerging travel phenomenon that has influenced various aspects of culture and tourism in Korea. However, it has received limited attention from researchers.

The purpose of this dissertation was to understand the travel culture of Railo. This was accomplished by providing the results of research about the Railo experience as well as predictors of Railers’ travel behaviors. In particular, this study:

(a) identified and described the travel culture of Railo;

(b) determined whether Railo experience exist as a shared cultural domain among

Railers;

4

(c) determined the degree to which Railers (or subgroups of Railers, such as

Railers by each age group, males/females Railers, and first-time Railers/repeat

Railers) agree on the shared cultural domain; and

(c) examined the relationships among Railers’ motivation, satisfaction, loyalty,

and their attachment to the country.

Theoretical Grounding and Research Hypotheses

This study explored five research questions and tested four hypotheses based on the literature review and research context. The following provides the theoretical grounding for this dissertation and introduces a series of hypotheses.

Railo at the Intersection of Domestic Tourism, Youth Tourism, and Rail Travel

Railo is associated with domestic tourism, youth tourism, and rail travel.

Considering the potential impacts each type of tourism could have on the growth of tourism in Korea and the improvement of leisure opportunities among youth in Korea, there is a strong need to give more attention to this novel travel phenomenon.

First, domestic tourism is a fundamental element in Railo. Domestic tourism refers to travel activities made by resident visitors within their home country (UNWTO,

2012). Researchers have discussed the importance of domestic tourism and its significant impacts on countries in terms of socio-cultural as well as economic aspects (Jafari, 1986;

Singh, 2009). Domestic tourism also influences national awareness and sense of belonging while contributing to more effective development of international tourism

(Jafari, 1986). Railo has encouraged the younger generation to travel domestically.

5

Railers visit a number of different areas in Korea, including cultural and historic sites, natural resource areas, and local food establishments. Their perception of domestic tourism has been positively changed and they have become “fans” of domestic tourism

(see Chapter 2).

Second, Railo can be considered a type of youth tourism. Youth, in general, refers to individuals between the ages of 15 and 26 (Bywater, 1993; Horak & Weber, 2000).

This group of travelers has advantages in traveling such as a strong physical condition, less time constraints, and no dependents (Vogt, 1976). Although the economic impact they currently make at their age might not be huge, young tourists have the potential for far more consumption in the future (Bywater, 1993; Richards & Wilson, 2003). Railers include young people under 26, most of whom are college students. Taking advantage of their school breaks, they travel for 7 days and usually repeat their trips until they reach the maximum eligible age of 25 (i.e., the time they are no longer eligible for a Railo pass).

Third, transport (in this case, train and a Railo pass) is an essential element in tourism, acting as a mediator between tourists and tourism attractions (Page, 2004). There are some cases where domestic tourism has achieved great success by promoting a specific mode of transportation to reach rural areas of the country (e.g., Wayfarer ticket in the United Kingdom). Railo enables young travelers to access the entire country without personal vehicles at a reasonable cost. It is very meaningful in that Railo is the only and the first rail product which has had many zealous travelers on a regular basis constantly over the years, although there have been various rail travel products in Korea based on the cooperation between Korail and local tourism businesses.

6

To understand this novel travel phenomenon based on domestic tourism, youth tourism, and rail travel, this study illustrates in-group members’ perspectives using ethnography and also examines the coherence of the cultural domain, Railo experience using cultural consensus theory.

Ethnography

Ethnography is a great methodological tool to use when attempting to understand a novel phenomenon because cultural insiders’ rather than the researcher’s perspectives are fully reflected to examine their world (Binder, 2004). Ethnography has been used by tourism researchers to describe travel phenomena (e.g. Cohen, 2011; Muzaini, 2006;

Sørensen, 2003). Considering the mobile nature of tourism, some researchers have used mobile ethnography, which is used while moving in various modes of transportation rather than in one fixed spot (Johnson, 2010). Microethnography is an ethnography which deals with a phenomenon for a relatively short period of time. It is also an effective tool to examine travel phenomena because, in many cases, they include short leaves such as a day-tripping or a week-long getaway as well as a long-term vacation (Creswell, 2012).

Despite its obvious usefulness, however, ethnography has rarely been used in tourism research in Korea (Park, 2010).

Because Railo is a novel travel phenomenon in Korea, it is important to understand the phenomenon from in-group members’ perspectives. Thus, this study focused on an emic description of the Railo experience first. Then, Railers’ motivations were examined to understand Railers’ behaviors though various ethnographic data

7

collection methods. The specific research questions that guided this component of the study were:

RQ1. How do Railers describe their Railo experiences?

RQ2. What motivates college students to make Railo trips?

Cultural Domains and Cultural Consensus Theory

Many anthropologists are interested in the exploration of cultural domains

(Spradley, 1979; Weller & Romney, 1988). A cultural domain is a set of items that are considered the same type with membership determined by culture (Borgatti, 1999).

“Animals” or “illnesses” are examples of cultural domain. Sometimes, cultural domains are implied and comprise an “ad hoc category” (Barsalou, 1983). For example, the “Railo experience” is an ad hoc category in the context of this study. In general, the analysis of cultural domains (i.e., cultural domain analysis) is conducted based on in-group members’ perspectives instead of reaching answers from theory or researchers’ opinions

(Collins & Dressler, 2008).

However, cultural domains may not always be coherent among in-group members. To assess intra-cultural differences in cultural domains, Romney, Weller, and

Batchelder (1986) developed cultural consensus as both a theory of culture and a statistical method that (a) determines whether or not a cultural level of group agreement exists, (b) estimates the degree of agreement among informants about a cultural domain, and (c) the degree to which individuals’ beliefs are in line with the shared belief. It provides researchers culturally correct answers as well as cultural understanding of the domain from in-group members’ perspectives (Caulkins & Hyatt, 1999; Weller, 2007).

8

The usefulness of this theory and method has been documented in various disciplines

(e.g., Dressler, 1996; Gatewood & Cameron, 2009; Kerstetter, Bricker, & Li, 2010; Li,

Chick, Zinn, Absher, & Graefe, 2007; Miller, Kaneko, Bartram, Marks, & Brewer, 2004;

Weller, Ruebush, & Klein, 1997).

Based on cultural consensus theory, this study investigated if this ad hoc category, the Railo experience, constitutes an agreed-upon cultural domain among Railers, and examined the degree of Railers’ agreement on Railo culture. The following two research questions guided this component of the study.

RQ3. To what degree do Railers agree on a shared cultural model about Railo?

RQ4. If Railo culture exists, how does Railers’ cultural knowledge vary by

subgroup (i.e., gender, age, and years of experiences)?

Next, additional research question and hypotheses will be introduced based on the constructs of motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment to examine Railers’ travel behaviors. The concept of attachment was applied at a national level rather than to a specific destination.

Attachment in the Context of Domestic Tourism

People can form attachment toward people, buildings, environments, homes, objects, landscapes, neighborhoods, towns and cities (Cresswell, 2004). Their perceptions about a certain place and their behaviors are often influenced by a sense of attachment

(Brocato, 2006). Researchers have used two dimensions of attachment – place identity and place dependence – which reflect cognitive and functional aspects to examine the

9

nature of place attachment in the recreation settings (Moore & Graefe, 1994), the influence of attachment on visitors’ perceptions of recreation impacts (White, Virden, &

Van Riper, 2008), the relationship between tourists’ involvement and place attachment

(Gross & Brown, 2008; Hwang, Lee, & Chen, 2005), the relationship between level of specialization and place attachment among recreationists (Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000).

A sense of attachment may arise at a national level and be manifested in residents’ feelings of national pride and/or thinking about their shared history in the context of domestic tourism (Franklin, 2003). For example, Korea is a homogeneous country in terms of ethnicity and Korean people often display a sense of “Koreanness.” It becomes stronger when they visit a heritage setting within a country (Palmer, 2005). Despite its potential applicability at the national level, few researchers have applied it in that context and instead focused on specific places or destinations.

In the case of Railo experiences, destinations visited by Railers differ. Thus, existing place attachment concepts were not directly applicable. Therefore, it was essential to determine whether Railers have a sense of attachment to their country and if so, how they describe it during and after their Railo experiences. The following research question reflects this component of the study:

RQ5. Do Railers have a sense of attachment to their country and, if yes, how do

they define and describe it during and after their Railo experiences?

Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty

Motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty have been popular interrelated research topics among researchers and are considered to be crucial predictors of tourists’ behaviors

10

(Crompton, 1979; Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991; Yoon & Uysal, 2005). Many researchers have examined the relationship between motivation and satisfaction (Chon, 1989; Ross & Iso-

Ahola, 1991; Qu & Ping, 1999) and the relationship between satisfaction and loyalty

(Petrick & Backman, 2001; Yüksel, Yüksel, & Bilim, 2010). However, few researchers have addressed these constructs simultaneously, which could provide more extensive and comprehensive results (Yoon & Uysal, 2005).

Given the increasing popularity of Railo, understanding tourists’ motivation is very important for destination managers who want to satisfy tourists’ wants and needs.

Motivation is also highly associated with satisfaction and loyalty (Yoon & Uysal, 2005).

Given that youth tourists currently are and will likely continue to be an important segment of the tourist market in the future (Bywater, 1993; Richards & Wilson, 2003), it is likely that if satisfied they would display positive future behaviors (e.g., revisit), be supporters of domestic tourism, and become better hosts for international tourists who visit Korea. Thus, the following hypotheses were developed to test the relationship among the three constructs.

H1. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation.

H2. Loyalty is positively influenced by satisfaction.

Previous studies have revealed that individuals who are attached to a certain place tend to feel more satisfied with their experiences there, and intend to revisit the place and recommend it to others (Lee, Graefe, & Burns, 2007; Scott & Vitartars, 2008). Also, there are indications that satisfaction is an antecedent of attachment (Brocato, 2006; Hou,

Lin, & Morais, 2005; Lee, 1999; Lee & Allen, 1999). Thus, the attachment of domestic

11

tourists towards their country may be associated with their satisfaction and loyalty to domestic tourism. In this study, the latter argument was used to develop a hypothesis according to the preliminary interview results (see Chapter 2). Moore and Graefe (1994) note that a sense of attachment begins to be formed once someone makes at least one visit or more to a particular destination. Given the documented behavior of Railers, it is worth examining whether their attachment at a national level is associated with motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty.

H3. Attachment is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H4. Loyalty is positively influenced by attachment.

Research Overview

This study is composed of three interrelated articles that are based upon data collected in two phases: phase I (June-August 2012; Railo summer 2012) and phase II

(December 2012-March 2013; Railo winter 2013) (Figure 1-1). The population for the data collection in phase I was Railers either who were traveling during the summer of

2012 or who had experienced Railo since its introduction in 2007. The sample in phase II was limited to Railers who had made Railo trips between December 2012 and March

2013 (excluding the ones who made trips in the previous years). In order to have the necessary background information about Railo, I provided an ethnographic description first, then determined whether Railo constitutes a shared cultural domain or not, and, lastly, tested several hypotheses that would help understand its influence on domestic tourism.

12

Figure 1-1. Research Overview

The first article is to understand Railers’ perception of Railo experiences based on an ethnography of Railo (RQ1). The ethnography was not intended to develop theory, but rather to explore the nature of the phenomenon for future theory development (Atkinson

& Hammersley, 1994). A variety of ethnographic data were collected using semi- structured and unstructured interviews, free listing techniques, and observation. This article provides rich and in-depth description about Railo experiences based on an emic approach (i.e., the view of a cultural insider). It offers a strong fundamental background for the two other articles.

The second article explores shared cultural domains of Railo experiences among

Railers as well as their agreement on them. Based on cultural consensus theory and method, a questionnaire was developed and used to demonstrate a coherence of Railo

13

experiences (RQ3). The subgroup variations were also examined by gender, age, and years of experience (RQ4). It is important to address whether Railo experience unites

Railers in a single coherent culture because it could support a new view that a transportation pass can create a travel culture.

The third article focused on the data collected via a series of interviews to understand Railers’ motivation (RQ2) and attachment (RQ5) and a survey questionnaire that contained questions about motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment (H1-4).

To examine the structural relationship among these four latent constructs, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used for analysis. It provides theoretical and practical implications based on the model tested in this study.

In sum, these three interrelated studies will not only provide various insights to

Railo and its influences on Korean youths’ domestic travel behaviors, but also produce a number of practical applications for Korail, and local governments and tourism organizations in Korea.

14

References

Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation.

Handbook of Qualitative Research, 1, 248-261.

Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 211-227.

Binder, J. (2004). The whole point of backpacking: Anthropological perspectives on the

characteristics of backpacking. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), The global

nomad: Backpacker travel in theory and practice (pp. 60-76). Bristol, UK: Channel

View Publications.

Borgatti, S. (1999). Elicitation techniques for cultural domain analysis. In J. Schensul &

M. LeCompte (Eds.), The Ethnographer’s Toolkit, Vol. 3 (pp. 1-26). Walnut Creek,

CA: Altimira Press.

Bricker, K. S. & Kerstetter, D. L. (2000). Level of specialization and place attachment:

An exploratory study of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences, 22(4), 233-257.

Brocato, E. D. (2006). Place attachment: An investigation of environments and outcomes

in service context. Doctoral Thesis. The University of Texas at Arlington.

Bywater, M. (1993). The youth and student travel market. Travel & Tourism Analyst, 3,

35-50.

Caulkins, D. & Hyatt, S. B. (1999). Using consensus analysis to measure cultural

diversity in organizations and social movements. Field Methods, 11(1), 5-26.

Chon, K. (1989). Understanding recreational travelers’ motivation, attitude and

satisfaction. The Tourist Review, 44(1), 3-7.

Cohen, S. (2011). Lifestyle travellers: Backpacking as a way of life. Annals of Tourism

Research, 38(4), 1535-1555.

15

Collins, C. C. & Dressler, W. W. (2008). Cultural consensus and cultural diversity: A

mixed methods investigation of human service providers’ models of domestic

violence. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(4), 362-387.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches. Sage Publications, Inc.

Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations of pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6,

408-424.

Dressler, W. W. (1996). Culture and blood pressure: Using consensus analysis to create a

measurement. Cultural Anthropology Methods, 8(3), 6-8.

Franklin, A. (2003). Tourism: An introduction. London, UK: Sage Publications.

Gatewood, J. & Cameron, C. (2009). Belonger perceptions of tourism and its impact in

the Turks and Caicos Islands. Retrieved on August 21, 2013 from

http://www.lehigh.edu/~jbg1/Perceptions-of-Tourism.pdf

Gross, M. J. & Brown, G. (2008). An empirical structural model of tourists and places:

Progressing involvement and place attachment into tourism. Tourism Management,

29(6), 1141-1151.

Horak, S. & Weber, S. (2000). Youth tourism in Europe: Problems and prospects.

Tourism Recreation Research, 25(3), 37-44.

Hwang, S. N., Lee, C., & Chen, H. J. (2005). The relationship among tourists’

involvement, place attachment and interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s national

parks. Tourism Management, 26(2), 143-156.

16

Johnson, J. (2010). Euro-railing: A mobile-ethnography of backpacker train travel. In K.

Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and

experiences (pp. 85-101). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Kerstetter, D. L., Bricker, K. S., & Li, H. (2010). Vanua and the people of the Fijian

Highlands: Understanding sense of place in the context of nature-based tourism

development. Tourism Analysis, 15(1), 31-44.

Kim, S. (2010). Domestic tourism promotion plans. Korea Culture & Tourism Institute.

Korea Youth Violence Prevention Institute. (2002). Current status of adolescence

violence and solution suggestions.

Lee, J., Graefe, A., & Burns, R. (2007). Examining the antecedents of destination loyalty

in a forest setting. Leisure Sciences, 29(5), 463-481.

Li, C., Chick, G., Zinn, H., Absher, J., & Graefe, A. (2007). Ethnicity as a variable in

leisure research. Journal of Leisure Research, 39(3), 514-545.

Miller, M., Kaneko, J., Bartram, P., Marks, J., & Brewer, D. (2004). Cultural consensus

analysis and environmental anthropology: Yellowfin tuna fishery management in

Hawaii. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(3), 289-314.

Moore, R. L. & Graefe, A. R. (1994). Attachments to recreation settings: The case of

rail‐trail users. Leisure Sciences, 16(1), 17-31.

Muzaini, H. (2006). Backpacking Southeast Asia: Strategies of “looking local.” Annals of

Tourism Research, 33(1), 144-161.

Lee, C. C. (1999). Investigating tourist attachment to selected coastal destinations: An

application of place attachment. Doctoral Thesis. Clemson University.

17

Lee, C. C. & Allen, L. (1999). Understanding individuals’ attachment to selected

destinations: An application of place attachment. Tourism Analysis, 4, 173-185.

Page, S. (2004). Transport and Tourism. In A. Lew & C. Hall (Eds.), A companion to

tourism (pp. 146-158). Victoria, Australia: Blackwell Publishing.

Palmer, C. (2005). An ethnography of Englishness: Experiencing identity through tourism.

Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 7-27.

Park, H. (2010). Heritage tourism: Emotional journeys into nationhood. Annals of

Tourism Research, 37(1), 116-135.

Petrick, J. F. & Backman, S. J. (2001). An examination of golf travelers’ satisfaction,

perceived value, loyalty, and intentions to revisit. Tourism Analysis, 6(3/4), 223-237.

Qu, H. & Ping, E. W. Y. (1999). A service performance model of Hong Kong cruise

travelers’ motivation factors and satisfaction. Tourism Management, 20(2), 237-244.

Richards, G. & Wilson, J. (2003). New horizons in independent youth and student travel.

A report to the international student travel confederation (ISTC) and the

association of tourism and leisure education (ATLAS). Amsterdam: International

Student Travel Confederation.

Ross, E. L. D. & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1991). Sightseeing tourists’ motivation and satisfaction.

Annals of Tourism Research, 18(2), 226-237.

Scott, D. & Vitartas, P. (2008). The role of involvement and attachment in satisfaction

with local government services. International Journal of Public Sector

Management, 21(1), 45–57.

Shim, W. (2007). The mid/long-term policy development for revitalization of domestic

tourism. Korea Culture & Tourism Institute.

18

Sørensen, A. (2003). Backpacker ethnography. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4), 847-

867.

Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

Vogt, J. W. (1976). Wandering: Youth and travel behavior. Annals of Tourism Research,

4(1), 25-41.

Weller, S. C. & Romney, A. K. (1988). Systematic data collection. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Weller, S. C. (2007). Cultural consensus theory: Applications and frequently asked

questions. Field methods, 19(4), 339-368.

Weller, S. C., Ruebush II, T. R., & Klein, R. E. (1997). Predicting treatment-seeking

behavior in Guatemala. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 11, 224-245.

White, D. D., Virden, R. J., & Van Riper, C. J. (2008). Effects of place identity, place

dependence, and experience-use history on perceptions of recreation impacts in a

natural setting. Environmental Management, 42(4), 647-657.

Yoon, Y. & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and

satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1),

45-56.

Yüksel, A., Yüksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer

satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management,

31(2), 274-284.

19

Chapter 2

An Ethnography of an Emerging Korean Youth Culture: Domestic Train Backpackers in Korea

Abstract

This paper is an ethnography of Railo, a rail pass as well as an emerging domestic rail travel phenomenon among youth in Korea. Using a variety of ethnographic data collection methods including semi-structured/unstructured interviews, free listing techniques, and observation, this paper provides a rich and in-depth description about

Railo experiences based on the view of youth train backpackers (i.e. “cultural insiders”).

The results indicated that Railo is not just a rail pass among youth, but is perceived as an exclusive right of mainly college students to participate in week-long domestic rail travel.

In addition, the results showed that Railers associated four meanings with Railo: (a) Railo is a perfect opportunity for Railers to make self-initiated travel experiences; (b) Railo is perceived as a privilege exclusively given to young generations, which strongly motivates

Railers to travel with Railo in their early twenties; (c) Railo enables Railers to realize the forgotten beauty of Korea and feel a sense of attachment to Korea; (d) Railo makes

Railers more skilled and thoughtful travelers. The results of this study can be used as a strong fundamental background for additional study of Railo in the context of Korea’s domestic tourism, railroad system, and culture.

20

Introduction

Railo is an emerging travel phenomenon in Korea which involves domestic travel by train, mainly among college students who backpack throughout the country (i.e.,

“Railers”). Railo, similar to the Eurail pass in Europe or Seishun 18 ticket in Japan, is the name of a 7-day train pass offered to individuals who are age 25 or under. It has led young people to travel all over the country by train for seven consecutive days. Since the inception of Railo in 2007, the number of passengers who have traveled with a Railo pass has increased from 7,868 in 2007 to 173,654 in 20124.

While backpacking tourism has been studied as a relatively homogenous phenomenon that originated in Western countries and is visible internationally (Huxley,

2004), Cohen (2004) has argued for future research about backpackers, particularly unique subcultures of backpackers like “Railers.” An increasing number of tourism researchers feel that unique travel phenomena like backpacking via rail systems should use ethnography as a data collection tool (e.g. Cohen, 2011; Muzaini, 2006; Sørensen,

2003). It enables cultural insiders to provide their own perceptions of “how they experience ‘their world’” instead of researchers’ predetermined perspectives (Binder,

2004, p. 93). Modified ethnography such as micro-ethnography or mobile ethnography has also been proposed as a way to document the nature of tourism. However, ethnography has rarely been used in tourism research, particularly in Korea (Park, 2010).

Railo has strongly influenced Korean youths as well as domestic tourism in

Korea. Korean youths are often isolated from leisure experiences during their teenage periods because of fierce peer competition for college admission (Korea Youth Violence

4 Source: Korail Statistics.

21

Prevention Institute, 2002). According to the senior manager of the Korail marketing team, Railo has contributed to students’ healthy use of their leisure time during school holidays. In addition, Railers have become more interested in domestic travel as a result of their Railo trips. This is important in that the Korean government recently encouraged people to make more domestic trips to experience the beauty of their country (Shim,

2007). Railers have influenced on local tourism in Korea such as an emergence of

Korean guesthouse culture, city tour booms, and an inflow of the young population into rural areas. In recognition of the positive changes, Railo was awarded the 2012 Korea

Tourism Award5.

The purpose of this study is to provide an ethnographic description of a novel travel phenomenon, Railo. Some existing categories of tourism – domestic tourism and youth tourism – will be introduced as explanatory frameworks for Railo. The latter includes U.S. students’ spring break and backpacking tourism.

Domestic Tourism in Korea

Domestic tourism includes resident visitors’ travel activities within their home country (UNWTO, 2012). Despite the lack of statistics, “domestic tourism can be assumed to far exceed its international counterpart in most countries of the world”

(Singh, 2009, p. 1). Domestic tourism has significant socio-cultural and economic impacts on countries, including national awareness and a sense of belonging (Jafari,

5 Korea Tourism Awards is an annual event to recognize the 10 best players (e.g., individuals, programs, destinations, facilities, publications) in the Korean tourism industry who have made a significant contribution to domestic tourism in Korea. There are 10 categories of awards including frontiers, traditional accommodations, cultural resources, ecotourism resources, smart technologies, publications, shopping, safe tourism destinations, influential figures, and a corporate encouraging vacation culture.

22

1986). In addition, domestic tourists crossing regional borders often stimulate

“redistribution of spending power” (Archer, 1978, p. 127) and acculturation (Jafari,

1986). It is also relatively easier to predict domestic tourists’ activities compared to international tourists’ activities. Nevertheless, many scholars have marginalized domestic tourism by mostly focusing on international tourism behaviors and impacts (Ghimire,

2001; Singh, 2009).

In the last two decades the domestic tourism industry in Korea has developed mainly in response to economic development and increased leisure time. An increase in the number and type of TV programs that show attractive destinations in Korea also has inspired many Korean people to travel within their own country. One of the most popular travel entertainment programs in Korea, il- bok-ee-il (a two-day overnight travel) not only shows a lot of beautiful scenery in

Korea, but also describes local people’s living areas and their life in a natural and entertaining manner. People living in rural areas are big fans of this program since it helps develop awareness of their towns or villages.

According to the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism (2012), the number of domestic tourists in 2011 was 35 million, an increase of 13.2% compared to 2010. Day- trips increased by 31.1% while overnight trips increased by 6.2%. Korea Tourism

Organization (2009) indicated that Koreans often make relatively short trips such as two- day (48.9%) or three-day trips (48.1%). About one-half of the domestic tourists travel over the weekend while 22.6% travel during the holiday seasons and 18.1% travel during summer/winter vacations. They mainly travel by vehicle (58.4%) and with their family

23

and relatives, but some travel by train (18.9%) or express bus (17.4%). The major purpose of their travel is to rest or view nature.

In 2012, Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) underscored the importance of the tourism and leisure industry in Korea. The Korean government has put much effort and investment in driving domestic tourism by building awareness via campaigns and social networks as well as by developing various tourism programs.

Youth Tourism

The term, “youth,” refers to individuals who are between the ages of 15 and 26

(Bywater, 1993; Horak & Weber, 2000). They are an important segment of the tourist market, representing approximately 20% of travel in the world (Richards & Wilson,

2003). Despite their size and potential influence, youth travelers have been given less attention than mass, adult tourists because of their low income level and budget consciousness (Theuns, 1991). However, youth tourists have the potential for greater consumption in the future (Bywater, 1993; Richards & Wilson, 2003).

Vogt (1976) explained that youth have fewer travel constraints based on

Lansing’s (1964) six major barriers for travel: expense, lack of time, poor health and old age, presence of children, lack of interest and motivation, and fear of psychological difficulties. Most young tourists have time for travel, are healthy and young, and have no children. Moreover, they are motivated to conquer hardships and difficulties possibly associated with low budgets and the uncertainty of travel. Young tourists attempt to distinguish themselves from adult tourists by having their own identity and specific interests and needs (Ravon, 1991).

24

For the last two decades, scholars have discussed several types of youth tourism in both domestic and international contexts (e.g., Carr, 2002; Hobson & Josiam, 1992;

Horak & Weber, 2000; Richards & King, 2003; Simpson, 2005). The most relevant example in the domestic context is the spring break phenomenon whereas in the international context it is backpacking tourism.

The Spring Break Phenomenon

More than two million North American college students leave for a week-long break in the spring every year (Reynolds, 2004). Spring break provides college students with opportunities to get away from their school routine and spend time with their friends in popular holiday destinations. The major destinations are located in Florida, California,

Texas, and Mexico. The origin of spring break goes back to the College Swim Forum held in Fort Lauderdale in Florida in 1938 (Hobson & Josiam, 1996). Since this first event, spring break has grown in popularity and become a cultural phenomenon in North

America. However, the majority of students are not necessarily conventional “tourists”

(Hobson & Josiam, 1992). They enjoy excessive drinking, having sex, and clubbing in their destinations (Grekin, Sher, & Krull, 2007; Lee, Maggs, & Rankin, 2006; Ribeiro,

2011; Sönmez, Apostolopoulos, Yu, Yang, Mattila, & Yu, 2006), and their behaviors are heavily influenced by their friends (Patrick, Morgan, Maggs, & Lefkowitz, 2011).

Friends’ opinions may “either encourage or discourage health risk and protective behaviors” (Patrick et al., 2011, p. 3).

A majority of the research regarding spring break was done in the 1990s and early

2000s. Ribeiro (2011) suggested that there was a shift of research topics from spring

25

break travel marketing (e.g., Hobson & Josiam, 1992; Josiam, Clements, & Hobson,

1994; Josiam, Hobson, Dietrich, & Smeaton, 1998) to spring breakers’ behaviors (e.g.,

Grekin et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2006; Maticka-Tyndale, Herold, & Mewhinney, 1998).

The majority of the recent research has focused on spring breaker’s behaviors as

“extreme, alcohol-fueled, ritualistic, overly sexual, and ultimately health-threatening”

(Ribeiro, 2011, p. 13). Despite these negative aspects of spring break as displayed on the media and through research, the phenomenon has exerted a significant impact on many destinations across the U.S. (Hobson & Josiam, 1996). Expenditures were over one billion dollars in the U.S. in 2003 (Porter, 2003; Reynolds, 2004).

The Railo phenomenon is similar to the spring break phenomenon in that week- long travel is made during college students’ school breaks and it allows students to travel and spend time with their friends. With a few exceptions, spring breakers mostly travel to domestic destinations similar to Railers who travel within the country. However, spring breakers want to stay in one destination and have fun while Railers are encouraged to be

“travelers” thanks to an unlimited access to a specific form of transportation (i.e., train).

Backpacking Tourism

Backpacking tourism has become a “culture symbolic of the increasingly mobile world” (Paris, 2010, p. 40), which stimulates transnational investment and consumption.

Young tourists now consider backpacking tourism as a rite-of-passage (Graburn, 1983;

Maoz, 2007; O’Reilly, 2006). These young backpacking tourists originated from youth tourists called ‘drifters’ (Cohen, 1973) or ‘wanderers’ (Vogt, 1976); individuals who roam around internationally and spend time with local residents. However, backpackers

26

traveling in the modern era have shown distinct travel patterns and behaviors unlike the traditional descriptions of drifters and wanderers (Sørensen, 2003).

Backpackers have been defined as young independent tourists who have a preference for cheap accommodations, and opportunities to seek their identities, meet new people, and pursue authentic experiences (Loker-Murphy, 1996; Maoz, 2007; Noy,

2004). However, they are not as homogeneous as they used to be (Ateljevic & Dorne,

2004; Maoz, 2007; Uriely, Yonay, & Simchai, 2002); they differ by purpose of travel, motivations, period of travel, age/gender, and life cycle (Larsen, Ø gaard, & Brun, 2011).

For example, there is an emerging segment of backpackers called flashpackers. While a majority of backpackers are still gap year travelers called gappers (i.e., backpackers who travel between high school and college), flashpackers are in their mid-twenties or early thirties with established career paths. They travel like backpackers, but for relatively shorter periods. Since a budget is not their main concern, they stimulate local economies more than traditional backpackers (Javis & Peel, 2010; O’Reilly, 2006; Sørensen, 2003).

In addition, the development of communication tools stemming from modern technology has also influenced the travel culture of backpacking tourism. While planning a trip at home, individuals can experience tourism destinations or relevant activities virtually through the Internet (Paris, 2010). Smart devices such as smart phones,

Blackberries, and tablet PCs, have enabled tourists to stay connected with their friends and family at home and access real-time information during their travels (Sørensen,

2003). Sørensen (2003) claimed that, “the recurrent communication with the home environment that the Internet enables confirms the connection, rather than the distinction,

27

between ‘here’ and ‘back home,’ between the present backpacker situation and the non- backpacking normality” (p. 861).

Since the late 1990s, a number of researchers have studied the phenomenon of backpacking tourism, mainly focusing on several popular destinations in South East Asia or in Australia (Cohen, 2010; Hampton, 2010). Despite the importance of international backpacking tourism, considering it in the domestic context could expand the scope of backpacking tourism research.

The purpose of this study is to identify and describe the travel culture of Railo

(i.e., domestic train backpacking among young adults that occurs during students’ seasonal breaks in Korea). This study will present an ethnographic account of Railo based on an emic approach (i.e., the view of a cultural insider).

The Railroad System in Korea

The Korean railroad system was introduced in 1899. It has 12 managerial districts and over 600 stations including small, remote stops. There are five types of trains by which people can reach most of Korea: KTX (express trains), Saemaul, Mugunghwa,

Nuri-ro, and commuter trains (Table 2-1). KTX trains are the fastest (330 km/h), but the most expensive in Korea. Saemaul trains offer more comfortable seats with a higher price

(still lower than KTX) compared to Mugunghwa trains while the speeds of both trains are not much different (about 150 km/h). Nuri-ro and commuter trains run within limited areas. The introduction of KTX in 2004 dramatically reduced the travel time between cities far from each other. A majority of the passengers of KTX include commuters, business people, and some adult travelers.

28

Table 2-1. Comparison of Fare and Travel Time among Major Trains in Korea * Fare by type of seats Travel time Type of trains Premium Standing areas/Unassigned (Seoul - Regular seats seats seats Busan) KTX 74,600 53,300 50,600 2 h 45 m Saemaul 46,800 40,700 38,700 4 h 56 m Mugunghwa N/A 27,300 23,200** 5 h 20 m * Fare for adults, weekday, KRW (USD 1=KRW 1,150) ** Mugunghwa doesn’t have unassigned seats, but has standing areas.

However, the introduction of KTX resulted in the decreased use of other trains, especially Saemaul trains. To encourage the use of the non-KTX trains, a Railo pass has been developed which allows passengers aged 25 or younger to use unassigned seats and the standing areas of these trains for a week at a reasonable price.

Data Collection

I collected data in summer 2012 using participant observation, semi- structured/unstructured interviews, free listing, and a review of the online community, By

Train. Instead of testing hypotheses, I explored “the nature of social or cultural phenomena” in the context of the Korean rail system (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994). I played dual roles both as a backpacker and a researcher over three train trips. The main participants in this study were Railers who were traveling during the summer of 2012 or who had used a Railo pass since its introduction in 2007.

In this study, I used the technique of mobile ethnography (Hannam, Sheller &

Urry, 2006, p. 15). Considering the mobile nature of tourism, it is especially effective for

“detailing passengers, activities, and actions as they are moved by and move in modes of transportation” (Johnson, 2010, p. 108). Mobile ethnography is also a part of a

“microethnography” (Passariello, 1983, p. 109), which is used to examine a phenomenon

29

for a relatively short period of time (Creswell, 2012). Many tourism scholars have found

microethnography to be useful in a tourism context that does not require learning a new

language but rather includes a short-period travel (e.g., Foster, 1986; Mitas, Yarnal, &

Chick, 2012; Passariello, 1983; Yarnal & Kerstetter, 2005).

Data were collected from By Train for 8 months (i.e., January 2012 - August

2012). They were also collected in summer 2012 using multiple ethnographic methods.

First, I met a key informant to get advice for overall data collection. Second, I had

interviews with Korail (Korean Railroad Corporation) employees and train station staff

members to get an idea about Railo. Third, I made three train trips to meet traveling

Railers and conduct participant observation, unstructured interviews, and free listing

surveys. Fourth, between the trips, I had in-depth semi-structured interviews with Railers

who have experienced Railo. I also administered free listing surveys on-line (Figure 2-1).

Figure 2-1. Data Collection Process

Jan-Aug 2012 On-going review of By Train

Jun 2012 (Semi-structured) Interview with a key informant

(Semi-structured) Interviews with Korail employees and train station staff members (n=5)

Jun-Aug 2012 Participant observation (Semi-structured) Interviews with Railers, travel writers, and By Train (Unstructured) Interviews with Railers staff members (n=15)

Free listing survey with Railers Online free listing survey with Railers in person (n=94) (n=111)

Fieldwork through 3 train trips

30

During the data collection process, I wrote exhaustive field notes regarding space, actor, activity, object, act, event, time, goal, and feeling (Spradley, 1979). I recorded all the conversations and interviews after receiving participants’ consent with a digital voice recorder. Before, during, and after each data collection period, I tried to capture descriptions of the scene, and wrote analytical memos and self-reflections in my field notes. Data collection was an iterative process, which created synergy across each data collection period. For example, a review of By Train and an interview with a key informant enabled me to do more thorough observation during the trips. The field notes I wrote during my observation, in turn, helped me to ask more relevant questions for additional in-depth interviews.

A Review of the Online Community, By Train

“Virtual ethnography” (Hine, 2000) is often used to observe and participate in the communication taking place via blogs or websites. Kozinets (2010) called the ethnography of online cultures “netnography.” Since the online space, By Train, was inseparable from Railers’ culture, I reviewed By Train for eight months, beginning in

January 2012. The questions guiding my observation were as follows: (a) what kind of information is shared on this website; (b) who mainly visits this community; (c) how actively do Railers upload postings and reply to another person’s postings; (d) what kind of postings do Railers upload and what constitutes content; and (e) what are the most popular destinations among Railers. As the summer season for Railo got closer, the number of postings dramatically increased. By Train provided useful information for fieldwork planning and subsequent interviews and free listing surveys.

31

Meeting with a Key Informant

Prior to fieldwork, I was advised by a key informant, a 25-year old avid Railer who identified himself as a “traveler.” He was a senior college student majoring in management of technology. He has experienced Railo more than 10 times since 2007. He produces a wide range of information and opinions based on his travel experiences on his personal blog to which many online tourism media subscribe. For this study, he provided a rich and detailed description of his Railo experiences as well as advice in response to my questions about data collection (e.g., What are the popular places where I can meet as many Railers as possible? Whom else do you think I need to interview to understand the context of Railo? Do you think these questions are appropriate to ask?).

Semi-structured Interviews with Korail Employees and Train Station Staff Members

For a more comprehensive understanding of Railo, I conducted semi-structured interviews with a manager of the marketing team in Korail and employees at train stations in Seoul, Daejeon, Daegu, Gyeongju, and Suncheon. These are the major stations

Railers use according to the key informant and information obtained from By Train.

When I contacted train station employees by phone, all indicated a willingness to participate in an interview. I visited the headquarters of Korail in Daejeon first. The questions I asked Korail employees are listed in Table 2-2. Each interview lasted for approximately 30 to 60 minutes.

32

Table 2-2. Interview Guide for Korail/Train Station Employees Sample questions Korail/train station  What are the roles of Korail and each train station? employees  Would you share some background of the onset of Railo?  What has been changed since Railo was introduced and became popular among Korean youths?  How do you perceive Railo’s influence on tourism and youth such as train trips, domestic travel, and youth culture?  What are some of the common questions Railers ask?  How is Korail’s relationship with local communities? Any plans for cooperation?

Participant Observation and Unstructured Interviews with Railers

Participant observation helps researchers to better understand “particular local contexts and activities” (Smith, Flowers, & Larkin, 2009, p. 73). During the three train trips, as a backpacker as well as a researcher, I observed Railers’ behaviors and had unstructured interviews with them. This approach has been supported by Sørensen (2003) who said, “equally important for the comprehension of backpacker tourism culture are the countless observations and interactions while traveling among backpackers and participating in their road culture” (p. 851). Many Railers actually expressed their interest in this study and asked me questions about the purpose, processes, and findings. Some

Railers even asked me to share my results once they are published.

My itineraries for fieldwork included major train stations and attractions called seong-ji, literally meaning “sacred places,” by Railers. This Korean word does not include any religious connotation, but rather implies “must-visit places” among Railers.

Seong-jis can be cities, train stations, natural/cultural attractions, or even guesthouses.

For example, the popular nature reserve in Korea, Suncheon Bay is considered the most representative seong-ji because of its splendid scenery as well as its superior location

33

bridging several other destinations by train. A majority of Railers would not want to miss it so they make sure to include this place in their itineraries.

Free Listing Surveys

Free listing is a technique for collecting information about a specific cultural domain in a group by asking participants to list all the items related to the given cultural domain (Bernard 2011; Borgatti 1999; Weller & Romney 1988). To have an emic perspective of Railo from Railers, free listing was conducted with 204 participants through the online channel as well as in person during my fieldwork. The task given to participants was the same for both online and offline. I asked them to list “all of the things that come to your mind regarding Railo experience.” I added specific directions under this question, such as “list the things that pop in to your mind, regardless of order” and “think of as many items as you can.” Several questions about demographic factors were asked at the end (e.g., gender, age, school years, number of Railo experiences, and intention to repeat Railo trips).

I used a convenience sampling (or availability sampling) approach to recruit

Railers for free listing surveys. Given the inherent nature of mobility in tourism, it is difficult to have a fixed set of participants for ethnographic fieldwork (Sørensen, 2003).

To minimize the limitations of convenience sampling, such as lack of representativeness,

I approached target participants via two different channels, online (n=110) and offline

(n=94). Online data collection has proved to be effective for inherently mobile groups such as tourists (Sørensen, 2003). For the online recruitment, I sent messages to (a) members of By Train who have recently uploaded their postings and (b) personal

34

bloggers located through a major search engine in Korea, Naver (www.naver.com) by using the search word, Railo. The message included a personal introduction, a statement asking for their voluntary participation, and a description of the task. Once participants replied, I sent another message to ask them for additional demographic information.

Some participants (n=10) sent me a reply in response to the first message, but did not respond to the second one. In some cases where participants provided answers that needed further clarification, I asked them more questions via an e-mail interview.

While effective, on-line access to Railers may exclude members who do not produce information actively online. Therefore, I also approached Railers traveling on a train (from Seoul to Busan and from Seoul to Suncheon) and at one of the popular jjim-jil- bangs (i.e., Korean style dry sauna in which people can stay overnight)6 during my fieldwork. Both places are considered among Railers as “low threshold tourist locations”

(i.e., places where many tourists would want to visit and anyone could access without an issue of limited resources) (Larsen et al., 2011, p. 695) and I could meet literally “a sea of

Railers” in both places. Many Railers on the train found free listing tasks interesting and actively participated. Generally, I had informal conversations and/or interviews with them along with free listing surveys. At each jjim-jil-bang, I conducted free listing from

10:30 pm to 1:30 am when Railers returned from their trips.

A free listing survey, in general, requires approximately 20 to 30 informants for valid analysis (Weller & Romney, 1988). To ensure I had a sufficient number of

6 Jjim-jil-bang is a dry sauna where Korean people enjoy sauna and get rest alone or with friends or family. A shirt and shorts are provided and a variety of facilities are often equipped including a movie room, a snack bar, a massage place, and sleeping areas where people can stay overnight. In addition, there are several dry sauna domes of varying temperatures. It is not difficult to find jjim-jil-bangs in most areas in the cities in Korea. The cost varies from 5,000-12,000 KRW (USD 4.5-11) per day.

35

participants, I collected data until I reached 200 individuals. As a result, I had 111 online respondents and 89 offline respondents. After removing incomplete surveys, the sample size was 187, including 77 males and 110 females. The majority of respondents were between 20 and 24 (70.0%) and first-time Railers (68.5%). Approximately 31.5% were repeat Railers, including the three avid Railers who had made Railo trips more than 10 times. Most Railers intend to repeat Railo in the near future (Table 2-3).

Table 2-3. Demographic Information of Free Listing Survey Participants Categories Frequency Percent Channels Online 98 52.4 Offline 89 47.6 Total 187 100 Gender Male 77 41.2 Female 110 58.8 Total 187 100.0 Age (Mean=22.51) 17 2 1.1 18 12 6.4 19 14 7.5 20 25 13.4 21 18 9.6 22 33 17.6 23 25 13.4 24 30 16.0 25 17 9.1 26+ 10 5.4 Missing 1 0.5 Total 187 100.0 Number of Railo experiences 1 128 68.5 (Mean=1.46) 2 33 17.6 3 16 8.6 5 6 3.2 7 1 0.5 10+ 3 1.6 Total 187 100.0 Intention to Repeat Railo Yes 184 98.4 No 3 1.6 Total 187 100.0

36

Semi-structured Interviews with Railers, Travel Writers, and By Train Staff Members

I conducted semi-structured interviews with bloggers/opinion leaders among

Railers, travel writers, and By Train staff members. I used an interview guide to probe more case-oriented stories from participants (Crabtree & Miller, 1999) (Table 2-4). I traveled to the places where interviewees wanted to meet (e.g., train stations, coffee shops). It took 40 minutes to over 3 hours for each interview. All the interviews were recorded by a digital voice recorder after participants’ consent was obtained. When some participants ended up not being available for in-person interviews because of their schedule conflicts, interviews were conducted via e-mail.

I used snowball sampling and purposeful sampling to recruit interview participants. First, I conducted e-mail interviews with several survey respondents who expressed interest in this study. Instead of meeting in person, they preferred e-mail communication. I attempted to probe their survey responses and asked them a series of questions about their Railo experiences and perceptions of Railo. Second, based on my key informant’s advice, I contacted several active personal bloggers (called power bloggers in Korea). They shared vivid descriptions of their Railo experiences and their perception of the Railo phenomenon. Third, I had a series of interviews with other key stakeholders such as Railo guidebook writers and a staff member of By Train who were chosen purposefully. Although the main purpose of this study was to examine the Railo phenomenon from an emic perspective, key stakeholders’ opinions were still considered important for understanding the context of Railo. One of the travel writers wrote the very first guidebook for Railo in 2010, which was selected as a bestseller in Korea during

37

summer 2012. The other two were student writers who published books based on their own Railo experiences.

Table 2-4. Interview Guides for Railers, Writers, and By Train staff Sample questions Railers  How did you find out about Railo? Why did you decide to purchase a Railo pass?  What are the characteristics of “typical Railers”? (e.g., demographic characteristics, outfits, major destinations, etc.)  Would you describe how you prepare for your trips, including the information you gather?  How was your Railo trip? Will you share your experiences?  Were there any changes before and after the Railo trips? (e.g., How did Railo influence your perception of train trips, domestic travel, and travel in general?)  (After sharing my plans for data collection) Do you think my plan makes sense? Writers  What motivated you to write a travel guidebook for Railers?  What was the focus of your book? In what sense did you want to help readers (Railers)?  Would you share your experience of traveling as a Railer and/or with Railers?  What were your major observations?  What do you perceive Railo’s influence has been on tourism, such as train trips and domestic travel, as well as the youth culture? By Train staff  Would you explain the roles of each department in your management team?  What are the characteristics of individuals who like train trips? Have there been any changes in trends?  What portion of your membership is Railers?  What is the main purpose of Railers to visit By Train?  What has changed since Railo was introduced and became popular among Korean youths?  What do you perceive Railo’s influence has been on tourism, such as train trips and domestic travel, as well as the youth culture?  How do you cooperate with Korail?

38

Data Analysis

Ethnographic data analysis is an iterative process of transforming cultural ideas into a textual document through substantial fieldwork (Thorne, 2000). Its goal is to describe a culture in reality, find its implicit meanings, and categorize and make sense out of potential themes (Goetz & LeCompte, 1981). My data analysis began with organizing information obtained from By Train. I then transcribed the digitally-recorded interview data into Korean. Next, the field notes for interviews and observation were reviewed along with the transcripts. I examined these data repeatedly until I became familiar with them and the themes became evident.

In the meantime, free listing data coding was conducted. Respondents’ free lists and their demographic information (i.e., gender, age, school year, and the number of

Railo experiences) were coded separately. In terms of the free lists, synonyms were integrated and typos were cleaned up. I cross-checked the subset of the free lists with a peer Korean tourism researcher. However, during the coding process, an unexpected issue arose. I ended up having an extremely long list of items in varying levels of contrast

(e.g., bald eagle is a type of eagle which is a type of bird) because Railo turned out to be a multi-dimensional phenomenon. The original intention was to analyze the free listing data in a more quantitative manner using the software Anthropac, but it seemed to be more appropriate to use the free listing results as a source of description in an ethnographic manner. Thus, rather than comparing the length and rank of respondents’ lists, I categorized items in free lists under a set of larger concepts or themes. The frequency information was still very helpful to ethnographic description.

39

To understand participants’ perspectives in their language, data were analyzed in

Korean first, and then, if necessary, key information and quotes were translated into

English. An audit (i.e., a review by an external auditor) is important to ensure the trustworthiness of qualitative data (Creswell & Miller, 2000). I had a peer Korean tourism researcher review the translation of data. To ensure trustworthiness of data, I used various tools to assess different dimensions of culture and to make rich and thick descriptions. With unclear ideas or questions aroused from data, I clarified them with respondents via phone calls or e-mails during my data analysis process. In order to reduce researcher bias, I constantly communicated and had regular meetings with my advisor to review the results of categorization and determine an appropriate way to present the results.

What is Railo?

Railo is a combined word of Rail and Ro. Rail has the dual meaning of “trains” as well as “tomorrow/future” in Korean, while Ro means “path.” Therefore, Railo symbolizes “the path to the future (by train).” More specifically, Railo is a seven-day train pass offered by Korail (the primary passenger rail system in Korea) for both

Koreans and foreigners who are 25 or under. The pass guarantees passengers an unlimited use of unassigned seats and standing areas, with the exception of KTX7, for seven consecutive days for 56,500 KRW (about USD 50). In general, the ticket price is comparable to the cost of one round-trip ticket between Seoul and Busan (Figure 2-2). A

Railo pass is offered during selected seasons during college students’ seasonal breaks in

7 Railers can purchase a KTX ticket with 50% off twice at a maximum for a week.

40

summer and winter (Railo summer: June-September, Railo winter: December-March).

Korail sells a maximum of 2000 Railo passes a day to prevent extreme crowdedness. The well-established railroad system in Korea enables students to travel all over the country by train.

Figure 2-2. A Train Map in Korea

Seoul

Busan

Mokpo

In 2007, Railo was developed to encourage use of trains as well as to provide youths more domestic travel opportunities at a reasonable cost. A Railo pass used to be available during summer only until 2009, when Korail began to provide winter tickets.

Most passengers who purchase a Railo pass are Korean college students between 19 and

41

25 years old. They travel all over the country alone, or with friends, during their school breaks. Over the last five years, the sales of Railo passes have dramatically increased

(Table 2-5). Several guidebooks for Railo have been published as well both by Railers

(student writers) and non-Railers. In response to the increased number of youths buying a

Railo pass, in 2011 a 3-day Hanaro pass was offered to adult travelers who are over 25.

Table 2-5. The Number of Railo Passes Sold from 2007 to 2012 (USD 1 = KRW 1,150) The number of tickets The number of tickets A total number of Ticket Price Year sold in summer sold in winter tickets sold (KWR) 2007 7,868 - 7,868 49,800 2008 13,081 - 13,081 54,700 2009 24,333 15,644 39,977 54,700 2010 58,122 39,794 97,916 54,700 2011 88,538 77,163 165,701 54,700 2012 99,362 64,763 163,125 56,500 (Source: Korail)

Railo is similar to the Eurail pass in Europe and the Seishun 18 ticket in Japan in that all offer train passes at a relatively low price (Table 2-6). However, they also differ in terms of their target market, pricing strategy, duration, and seating assignments. The most distinctive feature of Railo is that it is offered to passengers 25 years of age or younger; there is no age limit for Eurail and Seishun 18. This age limitation has made

Railo a “rite-of-passage” among college students in Korea. A senior manager of the

Korail marketing team, Gyu-Chul Ryu said:

Railo has exerted significant impact to Korean travel culture. We never expected it to be this much successful. In fact, Railo has changed the perception of trains especially among Korean youth. It used to be a mode of transportation for special occasions, but now Railers has become much more familiar with train use.

42

Table 2-6. Comparison of Train Passes Railo Eurail Seishun 18 Period 7 consecutive days 30 consecutive days Any 5 days in season during during students’ any time of the year students’ seasonal breaks seasonal breaks (June- (March; July-August; September; December- December-January) March) Price USD 50 USD 48-468 USD 100 (Different pricing based on age) Target Anyone who is 25 or Anyone from non- Anyone regardless of age or Market under European countries nationality Seating Unassigned seats or Any seat in certain Unassigned seats standing areas only sections

In the past, travelers used to select their destinations first, find accommodations in that area next, and then think about a mode of transportation to get there. In the case of

Railo, the main mode of transportation is fixed, which enables passengers to enjoy unlimited use of a train for a week. Thus, Railers often develop their itineraries based on the accessibility of sites by train, and then arrange accommodations according to their travel routes.

Regardless of place of departure, Railers can make a reservation for a Railo pass from any station either in person or via the website or a phone call. As a result, there has been severe competition between train stations; each station has come up with ideas to attract Railers to purchase a pass through them. For example, finding accommodations with a reasonable price is one of the most challenging issues for Railers. So, in 2009, one station began to offer employees’ unused accommodations (often available at remote train stations) for free to a limited number of Railers who purchased a pass through that station.

Other stations have offered discounts for Jjim-jil-bangs or motels around train stations targeting Railers who make reservations through them. In addition, there is a case where

43

the chief station manager holds a campfire with corn or sweet potatoes at night for

Railers. A free city tour bus and a discount for recreation activities have also been popular benefits offered by stations. An anonymous person from By Train (an online community for train travelers) began calling these benefits offered by train stations to

“Railo plus” in 2009. It has become common for Railers to compare Railo plus benefits before they purchase a pass.

The young adult population has become more familiar with trains thanks to Railo.

In the past, the train used to be a mode of transportation especially for commuters working in bigger cities (e.g., Seoul) and students studying outside of their hometown.

Young adults and college students in Seoul perceived trains as a mode of transportation on special occasions only. However, many college students who experienced Railo explained that trains are now a very familiar mode of transportation, much like buses or subways.

An Online Community for Train Travelers, By Train

A majority of Railers share information about Railo through “By Train”

(www.kicha.org), the biggest online community for train trips in Korea, which has

413,719 members (as of August 29, 2013). Since 1998, people who like traveling by train have joined this community and shared their travel stories and information. When Railo was introduced in 2007, Railers became quite involved in information exchange. By

Train is perceived as an absolute compass of Railo experiences among Railers. Railers have indicated that they can’t think of Railo trips without referencing By Train. They try to stay connected with By Train before, during, and after their trips.

44

By Train is managed by volunteers who are in charge of six teams (i.e., strategies, business, development, operation, support, and membership). It is a communication hub between Railers and Korail/train stations. A management team sometimes holds promotional events (e.g., Railo guidebooks), initiates regular train trips among members, and filters undesirable postings (e.g., commercialized postings). According to By Train, the age range of active members is between 18 and 30 with a dominant proportion being college students. Statistics indicate that male members participate more actively, although

60% of the members are female.

Similar to other online communities, the members of By Train play a role as both producers and consumers of information. One major focus is after-trip postings, including

Railers’ own experiences with train facilities, accommodations, and restaurants. There are specified boards available for short-term trips (1-2 days), trips with a 3-day pass, and

Railo trips. “Tips for developing itineraries” is one of the most popular boards for first- time Railers.

Prior to their trips, Railers usually ask questions about how to prepare for their trips and read through postings relevant to their destinations. Interestingly, however, By

Train is also frequently visited by Railers “during” their trips. Since there are lots of smart-phone users among Railers, they often log into By Train during their trips. Railers traveling alone enjoy conversations with other Railers on By Train. Specific and detailed questions are often asked, and answered shortly by unknown peer Railers. Given that a block of unassigned seats or standing areas are the only places where Railers can be on a train, they often upload postings asking “are there any seats available on the train leaving

45

at 3:00 from X to X?” More general questions such as “how is the weather in area X?” or

“is X crowded this afternoon?” are also asked on By Train during Railers’ trips.

In addition, Railers often seek travel mates both prior to and during their trips.

There are some cases where a person traveling alone may want to meet other Railers. For example, many local restaurants require at least two people to order a certain dish.

Individuals traveling alone but still wanting to taste the local food need to find one more person to order it. Also, in some cases, there is no transportation available other than a taxi to get to a certain destination from train stations. To save money, Railers recruit people to carpool. By Train is a main source of communication for these types of purposes during trips.

After their Railo trips, many Railers want to hold on to their memories by taking another Railo trip during the same season or the next season. Some active members, who usually maintain their own personal blogs, leave after-trip postings with their stories, photos, and travel tips. They also provide answers when other Railers ask questions about their upcoming Railo trips. Some people just read postings, coming back to this online community frequently even after their trips.

My Travel Experience with Railers

In 2012, the summer Railo pass was offered from June 1 through September 6. In order to observe Railers during this period, I decided to make three trips, one in early

June, one in early July, and one in late July. A wind jacket, a wide-brimmed hat, a huge backpack, and hiking shoes described me as a traveler. It was my first experience traveling alone for many days by train, which made me excited as well as nervous.

46

Through my three train trips, I learned about Railers’ thoughts, behaviors, and travel activities from direct and indirect communications with Railers.

Since I was not eligible for a Railo pass, I traveled with a Hanaro pass, which is a

3-day pass for the unlimited use of trains (Figure 2-3). It was about the same price as a

Railo pass. I left from a Seoul Station, which is one of the most representative train stations in Korea (Figures 2-4 & 2-5). I got on the fifth car of the Saemaul train, which offers unassigned seats (Figure 2-6). In general, one train is made up of seven to eight cars and it sometimes doubles the number of cars for special occasions.

Figure 2-3. Railo (for 25 or younger) and Hanaro Pass (for 26 or older)

 A Period of Travel (7 days)

 Name & Date of Birth

 Issuing Station

< A Mobile Railo Pass >

 A Period of Travel (3 days)

47

Figure 2-4. Seoul Station

Figure 2-5. Inside of the Seoul Station

48

Figure 2-6. Inside of the Train

Figure 2-7. The Monitor in the Train

49

Figure 2-8. Train

As I expected, it was quiet on the train. Early-mid June is the final exam period for most Korean college students. The seat was very comfortable although the air conditioning in the train was much too strong. The train left exactly on time. Soon, the announcement was made about the destination and the arrival time. About 10-20 minutes later, a member of the train crew came to check tickets. Another member of the train crew with a uniform sometimes walked from car to car to ensure security on train. When he came in and out, he gave passengers formal-looking nods in the front of the carriage.

The first interview occurred on the train. There were two female travelers in the same car I was in. I approached them and asked, “Are you Railers?” They answered,

“Yes, we are.” When I introduced myself and my research, they seemed to be relieved to learn that I didn’t have any negative intentions in approaching them. They were willing to answer some of my questions and also fill out the free listing survey. They were friends and both were 21-year-old college students. They said they wanted to make a refreshment

50

trip together to get rid of stress before entering into the job market. One female said that she has already experienced Railo. Thanks to their interest and willingness to support my research, the first interview and survey were conducted successfully. I got to meet more

Railers every time the train made stops.

The rattle of rails, flowing scenes outside of the window, casual conversations with other passengers, and the train space brought a very attractive and even mysterious atmosphere. These are exactly the things that many Railers described about the charm of trains on By Train. However, it was surprising to see that many Railers traveled alone or in a small group with one or two friends. I used to picture a group of boisterous people as typical Railers.

I got to meet many more Railers on the train during my second and the third trips made in July. It is well-known that early- or mid-July is the most popular Railo season. In contrast to my trip in June, the unassigned seats in the fifth car of the Saemaul train were already full and many students were even standing in the aisle. Railers traveling alone were often holding their smart phones with their earphones on. Sometimes, they were doing research about their next destinations or posting their travel stories via SNS or personal blogs. It was not difficult to find Railers who became friends with one another on the train. Chatting between friends went on and on. Many Railers also took a nap to relieve their tiredness caused by tight schedules.

One train car carries about 60 passengers. Since the car was full, I could have a number of conversations with Railers, and also have them complete free listing surveys unless they were asleep. No one rejected my request to have a conversation. In fact, some

Railers showed a lot of interest in my research and wanted to know more about it. Later, I

51

found a number of encouraging messages written on the back page of the survey such as

“I hope my answers help!” or “Good luck with your research!”

During the survey on the train, one of the train crew members approached me. I thought he was going to stop me from conducting a survey on train. However, when I explained what I was doing and why I was doing it, he provided me with helpful advice about where I could best find Railers, when they travel most frequently, what they look like, and what they are usually interested in.

As I moved from car to car, I found Railers traveling with a number of electronic devices such as smart phones, laptops, and digital cameras and busily looking for available electric outlets while holding their devices and an extension cord. On the trains, there are power outlets in the front of the first row seat in each car. One of the Railers explained to me that looking for available outlets is the very first thing Railers do when they get on a train. The ones who find them are considered lucky.

Through a number of conversations with Railers, I learned how they plan their

Railo trips. In general, their planning flows in the following order: (a) deciding on the place of departure, (b) organizing their travel routes, and (c) developing detailed itineraries for each destination (Figure 2-9). Once they decide where to start their trips, it is important to build up a route based on the train map. Railers want to take full advantage of their unlimited seven-day travel pass while making the best travel experience according to their preference. Railers often include four to six destinations in their Railo trip. Next, they will choose where to stay overnight, where to eat, where to visit, and how to move around in each destination. How to use Railo plus benefits

52

effectively is one of their main ways of minimizing their expenditure. Almost all of the

Railers mentioned By Train first when they were asked about their planning process.

Figure 2-9. Railers’ Typical Planning Process of Railo Trips

During the daytime, I got off at some stations and traveled with Railers. I used public transportation such as buses, minibuses, or taxis within a destination area. Visiting local restaurants was one of the must-do activities among Railers. I also met a lot of

Railers at historic and natural local attractions. Most Railers look similar to one another.

They wear wide-brimmed hats and backpacks and carry water bottles and smart phones.

Since I looked like a typical Railer, sometimes other Railers approached me and initiated a casual conversation. I learned that they consider themselves “(domestic) backpackers,” even though they travel within the country for a relatively short period of time (i.e., one week).

53

Train stations were a great place to observe and meet a lot of Railers. When I found something interesting about their behaviors, I approached them and initiated a conversation. Most were friendly and kind enough to answer my questions. First, I learned that Railers often leave their backpacks in the train station office if officers allow them to do. Because there are just a few lockers in each train station, they are mostly full during Railo seasons. While they travel around to different destinations, Railers want to be free from carrying heavy backpacks, which is particularly exhausting in the intense heat. Second, Railers frequently fill their water bottles. Although using water fountains in

Korea is not as common as in the U.S., Railers have become used to bringing their own water bottles when traveling. Third, collecting stamp marks from each station was a common behavior. Most train stations have their own rubber stamps with engraved symbols and allow people to put a stamp in their own notebooks or diaries. This behavior is in line with my observation from By Train because many Railers often post pictures of their stamp mark diaries with much pride (Figures 2-10 & 2-11).

I stopped by some of the train station offices along with the Railers. I asked the officers if I could leave my backpack during the day, if I could get some water from the water fountain in the office, and if the bus information I had was accurate. They were amazingly congenial enough to answer my questions and help me out with what I requested. For example, when I was lost near Gyeongju station, the train station officer accompanied me to the bus stop where I could catch a bus to my next destination.

54

Figure 2-10. The Author Collecting the Stamp Marks

Figure 2-11. One Railer’s Stamp Collection Book

55

When I obtained information from By Train, I felt that Railers seem to have a sense of community. I got to experience it in one of the local restaurants in Andong. At this small restaurant near the traditional folk village, a certain dish is not available for one person; that is, they serve it to parties of at least two people. Since I was on my own, I had to order from the other menu although I wanted to taste that specific local food. At that moment, I heard somebody sitting behind calling me. She asked if I wanted to join her table so that I could have that local food. So, I got to join her and her boyfriend, and ordered that dish. The first thing they asked me was “are you a Railer?” I told them “In fact, I’m a graduate student and I’m conducting research about Railo.” They were a very nice and open-minded couple. We had a comfortable conversation while waiting for the food.

When the food was served, another interesting thing happened. Someone sitting in the back table brought a small plate filled with some of their food, and my new friend also shared some of ours with her. She told me that they just met on the way to this traditional folk village and became friends. Her boyfriend further discussed the solidarity that exists among Railers. He said being a Railer brings such a strong sense of community on the road.

Jjim-jil-bang is the most popular accommodation for Railers (Figures 2-12 & 2-

13). When I arrived at one of the jjim-jil-bangs near the Suncheon station, it was already full of Railers who had come back from their trip. Since it was after 11 at night, there were only a few dim lights on inside. Railers were generally lying down and resting, watching TV, writing diaries or having snacks and beer with friends. I also found Railers moving around to look for electric outlets to charge their devices. Here, I got to have a

56

conversation with Railers and ask them to do free listing surveys as well. Some of them actively showed their detailed itineraries and shared their travel experiences. I even met one male Railer again who I talked to on the train on that morning.

Figure 2-12. The Lounge of the Jjim-jil-bang

57

Figure 2-13. A Snack Bar in Jjim-jil-bang

A city tour is a great way to look around local areas (Figure 2-14). Since Railers travel without a car, one-day or half-day city tours help them save time and effort to move around within a destination by public transportation. In general, it costs 5,000-

12,000 KRW (about USD 4.5-11) and interpreters offer explanations about local attractions. Early booking is encouraged because it gets especially popular during the

Railo seasons. When I was waiting for a city tour bus, I had conversations with Railers waiting in line. They said a city tour bus is an attractive option which saves their budget and helps them to visit several attractions with less effort. During the seven days of their trip, they included one to three city bus tours in their itineraries. They arrive at a destination by train, catch a city tour bus, visit several popular sites within a destination, return to the train station, and either move to the next destination or stay overnight around the station and leave the next morning.

58

Figure 2-14. A City Tour Bus in Suncheon

Railers I met on the road were traveling with high expectations of Railo and seemed to be enjoying their travel very much. Most considered Railo as their special experience with unforgettable memories. Although some Railers mentioned physical tiredness from this backpacking experience, a majority of them showed strong intention to do Railo again in the next break. Through Railo experiences, they became much more familiar with trains and were amazed by Korean local food, nature, and culture.

59

Free Listing Survey Results: Railers’ Perceptions of Railo

Free listing, conducted during the participant observation, was used to understand

Railers’ perspectives on their Railo experiences. Through online and offline free listing surveys, Railers produced a long list of items representing what they think about Railo.

There was no major difference between the free lists from online and offline surveys; thus, frequency was calculated regardless of the data collection channels. To begin, the first free lists included 1,220 items with a total frequency of 3,374 and the average number of items per respondent was 16.87. Through the repeated review of free list items and data clean-up (i.e., integration of synonyms, correction of typos), the number of items was reduced to 669 including 357 items mentioned by only one person.

Because the combined (and reduced) free list of online and offline data included a number of items with varying levels of contrast, I grouped similar items together under

20 categories to understand overall picture of items: train, food, people, images, accommodations, activities, travels, things that Railers bring, feelings, nature, behaviors before the trip and during the trip, weather, region/cities, benefits, Korea, elements of

Railo, rural areas, sightseeing, and transportation. The list of categories showed a variety of dimensions of Railo (Table 2-7).

In terms of the frequency, 36 items were mentioned by at least 20 respondents which is about 10% of the sample size (Bernard, 2011). Some items were associated with travel itself. The item, “travel,” was mentioned by 62 individuals and some items indicate the elements of travels or backpacking trips. For example, “memories (74),” “pictures

(65),” “people (23),” “camera (22),” and “rest (20)” are some of the traditional symbols

60

Table 2-7. 20 Categories for Free List Items Train Food People train 121 local food/restaurant tour 90 friends 85 train station 18 meeting new people 77 Saemaul trains 17 people 23 Mugunghwa trains 14 company 16 train cafe 13 boyfriend/girlfriend 14 ticket 13 parents/family 13 unassigned seat 13 couple 12 standing area 13 railroad 11 train schedule 10 station employees 10 Images Accommodations Activities memories 74 jjin-jil-bang 65 photograph 65 college student 48 guesthouse 32 walking 13 chung-choon (youth) 47 place to sleep 16 being young 44 hardship/tiredness 43 adventure 26 traveling all over the country 24 school break 22 one week 22 experience 20 train trip 20 backpacking 18 Korail 18 cheap 16 By Train 16 hot 15 privilege 13 summer 11 heavy backpack 11 Travels Things that Railers bring Feelings travel 62 backpack 53 freedom 49 vacation 13 camera 22 heartbeating 41 map 20 romance of the trip 36 sneakers/running shoes 17 pleasure 29 charger/charging 16 unfamiliar/new 21 straw hat 13 expectation 18 I miss Railo 10 Nature Before the trip During the trip ocean 48 planning 28 stamp 27 scenery 39 money 21 alcohol 19 mountains 18 nature 14 Weather Region/Cities Benefits rain 22 Busan 22 rest 20 weather 16 Suncheon 12 not being rushed 19 time for thoughts 18 deviance 18 friendship 11 traveling alone 11 exploring myself/identity 11 Korea Elements of Railo Rural areas Korea/beauty of Korea 20 Railo plus 19 something local 14 Sightseeing Transportation countryside 12 tourism attractions 16 bus 12 * The items mentioned by more than 10 people were included in this table and the ones mentioned by 20 or more were written in bold.

61

of travel, and having a “map (20)” instead of GPS is a common element of backpacking along with willingness to face “hardship (44)” or “adventure (26).”

In addition, some items can be understood better within the context of Korean culture. One of the most frequently-mentioned items was “jjim-jil-bang (65).” Due to its relatively reasonable cost, Railers spend nights in jjim-jil-bang frequently during their

Railo trips. The item, “ocean (48)” is highly associated with a geographic location of

Korea because of the peninsula surrounded by the oceans. Thanks to accessibility to the ocean, Korean people often say “let’s go to the ocean” when they feel like getting away from their daily routines and leaving to somewhere. The meaning of “romance of the trip

(36)” is similar to a bucket list. Because of their lack of travel experiences, today’s

Korean youth have perceived Railo as the thing that they want to do before graduation.

Ultimately, there were several items that directly reflect the characteristics of

Railo. “Train (121)” is obviously the most frequently-mentioned item because Railo is a train pass. In fact, Railo highly contributed to building awareness of train trips among

Korean youth. The items, “college student (48),” “chung-choon (47),” and “being young

(44)” are related to youth’s exclusive rights to purchase Railo pass. “Chung-choon” literally means a season of spring full of green, which symbolizes the liveliness of youth.

Most of these young travelers are budget travelers who are concerned about “money

(21).” They travel for “a week (22)” during their “school break (22).” This “train trip

(20)” enabled Korean youth to “travel all over the country (24)” because it used to be difficult to do so without personal vehicles. The increasing use of Railo contributed to the spread of “guesthouse (32)” business near train stations, which has become an essential part of Railo. The name of the second largest cities in Korea, “Busan (22)” was

62

frequently mentioned because a part of the data collection took place on the train heading to Busan. Collecting “rubber stamp (27)” marks from each train station is one of the most representative Railers’ behaviors during their Railo trips.

The free listing result shows how Railers perceive of Railo. It provides the significant ethnographic description of Railo from an emic perspective. Table 2-8 shows the 36 items most frequently mentioned in the free listing exercise.

Table 2-8. Frequently-Mentioned Items (Items mentioned by at least 20 respondents) Percentage of Average Rank Item Frequency respondents who listed the item (%) Rank 1 train 121 59 3.975 2 visiting local restaurants (local food) 90 44 8.789 3 friends 85 41 7.788 4 new acquaintances 76 37 9.316 5 memories 74 36 9.432 6 pictures 65 32 11.215 7 jjim-jil-bang (Korean dry sauna) 65 32 11.031 8 travel 62 30 4.306 9 backpack 53 26 11.962 10 freedom 48 23 5.938 11 college student 48 23 6.229 12 ocean 48 23 9.333 13 chung-choon 47 23 5.936 14 being young 44 21 6.795 15 hardship 44 21 9.091 16 excitement 41 20 9.585 17 romance of the trip 36 18 6.306 18 guesthouse 32 16 11.813 19 scenery 30 15 10.333 20 planning 28 14 12.643 21 joyful 28 14 9.214 22 rubber stamp 27 13 11.148 23 adventure 26 13 7.962 24 travel all over the country 24 12 7.292 25 people 23 11 10.174 26 school break 22 11 7.909 27 camera 22 11 13.182 28 rain 22 11 13.318 29 Busan 22 11 5.773 30 a week (7 days) 22 11 8.455 31 money 21 10 12.952 32 something new 21 10 11.095 33 map 20 10 13.300 34 train trip 20 10 3.250 35 rest 20 10 8.500 36 experience 20 10 10.000

63

Meanings of Railo

A series of semi-structured in-depth interviews with Railers and associated parties contributed to my understanding of the meanings of Railo. The following results illustrate the four themes regarding meanings of Railo. First, Railers perceived Railo as a travel enabler that provides them with a perfect opportunity for their very first “real” travel experience. Second, Railo was perceived by Railers and stakeholders as their “exclusive right,” a “rite-of-passage,” “something that they should do during their college years,” and a “culture code.” Third, many Railers thought of Railo as a chance to rediscover the beauty of Korea and to realize forgotten Koreanness. Fourth, Railers said that they have become more skilled and thoughtful travelers after their Railo experiences.

A Perfect Opportunity for the First Travel Experience (A Travel Enabler)

Railo has provided accessibility to travel by reducing the level of travel constraints among college students. They used to have a prejudice that leaving for travel is somewhat burdensome because of cost, distance, and cultural constraints. However, many Railers indicated that Railo enabled the very first travel experience in their life.

I used to think it is somewhat difficult to actually make travels happen, but now I have become much more familiar with it. After returning from Railo, I feel like I can go traveling more frequently. Fear is gone. (Railer 3)

Especially, in terms of a domestic travel, Railo has attached wings to college students to make it possible. We can say “before Railo” and “after Railo.” Railo was a watershed for college students’ domestic travel in Korea. (Railer 2)

There were a number of perceived barriers for traveling, but I think Railo has actualized dream of traveling, particularly traveling on our own. (Writer 2)

64

Many Railers, guidebook writers, and By Train staff members agreed that low cost is the biggest merit of Railo, considering the financial burden of travel for college students. In fact, when they think of travel, “backpacking trip to Europe” is the first thing that comes to their mind. This is often an item in their bucket list and they try to make it happen during their college years even though they often face a budget issue. However, they think Railo has enabled them to travel with their backpacks at a lower cost. A male

Railer who has made 5 Railo trips said, “Korail did an awesome job! Railo is an excellent opportunity to escape our daily routines and travel with a low cost.”

I think Korail was very smart enough to assess the characteristics of college students or people who are 25 or under. They don’t have much money, but they have time. (Writer 3)

You know this generation has been struggling because of the difficulty in getting a job. We can’t ask money to our parents, either. My friends are always telling me about a financial burden. In that aspect, Railo is perfect for us. (Railer 2)

If we fully utilize Railo Plus benefits, we can make a 7-day travel for 100,000- 200,000 KRW (USD 90-185) excluding the cost for a pass. How could we make domestic travel for a week with 250,000 KRW (USD 230)? Railo has made it possible. (Railer 4)

Many Railers also mentioned that Railo functions as a trigger, which decreases college students’ fear of traveling. Since Railo deals with domestic tourism, it is less burdensome compared to international backpacking trips which require much more detailed and thorough planning. Railers perceived international travel as less flexible because detailed elements such as flight tickets should be prepared and fixed far in advance, which makes them hesitant to execute planning. Thus, some Railers even mentioned that Railo provides an opportunity to practice backpacking “in a safer context”

65

before making an international backpacking trip because there is at least no significant cultural challenge including language, food, and climate.

If you think about international travel, you need to plan a lot of things in advance. You need to book a flight ticket, fix the date for travels, and you need to go for it. Also, if you are a first-time traveler, unfamiliar atmosphere including different food and language could be another constraint to discourage your international backpacking trips. However, think about domestic travels. You can leave anytime with a backpack. (Writer 2)

College students know that they can leave for backpacking trips. But, you know, it’s just not easy. They don’t really know where to start. However, once the concept of “Railo” was introduced, they found a clue. They can plan Railo as their very first travel. It’s like a stepping stone. My friend also told me that it was a great practice for a Europe backpacking trip. I think we have fewer burdens in terms of time and distance. (Writer 1)

Railo as a travel enabler is also associated with the way in which Korean children are raised. Many respondents described the influence of their parents. In Korea, it is not uncommon for young adults to live with their parents until they get married unless they decide to live by themselves or attend colleges in other cities. Korean parents are often protective and relatively conservative with their children, especially their daughters. One

Railer shared that her parents had not allowed her to travel alone or with friends even after she became a college student. However, because Railo has became a remarkable phenomenon among college students, her parents have become more lenient and allowed their children to travel on their own.

My parents are very protective. They had never allowed me to travel at all. But when I found information about Railo, I just couldn’t let this opportunity go away. I was a little bit afraid to persuade my mom and dad, but decided to do it. So I wrote up a detailed travel plan on a daily basis and showed it to them. I was not confident if they would let me go, but they actually told me to go ahead. You have no idea how happy I was. Railo made this possible. (Railer 3)

66

An Exclusive Right of Youth

Railo was perceived as an “exclusive right,” “something that they should experience during their college years,” and a “culture code” among Railers and stakeholders. Interestingly, they described Railo experiences by using the term, a “rite-of- passage” which has been mainly used in anthropology literature. A ritual process includes separation from the ordinary life and reaggregation to the society (Van Gennep, 1909).

Since tourism includes both elements despite its structured and self-imposed nature,

MacCannell (1976, p. 13) called tourism a “modern ritual.” Graburn (1983) echoed that all forms of tourism could be considered a rite-of-passage. In this study, Railo was strongly recognized as a “rite-of-passage.”

A manager of Korail marketing said, “Railo has exerted such a significant impact to college students. They even coined a new term, ‘Railer’ to indicate themselves.” He also emphasized that a large cultural phenomenon has been established since Railo has become a “thing that they must experience during their vacation” among Korean college students. Responses by many Railers lent support to this notion. A By Train staff also suggested that Railo has generated a travel culture among college students.

Railers appreciated the fact that Railo is offered to people who are the age of 25 or under, unlike other existing train passes. They often associated the age limit with exclusiveness. They considered Railo as something that just young people can do. In general, backpackers are less interested in luxurious and restful conditions (Larsen et al.,

2011), and are willing to accept a certain level of discomfort (Bell, 2010). Similarly, although Railers are aware of the hardship inherent in backpacking trips, they consider it as a special opportunity for youth. In fact, a popular quote in Korea says, “pay for

67

hardship when young.” These types of comments are, in fact, reflective of common perceptions among college students and were included in the list of 15 most frequently- mentioned items: “chung-choon” (literally meaning “blue spring” which is a frequently- used metaphor of youth in Korea) was mentioned by 47 respondents and “being young” and “hardship” by 44 respondents.

As far as I know, there is no age limit for Eurail passes or Sei-shun tickets. I believe Railo is the privilege for youth. (Writer 1)

I really like the fact that there is an age limit. It makes Railo a symbol of youth. I perceive this as a journey for chung-choon only. Without an age limit, it wouldn’t have become this popular at all. I absolutely think this age limit is needed. (Railer 2)

Railo is one of the special rights that young people could enjoy. You know the saying that “pay for hardship when young.” Everything we could experience throughout Railo is a great opportunity for young people to learn and grow. (Railer 7)

In a similar context, many respondents agreed that Railo has become a “culture code” (Rapaille, 2006) in a short period of time. The most representative culture among college students in Korea is “MT” which literally refers to “membership training,” but in reality is simply another excuse to get together and consume alcohol while spending a night in a remote area near mountains or beaches. However, Railo has provided a leisure opportunity that can enable them to plan a “real” trip and spend time with peers in more meaningful ways.

I think Railo has become one of the representative cultures among college students. During Railo seasons, it is not difficult to see students traveling with backpacks. (Railer 6)

68

Thanks to Railo, college students have been contributing to create a domestic travel culture. Traveling in Korea for 7 days? It used to be something unfamiliar to people. When we thought about travels, a Europe backpacking trip, that was it. But when I visit college as a guest speaker, a lot of freshmen are planning Railo trips for their very first vacation. It seems like ‘doing Railo during a vacation’ becomes a must-do activity for them. (Writer 3)

Before I knew about Railo, I was like… what am I going to do for this break? Doing part-time job? Learning something? Volunteer works? Actually, when we think of leisure for college students, going MT and getting drunk used to be the No.1 activity. But since Railo gets popular, it becomes so natural to plan Railo trips even before the break begins. I just look forward to doing Railo every semester very much. (Railer 3)

In general, forming a relationship with peer backpackers occurs more naturally and quickly than daily-life situations (Murphy, 2001; Riley, 1988; Sørensen, 2003).

Railers often became friends with peer travelers and shared a part of their time traveling together (Maoz & Bekerman, 2010; Vogt, 1976). Since all of Railers fall in to a similar age group, they find shared interests and life issues easily. In addition, respondents expressed a sense of solidarity and camaraderie while going through challenging or emergency situations during trips with the other Railers. By Train plays a significant role in the creation of solidarity and camaraderie through its role as a communication hub for

Railers.

I feel a sense of solidarity from the presence of other Railers during the trip. It’s camaraderie. Sometimes, we can find a company via By Train before or during the trip. By the fact that we are Railers, we become friends quickly and travel together. (Railer 3)

Traveling with peer travelers who are going through the same “transitional period” as college students creates unique experiences. Railers want communication with peers. So, they choose to experience hardship during the trip and meet people who are in the similar age range. Often times, we end up traveling together after meeting at a guesthouse, on train or elsewhere. (Railer 1)

69

Rediscovery of Korea

One of the most salient characteristics of Railo was associated with rediscovery of

Korea. Many Railers shared their previous travel experiences prior to a Railo trip, specifically family vacations and school field trips. They were in agreement that these travel experiences did not allow them to feel the beauty of travel or beauty of Korea. It was almost always teachers or parents who were involved in planning trip details while students or children were excluded. Thus, the general perception of domestic tourism among college students used to be “there is nothing much to see in Korea.” It was often compared to Europe backpacking travels or overseas travels.

Korean college students used to have a prejudice that overseas travels are “real” travels because of few domestic travel experiences as well as a long-standing desire of college students for Europe backpacking. (Railer 2)

There are lots of college students who think there is nothing much to see in Korea and overseas travels are much better no matter what. In fact, I was one of them. (Railer 10)

However, Railo was perceived as one of the major triggers of their perception change. Respondents described their travel experiences “before and after Railo” while considering it as an important turning point. Railers appreciated and were amazed by the diverse and distinctive local cultures in each region which they had not previously experienced or expected. They learned that domestic travel is not inferior to overseas travel at all.

Once I experienced Railo, my perception of Korea has been totally changed. I got to visit all different places to Korea and learned that each region has its own culture and they were all amazing. (Railer 10)

70

Before I went to Suncheon Bay, you know it is a Railers’ seongji, I didn’t know it had such splendid scenery. Wow, I never knew Korea has so many beautiful places before. I feel like I don’t necessarily have to stick to dream for overseas travels, but rather visit more places in Korea. (Railer 3)

Korea is like a chameleon. People often think that Korea is a small country, but it actually has a number of beautiful resources. Each region has its own color… they are all unique… different food, different vernaculars... I can even feel different scent… (Railer 4)

“Koreanness” (Park, 2010, p. 120) based on shared nationality was another theme.

Railers indicated that Korean people’s inherent giving nature and warm hearts are distinctive and can’t be experienced through overseas travel. They often felt these both from other travelers as well as local residents at destinations. One respondent described her experience and opinions based on the concept of individualism and collectivism.

I love the fact that Korean people are giving and warm-hearted. When I did Railo, I received a number of help from the other Railers. It is not only tourism destinations but also anonymous travelers that remind me of my Railo experiences. (Railer 3)

When I travel in the other countries, I didn’t get to feel there was “genuine” interaction with local people although I felt they were “very kind.” Since people in those countries live based on individualism, they respect private spaces. On the other hand, when I travel in Korea, I don’t get offended even when people try to enter into my private space. I feel they are just like my mom and dad, or grandpa… I really think that genuine communication is for sure the beauty of domestic travel. (Writer 3)

In particular, many Railers shared their guesthouse experiences where the collectivistic characteristic of Korean people was reflected. One travel guidebook writer explained that the increase of Railers has resulted in more guesthouses in each local destination near train stations. Although the concept of a guesthouse such as paying for a bed and sharing public areas and utilities is similar to those in other countries, there is a

71

“get-together” culture every evening created in most Korean guesthouses. It was often referred to as “Korea-only guesthouse culture.” She explained, “It is absolutely Railo that has exerted the most significant influence in the development of Korean guesthouse culture” and shared her observation and experiences about guesthouses in Korea that she has had over the last 3 to 4 years.

I highly recommend you to stay in at least two or three popular guesthouses in Korea. There is “Korea-only guesthouse culture” well-known to many travelers including Railers. In other countries, travelers share a lounge area and it is also natural for them to meet and communicate with each other, right? However, they will find it awkward to sit and have dinner together every evening. Doing something together is an obviously optional, not a fixed schedule because travelers have their own schedules. But, in Korea, it is expected that travelers get together with a host. They will put some money together and purchase food, alcohol… and just chat until late at night. Specifically, guesthouses in Gyeongju have earned reputation for this kind of gathering. It continues until 3 or 4 in the morning. (Writer 3)

During the interviews, Railers also displayed their attachment to Korea after Railo experiences. They often use phrases such as “my country,” “the country where I live,”

“pride,” and “attachment.” They were highly motivated to see and learn more about

Korea, which led to their intention to repeat Railo trips.

I realized that I should know more about Korea because it’s my country. Railo provides this opportunity to college students. Moreover, there is no language barrier when we make domestic travels unlike overseas travel which often requires communication in foreign languages. (Writer 1)

There are still a lot of students who have never made domestic travels. I really wanted them to experience Railo as soon as possible. It really makes me feel like “I was born in this awesome country!” Pride? Attachment? Patriotism? (Railer 5)

I have become more attached to my country, especially to our historical background. During Railo trips, I don’t really visit high-tech facilities and attractions, but historic heritages or temples instead. It was amazing to see every

72

heritage has its own story and historical background. I got to learn more about history. In fact, I felt a lot more pride about being Korean. I really want to make domestic travels throughout my life because I want to be a person who can help others to plan traveling Korea. (Railer 2)

Becoming Skilled and Thoughtful Travelers

Railers seemed to be very similar to conventional tourists. Seven days of a set travel period and Railers’ desire for cost-efficient trips pressures Railers to think “we have to see as many things (or visit as many places) as possible.” Thus, most Railers struggle with planning a travel route in order to “cover” well-known places as much as they can. In addition, since they are mostly first-time travelers, they want to visit every planned destination once it’s included in their routes. This often brings them pressure.

There are a lot of first-time Railers who hop around popular tourism destinations. You know, that’s a typical thing for any type of first-time travelers to do. I think it is very similar to what our parents’ generation used to do when they made travels for the very first time. (Writer 3)

There is a kind of pressure to Railers. We always want to take advantage of the unlimited use of a Railo pass for seven days and it makes us to move from one place to the other frequently. Thus, we end up not having sufficient time to enjoy one specific destination. (Railer 3)

I have done Railo trips many times, so I don’t plan it in details any more. But when my friends do it for the first time, they often feel pressure to stick to their route. They think their travel experiences will not be as satisfactory if they don’t travel based on their planned routes. (Railer 1)

However, once Railers repeat their travels, they get to find their own travel patterns and become more familiar with planning and leaving for travel. In general, many

Korean college students are not accustomed to expressing their opinions and have a hard

73

time making decisions because of the relatively passive education system in Korea. One travel guidebook writer addressed this point by saying:

I realize how much these college students are naive because they ask a lot of very simple questions such as “should we use umbrellas or wear raincoats in rain?” You know it’s up to each individual’s preference. Because of non-interactive education system, students even struggle to make very easy decisions although they can decide as they want.

Some Railers actually explained how their travel patterns have been changed. One

Railer began to post his travel advice for Railers on By Train because he realized that being rushed with a really tight schedule is not the best way to enjoy Railo. They have also raised the issue of Railers’ current behavior and claimed the importance of establishing a healthy travel culture. There were some Railers who even presented some of their ideas to improve Railo as an active stakeholder.

Most train stations offer various benefits to Railers for free. Station employees do their best to help Railers to have the best Railo experiences in many ways. However, after several Railo trips, I realized that some Railers take those for granted. For example, when they are offered the room in the train station for free, they are supposed to use it as cleanly as possible. But, unfortunately, many of them don’t. (Writer 1)

Some Railers take an assigned seat which is not assigned for Railers, and they argue with a person who owns that seat when he or she shows up. In the cafeteria on train, they don’t clean up their areas after eating which really frustrates employees there. As much as the number of Railers increases, the number of discourteous Railers also increases. (Railer 4)

Collecting each station’s stamp mark is one of the representative things for Railo. But it would be great if Korail comes up with an official character, something like Railee…? I’m just making this up, but I think a character would strengthen the identity of Railers. Also, it could be utilized in marketing plans for Railo, too. (Railer 2)

74

Conclusion

This study provides fundamental background through an ethnographic study of

Railo using various research tools based on in-group members’ perspectives. The results show that Railo is perceived as an exclusive right of mainly college students to travel domestically by train for a week. It has become a rite-of-passage which college students feel they shouldn’t miss during their college periods. It is remarkable that an introduction of a transportation pass targeting a particular age group has exerted considerable influence on the development of a Korean youth domestic backpacking travel culture.

Unlike train trips in the past, the train is considered not only as a means to access destinations but also an important part of the travel itself.

Railo has reduced various travel constraints (i.e., structural, interpersonal, and intrapersonal constraints) and enabled many students to travel domestically. In general, cost and lack of time are the most frequently mentioned leisure constraints (Jackson,

2000). Young people are particularly sensitive to cost (Jackson, 2005). A travel opportunity with a reasonable cost is highly attractive to college students who have relatively fewer time constraints thanks to regular school breaks. By reducing cost-related constraints, this low-priced train pass also created a trend of traveling alone and encouraged many students to travel domestically. Having no company or having no interest no longer becomes a major constraint. Active and voluntary information exchange via By Train also reduced another structural travel constraint, lack of information (Nyaupane & Andereck, 2008).

In addition, Railers have formed their own community based on shared interests and a sense of solidarity (Esposito, 2009). During the transitional period in their early- or

75

mid-twenties, Railers seem to enjoy getting out of their stressful daily life and temporarily going through a “liminal period” (Cohen, 2010; Turner, 1987). They communicate with one another, learn from others, and belong to a group of Railers during their trips as well as in By Train. Railo is different from another example of domestic travel, spring break, because it consists of in-group members (i.e. Railers) rather than external parties who create and shape Railo culture. In the case of spring break, it is often media that produces and displays particular images to drive college students’ attitudes and behaviors (Ribeiro, 2011).

Railo has been leading a mega trend of domestic travel in Korea. Through this week-long domestic trip, Railers have found the natural and cultural beauty of Korea and became more attached to it. Unlike vacations or field trips initiated by parents or teachers,

Railers’ voluntary visits to cultural and historic heritage sites have connected them to their country and its history (Park, 2010). This finding supports Palmer’s (2005) argument that heritage tourism often arouses a sense of national belonging to people.

Attachment often leads individuals into developing various forms of belongingness and identity to their destination (Hou, Lin, & Morais, 2005). A domestic backpacking experience such as Railo promotes national attachment amongst domestic individuals, which may build up satisfaction and loyalty to future domestic travel (e.g., George &

George, 2004; Hou et al., 2005; Lee & Allen, 1999; Lee, Graefe, & Burns, 2007; Yüksel,

Yüksel, & Bilim, 2010).

Backpacking travel, especially international backpacking, has been a long- standing rite-of-passage for young people in western countries (Cohen, 2003; Sørensen,

2003). However, it is interesting that it occurs in domestic backpacking as well; that is,

76

Railers find special meaning by traveling their own country with which they are culturally familiar. Considering the importance of the role of domestic travel in Korea, an increasing number of Railo trips is highly encouraging. It will be essential to give attention to Railers who have been shaping their own travel culture as well as playing a role as active producers of travel information.

Despite its contribution, this ethnographic research may be limited by using purposeful sampling. Moreover, more hypothesis testing based on quantitative data will enrich the research about Railo. I suggest several avenues for future research on Railo which could expand the scope of current literature on domestic backpacking and youth tourism. First, whether there is such a thing as Railo culture or not needs to be tested.

Although Railers perceive it as a culture, it must be empirically determined based on

Romney, Weller, and Batchelder’s (1986) theory of culture as consensus. By knowing that Railo constitutes a culture, practitioners will be able to improve it accordingly based on characteristics of this potential cultural group, and also create a synergy between tourism and transportation. Second, Railers’ motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty needs to be further examined. Railo was introduced in 2007 and is still in its infancy. To continue its positive influence on domestic tourism, it would be important to understand Railers’ behaviors thoroughly. Considering the potential influences of attachment, it might be also helpful to examine Railers’ motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty with the concept of attachment in the domestic context. Third, a longitudinal study of Railo’s influence on domestic tourism would expand the understanding of the relationship between transportation and tourism. Unlike the Wayfarer ticket in UK, which was intentionally developed to encourage domestic tourism (Lumsdon, Downward, & Rhoden, 2006),

77

Railo’s significant influence on domestic tourism was an unintended consequence of the original idea to increase train travel. Long-term observations and analyses of Railers’ behaviors and Railo phenomenon would provide new insights on an appropriate usage of public transportation to encourage domestic tourism.

78

References

Archer, B. (1978). Domestic tourism as a development factor. Annals of Tourism

Research, 5(1), 126-141.

Ateljevic, I. & Dorne, S. (2004). Theoretical encounters: A review of the backpacker

literature. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), The global nomad: Backpacker travel

in theory and practice (pp. 60-76). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation.

Handbook of Qualitative research, 1, 248-261.

Bell, C. (2010). Budget backpackers testing comfort zones in Mongolia. In K. Hannam &

A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and experiences (pp.

102-113). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches (5th edition). Lanham, MD: Altamira Press.

Binder, J. (2004). The whole point of backpacking: Anthropological perspectives on the

characteristics of backpacking. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), The global

nomad: Backpacker travel in theory and practice (pp. 60-76). Bristol, UK: Channel

View Publications.

Borgatti, S. (1999). Elicitation techniques for cultural domain analysis. In J. Schensul &

M. LeCompte (Eds.), The Ethnographer’s Toolkit, Vol. 3. Walnut Creek, CA:

Altimira Press.

Bywater, M. (1993). The youth and student travel market. Travel & Tourism Analyst, 3,

35-50.

79

Carr, N. (2002). A comparative analysis of the behaviour of domestic and international

young tourists. Tourism Management, 23(3), 321-325.

Cohen, E. (1973). Nomads from affluence: Notes on the phenomenon of drifter-tourism.

International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 14(1-2), 89-103.

Cohen, E. (2004). Backpacking: Diversity and change. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.),

The global nomad: Backpacker travel in theory and practice (pp. 60-76). Bristol,

UK: Channel View Publications.

Cohen, S. (2010). Reconceptualising lifestyle traveler: Contemporary ‘drifter.’ In K.

Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and

experiences (pp. 8-20). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Cohen, S. (2011). Lifestyle travellers: Backpacking as a way of life. Annals of Tourism

Research, 38(4), 1535-1555.

Crabtree, B. F. & Miller, W. L. (1999). Doing qualitative research (2nd edition).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry.

Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130.

Esposito, R. (2010). Communitas: The origin and destiny of community. Stanford: CA:

Stanford University Press.

Foster, G. M. (1986). South seas cruise: A case study of a short-lived society. Annals of

Tourism Research, 13(2), 215-238.

80

George, B. & George, B. (2004). Place attachment as the mediator and novelty seeking as

the moderator. The Journal of Tourism Studies, 15(2), 51-66.

Ghimire, K. (2001). The native tourist: Mass tourism within developing countries.

London, UK: Earthscan Publications.

Goetz, J. P. & LeCompte, M. D. (1981). Ethnographic research and the problem of data

reduction. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 12, 51-70.

Graburn, N. H. (1983). The anthropology of tourism. Annals of tourism research, 10(1),

9-33.

Grekin, E. R., Sher, K. J., & Krull, J. L. (2007). College spring break and alcohol use:

Effects of spring break activity. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 68(5),

681-688.

Hampton, M. (2010). Not such a rough or lonely planet? Backpacker tourism: An

academic journey. In K. Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker

tourism: Mobilities and experiences (pp. 8-20). Bristol, UK: Channel View

Publications.

Hannam, K., Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). Editorial: Mobilities, immobilities and

moorings. Mobilities, 1(1), 1-22.

Hine, C. (2000). Virtual ethnography. Sage Publications Limited.

Hobson, J. & Josiam, B. (1992). Spring break student travel: An exploratory study.

Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 1(3), 87-97.

Hobson, J. & Josiam, B. (1996). Spring break student travel: A longitudinal study.

Journal of Vacation Marketing, 2(2), 137-150.

81

Horak, S. & Weber, S. (2000). Youth tourism in Europe: Problems and prospects.

Tourism Recreation Research, 25(3), 37-44.

Hou, J. S., Lin, C. H., & Morais, D. B. (2005). Antecedents of attachment to a cultural

tourism destination: The case of Hakka and non-Hakka Taiwanese visitors to Pei-

pu, Taiwan. Journal of Travel Research, 44(2), 221-233.

Huxley, L. (2004). Western backpackers and the global experience: An exploration of

young people’s interaction with local cultures. Tourism Culture & Communication,

5(1), 37-44.

Jackson, E. L. (2000). Will research on leisure constraints still be relevant in the twenty-

first century? Journal of Leisure Research, 32(1), 62-68.

Jackson, E. L. (2005). Leisure constraints research: Overview of a developing theme in

leisure studies. Constraints to Leisure, 3-19.

Jafari, J. (1986). On domestic tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 13(3), 491-496.

Javis, J. & Peel, V. (2010). Flashpacking in Fiji: Regraming the ‘global nomad’ in a

developing destination. In K. Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker

tourism: Mobilities and experiences (pp. 8-20). Bristol, UK: Channel View

Publications.

Johnson, J. (2010). Euro-railing: A mobile-ethnography of backpacker train travel. In K.

Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and

experiences (pp. 85-101). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Josiam, B., Clements, C. & Hobson, J. (1994). Youth travel in the USA: Understanding

the spring break market. In Seaton, A. (Ed.): Tourism: The state of the art (pp. 322-

331). Chichester, England: Wiley.

82

Josiam, B., Hobson, J., Dietrich, U. & Smeaton, G. (1998). An analysis of the sexual,

alcohol and drug related behavioural patterns of students on spring break. Tourism

Management, 19(6), 501-513.

Korea Tourism Organization (KTO). (2009). Domestic Tourism Report. Retrieved

November 12, 2012 from

http://kto.visitkorea.or.kr/kor/notice/news/press/board/view.kto?id=381021&insta

nceId=42

Korea Youth Violence Prevention Institute. (2002). Current status of adolescence

violence and solution suggestions.

Kozinets, R. V. (2010). Netnography: The marketer’s secret weapon. Mountain View,

CA: NetBase Solutions, Inc.

Lansing, J. B. & Blood, D. (1964). The changing travel market. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute

for Social Research.

Larsen, S., Ø gaard, T., & Brun, W. (2011). Backpackers and mainstreamers: Realities

and myths. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2), 690-707.

Lee, C. C. & Allen, L. (1999). Understanding individuals’ attachment to selected

destinations: An application of place attachment. Tourism Analysis, 4, 173-185.

Lee, C., Maggs, J., & Rankin, L. (2006). Spring break trips as a risk factor for heavy

alcohol use among first-year college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 67(6),

911-916.

Lee, J., Graefe, A., & Burns, R. (2007). Examining the antecedents of destination loyalty

in a forest setting. Leisure Sciences, 29(5), 463-481.

83

Loker-Murphy, L. (1996). Backpackers in Australia: A motivation-based segmentation

study. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 5(4), 23-45.

Lumsdon, L., Downward, P., & Rhoden, S. (2006). Transport for tourism: Can public

transport encourage a modal shift in the day visitor market? Journal of Sustainable

Tourism, 14(2), 139-156.

MacCannell, D. (1976). The tourist: A new theory of the leisure class. New York:

Schocken.

Maoz, D. (2007). Backpackers’ motivations: The role of culture and nationality. Annals

of Tourism Research, 34(1), 122-140.

Maoz, D. & Bekerman, Z. (2010). Searching for Jewish answers in Indian resorts: The

postmodern traveler. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(2), 423-439.

Maticka-Tyndale, E., Herold, E. S. & Mewhinney, D. M. (1998). Casual sex on spring

break: Intentions and behaviors of Canadian students. The Journal of Sex Research,

35(3), 254-264.

Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism (MCST). (2012). 2011 Annual Tourism Trend

Report. Retrieved November 12, 2012 from the website of Korea Culture and

Tourism Institute, http://www.kcti.re.kr/03_1.dmw

Mitas, O., Yarnal, C., & Chick, G. (2012). Jokes build community: Mature tourists’

positive emotions. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(4), 1884-1905.

Murphy, L. (2001). Exploring social interactions of backpackers. Annals of Tourism

Research, 28(1), 50-67.

Muzaini, H. (2006). Backpacking Southeast Asia: Strategies of “looking local.” Annals of

Tourism Research, 33(1), 144-161.

84

Noy, C. (2004). This trip really changed me: Backpackers’ narratives of self-change.

Annals of Tourism Research, 31(1), 78-102.

Nyaupane, G. P. & Andereck, K. L. (2008). Understanding travel constraints: Application

and extension of a leisure constraints model. Journal of Travel Research, 46(4),

433-439.

O’Reilly, C. (2006). From drifter to gap year tourist: Mainstreaming backpacker travel.

Annals of Tourism Research, 33(4), 998-1017.

Palmer, C. (2005). An ethnography of Englishness: Experiencing identity through

tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 7-27.

Paris, C. (2010). The virtualization of backpacker culture: Virtual mooring, sustained

interactions and enhanced mobilities. In K. Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.),

Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and experiences (pp. 21-39). Bristol, UK:

Channel View Publications.

Park, H. (2010). Heritage tourism: Emotional journeys into nationhood. Annals of

Tourism research, 37(1), 116-135.

Park, S. H. (2012). Youth on the Railroad. Gimpo, Korea: Dream map.

Passariello, P. (1983). Never on Sunday? Mexican tourists at the beach. Annals of

Tourism Research, 10(1), 109-122.

Patrick, M. E., Morgan, N., Maggs, J. L., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2011). “I got your back”:

Friends’ understandings regarding college student spring break behavior. Journal of

Youth and Adolescence, 40(1), 108-120.

Porter, K. (2003, May 17). Calmer Panama City Beach, Fla., spring break brought area

$160 million. Knight Ridder Tribune Business News (p. 1).

85

Rapaille, C. (2006). The culture code. New York, NY: Broadway.

Ravon, Z. (1991). Incentives for youth tourism. Keynote paper presented at the WTO

International Conference on Youth Tourism, New Dehli, India.

Reynolds, C. (2004). Gimme a break! What a number spring break does on college

students' bankbooks. American Demographics, 26(2), 48.

Ribeiro, N. F. (2011). Culture, consensus and behavior among North-American spring

breakers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University,

University Park, PA.

Richards, G. & King, B. (2003). Youth travel and backpacking. Travel & Tourism

Analyst, 6, 1-23.

Richards, G. & Wilson, J. (2003). New horizons in independent youth and student travel.

A report to the international student travel confederation (ISTC) and the

association of tourism and leisure education (ATLAS). Amsterdam: International

Student Travel Confederation.

Riley, P. J. (1988). Road culture of international long-term budget travelers. Annals of

Tourism Research, 15(3), 313-328.

Romney, A. K., Weller, S. C., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A

theory of culture and informant accuracy. American anthropologist, 88(2), 313-338.

Shim, W. (2007). The mid/long-term policy development for revitalization of domestic

tourism. Korea Culture & Tourism Institute.

Simpson, K. (2005). Dropping out or signing up? The professionalisation of youth travel.

Antipode, 37(3), 447-469.

86

Singh, S. (2009). Domestic tourism in Asia: Diversity and divergence. London, UK:

Earthscan Publications.

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis:

Theory, method and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Sönmez, S., Apostolopoulos, Y., Yu, C., Yang, S., Mattila, A., & Yu, L. (2006). Binge

drinking and casual sex on Spring Break. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(4), 895-

917.

Sørensen, A. (2003). Backpacker ethnography. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4), 847-

867.

Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

Theuns, L. (1991). The significance of youth tourism: Economic dimensions. Paper

presented at the WTO International Conference on Youth Tourism, New Delhi,

India.

Thorne, S. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Evidence Based Nursing, 3(3),

68-70.

Turner, V. (1987). Betwixt and between: The liminal period in rites of passage. In L. C.

Mahdi, S. Foster, & M. Little (Eds), Betwixt and between: Patterns of masculine

and feminine initiation (pp. 5-22). Peru, IL: Open Court Publishing.

United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). (2012). Retrieved November 12,

2012 from http://media.unwto.org/en/content/understanding-tourism-basic-glossary

Uriely, N., Yonay, Y., & Simchai, D. (2002). Backpacking experiences: A type and form

analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 520-538.

87

Van Gennep, A. (1909). The rites of passage (trans. by M. Vizedom and G. Caffee).

London: Routledge and Kegan Paul (1960).

Vogt, J. W. (1976). Wandering: Youth and travel behavior. Annals of Tourism Research,

4(1), 25-41.

Weller, S. C. & Romney, A. K. (1988). Systematic data collection. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Yarnal, C. & Kerstetter, D. (2005). Casting off an exploration of cruise ship space, group

tour behavior, and social interaction. Journal of Travel Research, 43(4), 368-379.

Yüksel, A., Yüksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer

satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management,

31(2), 274-284.

88

Appendix A

Free Listing Questionnaire (English/Korean)

89

Free Listing Survey (English)

Please make a list of anything you can think of Railo or Railo trips below.

* List the things that pop in to your mind, regardless of order. * Think of as many items as you can.

 Gender:  Male  Female  Age: ______ Area of Residence: ______(e.g., Seoul, Gyeonggi, Gangwon, Daegu, Chungbuk, Gwangju, Jeju)  Are you a student?  Yes  Year: ______ No  Job: ______, Expertise: ______ How many times have you traveled with a Railo pass? (if you are now on your Railo trip, count that as well) ______ Are you willing to make Railo trips again in the future?  Yes  No

90

Free Listing Survey (Korean)

<내일로> 혹은 <내일로 여행> 하면 하면 생각나는 것을 리스트 형태로 적어주십시오.

* 순서에 관계없이, 개인적으로 떠오르는 것들을 적어주시면 됩니다. * 가능한 많이 적어주세요.

 성별:  남  여  나이: 만 ( ) 세  거주지역: ( ) (예) 서울, 경기, 강원, 대구, 충북, 광주, 제주 등  학생이신가요?  예  ( ) 학년  아니오  직업 ( ) 분야 ( )

 과거 내일로 여행 회수 (지금 내일로 여행중이시라면 그것도 포함해서): ( ) 회

 내일로 여행을 또 하고 싶은 의향이 있으신지요?  예  아니오

91

Chapter 3

Using Cultural Consensus to Identify an Emerging Korean Youth Culture, Railo

Abstract

This paper explores the shared cultural domain of Railo experiences among

Railers as well as their agreement on it. Based on cultural consensus theory and method, a questionnaire was developed and used to demonstrate a coherence of Railo experiences.

The results showed a moderately high agreement in the cultural domain of Railo experiences. In all subgroups by gender, age, and years of experiences, the results demonstrated a consensus among Railers with no significant sub-group difference in cultural knowledge of Railo experiences. By examining the coherence of the Railo culture, this paper provides a support of a new view that a transportation pass can create a travel culture.

92

Introduction

Railo is a popular travel trend among Korean youth. It is the name of a rail pass which allows passengers of 25 years of age or younger to enjoy an unlimited number of a train trips for a week. But major users of this pass who are college students have formed their own identity and called themselves “Railers,” a group of people traveling with a

Railo pass. Since its introduction in 2007, Railo has become a “cultural code” among youth in Korea, because this travel phenomenon has not been driven by Korail (Korean

Railroad Corporation), but rather arose among Railers themselves. The number of pass purchases has dramatically increased from 7,868 in 2007 to 173,654 in 20128.

A Railo pass is mainly offered during college students’ vacation seasons, which creates a high number of Railers’ traveling domestically in summer and winter.

Considering the importance of sustainable domestic tourism in Korea (Shim, 2007), it’s encouraging that the inflow of young people to rural areas has increased because of

Railo. A number of less well-known destinations in Korea have been visited and rediscovered by Railers. The younger generation in Korea has found Railo highly attractive because it allows them to find the beauty of travel, especially in their own country (See more details in Chapter 2).

According to the senior manager of the Korail marketing team, Gyu-Chul Ryu, the success of the Railo pass was unexpected. It was developed in order to increase rail use among young people. However, these young people have formed a travel culture on their own. Railo has contributed not only increase the amount of domestic travel, but also changed the perception of domestic tourism.

8 Source: Korail Statistics

93

Despite the expansion of this travel phenomenon, it has not yet been examined by tourism researchers in Korea. Considering the influence of Railo on youth culture and domestic tourism, it is important to understand how Railers perceive their experiences and to document whether Railo is a single coherent culture or a momentary trend shared by a few. In this study, Railo experiences will be examined using several ethnographic methods and Romney, Weller, and Batchelder’s (1986) cultural consensus theory. If

Railo turns out to be a coherent cultural phenomenon, it can be strongly marked as an example where the development of a rail pass eventually develops a remarkable travel culture. This study will provide practical implications based on the results.

Literature Review

What is Culture?

Culture is one of the common concepts used in tourism research. However, it has rarely been applied to the study of tourists and their behaviors (Sorenson, 2003); instead, it has been used to categorize a group of people with some proxy measures such as nationality or ethnicity (Chick, 2006). It is important to define culture clearly in order to delineate the scope of this research. What is culture?

There are three primary approaches to defining the concept of culture including mental/ideational, behavioral, and material (Chick, 2013). First, culture can be considered as mental phenomenon (Keesing, 1986; Tylor, 1871). It includes mental phenomena in the heads of members in a society such as knowledge, beliefs, and values. Second, behavioral patterns distinctive of a community can be included along with ideas (Ember

& Ember, 1988). For example, greeting manners or comfortable distances between

94

people may not be the same in different cultural communities. Third, some researchers included artifacts with ideational and behavioral aspects of culture (Brown, 1991).

Boomerang or Hanbok (a Korean traditional dress) are examples of culture as artifacts.

However, Chick (2013) claimed that there are some issues in the second and third categories of definitions. Since the definitions already involve behaviors and/or artifacts, researchers can’t use culture as a variable to explain behaviors and artifacts.

For this reason, many anthropologists have used a cognitively-oriented definition of culture (Goodenough, 1957; Richerson & Boyd, 2005; Roberts, 1964; Romney et al.,

1986). Goodenough (1957, p. 167) defined culture as “whatever it is one has to know and believe to operate in a manner acceptable to members.” Roberts (1964) referred to culture as information. He believed the operation of information is the key to cultural evolution.

Richerson and Boyd (2005) also consider culture as all the information that influences people’s behaviors transmitted by social processes such as teaching and sharing.

Cultural Domains and Ad hoc Categories

Anthropologists have been interested in the exploration of cultural domains for many years (Spradley, 1979; Weller & Romney, 1988). A cultural domain refers to “a set of items that are all of the same type” which implies that “membership in the domain is not solely determined by the individual respondent, but exists ‘out there’ either in the language, in the culture or in reality” (Borgatti, 1999, p. 1). Simple examples of cultural domain are “animals” or “illnesses.”

Unlike these common domains, cultural domains are sometimes implied. A cognitive psychologist, Barsalou (1983) introduced the concept of “ad hoc categories,”

95

which refers to novel, goal-derived categories. He claimed that we use a lot of “highly specialized and unusual sets of items” in our everyday life (Barsalou, 1983, p. 211).

Some domains such as “the things to take for fishing” or “qualifications to become a competitive researcher” are examples. These domains are created to achieve goals in specialized contexts.

Cultural domain analysis, in most cases, implies an emic approach, which refers to locating the answers from the respondents rather than getting them from theory or researchers’ opinions (Collins & Dressler, 2008). In general, it requires a researcher to select a set of items to analyze. Free listing is one of the most frequently used tools to determine the content of a domain (Borgatti, 1994). Once researchers prepare a description of a domain, respondents list items that fit in that domain.

Cultural Consensus Theory

To assess intra-cultural differences in cultural domains, Romney et al. (1986) developed the idea of cultural consensus as both a theory and a method that estimates the degree of agreement among informants about a cultural domain and the degree to which individuals’ beliefs are in line with the shared belief. It provides “culturally correct answers” to questions about a given domain (Weller, 2007, p. 339) and indicates

“whether there is either a culturally central or more diversified understanding of the domain within the local knowledge system” (Caulkins & Hyatt, 1999, p. 6). Researchers do not need to know the correct answers in advance as these are derived from informant data (Romney et al., 1986; Weller, 2007).

96

Cultural consensus theory helps investigators generalize their research findings into other contexts by using more objective and quantitative methods compared to other forms of ethnography. Since its development, many different formats have been developed to utilize the method such as true-false items, multiple choice items, ranking, matching, and Likert scale items (Weller, 2007). There are three assumptions underlying the application of cultural consensus theory (Romney et al., 1986). First, informants must come from a common culture (Common Truth). Second, each informant’s response should be asked independently from the other informants (Local Independence). Third, the questions should involve one single cultural topic and questions should be at the same level of difficulty (Homogeneity of Items).

Cultural consensus theory has supported “the analysis and understanding of cultural sharing and of intracultural variability” in various disciplines (Romney et al.,

1987, p. 176). This includes beliefs about illness (Weller, Ruebush, & Klein, 1997); reasons for poverty (Dressler, 1996); knowledge about fishery management (Miller,

Kaneko, Bartram, Marks, & Brewer, 2004); and homogeneity of ethnic groups in leisure research (Li, Chick, Zinn, Absher, & Graefe, 2007). It has also been used to investigate the different opinions among several groups defined by their roles. For example, Smith and colleagues (2004) applied cultural consensus analysis to investigate value differences among patients, faculty, and residents in a clinic. Collins and Dressler (2008) also probed the “shared understandings within and between four different service providers who deal with similar client populations” (p. 383).

Recently, the theory and method have also been applied to the context of tourism.

Gatewood and Cameron (2009) discussed whether “belongers” (a local term for citizens)

97

in the Turks and Caicos Islands have a consensus cultural understanding of tourism and its impact. In a similar context, Kerstetter, Bricker, and Li (2010) explored the sense of place among Fijian highlanders using cultural consensus analysis. However, there are still only a handful of studies conducted based on the theory of culture as consensus despite its obvious usefulness.

Transport, Tourism, and the Railroad

Transport is an essential element in tourism. It plays a role as a bridge between tourists and destinations (Page, 2004). An increase of automobile ownership has eased the access to tourism and recreation sites and extended the range of activities (Halsall,

1982). The development of the air transport system has also influenced international tourism by motivating many global citizens to travel around the world. These changes in accessibility to travel are one of the major contributions to the tourism industry (Page,

2004).

Despite its benefits, however, the remarkable increase of car usage and frequent air travel has caused various social and environmental issues such as air pollution, noise, and road congestion. In an effort to reduce these drawbacks, a number of efforts have been made to encourage travel using public transportation. Many countries executed plans for a modal shift from traveling by private vehicles to public transportation such as trains, subways, and buses (e.g., De Tommasi, 2003; Lumsdon, Downward, & Rhoden,

2006).

One of the examples discussed by Lumsdon et al. (2006) is the effort made in the

UK to encourage the use of public transportation for recreational travel. In 1980, a multi-

98

modal pass called Wayfarer was launched to expand access to the countryside by public transportation. It allowed people to reach designated areas by either trains or trams for a day. Lumsdon et al. (2006) explained that this pass has survived and contributed to continuous visits to the countryside while offering sustainable transport to passengers.

Korea is one of the most densely populated countries in the world with about 50 million people living in an area of 100,210 km2. Although there is a heavy car use, especially in urban areas, big cities (e.g., Seoul, Busan) are also well-equipped with public transportation systems. Above all, a nation-wide Korean railroad system9 supports passengers who travel between the country’s regions for business, recreation, and tourism. Travel agencies managed by Korail, the Korean rail system, also have offered tourism products near the major train stations although they have been more frequently purchased by older people prior to the introduction of Railo.

Railo

In 2004, KTX (Korea Train Express) was introduced and it reduced travel time between the regions dramatically. However, the introduction of KTX led to a decline in the use of other ordinary trains. In order to encourage people to use non-KTX trains as well as increase rail use among young people, Korail developed a special train pass named Railo targeting passengers of 25 years of age or under.

Railo is a train pass for passengers who are 25 or under that guarantees an

9 The Korean railroad system was introduced in 1899. It has 12 managerial districts and over 600 stations including small, remote stops. There are 5 types of trains by which people can reach most regions in Korea: KTX (express trains), Saemaul, Mugunghwa, Nuri-ro, and commuter trains. KTX is the fastest (330 km/h), but the most expensive train in Korea. Saemaul trains offer more comfortable seats with a higher price (still lower than KTX) compared to Mugunghwa trains while the speeds of both trains are not much different (about 150 km/h). Nuri-ro and commuter trains run within limited areas.

99

unlimited amount of travel for seven consecutive days. They can use unassigned seats and standing areas of trains in Korea except for KTX (Korea Train Express)10 and it costs

56,500KRW (about USD 50). The Railo pass was developed to encourage use of trains as well as to provide youths more domestic travel opportunities at a reasonable cost. It is available during college students’ seasonal breaks in summer and winter. The number of passengers traveling with a Railo pass has increased dramatically over the last five years.

Although it is similar to the ‘Eurail pass’ in Europe and the ‘Seishun 18 ticket’ in Japan, the age limit is the distinctive feature of Railo and has made it a rite-of-passage among college students in Korea. The online community for train travelers – By Train – is a major information source for Railo as well as a venue for communication among Railers.

It has over 300,000 members and is used by Railers prior to, during, and after their trips.

Railo can be compared with the spring break phenomenon in North America. It provides opportunities for students to travel and spend time with friends during week- long travels. However, there are several differences. First, Railers can pick their travel period during the two to three months of their breaks while spring break trips are often made during the fixed week designated by schools. Second, Railo includes domestic destinations while some spring breakers may travel out of the country, such as to Mexico.

Third, Railers identify themselves as travelers and take advantage of the unlimited use of trains offered by a Railo pass, but spring breakers mostly stay in one destination and have fun.

10 Passengers who purchase a Railo pass can purchase KTX tickets with a half-off price twice during their travels.

100

Railo can also be compared with backpacking tourism. Backpacking tourism is a

“culture symbolic of the increasingly mobile world” (Paris, 2010, p. 40). Young tourists now consider backpacking tourism as a rite-of-passage (Graburn, 1983; Maoz, 2007;

O’Reilly, 2006). They like to travel with small budget, meet new people on the road, and have new experiences (Loker-Murphy, 1996; Maoz, 2007; Noy, 2004). Although research about backpacking tourism has been popular since the late 1990s, it mainly involves a limited number of destinations such as South East Asia or Australia (Cohen,

2010; Hampton, 2010). Given that Railers consider themselves to be “domestic backpackers” and they travel within the country for a relatively short period of time (i.e., one week), backpacking tourism research in the domestic tourism context is limited.

Research Purpose and Questions

The purpose of this study is to document Railers’ perception of their Railo experiences and determine whether the ad hoc domain, Railo experience, exists as a shared cultural domain among Railers using Romney et al.’s (1986) cultural consensus analysis. If a cultural domain exists, this study will also determine the degree to which

Railers (or subgroups of Railers, such as males/females Railers, Railers by each age group, and first-time Railers/repeat Railers) agree on them. There are four research questions guiding this study:

1. How do Railers describe their Railo experiences?

2. Does Railer agreement on the nature of their experience reach a cultural level

according to Gatewood and Cameron’s (2009) guidelines?

101

3. If Railo culture exists, how does Railers’ cultural knowledge vary by gender,

age, and years of travel experience?

Data Collection

Data were collected in three phases during summer 2012 and spring 2013. First, participant observation and semi-structured/unstructured interviews were conducted from

May to July 2012 to become familiar with the context of Railo. Second, a free listing survey was administered to Railers from June to August 2012. Third, a cultural consensus questionnaire was administered in April 2013. The first and second phases of data collection were targeted to Railers who have experienced Railo since its introduction in 2007. In order to minimize possible errors caused by memory effects, respondents for the cultural consensus survey were limited to the ones who had experienced Railo over the December 2012 through March 2013 period.

Observations & Interviews

I made three train trips from May to July 2012 to meet traveling Railers. A number of informal communications as well as formal interviews with Railers occurred during these trips. Using purposeful sampling, 15 pre-scheduled in-depth interviews were also conducted with Railers, travel writers, major station employees, and a By Train staff member (Table 3-1). Several active popular bloggers among Railers and associated stakeholders were contacted and the interviews were scheduled after their voluntary consent. Interviews took place at train stations or coffee shops. Each interview took from

40 minutes to over 3 hours.

102

Table 3-1. Interview Participants Participants Gender Age Train station Gyu-Chul Ryu (Korail headquater) M early 30 Station Officer 1 M early 40 Station Officer 2 M early 40 Station Officer 3 F early 30 Station Officer 4 M early 40 Station Officer 5 F late 20 Railers Railer 1 (key informant) M 25 Railer 2 M 25 Railer 3 F 22 Railer 4 M 24 Railer 5 F 23 Railer 6 F 20 Railer 7 M N/A Railer 8 F N/A Railer 9 F 20 Railer 10 M 26 Writers Writer 1 F early 20 Writer 2 F early 20 Writer 3 F early 30 By Train Staff member M early 20

Free Listing Survey

Free listing is one of the ethnographic data collection methods that can be used to obtain information about a specific cultural domain (Bernard, 2011; Borgatti, 1999). The method involves asking participants to list items that belong to the given domain. In order to have an in-group perspective of Railo from Railers, free listing was conducted in person at several major Railers’ destinations as well as through the online community, By

Train. Respondents were asked to list “all of the things that come to your mind regarding

Railo.” A total of 187 respondents (including 98 on-line respondents) completed the survey (Table 3-2) and produced 1,220 items. The items mentioned by at least 20

103

respondents (about 10% of the total individuals) were used in the cultural consensus questionnaire (Table 3-3).

Table 3-2. Demographic Information of Free Listing Survey Participants Categories Frequency Percent Channels Online 98 52.4 Offline 89 47.6 Total 187 100 Gender Male 77 41.2 Female 110 58.8 Total 187 100.0 Age (Mean=22.51) 17 2 1.1 18 12 6.4 19 14 7.5 20 25 13.4 21 18 9.6 22 33 17.6 23 25 13.4 24 30 16.0 25 17 9.1 26+ 10 5.4 Missing 1 0.5 Total 187 100.0 Number of Railo experiences 1 128 68.5 (Mean=1.46) 2 33 17.6 3 16 8.6 5 6 3.2 7 1 0.5 10+ 3 1.6 Total 187 100.0

104

Table 3-3. Frequently-Mentioned Items about Railo (Items mentioned by at least 20 participants) Percentage of participants Average Rank Item Frequency who listed the Rank item (%) 1 train 121 59 3.975 2 visiting local restaurants (local food) 90 44 8.789 3 friends 85 41 7.788 4 new acquaintances 76 37 9.316 5 memories 74 36 9.432 6 pictures 65 32 11.215 7 jjim-jil-bang (Korean dry sauna) 65 32 11.031 8 travel 62 30 4.306 9 backpack 53 26 11.962 10 freedom 48 23 5.938 11 college student 48 23 6.229 12 ocean 48 23 9.333 13 chung-choon (youth) 47 23 5.936 14 being young 44 21 6.795 15 hardship 44 21 9.091 16 excitement 41 20 9.585 17 romance of the trip 36 18 6.306 18 guesthouse 32 16 11.813 19 scenery 30 15 10.333 20 planning 28 14 12.643 21 joyful 28 14 9.214 22 rubber stamp 27 13 11.148 23 adventure 26 13 7.962 24 travel all over the country 24 12 7.292 25 people 23 11 10.174 26 school break 22 11 7.909 27 camera 22 11 13.182 28 rain 22 11 13.318 29 Busan (the second largest city in Korea) 22 11 5.773 30 a week (7 days) 22 11 8.455 31 money 21 10 12.952 32 something new 21 10 11.095 33 map 20 10 13.300 34 train trip 20 10 3.250 35 rest 20 10 8.500 36 experience 20 10 10.000

105

Cultural Consensus Questionnaire

A cultural consensus questionnaire was constructed based on the free listing survey and interview results. The items associated with Railo experiences and mentioned by at least 20 respondents were included in the cultural consensus questionnaire along with the items derived from the interviews.

The free listing items needed to be specified, rearranged, and rephrased because they were found to include a number of items with varying levels of contrast even after the initial cleanup process. Thus, the items were reorganized based on the respondents’ description about each item as well as feedback provided by the interviewers (Table 3-4).

Table 3-4. The Development of Cultural Consensus Questionnaire Items Based on Free Listing Free listing items Cultural consensus questionnaire items train  Get familiar with train visiting local restaurants (local food)  Visit local restaurants friends  Spend time with friends (boyfriend/girlfriend) new acquaintances/ people  Communicate with other Railers  Communicate with other local residents memories  Make special memories pictures/ camera  Leave memories by taking photos jjim-jil-bang (Korean dry sauna)/  Choose appropriate accommodations guesthouse backpack  Practice backpacking trips freedom  Feel freedom ocean/ scenery  Enjoy nature of Korea chung-choon (youth)  Feel a sense of belonging as a Railer being young hardship/rain  Deal with difficulties during trip romance of the trip/ train trip/ travel  Feel the beauty of train trips planning  Plan a trip by myself  Pre-research about travel destinations rubber stamp  Collect stamp marks at train stations adventure  Do adventure during trip travel all over the country  Travel all around Korea money  Make a budget travel something new/ experience  Experience something new map  Prepare travel necessities rest  Get rest

106

First, broad items were described in more detail to indicate the Railo experience appropriately. For example, the item, “map” listed by respondents was rewritten as

“prepare travel necessities” and “new acquaintances/people” as “communicate with other

Railers/communicate with other local residents.” Second, some items were better explained with a context provided by the interviews. For instance, according to the

Railers, the item, “rain” was associated with “hardship” because many Railers had to struggle with inclement weather during the rainy season which generally occurs over a few weeks in mid-July through mid-August. Thus, it was rewritten as “deal with difficulties during trip.” Also, the items “chung-choon” and “being young” were derived from college students’ desire to be a part of Railers and to take advantage of their youth to enjoy Railo opportunities before they reach their maximum eligible age of 25. These items were reworded as “feel a sense of belonging as a Railer.” Third, several items were divided into the two separate ones or integrated into a single item. For example, the item

“planning” was specified into “plan a trip by myself” and “pre-research about travel destinations.” On the other hand, the items, “jjim-jil-bang” and “guesthouse” were combined as “choose appropriate accommodations.”

The items which were not directly associated with the Railo experience were removed from the list. These items included “joyful/excitement” (overall feeling about their Railo experience), “college student/school break/a week” (the characteristics of a

Railo pass), and “Busan” (one of the cities in Korea). Instead, more relevant items derived from the interviews with Railers were added (Table 3-5). As a result, a total of 38 items (i.e., 23 items from a free listing survey and 15 items based on the interview results) were used in the cultural consensus questionnaire (Figure 3-1).

107

Table 3-5. Additional Items Derived From the Interviews for a Cultural Consensus Questionnaire

 Use smart devices during the trip  Get help from train station employees  Buy local goods  Experience a city tour  Enjoy sport and leisure activities  Visit family, friends, or relatives living in other regions  Get to know my travel preferences  Visit Korean cultural historic sites  Get out of daily routines  Enjoy time for myself  Take advantage of Railo Plus benefits  Use online communities (e.g., By Train) as an information source  Feel pride as a Korean  Get to know more about Korea  Share Railo experiences via SNS

The respondents were asked to rate how important each item is to truly enjoy the

Railo experience using a 5-point Likert scale (1: not important at all; 5: highly important). Several questions about Railers’ demographic factors (e.g., gender, age, number of previous Railo experiences) were asked at the end of the questionnaire. To ensure the quality of the survey, a pilot test was conducted with 15 respondents who previously had participated in the interviews. They willingly provided feedback on the relevancy of the items, wordings, and formats.

The questionnaire was developed using Qualtrics survey software

(www.qualtrics.com) and distributed via By Train. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit survey participants because: (a) it is difficult to use a probability sampling method because a sampling frame for Railers is not available; (b) By Train is the most popular place to reach a large number of Railers since most Railers visit this on-line community to communicate with other Railers and share information before, during, and after Railo

108

Figure 3-1. Railo Experiences (listed in time sequence)

Before During After Railo trips Railo trips Railo trips

 Plan a trip by myself  Use smart devices during the trip  Make a budget travel  Share Railo experiences  Prepare travel necessities  Get familiar with train  Travel all around Korea via SNS  Pre-research about travel  Feel the beauty of train trips  Deal with difficulties during trip destinations  Collect stamp marks at train stations  Do adventure during trip  Get help from train station employees  Get to know my travel preferences  Visit local restaurants  Leave memories by taking photos  Buy local goods  Enjoy nature of Korea  Experience a city tour  Visit Korean cultural historic sites  Enjoy sport and leisure activities  Feel freedom  Spend time with friends  Experience something new (boyfriend/girlfriend)  Make special memories  Visit family, friends, or relatives living  Get rest in other regions  Get out of daily routines  Communicate with other Railers  Enjoy time for myself  Communicate with other local residents

 Choose appropriate accommodations  Practice backpacking trips  Take advantage of Railo Plus benefits

 Use online communities (e.g., By Train) as an information source  Feel pride as a Korean  Get to know more about Korea  Feel a sense of belonging as a Railer

109

trips. With the introduction of the research and the survey link, the recruitment messages were sent to 1,176 members of By Train who made Railo trips between December 2012 and March 2013 (excluding the ones who made trips in the previous years). Among the

245 surveys completed, 218 valid responses were used for data analysis (Table 3-6).

Table 3-6. Demographic Information of Cultural Consensus Questionnaire Participants Categories Frequency Percent Gender Male 98 45.0 Female 119 54.6 Missing 1 0.5 Total 218 100.0 Age (Mean=22.14) 17 1 0.5 18 4 1.8 19 24 11.0 20 25 115 21 28 12.8 22 33 15.1 23 34 15.6 24 36 16.5 25 32 14.7 Missing 1 0.5 Total 218 100.0 Number of Railo experiences 1 145 66.5 (Mean=1.64) 2 40 18.3 3 11 5.0 4 10 4.6 5 2 0.9 6 6 2.8 8 1 0.5 Total 218 100.0

110

Data Analysis

To develop the questionnaire, ethnographic data were thoroughly reviewed beforehand. First, the digitally-recorded interview data were transcribed. Second, the field notes written during the interviews and observations were reviewed. Third, the free listing data were coded. After cleaning up the data (e.g., synonyms, typos), data were analyzed using the ethnographic data analysis software, Anthropac, to get the frequency of the items, percentage of respondents who listed each item, and the average rank of the items. Finally, frequently-mentioned items (i.e., items mentioned by 10% of the total respondents) during observations, interviews, and free listing were used to develop the questionnaire.

In order to test whether there is a consensus on Railo culture, cultural consensus analysis was administered. Romney et al. (1986) developed the idea of cultural consensus as both a theory and a method that estimates the degree of agreement among informants about a cultural domain and the degree to which individuals’ beliefs are in line with the shared belief. An informal cultural consensus model (Romney et al., 1987), which is applicable to the survey with rating questions, was used to test this hypothesis.

The data were analyzed using SPSS 19.0 with unweighted least squares factor analysis with no rotation; it is mathematically equivalent to minimum residual factor analysis (Jöreskog, 2003), the technique originally prescribed by Romney, Weller and

Batchelder (1986) for consensus analysis. The respondents were entered in the rows and items in the columns first, and then the matrix was transposed. Factor analysis results provided eigenvalues, factor loadings, and factor scores. If the following criteria are met, it is then assumed that cultural consensus exists: (a) the ratio of the first and the second

111

eigenvalue should be greater than three to one; (b) loadings on the first factor for individuals (i.e., cultural competence) has to be positive; (c) the mean factor loading has to be over .50 (Gatewood & Cameron, 2009). In addition, the cultural answer key (i.e., weighted average of answers to each item) can be calculated by weighting the answers of each respondent by their competence scores and computing the average11 (Weller, 2007).

Then, I ran a Spearman correlation analysis with cultural answer keys by gender, age, and years of travel experience to illustrate if Railers’ cultural knowledge varies by subgroup.

Results

This section addresses: (a) how Railers described their Railo experiences based on informants’ responses (RQ1); (b) whether Railers agreed on Railo experiences (RQ2);

(c) whether Railers’ cultural knowledge varied by gender, age, and years of experiences and, if so, how they differ? (RQ3).

Railo Experiences

Railo was not just about a train pass, but a comprehensive experience from the purchase of a pass to the sharing of experiences after traveling with a Railo pass. There are four main features of Railo experiences according to informants’ responses. First, planning trips by themselves was a very important part of Railers’ experiences. Second, leaving behind daily life and the train, the main mode of transportation, were at the core

11 Here are the steps used to calculate a cultural answer key. First, calculate the average of competence scores. Second, calculate a weight for each individual by dividing their competence scores by the average competence score. Third, multiply each individual’s answer by weight calculated in the previous step. Fourth, average the weighted answers to each item. This weighted average of answers to each item is the cultural answer key.

112

in their memories. Third, Railo experiences were highly associated with communications among Railers and with local residents. Fourth, their experiences were about the process of becoming real Korean “insiders.”

It was the very first travel which I initiated

When informants were asked to share their Railo experiences, they began to describe the travel route they planned: “This is the travel route that I made for the Railo this year,” “It was the very first time that I initiated and planned a trip,” and “I really enjoyed the fact that Railo experience was totally up to my own plans.” The subject, “I” was very much emphasized in their stories although it was often left out in verbal conversations in Korean. Railers thought Railo experiences began from the moment they plan their trips. Hence, the decision-making related to the Railo trips, including the entire planning process was a very important part of Railers’ experiences.

Through Railo experience, we can learn how to plan a trip, how to execute a trip, and how to end a trip by ourselves. (Female Railer, age 21)

I gained much joy and confidence when I initiated a trip based on the plan I made. It was the best part of my Railo experience. (Male Railer, age 19)

Just like other teenagers, I used to be a passive traveler who has made travels planned by other people. It was the very first time to make a trip I planned myself, visit destinations based on the route I developed, and communicate with other travelers when I wanted during the trip. It was a really important part of my Railo experience. (Female Railer, age 23)

Railers’ self-initiated Railo experiences led to their active development of thoughts about each element of Railo and to share their thoughts with other Railers, especially on the online community, By Train. Railers agreed that sharing their travel

113

stories and providing advice to first-time Railers is an important part of their Railo experience.

I logged into By Train even after the Railo trips in order to read postings about other Railers’ experiences, and also to answer the questions from the first-time Railers. Most Railers feel strong connection to the Railers’ community and want to contribute something based on their experiences. (Male Railer, 25)

It’s like addiction. Although the Railo trip itself is over, many Railers don’t want to end their Railo experience, but to continue. That’s why they spend time on the By Train frequently even after the trip, and communicate with other Railers about their own Railo experiences. (Female Railer, 23)

Basically it’s about leaving, but the train is at the core!

Railers agreed that Railo is basically about getting away from their daily routines.

Similar to typical travel motivations, they considered their Railo experiences the same as time for rest, time to experience something new, and time to feel freedom. Among free listing informants, there were many gappers such as college students who took years off to have more diverse experiences, military men in their “precious” week-long vacations, and soon-to-graduate high-schoolers waiting for their letters of admission to college.

Railo experiences, especially for these gappers, were “the best opportunity to get out of their routines and refresh.”

I made a Railo trip when I got my week-long vacation during my military service. It was the time to enjoy freedom as well as the time to refresh. (Male Railer, age 23)

I was overwhelmed by much stress about my career and experienced a slump. Railo experience was the time for me to refresh and organize my thoughts. I really enjoyed ‘leaving’ itself. Railo was the “freedom for 7 days” to me. (Female Railer, age 19)

114

Although Railers considered Railo experiences as similar to other general trips, they also admitted that the main mode of transportation, trains, made Railo more attractive. Railers said they couldn’t think about Railo without trains. This notion was reinforced through the free listing results which indicated that train was ranked first with

121 counts. One Railer mentioned, “Traveling with a well-developed route is very important because we travel basically based the train schedules during the limited time.”

In addition, Railers became very familiar with trains through their Railo experiences.

Train station employees also agreed that Railo has contributed to the increased level of awareness of trains.

The image of train has been changed much among young people through their Railo experiences. They thought it was something that was not familiar to them in the past, but now they considered it as a symbol of freedom, leaving, and slowness. (Daejeon station employee, early 30s)

The fact that we travel by train means a lot. Most young people have not much experiences of being on train. The leaving by train itself is very attractive to us. (Female Railer, age 22)

I love Railo because I can enjoy time on train. It is just perfect to enjoy scenery, meet other Railers, have time for myself, and sometimes be inspired! (Female Railer, age 21)

All about communication based on the identity as a Railer

Passengers traveling with a Railo pass like to call themselves “Railer.” That is, during their Railo experiences, they wanted to enjoy “being a Railer.” They mentioned that their identity as a Railer made them feel good about themselves and free to initiate a conversation with other Railers. The identity as a Railer was the key element of Railo experiences.

115

Based on the same identity, Railers, we can freely join each other’s travel schedule. We can find travel partners or carpools on By Train. It’s always fun to get to know other Railers at guesthouses, too. Since all the Railers are in the same age range, we often feel a strong bonding and even a sense of belonging to this group of Railers. (Male Railer, age 25)

Railers emphasized that Railo experiences are about meeting local residents at destinations as well as other Railers. They said that it’s now common to hear the question, “Are you a Railer?” from local residents. Railers who traveled alone mentioned that they could have more conversations with locals because they were by themselves.

Above all, getting to know people living in other regions is very much inspiring in Railo experiences. I believe, as much as we communicate with them, we can make “real” trips. The beauty of Railo is the communication with other people. (Male Railer, age 24)

Railers agreed that the communication with other people helped them to get to know more about themselves, which is another important part of Railo experiences.

During their Railo trips, they could organize their thoughts and search for their identity.

After the long suppressed period of being a teenager in a highly structured education system with limited opportunities to experience the world, Railo provides Railers, mainly college students, unforgettable experiences.

Korean students mostly suffer from social pressure. Railo trips provide us the opportunity to build up our own perspectives to the world while we communicate with others who have different viewpoints on the road. (Female Railer, age 22)

During the Railo trips, I got to meet a number of travelers as well as residents. I like Railo so much because, through communications with them, I can find myself and get to know more about myself such as what I like and not, what I can handle and not, and what I think about a certain situation or phenomenon. (Female Railer, age 23)

116

The opportunity to rediscover Korea

Interestingly, many Railers associated their Railo experience with the rediscovery of their own nation. Although they are all Koreans and have lived in Korea much if not all of their life, they have had limited opportunities to look around the country. Unlike any previous travel experiences in Korea, the Railo experience is the one that Railers plan and initiate by themselves. Thus, they become more passionate about learning more about destinations before, during, and even after their trips.

I was born in the rural community on Ganghwa Island. Since my Island is full of beautiful nature, I was so used to have it around, which made me wonder why so many people come to visit my home Island. However, through Railo experiences, I got a chance to rediscover the country where I live. I didn’t know Korea has so much different culture and nature in each region. I love to experience local characteristics. (Male Railer, age 25)

As you might have noticed from my strong accent, I was born in Busan. When I did Railo, I went to the other part of the country such as Jeolla or Gangwon areas. Some older adults in those regions were first hesitant to talk to me when they heard my accent. But later on, I got to learn more about the local culture in these regions. I think Railo experiences are about breaking the wall between regions and getting to know each other’s culture. (Female Railer, age 25)

As Railers begin to understand the natural resources and cultures of other regions in Korea, they realize Korea has much more beautiful natural and cultural assets than they thought. The bias that there is not much to see in Korea has been changed through their Railo experiences. They even feel a strong attachment to the country and a sense of belonging, which has led them to plan future Railo trips or other types of domestic travel.

During my Railo trips, I felt so blessed to be a Korean. I thought Korea is such a wonderful nation to visit. I got much more attached to my country. (Female Railer, age 25)

117

I learned Korea has lots of beautiful places to visit. It was my first-time Railo, but I would definitely love to do it again and visit the other parts of the countries that I missed this time. (Female Railer, age 23)

Cultural Consensus Analysis Results

A list of items about the Railo experience was created based on Railers’ responses to interview questions (i.e., “Please describe your Railo experiences” and “What can you experience through Railo?”) and the free listing survey (i.e., “Please list the things you can think of about Railo”). 38 items were selected to create the questionnaire for cultural consensus analysis.

A total of 30 responses were randomly chosen out of the 218 responses to the on- line questionnaire for cultural consensus analysis. Then, in an effort to document that cultural consensus exists among Railers, I ran a unweighted least squares factor analysis

(no rotation) using SPSS 18.0 with the transposed matrix where the rows were items and columns were respondents. The results suggested that the following criteria were met and cultural consensus exists (Gatewood & Cameron, 2009): The ratio of the first to second eigenvalue was 4.981, which was over the cut-off ratio of 3 to 1; all the loadings on the first factor were positive and its mean score was .631 (Table 3-7). In addition, the reliability coefficient was higher than .65 (Cronbach’s alpha= .95).

Table 3-7. Consensus Findings from 30 Randomly-Chosen Participants (Cronbach’s alpha= .95) Percentage of Cumulative Factor Eigenvalue Ratio Variance Explained Percentage 1 12.533 41.776 41.776 4.981 2 2.516 8.387 50.163 1.358 3 1.853 6.176 56.339 *Mean 1st factor loading = .631, with 0 negative loadings

118

Given that there is a high agreement regarding the Railo experience among 30 randomly-chosen informants, a few more analyses were conducted with subgroups. Data were categorized by gender (male/female), age (19-25), and the number of Railo experiences (first-time/repeat). Thirty respondents were randomly selected in each subgroup. The results indicated that each analysis result showed high agreement with the mean first factor loadings over .5 and no negative loadings. Also, according to the correlation results, there were no significant differences in their cultural knowledge by subgroup.

First, in 30 randomly-chosen male and 30 randomly-chosen female informants, the first factor in each group accounted for 37.05% of total variance for Railo experience.

The ratio of the first to second eigenvalue was 4.381 in the male group and 4.203 in the female group. The mean first factor loading was .588 in male and .585 in female with no negative loadings (Table 3-8).

Table 3-8. Consensus Findings from 30 Male and 30 Female Random Participants Percentage of Cumulative Eigenvalue Ratio Factor Variance Explained Percentage M F M F M F M F 1 11.115 11.116 37.051 37.054 37.051 37.054 4.381 4.203 2 2.537 2.645 8.457 8.816 45.508 45.870 1.234 1.163 3 2.057 2.274 6.855 7.581 52.363 53.451 * Male group: Mean 1st factor loading = .631, with 0 negative loadings * Female group: Mean 1st factor loading = .585, with 0 negative loadings

The cultural answer keys between male and female can be found in Table 3-9.

The correlation coefficient (Spearman’s rho) of cultural knowledge between male and

119

female was .924. With the alpha level of .01, this means there is no significant difference between them (Table 3-10).

Table 3-9. Cultural Answer Keys of Each Item (by gender) Items Overall Rank Male Rank Female Rank 1. Experience something new 4.81 1 4.60 2 4.76 1 2. Make memories 4.81 2 4.56 3 4.73 2 3. Take pictures 4.68 3 4.43 8 4.49 7 4. Have time for myself 4.62 4 4.49 5 4.48 8 5. Feel freedom 4.60 5 4.69 1 4.40 9 6. Select appropriate accommodations 4.57 6 4.44 6 4.68 3 7. Plan a trip myself 4.54 7 4.52 4 4.52 6 8. Get out of daily routines 4.48 8 4.37 10 4.58 5 9. Get information from online community 4.45 9 4.44 7 4.21 16 (e.g., By Train) 10. Enjoy nature 4.45 10 4.26 11 4.31 12 11. Use smart devices during the trip 4.44 11 4.24 12 4.34 10 12. Prepare travel necessities 4.40 12 4.43 9 4.58 4 13. Take advantage of Railo plus benefits 4.33 13 4.04 19 3.74 25 14. Have a rest 4.24 14 4.20 13 4.31 11 15. Deal with hardship 4.21 15 3.81 22 4.22 14 16. Try adventures during the trip 4.12 16 3.58 27 3.92 20 17. Get to know more about Korea 4.11 17 4.13 15 4.30 13 18. Communicate with other Railers 4.10 18 4.16 14 3.95 19 19. Visit local restaurants 4.06 19 3.86 21 3.84 23 20. Visit cultural and historic sites 4.04 20 4.08 17 4.21 15 21. Get to know my own travel preference 4.00 21 3.94 20 4.03 18 22. Feel pride as a Korean 3.97 22 4.05 18 3.92 21 23. Feel the beauty of train trips 3.95 23 4.12 16 3.86 22 24. Travel all around Korea 3.94 24 3.73 24 3.81 24 25. Pre-research about destinations 3.90 25 3.65 26 4.14 17 26. Share travel experiences (via blogs, SNS, 3.76 26 3.74 23 3.53 30 or online communities) 27. Practice a backpacking trip 3.72 27 3.40 31 3.69 27 28. Make a budget travel 3.72 28 3.56 28 3.72 26 29. Get familiar with train 3.59 29 3.54 29 3.22 33 30. Communicate with local residents 3.50 30 3.70 25 3.66 28 31. Spend time with friends (including 3.35 31 3.35 32 3.31 32 boyfriend/girlfriend) 32. Feel belonged to the group of Railers 3.31 32 3.45 30 3.42 31 33. Get help from Korail or station employees 3.25 33 3.19 33 3.57 29 34. Enjoy sport and leisure activities 2.92 34 2.62 35 2.68 37 35. Collect stamp marks from train stations 2.77 35 2.38 38 3.12 34 36. Experience a city tour 2.72 36 2.42 37 2.92 35 37. Buy local goods 2.66 37 2.51 36 2.88 36 38. Visit family and friends living in other 2.62 38 2.89 34 2.53 38 regions

120

Table 3-10. Correlation Analysis Result (by gender) Male Female Male 1 Female .924** 1 ** Correlation is significant at the .01 level

Second, in each subgroup, 30 informants were randomly selected for 5 age groups

(i.e., 19, 22, 23, 24, & 25). In the 20 and 21-year-old age groups, the number of informants was smaller because the total number available was less than 30 (25 informants in the 20-year-old age group and 29 informants in the 21-year-old age group).

The first factor in each age group accounted for 36.75 to 41.08% of the total variance for

Railo experience. All of the ratios for the first to second eigenvalue ranged from 3.94 to

5.91. And, the range of the mean first factor loadings was .574 to .629 (Table 3-11).

Table 3-11. Consensus Findings from Randomly-Chosen Participants (by age) Age Mean 1st factor Number of Percentage of Eigenvalue ratio loadings negative loadings variance explained 19 (n=30) .581 0 36.752 3.935 20 (n=25) .592 0 38.324 3.961 21 (n=29) .574 0 38.519 4.660 22 (n=30) .594 0 37.583 4.797 23 (n=30) .629 0 41.075 4.777 24 (n=30) .589 0 37.568 4.812 25 (n=30) .609 0 39.359 5.098

The cultural answer keys by age can be found in Table 3-12. All the correlation coefficients for the cultural knowledge of each age group were significant at the .01 level.

There was no significant difference in cultural knowledge by age (Table 3-13).

121

Table 3-12. Cultural Answer Keys of Each Item (by age)

Items All Ra 19 R 20 R 21 R 22 R 23 R 24 R 25 R 1. Experience something new 4.81 1 4.63 2 4.74 1 4.87 1 4.55 5 4.47 2 4.45 1 4.66 2 2. Make memories 4.81 2 4.61 4 4.73 2 4.78 2 4.44 11 4.53 1 4.41 2 4.61 4 3. Take pictures 4.68 3 4.65 1 4.62 5 4.46 10 4.53 7 4.36 5 4.27 6 4.43 11 4. Have time for myself 4.62 4 4.30 9 4.57 6 4.70 4 4.48 8 4.25 7 4.24 7 4.56 7 5. Feel freedom 4.60 5 4.51 6 4.63 4 4.70 3 4.53 6 4.38 4 4.41 3 4.61 5 6. Select appropriate 4.57 6 4.57 5 4.46 10 4.65 6 4.59 4 4.21 8 4.20 8 4.54 8 accommodations 7. Plan a trip myself 4.54 7 4.36 8 4.53 8 4.50 8 4.60 3 4.46 3 4.39 4 4.43 10 8. Get out of daily routines 4.48 8 4.63 3 4.54 7 4.68 5 4.64 2 4.16 11 4.33 5 4.66 1 9. Get information from 4.45 9 4.04 13 4.11 15 4.31 13 4.44 10 4.21 9 3.90 16 4.65 3 online community (e.g., By Train) 10. Enjoy nature 4.45 10 4.01 14 4.10 17 4.18 15 4.20 15 4.20 10 4.02 14 4.56 6 11. Use smart devices during 4.44 11 4.10 12 4.10 16 4.34 12 4.30 12 4.14 12 4.04 13 4.36 12 the trip 12. Prepare travel necessities 4.40 12 4.39 7 4.67 3 4.51 7 4.67 1 4.28 6 4.08 11 4.20 15 13. Take advantage of Railo 4.33 13 4.17 11 4.52 9 4.11 17 3.91 23 3.87 16 3.79 20 3.75 24 plus benefits 14. Have a rest 4.24 14 4.23 10 4.38 11 4.46 9 4.47 9 4.03 14 4.11 10 4.43 9 15. Deal with hardship 4.21 15 3.94 17 4.18 13 4.20 14 4.24 13 3.64 24 3.86 17 3.99 19 16. Try adventures during the 4.12 16 3.35 29 3.73 22 3.95 21 3.88 25 3.27 28 3.42 25 3.80 23 trip 17. Get to know more about 4.11 17 3.88 20 4.00 18 3.98 20 4.16 16 3.95 15 4.05 12 4.28 13 Korea 18. Communicate with other 4.10 18 3.34 30 4.17 14 3.88 22 3.92 22 3.73 19 3.83 18 3.51 29 Railers 19. Visit local restaurants 4.06 19 3.89 19 3.97 19 4.04 19 4.10 17 4.07 13 3.45 24 3.85 20 20. Visit cultural and historic 4.04 20 3.75 24 3.65 26 3.83 23 4.06 19 3.71 20 3.98 15 4.27 14 sites 21. Get to know my own 4.00 21 3.81 23 3.70 23 4.39 11 4.10 18 3.71 21 3.81 19 4.01 17 travel preference 22. Feel pride as a Korean 3.97 22 3.84 22 3.69 25 3.79 26 3.96 21 3.70 22 3.74 21 3.99 18

122

Table 3-12 Continued. Items All Ra 19 R 20 R 21 R 22 R 23 R 24 R 25 R 23. Feel the beauty of train 3.95 23 3.98 15 3.86 20 4.11 16 3.97 20 3.68 23 4.13 9 4.19 16 trips 24. Travel all around Korea 3.94 24 3.90 18 3.74 21 3.59 29 3.75 26 3.83 17 3.36 26 3.58 28 25. Pre-research about 3.90 25 3.98 16 4.25 12 4.10 18 4.22 14 3.74 18 3.62 23 3.85 21 destinations 26. Share travel 3.76 26 3.63 25 3.49 28 3.80 24 3.69 28 3.37 26 3.72 22 3.71 26 experiences (via blogs, SNS, or online communities) 27. Practice a backpacking 3.72 27 3.31 31 3.26 32 3.78 27 3.60 29 3.20 29 3.32 29 3.41 30 trip 28. Make a budget travel 3.72 28 3.85 21 3.70 24 3.79 25 3.90 24 3.64 25 3.36 27 3.82 22 29. Get familiar with train 3.59 29 3.46 26 3.29 31 3.61 28 3.75 27 3.12 30 3.24 31 3.71 25 30. Communicate with 3.50 30 3.09 33 3.61 27 3.40 30 3.51 31 3.28 27 3.33 28 3.39 31 local residents 31. Spend time with friends 3.35 31 3.27 32 3.44 29 3.13 32 3.35 32 3.00 32 3.03 33 2.81 34 (including boyfriend/girlfriend) 32. Feel belonged to the 3.31 32 3.45 27 3.08 33 2.93 34 3.58 30 3.05 31 3.29 30 3.21 33 group of Railers 33. Get help from Korail or 3.25 33 3.35 28 3.41 30 3.20 31 3.29 33 2.84 33 3.09 32 3.66 27 station employees 34. Enjoy sport and leisure 2.92 34 2.63 37 2.74 37 2.81 35 2.66 37 2.43 37 2.77 35 2.66 35 activities 35. Collect stamp marks 2.77 35 2.71 36 3.05 34 3.05 33 2.87 36 2.71 34 2.87 34 3.30 32 from train stations 36. Experience a city tour 2.72 36 2.75 35 2.77 36 2.72 36 3.03 34 2.61 35 2.67 36 2.45 36 37. Buy local goods 2.66 37 2.50 38 2.72 38 2.66 37 2.61 38 2.56 36 2.14 38 2.45 37 38. Visit family and friends 2.62 38 2.90 34 2.83 35 2.50 38 2.91 35 2.26 38 2.36 37 2.33 38 living in other regions a R: Rank

123

Table 3-13. Correlation Analysis Result (by age) age 19 age 20 age 21 age 22 age 23 age 24 age 25 age 19 1 age 20 .929** 1 age 21 .921** .936** 1 age 22 .930** .921** .947** 1 age 23 .927** .934** .918** .928** 1 age 24 .910** .907** .946** .925** .921** 1 age 25 .893** .834** .922** .915** .894** .924** 1 ** Correlation is significant at the .01 level

Third, after randomly grouping respondents by their number of experiences (i.e., first time Railers (n=30) vs. repeat Railers (n=30)), the first factor accounted for 35.51% of total variance for first time Railers’ Railo experience and 37.25% of total variance for repeat Railers’ Railo experience. The ratio of the first to second eigenvalue was 4.06 in the first-time group and 3.52 in the repeat group. The mean first factor loading was .569 for the first-time group and .582 for the repeat group with no negative loadings (Table 3-

14).

Table 3-14. Consensus Findings from 30 First-time Railers and 30 Repeat Railers Percentage of Cumulative Eigenvalue Ratio Factor Variance Explained Percentage First-time (F) Repeated (R) F R F R F R 1 10.652 11.176 35.508 37.252 35.508 37.252 4.059 3.519 2 2.625 3.176 8.749 10.587 44.257 47.840 1.172 1.482 3 2.240 2.144 7.467 7.146 51.724 54.986 * First-time group: Mean 1st factor loading = .569, with 0 negative loadings * Repeated group: Mean 1st factor loading = .582, with 0 negative loadings

The cultural answer keys by number of Railo experiences can be found in Table

3-15. The correlation coefficient of cultural knowledge between first-time Railers and repeated Railers was .937 at the alpha level of .01. There was no significant difference in cultural knowledge between Railers by years of experiences (Table 3-16).

124

Table 3-15. Cultural Answer Keys of Each Item (by years of experiences) Items Overall Rank First-time Rank Repeated Rank 1. Experience something new 4.81 1 4.78 2 4.65 3 2. Make memories 4.81 2 4.81 1 4.69 1 3. Take pictures 4.68 3 4.77 3 4.56 5 4. Have time for myself 4.62 4 4.69 4 4.51 6 5. Feel freedom 4.60 5 4.65 7 4.42 8 6. Select appropriate 4.57 6 4.59 9 4.60 4 accommodations 7. Plan a trip myself 4.54 7 4.65 8 4.67 2 8. Get out of daily routines 4.48 8 4.68 5 4.46 7 9. Get information from online 4.45 9 4.49 11 4.31 10 community (e.g., By Train) 10. Enjoy nature 4.45 10 4.45 12 4.23 11 11. Use smart devices during the trip 4.44 11 4.38 14 3.93 20 12. Prepare travel necessities 4.40 12 4.65 6 4.42 9 13. Take advantage of Railo plus 4.33 13 4.26 15 3.92 21 benefits 14. Have a rest 4.24 14 4.52 10 4.23 12 15. Deal with hardship 4.21 15 4.04 21 4.13 15 16. Try adventures during the trip 4.12 16 4.09 19 3.61 26 17. Get to know more about Korea 4.11 17 4.40 13 4.09 16 18. Communicate with other Railers 4.10 18 4.25 16 4.03 18 19. Visit local restaurants 4.06 19 4.02 23 4.15 13 20. Visit cultural and historic sites 4.04 20 4.17 18 4.14 14 21. Get to know my own travel 4.00 21 4.08 20 4.01 19 preference 22. Feel pride as a Korean 3.97 22 3.91 26 3.86 22 23. Feel the beauty of train trips 3.95 23 4.22 17 4.03 17 24. Travel all around Korea 3.94 24 3.99 24 3.86 23 25. Pre-research about destinations 3.90 25 3.95 25 3.85 24 26. Share travel experiences (via 3.76 26 4.03 22 3.50 29 blogs, SNS, or online communities) 27. Practice a backpacking trip 3.72 27 3.81 28 3.35 30 28. Make a budget travel 3.72 28 3.87 27 3.71 25 29. Get familiar with train 3.59 29 3.52 31 3.14 32 30. Communicate with local residents 3.50 30 3.44 32 3.51 28 31. Spend time with friends 3.35 31 3.08 35 3.56 27 (including boyfriend/girlfriend) 32. Feel belonged to the group of 3.31 32 3.63 29 3.12 33 Railers 33. Get help from Korail or station 3.25 33 3.59 30 3.35 31 employees 34. Enjoy sport and leisure activities 2.92 34 3.01 36 2.84 36 35. Collect stamp marks from train 2.77 35 3.17 33 2.74 37 stations 36. Experience a city tour 2.72 36 3.14 34 2.92 34 37. Buy local goods 2.66 37 2.48 38 2.88 35 38. Visit family and friends living in 2.62 38 2.54 37 2.64 38 other regions

125

Table 3-16. Correlation Analysis Result (by years of experiences) First-time Repeated First-time 1 Repeated .937** 1 ** Correlation is significant at the .01 level

In summary, the result shows cultural consensus of Railo experience among

Railers and each subgroup (i.e., gender, age, and years of experiences). There were no significant differences in Railers’ cultural knowledge by subgroup.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the Railo experience unites

Railers in a single coherent culture. To address the study purpose, three research questions were examined: How do Railers describe their Railo experiences?; Do Railers agree on a shared cultural model of the Railo experience?; When Railo culture exists, is there variation of Railers’ cultural knowledge by subgroups (i.e., gender, age, and years of experiences)?

The results suggest that Railers considered Railo as a coherent experience associated with a train trip with a Railo pass. Railo experiences covered the entire process from the purchase of the pass before the trip to the sharing of their Railo experience after the trip. The experiences also influenced Railers to become “belongers” to Korea as though they were strangers before while being citizens. When the elements of rail travel and tourism met, young generations who haven’t planned much travel in the context of their own country, created an emerging phenomenon as well as a total experience named

“Railo.”

126

In addition, the results indicated that Railo is a single coherent culture among

Railers according to Gatewood and Cameron’s (2009) criteria for determining consensus.

There was a “moderately high agreement” (Weller, 2007, p. 360) present in the response data regarding the cultural domain of Railo experiences as they showed their desire to group themselves and even generated a newly-coined word, “Railers.” Moreover, in all subgroups by gender, age, and years of experiences, there was not much difference in cultural knowledge in Railo experiences.

This study supports the determination of whether Railo culture exists by using

Romney et al.’s (1986) method of cultural consensus analysis based on their theory of culture as consensus. Since the coherence of the cultural domain, Railo experience, was confirmed, this study supports a new view that a transportation pass can create a travel culture. Although Korail offered nothing but a rail pass exclusively for people 25 years of age and under, an agreed-upon travel culture was developed among passengers traveling with it. Unlike the case of Wayfarer in UK, which was intended to drive a modal shift and promote domestic travel, Railo has resulted in “unintended” success in the area of domestic tourism, and now is cited as a popular “culture code” among youth in Korea. A mode of public transport has become a source of single coherent culture which not only encourages inflows of young populations to rural areas but also provides an opportunity for sustainable domestic tourism. The results also provide support for practitioners’ efforts to improve Railo based on characteristics of this cultural group, and to create a synergy between tourism and transportation.

127

Theoretically, this study contributes more knowledge to existing literature on railway and youth tourism. First, this study provides more detailed understanding of

Railers’ perception of their experience focusing not only on their rail travel experience as a passenger, but also on their total domestic tourism experience as a tourist. Little attention has been given to the understanding of railway users since the distinction between local users and tourist users was difficult (Lumsdon & Page, 2004). Most researchers have focused on the quality of train service (Cavana, Corbett, & Lo, 2007;

Nathanail, 2008; Wardman, 1994), traveling time of train (Bel, 1997; Lyons, Jain, &

Holley, 2007), and satisfaction of the rail passengers (Givoni & Rietveld, 2007).

However, the main purpose of Railers’ rail use is quite clear; to gain access on domestic tourism resources and, secondarily, to have identity as a Railer. Considering the lack of understanding of rail users who intend to make tourism experiences via train, it is meaningful that this study illustrated rail users’ perception of the train as well as of their rail experiences extended to their identity as a Railer and their attachment to the country.

Second, young travelers’ shared culture was examined in the domestic tourism context. Despite the importance of youth tourists as potential future tourists (Bywater,

1993; Richards & Wilson, 2003), youth tourism study has been marginalized (Theuns,

1991). International backpackers or study abroad programs have been a major topic of youth tourists, but most research is yet limited to the international context (Cohen, 2010;

Hampton, 2010) with an exception of a few areas such as spring break phenomenon in which students leave for getting away rather than traveling around. This study provided

128 an understanding of domestic youth backpackers in Korea which could be the foundation of sustainable domestic tourism development.

In terms of the method, cultural consensus analysis was very helpful in producing insights into a novel travel phenomenon. It provided rich and in-depth understanding of

Railo using data rooted in ethnographic methods such as observations, interviews, and freelisting surveys (Paolisso, 2007). In part, the success of this method was possible thanks to Railers’ passion for sharing their Railo experience and their interest in this study throughout the multi-phased data collection process.

Railo is a cultural phenomenon and it exists as a culture code among youth in

Korea. Considering the influence of Railo, its evolution is important to expand Railers’ experiences as well as encouraging sustainable domestic tourism. It is a representative travel culture in Korea, one which may appeal to foreign visitors as well as domestic tourists. The cooperation between public transport and tourism should be applicable to the context of domestic tourism in other countries or regions. It can provide a strong booster of domestic travel and a unique travel culture may arise.

Managerial Implications

There are several managerial implications from this study. First, Korail needs to recognize that Railo is not just a rail pass, but rather is a culture. Railers have formed a travel culture through Railo. Also, they are active producers of information as well as potential future visitors to Korea. It would be important to communicate with them and develop an understanding of this cultural group about their reasons of traveling with

129

Railo, characteristics of their travel preference, and their expectations and actual experiences.

Second, linking other public transport to rail would also widen the scope of Railo experiences. Despite the well-established Korean railroad system, there are some areas which can’t be reached by train. Some train stations in the southern area offer discounts for air and accommodations on Jeju Island to Railers who purchase Railo passes from those train stations. However, there are limited opportunities for Railers who want to visit other destinations where they must use a bus or ferry. A multi-modal ticket similar to

Wayfarer should be considered.

Third, continuous cooperation between Korail and local tourism planners is essential to encourage visits to rural areas among Railers. Railers have been fascinated by the beauty of the culture and nature in Korea through their Railo experiences. Also, they value the time spent on the railroad as much as their time at the destinations. Korail and local tourism planners need to manage the quality of the existing offers for Railers (e.g., discounts on city tour buses, accommodations, and local recreation activities) and develop more diverse programs. Improved systems and more qualified programs associated with Railo would expand and enrich Railers’ experiences. A Railo culture will evolve.

130

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

The results of this study have contributed to an expansion of knowledge about a novel cultural travel phenomenon, Railo and built the bridge between transportation and tourism culture by confirming Railo as a single coherent culture. Despite its contributions, there are several areas to be investigated in future research. First, cultural consensus analysis is based on informants’ belief about a certain cultural domain. It means that their responses may not be identical with their actual behaviors. Dressler and

Bindon (2000) introduced the concept of cultural consonance, the degree to which informants’ behavior matches with their cultural belief. It would be useful to apply this concept to examine Railo culture in order to understand Railers’ beliefs and actual behaviors.

Second, this study doesn’t include a large number of informants although it was sufficient for the methods applied in this study. Considering the substantial number of

Railo passes purchased, a large-scale survey that includes a larger sample would add to the understanding of Railo culture. Based on this initial research, Railers’ expectations, their motivations, and level of satisfaction could be examined in the future to expand knowledge about Railo.

Third, this study covers the overall phenomenon about Railo rather than a trend in a time sequence. It’s been 6 years since Railo was introduced in 2007. The number of passes purchased in 2012 is about the same as in 2011 after the remarkable increase in the purchase trend during 2007-2011. In the future, it would be useful to conduct research from a longitudinal perspective to examine how this culture evolves and changes.

131

Lastly, the main target of this study was Railers although there are a number of other stakeholders such as Korail, local residents, and local tourism governments. It is certain that Railo has influenced many elements in domestic tourism. However, there might be some drawbacks from other parties’ perspectives behind the success of Railo.

For example, carrying capacity of transportation as well as local resources could be considered for sustainable domestic tourism. The impact of Railo on rail use and domestic tourism needs to be further investigated.

132

References

Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 211-227.

Bel, G. (1997). Changes in travel time across modes and its impact on the demand for

inter-urban rail travel. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and

Transportation Review, 33(1), 43-52.

Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches (5th edition). Lanham, MD: Altamira Press.

Borgatti, S. (1994). Cultural domain analysis. Journal of Quantitative Anthropology, 4(4),

261-278.

Borgatti, S. (1999). Elicitation techniques for cultural domain analysis. In J. Schensul &

M. LeCompte (Eds.), The Ethnographer’s Toolkit, Vol. 3. Walnut Creek, CA:

Altimira Press.

Brown, D. E. (1991). Human universals. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Bywater, M. (1993). The youth and student travel market. Travel & Tourism Analyst, 3,

35-50.

Caulkins, D. & Hyatt, S. B. (1999). Using consensus analysis to measure cultural

diversity in organizations and social movements. Field Methods, 11(1), 5-26.

Cavana, R. Y., Corbett, L. M., & Lo, Y. G. (2007). Developing zones of tolerance for

managing passenger rail service quality. International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management, 24(1), 7-31.

133

Chick, G. (2006). Leisure and cultural identity. In E. Jackson (Ed.), Leisure and the

quality of life: Impacts on social, economic and cultural development (pp. 164-178).

Hangzhou, China: Zhejiang University Press.

Chick, G. (2013). Leisure in culture. In T. Blackshaw (Ed.), The Routledge International

Handbook of Leisure Studies. London: Routledge.

Cohen, S. (2010). Reconceptualising lifestyle traveler: Contemporary ‘drifter.’ In K.

Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and

experiences (pp. 8-20). Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications.

Collins, C. C. & Dressler, W. W. (2008). Cultural consensus and cultural diversity: A

mixed methods investigation of human service providers’ models of domestic

violence. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(4), 362-387

De Tommasi, R. (2003) Strong partnerships to produce effective services for the traveler:

Swiss applications of promoting sustainable recreational traffic. In ECOMM

Managing transport demand to attain sustainable transport demand and economic

effectiveness: Why and how? Karlstad, 21–23 May.

Dressler, W. W. (1996). Culture and blood pressure: Using consensus analysis to create a

measurement. Cultural Anthropology Methods, 8(3), 6-8.

Dressler, W. W. & Bindon, J. R. (2000). The health consequences of cultural consonance:

Cultural dimensions of lifestyle, social support, and arterial blood pressure in an

African American community. American Anthropologist, 102(2), 244-260.

Ember, C. R. & Ember, M. (1988). Anthopology: A brief introduction (5th edition).

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

134

Gatewood, J. & Cameron, C. (2009). Belonger perceptions of tourism and its impact in

the Turks and Caicos Islands. Retrieved on August 21, 2013 from

http://www.lehigh.edu/~jbg1/Perceptions-of-Tourism.pdf

Givoni, M. & Rietveld, P. (2007). The access journey to the railway station and its role in

passengers’ satisfaction with rail travel. Transport Policy, 14(5), 357-365.

Goodenough, W. H. (1957). Cultural anthropology and linguistics. In P. L. Garvin (Ed.),

Report of the 7th annual round table meeting on linguistics and language study,

monograph series on languages and linguistics, No. 9 (pp.167-173). Washington,

DC: Georgetown University Press.

Graburn, N. H. (1983). The anthropology of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(1),

9-33.

Halsall, D. (1982). Transport for Recreation. Lancaster: IBG Transport Geography Study

Group.

Hampton, M. (2010). Not such a rough or lonely planet? Backpacker tourism: An

academic journey. In K. Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.), Beyond backpacker

tourism: Mobilities and experiences (pp. 8-20). Bristol, UK: Channel View

Publications.

Jöreskog, K. G. (2003). Factor analysis by MINRES. Scientific Software International,

Inc. Downloaded on July 29, 2013 from

www.ssicentral.com/lisrel/techdocs/minres.pdf.

Keesing, R. (1976). Cultural anthropology. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

135

Kerstetter, D. L., Bricker, K. S., & Li, H. (2010). Vanua and the people of the Fijian

Highlands: Understanding sense of place in the context of nature-based tourism

development. Tourism Analysis, 15(1), 31-44.

Li, C., Chick, G., Zinn, H., Absher, J., & Graefe, A. (2007). Ethnicity as a variable in

leisure research. Journal of Leisure Research, 39(3), 514-545.

Loker-Murphy, L. (1996). Backpackers in Australia: a motivation-based segmentation

study. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 5(4), 23-45.

Lumsdon, L., Downward, P., & Rhoden, S. (2006). Transport for tourism: can public

transport encourage a modal shift in the day visitor market? Journal of Sustainable

Tourism, 14(2), 139-156.

Lumsdon, L. & Page, S.J. (2004). Progress in transport and tourism research:

Reformulating the transport-tourism interface and future research agendas. In L.

Lumsdon & S.J. Page (Eds.), Tourism and Transport: Issues and Agenda for the

New Millennium (pp. 1-27). Oxford: Elsevier.

Lyons, G., Jain, J., & Holley, D. (2007). The use of travel time by rail passengers in

Great Britain. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(1), 107-

120.

Maoz, D. (2007). Backpackers’ motivations: The role of culture and nationality. Annals

of Tourism Research, 34(1), 122-140.

Miller, M., Kaneko, J., Bartram, P., Marks, J., & Brewer, D. (2004). Cultural consensus

analysis and environmental anthropology: Yellowfin tuna fishery management in

Hawaii. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(3), 289-314.

136

Nathanail, E. (2008). Measuring the quality of service for passengers on the hellenic

railways. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(1), 48-66.

Noy, C. (2004). This trip really changed me: Backpackers’ narratives of self-change.

Annals of Tourism Research, 31(1), 78-102.

O’Reilly, C. (2006). From drifter to gap year tourist: Mainstreaming backpacker travel.

Annals of Tourism Research, 33(4), 998-1017.

Page, S. (2004). Transport and Tourism. In A. Lew & C. Hall (Eds.), A companion to

tourism (pp. 146-158). Victoria, Australia: Blackwell Publishing.

Paolisso, M. (2007). Cultural models and cultural consensus of Chesapeake Bay blue

crab and oyster fisheries. NAPA Bulletin, 28(1), 123-135.

Paris, C. (2010). The virtualization of backpacker culture: Virtual mooring, sustained

interactions and enhanced mobilities. In K. Hannam & A. Diekmann (Eds.),

Beyond backpacker tourism: Mobilities and experiences (pp. 21-39). Bristol, UK:

Channel View Publications.

Richards, G. & Wilson, J. (2003). New horizons in independent youth and student travel.

A report to the international student travel confederation (ISTC) and the

association of tourism and leisure education (ATLAS). Amsterdam: International

Student Travel Confederation.

Richerson, P. J. & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human

evolution. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

137

Roberts, J. M. (1964). The self-management of cultures. In W. Goodenough (Ed.),

Explorations in cultural anthropology (pp. 433-454). New York, NY: MacGraw-

Hill.

Shim, W. (2007). The mid/long-term policy development for revitalization of domestic

tourism. Korea Culture & Tourism Institute.

Smith, C. S., Morris, M., Hill, W., Francovich, C., McMullin, J., Chavez, L., &

Rhoads, C. (2004). Cultural consensus analysis as a tool for clinic improvements.

Journal of General Internal Medicine, 19, 514-518.

Sørensen, A. (2003). Backpacker ethnography. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(4), 847-

867.

Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart &

Winston.

Romney, A. K., Batchelder, W. H., & Weller, S. C. (1987). Recent applications of

cultural consensus theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 31(2), 163-177.

Romney, A. K., Weller, S. C., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A

theory of culture and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist, 88(2), 313-338.

Theuns, L. (1991). The significance of youth tourism: Economic dimensions. Paper

presented at the WTO International Conference on Youth Tourism, New Delhi,

India.

Tyler, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture: Researches into the development of mythology,

philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom. 2 volumes. London, UK: John

Murray.

138

Wardman, M. (1994). Forecasting the impact of service quality changes on the demand

for inter-urban rail travel. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 287-306.

Weller, S. C. (2007). Cultural consensus theory: Applications and frequently asked

questions. Field Methods, 19(4), 339-368.

Weller, S. C. & Romney, A. K. (1988). Systematic data collection. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Weller, S. C., Ruebush II, T. R., & Klein, R. E. (1997). Predicting treatment-seeking

behavior in Guatemala. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 11, 224-245.

139

Appendix A

Cultural Consensus Questionnaire (English/Korean)

140

Cultural Consensus Questionnaire (English) Please rate how important each of the following items is for your Railo experience. Not Of little Somewhat Very Items important Important importance important important at all Plan a trip myself Prepare travel necessities Pre-research about destinations Take advantage of Railo plus benefits Use smart devices during the trip Get information from online community (e.g., By Train) Get familiar with train Feel the beauty of train trips Collect stamp marks from train stations Get help from Korail or station employees Visit local restaurants Buy local goods Select appropriate accommodations Experience a city tour Enjoy sport and leisure activities Spend time with friends (including boyfriend/girlfriend) Visit family and friends living in other regions Communicate with other Railers Communicate with local residents Make a budget travel Travel all around Korea Practice a backpacking trip Deal with hardship Try adventures during the trip Get to know my own travel preference Take pictures Share travel experiences (via blogs, SNS, or online communities) Enjoy nature Visit cultural and historic sites Feel pride as a Korean Feel belonged to the group of Railers Get to know more about Korea Feel freedom Experience something new Make memories Have a rest Get out of daily routines Have time for myself  What is your gender?  Male  Female  What is your age? ______ How many times have you experienced Railo? ______

141

Cultural Consensus Questionnaire (Korean)

내일로를 제대로 경험하기 위해, 다음 각각의 사항들이 얼마나 중요한지 표시해 주십시오.

전혀 별로 매우 중요하지 중요하지 보통이다 중요하다 중요하다 않다 않다

혼자 여행 계획해보기 여행 전 여행물품 준비하기 (배낭, 신발, 옷 등) 여행 전 방문예정지역에 대해 공부하기 내일로플러스 혜택 활용하기 여행 중 스마트폰, 태블릿 등 스마트 기기 사용하기 바이트레인 등 카페 또는 블로그 활용하기 기차에 익숙해지기 기차여행의 매력 느끼기 기차역에서 스탬프 모으기 코레일, 기차역 관계자 분들께 도움 받기 지역맛집 탐방하기 지역특산물 구입하기 적절한 숙박업소 (찜빌방, 모텔, 게스트하우스 등) 선택하기 시티투어 해보기 스포츠/레저 활동 즐기기 친구/이성친구와 시간 보내기 다른 지역에 살고 있는 가족/친지/친구 방문하기 다른 내일러들과 소통하기 지역주민분들과 소통하기 저렴하게 여행하기 우리나라 구석구석 전국일주하기 배낭여행 연습해보기 어려운 상황 만났을 때 대처하기 여행 중 모험해보기 자신의 여행성향 알아가기 사진으로 추억 남기기 여행경험 공유하기 (개인 블로그, 카페, SNS 등을 통해) 우리나라의 대자연 만끽하기 우리나라의 문화유산 답사하기 한국인으로서의 자부심 느끼기 내일러로서 소속감 느끼기 우리나라에 대해 더 알아가기 자유로움 느껴보기 새로운 것 경험하기 특별한 추억 만들기 휴식의 시간 가지기 일상 탈출의 시간 가지기 나만을 위한 시간 가지기 성별: 남 / 여 나이: 만 ( )세 내일로 경험회수: ( ) 회

142

Chapter 4

Railo, An Emerging Domestic Travel Phenomenon in Korea: An Examination of Motivation, Satisfaction, Attachment, and Loyalty Using Structural Equation Modeling

Abstract

This paper includes a series of hypotheses regarding several predictors of Railers’ behaviors using a survey questionnaire. To examine the structural relationship among motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used for analysis. According to the findings, a modified theoretical model was found acceptable and the results provided support for proposed hypotheses: (a) the motivation of ‘experience Korea and feel Koreanness’ significantly influenced satisfaction; (b) satisfaction was found to be an important antecedent of loyalty to Railo; (c) satisfaction with Railo experience was a predictor of attachment to the country; and (d) loyalty to domestic tourism was influenced by place dependence while the influence of place identity was not found to be significant. It provides theoretical and practical implications based on the model tested in this study.

143

Introduction

Railo is the name of a rail pass in Korea that allows passengers under age 26 to take unlimited trips for a week. Originally, the launching of the Railo pass was intended to increase the use of general trains, which has dramatically decreased after the introduction of the Korean express train (KTX) in 2004. Over the last few years, however, the Railo pass has been recognized as a privilege for youths who have chosen to take domestic backpacking via train. Passengers traveling with the Railo pass began to call themselves Railers and to use Railo as a verb to indicate “to experience domestic travels alone or with other Railers with a Railo pass.” Railo has become a cultural phenomenon among Korean youths.

In the tourism industry, it is important to predict tourists’ behaviors for the success of business. In particular, the constructs of motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty are crucial since the understanding of these concepts enables tourism managers to develop appropriate plans to achieve successful tourism operation. Researchers have found that motivation is a significant predictor of satisfaction which, in turn, influences loyalty (Yoon & Uysal, 2005). In the context of Railo, it is important to understand why

Railers have become so passionate about Railo trips, their level of satisfaction with it, and whether they are willing to repeat Railo and recommend it to friends. Despite its influence on domestic tourism and youth travel culture in Korea, Railo has not been studied by academics or by stakeholders such as the Korean Railroad Corporate (Korail) and local tourism governments.

Travelers often feel strong attachment to a certain destination or place. According to previous research, attachment is closely related with travelers’ satisfaction and loyalty

144

(George & George, 2004; Lee & Allen, 1999; Lee, Graefe, & Burns, 2007; Yüksel,

Yüksel, & Bilim, 2010). When individuals travel domestically they tend to develop a sense of identity or belonging while visiting national cultural heritage or natural resource sites (Palmer, 1999; Park, 2010). While they keep moving around the country, an attachment is often aroused not just to a specific place, but to their own nation itself.

Preliminary research indicates that a number of Railers showed a high level of satisfaction with their Railo experiences and felt strong attachment to the country during their trips (see Chapters 2 & 3). Considering the influence of attachment on domestic tourism, attachment also deserves a closer look.

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is a powerful statistical procedure that enables researchers to examine relationships among multiple latent variables (Reisinger

& Turner, 1999). Based on the literature reviewed, this study will offer a hypothetical research model and test it to provide theoretical and practical implications for the sustainable and successful operation of Railo. In that there has not been systemic research about Railo, this study will also provide a number of insights for future research.

Literature Review

Motivation, Satisfaction, and Loyalty

Tourist motivation is “the combination of needs and desires that affect the propensity to travel in a general sense” (O’Leary & Deegan, 2005, p. 247). Despite the existence of other influencing factors, motivation is one of the essential indicators of tourists’ behaviors (Crompton, 1979). Two popular concepts have been used to examine tourist motivations: push-pull factors and seeking-avoidance factors. Push factors are

145

associated with tourists’ internal desire (e.g., rest, adventure, family get-together, social interaction) while pull factors come from the external attractiveness of a destination (e.g., natural settings, shopping, entertainment, tourist facilities) (Dann, 1977). Seeking- avoidance indicates the two spectrums of tourists’ desire to seek more experience on one side and to get away from daily routines on the other side (Iso-Ahola, 1982).

Tourist satisfaction plays a crucial role in successful tourism management. It exerts significant influence on the development of loyalty (Dann, 1977). Some scholars have examined the relationship between motivation and satisfaction (Chon, 1989; Yoon

& Uysal 2005; Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991). Understanding tourist motivation would help a destination manager to organize tourism facilities or programs in a certain way to increase the level of tourist satisfaction. There are several useful models to measure tourist satisfaction. First, one can examine if expectations were met during the travel experiences (Oliver, 1980). Second, perceived values of tourism experiences can be compared with tourists’ investment of time and money (Oliver & Swan, 1989). Third, tourists can compare their current experiences with travel in the past (Cadotte, Woodruff,

& Jenkins, 1987). Fourth, satisfaction can be measured by overall perception of the tourism experiences, specifically when there is no comparison standard or if someone didn’t have any expectations prior to travel (Tse & Wilton, 1988).

Loyalty has received much attention as a key strategic business goal (Oliver,

1999). Despite the lack of a concrete definition, it has been studied by many researchers from the two perspectives, affective loyalty (psychological attachment) and behavioral loyalty (conative commitment) (Petrick, 2004). In the tourism context, destination managers also tend to pursue retaining loyal patrons for successful tourism management

146

(Gitelson & Crompton, 1984; Petrick & Backman, 2001). Because of the difficulty in measuring affective loyalty, however, researchers have more focused on behavioral loyalty which was measured with intention to revisit and recommendations to others

(Oppermann, 2000).

A number of researchers have focused on these three inter-related constructs (i.e., motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty) or partial relationships among these constructs (e.g.,

Chi & Qu, 2008; Devesa, Laguna, & Palacios, 2010; Meng, Tepanon, & Uysal, 2008,

Yüksel & Yüksel, 2007) while few have examined them simultaneously (Yoon & Uysal,

2005). Yoon and Uysal (2005) tested the relationship among motivation (push & pull factors), satisfaction, and loyalty. The finding indicated that (a) loyalty is positively influenced by tourist satisfaction and (b) satisfaction is positively influenced by push factors, but negatively by pull factors. The authors also found that loyalty is directly influenced by push motivation, which implies the importance of understanding tourist motivation to build destination loyalty.

As previous research indicates, the study of motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty is important to predict tourists’ behaviors. Nevertheless, few researchers have addressed these constructs simultaneously in the domestic tourism context which could provide more extensive and comprehensive results. There is a need to fill this gap in the literature.

Attachment to the Country

People can form attachment toward people, buildings, environments, homes, objects, landscapes, neighborhoods, and towns and cities (Cresswell, 2004). In recreation and tourism, place attachment such as attachment to recreation settings (Kyle, Mowen, &

147

Tarrant, 2004; Moore & Graefe, 1994) or attachment to tourism destinations (Hou, Lin,

& Morais, 2005; Yüksel et al., 2010) has received a great deal of attention. The most popular place attachment approach includes two components, place identity and place dependence (Schreyer, Jacob, & White, 1981). Place identity refers to the self that define one’s own identity in association with the environment (Proshanky, 1978). Place dependence is related to the perceived importance and suitability of a certain place in order to enjoy pursued activities (Williams & Roggenbuck, 1989). Place identity is considered as a cognitive concept whereas place dependence is more functional

(Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001).

Nationality is “one of the principle colorings of the tourist vision” (Horne, 1984, p. 166). If the concept of attachment is expanded to the national level, it becomes highly relevant to national attachment and national identity. People often display strong affiliation with their country (Grinstein & Nisan, 2009) and patriotism which indicates love for one’s country (Schatz & Staub, 1997). In a tourism context, heritage tourism often arouses a sense of national belonging to people (Palmer, 2005). Heritage site visitors feel connected to their nation’s history and feel part of the country (Park, 2010).

An Israeli walking tour, tiyulim, is an example of tourism which promotes national attachment amongst domestic individuals (Katz, 1985).

Koreans have much pride in “Dan-il-min-jok” (people from a single origin).

However, because of several external influences such as the experiences of colonization and war, globalization, modernization, and swift economic development (Moon, 2011), some people consider their culture and history to be “taken away by someone else”

148

(Kendall, 2011, p. 6). Thus, Koreans have a tendency to seek their lost “Koreanness” with nostalgia (Cho, 1998).

Koreans have shown a huge interest in domestic cultural heritage tourism since the 1990s. The heavy influence of globalization and ease of travel led people to travel abroad but, at the same time, they also tried to keep their identity by searching for their

Korean spirit rooted in cultural heritage. Kendall (2011) summarized the key motive of

Korean domestic travels as to “seek time-machine encounters with Korean us-ness” (p.

10). Through domestic travel, people’s nationalism or patriotism is maximized and their lost identity is regained or strengthened.

Undoubtedly, attachment to the country is associated with domestic tourism.

Previous research has examined destination attachment in relation to tourists’ satisfaction and loyalty which are crucial to the successful management of tourism destinations (e.g.,

George & George, 2004; Lee & Allen, 1999; Lee, Graefe, & Burns, 2007; Yüksel et al.,

2010). However, few scholars have addressed the relationships among attachment, satisfaction, and loyalty in the context of domestic tourism. To understand the influence of Railo on domestic tourism, it is important to examine Railers’ attachment to the country and its affiliation with their satisfaction and loyalty.

Railo

Railo is a rail pass in Korea which is available for passengers under age 26 regardless of their nationality. They can use unassigned seats or standing areas of any trains12 except for KTX for unlimited times for consecutive seven days. This pass is

12 Some train (namely Saemaul-train) is equipped with unassigned seats while the other (Mugunghwa-ho)

149

offered during the two seasons every year: mid-June through early September and mid-

December through early March. Since these periods mostly overlap with college vacation seasons, college students are major users of Railo passes while a few high school students make the purchase as well. Since the introduction of Railo in 2007, the number of Railers has been dramatically increased over the last 6 years from 7,868 in 2007 to 173,654 in

201213.

Thanks to a well-established railroad system in Korea, young travelers have been able to travel all around the country for a week. After going through stressful and suppressed teenager period under the competitive education system in Korea, college students in their early twenties find Railo fascinating. The previous research (see Chapter

2) showed that there are four meanings of Railo for Railers; (a) Railo offers them a perfect opportunity to make a very first real travel experience; (b) Railo is perceived to be an “exclusive right” as well as a “rite-of-passage” for them; (c) Railo allows them to learn about the attractiveness of Korea and realize forgotten “Koreanness”; (d) Railo helps them become more skilled and thoughtful travelers during their Railo experiences.

Railers have been creating their own culture while traveling with a Railo pass and communicating via the online rail travel community, By Train. Railo is not just a rail pass now, but a travel culture code among youths since it influences domestic tourism and the youth culture in Korea. The local tourism government has begun to organize local events targeting Railers and the number of guesthouses near train stations has been increasing considerably. However, little research has been conducted about Railo. In order to

has a train of standing seats instead of unassigned seats. 13 Source: Korail Statistics.

150

achieve successful operation of Railo passes and create a synergy between Railo and domestic tourism, there is a pressing need to understand the Railo phenomenon as well as

Railers’ behaviors.

Research Purpose and Questions

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships among Railers’ motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and their attachment to the country. Prior to testing hypotheses, the concepts of motivation and attachment to the country were examined in the context of Railo using explanatory factor analysis (EFA). Here are the two initial research questions;

RQ1. What are the dimensions of Railers’ motivation?

RQ2. What are the dimensions of Railers’ attachment to the country?

Next, a series of hypotheses were tested. A hypothetical research model was developed from the literature review and preliminary analysis of the data collected during the summer of 2012 (Figure 4-1). Researchers have discussed that satisfaction is positively affected by motivation (Chon, 1989; Ross & Iso-Ahola, 1991; Qu & Ping,

1999), and loyalty is positively influenced by satisfaction (Petrick & Backman, 2001;

Yüksel et al., 2010). To have a more integrated understanding, Yoon and Uysal (2005) also tested and revealed the relationship among all three constructs. In this study, five latent variables for motivation and two for loyalty were based on the preliminary data collection (see Chapter 2) and an exploratory factor analysis (RQ1&RQ2). Satisfaction was examined as a single construct. The following hypotheses address the relationships

151

among motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty (H1&H2):

H1. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation.

H1a. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation 1 (experience Korea

& feel Koreanness).

H1b. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation 2 (get out of daily

life).

H1c. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation 3 (meet people &

enjoy local activities).

H1d. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation 4 (travel by myself).

H1e. Satisfaction is positively influenced by motivation 5 (enjoy exclusive

merits of Railo).

H2. Loyalty is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H2a. Loyalty to domestic tourism is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H2b. Loyalty to Railo is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H2b. Loyalty to train is positively influenced by satisfaction.

In this study, the concept of attachment was added to the simultaneous testing of the three constructs, motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty. Scholars also have examined the influence of attachment on satisfaction and loyalty (Scott & Vitartas, 2008). In terms of the relationship between attachment and satisfaction, some found influence of satisfaction on attachment (Brocato, 2006; Hou et al., 2005; Lee, 1999; Lee & Allen,

1999) while others discussed the effect of attachment on satisfaction (Halpenny, 2006;

152

Mowen, Graefe, & Virden, 1997; Wickham, 2000). In this study, the hypothesis (H3) was developed based on the preliminary interview result that supports the influence of satisfaction on attachment instead of vice versa (e.g., I’m very much satisfied with my

Railo experiences. I think it helped me to build a sense of attachment to my country.). In addition, the influence of attachment on loyalty to domestic tourism was hypothesized

(H4) based on the literature review (Brocato, 2006; George & George, 2004, Lee et al.,

2007). To measure attachment to the country, two dimensions (i.e., place identity and place dependence) were identified using factor analysis.

H3. Attachment is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H3a. Place identity is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H3b. Place dependence is positively influenced by satisfaction.

H4. Loyalty to domestic tourism is positively influenced by attachment.

H4a. Loyalty to domestic tourism is positively influenced by place identity.

H4b. Loyalty to domestic tourism is positively influenced by place

dependence.

Figure 4-1 below represents the hypothesized causal relationships among motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment.

153

Figure 4-1. A Hypothetical Research Model

(Note: Motivation 1= Experience Korea & feel Koreanness; Motivation 2= Get out of daily life; Motivation 3= Meet people & enjoy local activities; Motivation 4= Travel by myself; Motivation 5= Enjoy exclusive merits of Railo)

Data Collection

Data were collected using an on-line questionnaire from January to April 2013.

Before constructing the questionnaire, I conducted interviews with 10 Railers to discuss the constructs in this study (i.e., motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment). When the measurement for concepts is not clearly defined, it is helpful to ask cultural insiders for their perspectives. For example, Kerstetter, Bricker, and Li (2010) recruited 10 key informants and asked them a series of questions about “sense of place,” and then developed a questionnaire based on the interview results.

Based on the previous data collection (i.e., observation, interviews, and free listing; see Chapters 2 & 3) and the additional interviews, a questionnaire was constructed using the online survey website, Qualtrics (www.qualtrics.com). It was announced via By Train in order to reach the Railer population efficiently as well as to maximize the number of respondents. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit survey respondents because: (a) it is difficult to use a probability sampling method when a

154

sampling frame is not available; and (b) By Train is the most popular place to reach a large number of Railers because they visit this online community to communicate with other Railers and share information before, during, and after Railo trips.

An introduction to the study and the survey link were sent to 1,176 Railers who had made Railo trips between December 2012 and March 2013 via e-mails and uploaded postings on By Train during or after this time period. The decision for this sampling frame was to minimize possible errors caused by memory effects. A total of 245 Railers completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 20.83%. After incomplete questionnaires were removed, 218 surveys were used for the analysis which is sufficient to attain reliable analysis results for structural equation modeling (SEM) (Hoe, 2008).

Three survey respondents won a Railo pass for summer 2013 via random drawings.

The survey included questions that addressed the following constructs: (a)

Railers’ motivation for Railo trips; (b) Railers’ satisfaction with their Railo experiences;

(c) Railers’ attachment to Korea; (d) Railers’ loyalty towards domestic tourism and

Railo; and (e) demographic information (e.g., gender, age, number of Railo experiences).

To ensure the reliability and validity of the questionnaire, I conducted a pilot test with 20

Railers and modified it based on the feedback received.

Measurement

Motivation

A total of 23 items for motivation were specified based on the interview and free listing results (i.e., preliminary data collection; see Chapters 2 & 3) (Table 4-1). This list includes the items mentioned by at least 10% of the respondents to the free listing and the

155

additional ones added by the interviewees, including the key informant. After the development of the list, it was later reviewed by 10 Railers during the pilot test. Railers were asked to rate each item using this statement, “I experienced Railo in order to

______.” Each motivation variable was measured using 5-point Likert type scale (1= not at all related, and 5= very much related). Later, the number of variables was reduced by using exploratory factor analysis.

Table 4-1. Railers’ Motivations Derived from the Initial Data Collection

Plan a trip by myself Experience guesthouse culture Enjoy the Railo opportunity before reaching 25 Enjoy nature of Korea Experience train trips Visit historic and cultural heritage Travel all around the country Know more about Korea Practice backpacking trips Feel the pride as a Korean Visit other regions in Korea Feel belonged to a group of Railers Spend time with friends Experience something new Visit friends or relatives living in other regions Make unforgettable memories Communicate with other people (e.g., Railers, Have time for rest locals) Have time to get out of routines Try local food Have time for myself Experience adventure Enjoy various sport and leisure activities

Satisfaction

Yoon and Uysal (2005) developed a tourist satisfaction scale based on the existing consumer satisfaction theories (i.e., Cadotte, Woodruff, & Jenkins, 1987; Oliver, 1980;

Oliver & Swan, 1989; Tse & Wilton, 1988). It was found successful and thus applied to this research. Railers were asked to rate the following five questions using a 5-point

Likert scale: (a) How was your Railo experience compared to your expectation? (1= much worse than expected, and 5= much better than expected); (b) Was your Railo experience worth your time? (1= definitely not worth it, and 5= definitely well worth it);

156

(c) Was your Railo experience worth your money? (1= definitely not worth it, and 5= definitely well worth it) (d) Was your Railo experience worth your effort? (1= definitely not worth it, and 5= definitely well worth it) (e) Overall, how satisfied were you with your Railo experience? (1= not at all satisfied, and 5= very satisfied) (Table 4-2).

Table 4-2. Items for Satisfaction and Loyalty Satisfaction How was your Railo experience compared to your expectation? Was your Railo experience worth your time? Was your Railo experience worth money? Was your Railo experience worth effort? Overall, how satisfied were you with your Railo experience? Loyalty to domestic How likely will you make domestic travels in the future? tourism Will you recommend domestic travels to your friends? Loyalty to Railo During the next summer break, how likely is it that you will make another Railo trip? Will you recommend Railo to your acquaintances (e.g., friends, family, colleagues)? Loyalty to train How likely will you travel by train in the future? Will you recommend train trips to your acquaintances (e.g., friends, family, colleagues)?

Loyalty

According to previous data analysis (see Chapter 2), Railers felt strongly connected to Railo trips, domestic travels, and the mode of transportation (i.e., train). In this study, two indicators of loyalty, intention to repeat travel and intention to recommend

(Yoon & Uysal, 2005), were examined. It was subdivided in terms of the two elements, domestic travel and Railo trips because most interview respondents did not consider loyalty to be a single domain, but split it into domestic tourism and the Railo experience.

Six questions were included to examine loyalty: (a) How likely is it that you will travel domestically in the future? (1= not likely at all, and 5= very likely); (b) Will you recommend domestic travels to your acquaintances (e.g., friends, family, colleagues)?

157

(1= not likely, and 5= definitely); (c) During the next summer break, how likely is it that you will make another Railo trip? (1= not likely at all, and 5= very likely); (d) Will you recommend Railo to your friends? (1= not likely, and 5= definitely) (Table 4-2).

Attachment

The concept of attachment has been applied to specific places or destinations in recreation and tourism research. One of the frequently used measurements for attachment is Williams and Vaske’s (2003) scale which has been modified and tested in different contexts (e.g., Brocato, 2006; Kyle, Graefe, Manning, & Bacon, 2004). It consists of the two constructs, place dependence and place identity. In this study, some additional statements developed during the interviews with Railers. As a result, 3 statements for dependence, 3 statements for identity, and 3 statements specified in the context of Railo were asked to Railers (Table 4-3). Each item was developed using a 5-point Likert scale

(1= not at all; 5= absolutely). The entire items for attachment were later factor analyzed to see if the 3 additional statements load separately or attach to either one of the existing dimensions (i.e., dependence, identity).

Table 4-3. Items for Attachment

During the Railo trips, ______. Dependence I thought Korea is the best travel destination even compared to the other countries I felt more satisfied in traveling domestically (compared to traveling other countries) I thought domestic travel is more important to me (compared to traveling other countries) Identity I felt pride as a Korean I felt attached to Korea I felt a sense of belonging as a Korean From I wanted to know more about Korean culture and history interviews I felt responsibility toward Korea I felt Korea is a much greater country than I thought

158

Data Analysis

Structural equation modeling (SEM) is used to “explain the pattern of a series of inter-related dependent relationships simultaneously between a set of latent (unobserved) constructs, each measured by one or more manifest (observed) variables” (Reisinger &

Turner, 1999, p. 72). To analyze the structural relationship among the four latent constructs (i.e., motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment), SEM was applied to test hypotheses by using SPSS 19.0 and LISREL 9.1 (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996).

A two-step analysis is to assess the measurement model first and then, assess the entire model after excluding the variables removed in the first step (Anderson & Gerbing,

1988). In this study, a two-step analysis was used to minimize interpretational confounding. To test a hypothesized model, correlation matrices were used. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed prior to the two-step analysis to reduce the number of variables in the motivation construct and examine the construct of attachment. To ensure reliability and validity of the scales, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed for each construct using SPSS 19.0 (Vaske, 2008).

Results

Sample Characteristics

The sample includes Railers who experienced Railo from December 2012 to

March 2013 (Table 4-4). There was little difference in terms of gender; 54.6% of the respondents were female. A majority (97%) of the respondents were in the age range of

19 to 25 while a few high school students were still under 18. College students comprised

60.1% and there are some new hires (17.9%) who recently graduated from college. A

159

substantial portion of male respondents (12%) who identified their jobs as ‘other’ were in the middle of their military service and experienced Railo during their short leaves.

Although there were many first-time Railers (66.5%), Railers also tended to repeat Railo (32.1%). The results showed that most Railers are likely to travel alone

(43.6%) or with just one other individual (41.7%). The average travel cost for one Railo trip (for a week) was 310,240 KRW (USD 270), including the Railo ticket (56,500 KRW,

USD 50). Most Railers were budget travelers; they spent between 150,000 and 350,000

KRW (USD 130-305). With a few exceptions (7.8%), a large portion of Railers had experienced domestic travel prior to Railo experiences. The most popular types of previous domestic travel were family trips (58.7%), traveling with friends (57.3%), and school field trips (51.4%).

Table 4-4. Demographic Information of Questionnaire Respondents Categories Frequency Percent Gender Male 98 45.0 Female 119 54.6 Missing 1 0.5 Total 218 100.0 Age (Mean=22.14) 17 1 0.5 18 4 1.8 19 24 11.0 20 25 115 21 28 12.8 22 33 15.1 23 34 15.6 24 36 16.5 25 32 14.7 Missing 1 0.5 Total 218 100.0 Job High school student 1 0.5 College student 131 60.1 Graduate student 5 2.3 Worker 39 17.9 Other 40 18.3 Mising 2 0.9 Total 218 100.0

160

Table 4-4 Continued.

Categories Frequency Percent Number of Railo experiences 1 145 66.5 (Mean=1.64) 2 40 18.3 3 11 5.0 4 10 4.6 5 2 0.9 6 6 2.8 8 1 0.5 Missing 3 1.4 Total 218 100.0 Number of people you travel with 1 (traveled alone) 95 43.6 (including yourself) 2 91 41.7 (Mean=1.82) 3 12 5.5 4 9 4.1 5 or more 9 4.1 Missing 2 .9 Total 218 100.0 Average travel cost per Railo trip* 150,000-200,000 38 17.4 (including the Railo ticket cost) 200,001-250,000 34 15.6 (Mean=310,240) 250,001-300,000 68 31.2 300,001-350,000 39 17.9 350,001-400,000 16 7.3 400,001-450,000 6 2.8 450,001-500,000 8 3.6 Greater than 500,001 3 1.4 Missing 6 2.8 Total 218 100.0 Number of domestic travel experience 0 17 7.8 before Railo trips 1 6 2.8 2-3 46 21.1 4-5 42 19.3 6-7 32 14.7 8-9 8 3.7 More than 10 61 28.0 Missing 6 2.8 Total 218 100.0 The type of previous domestic travel daytrip alone 56 25.7 experience (multiple choices allowed) family trip 128 58.7 travel with friends 125 57.3 (excluding field trips) School field trips 112 51.4 Travel sponsored by 56 25.7 institutions Other 10 4.6 *KRW, 1USD=1,150 KRW

161

Measurement and Structural Modeling

This section covers the results of the three analyses. First, the result of explanatory factor analysis (EFA) that specified the factors of motivation and attachment

(RQ1 & RQ2) are reported. Second, the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results are reported to test the fit of the measurement model. Third, the result of testing a structural model is described with appropriate indices (H1-H4).

Explanatory Factor Analysis (EFA)

First, EFA was performed using SPSS 19.0 on the 23 motivation statements to reduce the number of variables. In factor analysis, it is critical to decide how to determine the number of factors (Howard & Gordon, 1963). In order to avoid over extraction, parallel analysis (PA), a technique used to determine the number of retained factors, was performed using SPSS syntax14.

PA provides a matrix random data with the identical number of variables and respondents in the research data. The eigenvalues from random matrix are compared with those from the research data before rotation. When the eigenvalues from the research data exceed the ones in PA, they are retained. The components whose eigenvalues are smaller than the respective values in parallel analysis will be considered spurious (Franklin,

Gibson, Robertson, Pohlmann, & Fralish, 1995). As Figures 4-2 and 4-3 indicate, 5 was the appropriate number of factors that needed to be used for factor analysis in this research.

14 SPSS syntax reference: https://people.ok.ubc.ca/brioconn/nfactors/nfactors.html

162

Figure 4-2. An Eigenvalue Comparison between Research Data and Random Matrix in PA Root Raw Data Means Prcntyle 1.000000 5.364145 1.643781 1.755394 2.000000 2.168922 1.535209 1.613204 3.000000 1.717391 1.451703 1.520572 4.000000 1.653462 1.380678 1.437302 5.000000 1.430477 1.317129 1.367791 6.000000 1.193285 1.258424 1.304332 7.000000 1.055143 1.205708 1.251301 8.000000 .975420 1.154447 1.196819 9.000000 .838567 1.105292 1.149720 10.000000 .752974 1.057585 1.099569 11.000000 .691677 1.012300 1.050806 12.000000 .678563 .968823 1.008371 13.000000 .603375 .925219 .964841 14.000000 .567371 .883154 .921658 15.000000 .515442 .843530 .879069 16.000000 .460473 .802947 .839969 17.000000 .397399 .762453 .801865 18.000000 .383535 .722444 .757985 19.000000 .362263 .681358 .717481 20.000000 .342637 .640156 .676156 21.000000 .294393 .598015 .637414 22.000000 .278755 .552217 .593201 23.000000 .274331 .497429 .547519

Figure 4-3. An Eigenvalue Comparison between Research Data and Random Matrix in PA (Graph)

163

Then, principal axis factoring analysis was performed with direct oblimin rotation

(Table 4-5). This method was adopted because (a) oblique rotation fits best in factor analysis where the goal is to identify theoretically meaningful factors; and (b) the assumption that factors are inter-correlated makes oblique rotation more justifiable and applicable in social sciences (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1998). The seven items not correlating at >.40 with other motivation items were removed. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p < .000) and KMO measure of sampling adequacy was .793 which is higher than .5 for the acceptable result of the variance (Ferguson & Cox, 2007).

The EFA extracted a total of 5 factors which account for 60.28%: experience Korea and feel Koreanness (variance explained=25.03%, composite mean=3.92); get out of daily life (10.88%, M=4.64); meet people & enjoy local activities (9.26%, M=3.20); travel by myself (8.14%, M=4.16); and enjoy exclusive merits of Railo (6.97%, M=3.78). Alpha reliability was examined to ensure the reliability of the scales. The alpha reliability coefficients for the first four factors were over or close to .7 (.82, .74, .69, and .72) which confirmed internal consistency (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). But alpha reliability for the last factor was .6, which was below the cut-off point. This item was removed for the confirmatory factor analysis and structural model testing.

164

Table 4-5. The Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (Railers’ Motivation) Factor Explained Cronbach Factors Mean loading variance alpha Motivation 1.Experience Korea & Feel Koreanness 25.03 .82 3.92 Know more about Korea .82 4.14 Visit historic and cultural heritage .78 3.80 Enjoy nature of Korea .71 4.17 Feel the pride as a Korean .69 3.56 Motivation 2. Get Out of Daily Life 10.88 .74 4.64 Have time to get out of routines .70 4.75 Make unforgettable memories .67 4.65 Have time for rest .65 4.49 Experience something new .62 4.67 Motivation 3. Meet People & Enjoy Local Activities 9.26 .69 3.20 Communicate with other people .70 3.26 Experience guesthouse culture .61 3.53 Visit friends or relatives living in other regions .52 2.28 Enjoy various sport and leisure activities .48 2.70 Try local food .44 4.18 Motivation 4. Travel by Myself 8.14 .72 4.16 Have time for myself -.85 4.25 Plan a trip by myself -.61 4.07 Motivation 5.Enjoy Exclusive Merits of Railo 6.97 .60 3.78 Travel all around the country .70 3.90 Experience train trips .64 4.11 Practice backpacking trips .42 3.33 Total variance explained 60.28 Note: 1=not at all related, and 5=very much related. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy = .793. Bartlett’s test of sphericity p < .000

Second, EFA was performed on the 9 attachment statements to examine the dimensions of attachment in the context of Railo (Table 4-6). The same procedure took place as above. Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (p < .000) and KMO measure of sampling adequacy was .87 which is also higher than .5 for an acceptable result.

Interestingly, the three statements derived from interviews with Railers attached to the dimension of identity. Thus, the EFA resulted in the two dimensions of attachment, identity (51.39%, M=3.86) and dependence (12.36%, M=3.95), which accounted for

165

64.75% of the total variance. The reliability coefficients (.88, .74) were far higher than the acceptable level, .7, displaying high internal consistency.

Table 4-6. The Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (Railers’ Attachment to Country) Factor Explained Cronbach Mean

loading variance alpha Attachment 1. Identity 51.39 .88 3.86 I felt a sense of belonging as a Korean .85 3.68 I felt responsibility toward Korea .81 3.67 I felt pride as a Korean .80 3.60 I felt attached to Korea .76 3.97 I wanted to know more about Korean culture .65 3.91 and history I felt Korea is a much greater country than I .59 4.31 thought Attachment 2. Dependence 12.36 .74 3.95 I thought domestic travel is more important .88 3.89 to me (compared to traveling other countries) I felt more satisfied in traveling domestically .84 3.62 (compared to traveling other countries) I thought Korea is the best travel destination .54 4.32 even compared to the other countries Total variance explained 64.75 Note: 1=not at all related, and 5=very much related. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy = .872. Bartlett’s test of sphericity p < .000

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

In the past, measurement models and structural models were tested simultaneously, which is so-called a one-step analysis. However, because of possible interpretational confounding (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988; Burt, 1976), a two-step analysis has gained popularity among researchers using SEM; the testing of measurement model occurs first, and the separate estimation of structural model comes after the respecification of the measurement model (Anderson & Gerbing, 1998).

In this research, a two-step analysis was utilized. In order to examine the reliability of each construct, first, CFA was performed on the 9 latent variables and the 35

166

observed variables, using LISREL 9.1 with maximum likelihood estimation. The correlation matrix of the responses (n=218) was used and all factors were free to correlate. The rule of thumb for the good model fit is when χ²/df ratio is less than 2.

However, since chi-square is heavily influenced by sample size, data non-normality, and model complexity (Gerbing & Anderson, 1985; Hu & Bentler, 1995), the following additional fit indices were used to determine the accurate fit of a model: root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), non-normed fit index (NNFI), comparative fit index

(CFI), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). RMSEA should lie between

.05 and .08 (Turner & Reisinger, 2001). The values of CFI and NNFI are considered ideal when they are close to 1.0 (Bryne, 1998). SRMR is considered acceptable when it’s as high as .08 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). In this research, the fit statistics suggest that the measurement model adequately fits the data with a sample size of 218 (χ²= 931.63, df=515, p=.000, RMSEA=.0609, NNFI=.936, CFI=.945, SRMR=.0612) (Table 4-7).

167

Table 4-7. Factor Loadings for Measurement Model Factor Variance Construct Items loadinga extractedb reliabilityc (t-value) (%) Exogenous variable: Motivation 1 .538 .822 Know more about Korea .784 Visit historic and cultural heritage .670 Enjoy nature of Korea .647 Feel the pride as a Korean .819 Exogenous variable: Motivation 2 .432 .750 Make unforgettable memories .573 Have time to get out of routines .750 Have time for rest .711 Experience something new .575 Exogenous variable: Motivation 3 .308 .688 Communicate with other people .615 Experience guesthouse culture .579 Visit friends or relatives living in other regions .551 Try local food .579 Enjoy various sport and leisure activities .435 Exogenous variable: Motivation 4 .309 .422 Have time for myself .264 Plan a trip by myself .741 Endogenous variable: Satisfaction .540 .853 I’m satisfied compared to expectation .623 I’m satisfied in terms of time .786 I’m satisfied in terms of money .659 I’m satisfied in terms of effort .831 Overall satisfaction .755 Endogenous variable: Place identity .562 .884 I felt a sense of belonging as a Korean .814 I felt responsibility toward Korea .796 I felt pride as a Korean .742 I felt attached to Korea .820 I wanted to know more about Korean culture and history .662 I felt Korea is a much greater country than I thought .646 Endogenous variable: Place dependence .515 .757 I thought domestic travel is more important to me (compared .797 to traveling other countries) I felt more satisfied in traveling domestically (compared to .771 traveling other countries) I thought Korea is the best travel destination even compared .562 to the other countries Endogenous variable: loyalty to domestic tourism .621 .766 I’m likely to make domestic travels in the future .693 I will recommend domestic travels to my friends .715 Endogenous variable: loyalty to Railo .496 .663 I’m likely to make Railo trips in the future .768 I will recommend Railo trips to my friends .807 Endogenous variable: loyalty to train .687 .814 I’m likely to make train trips in the future .887 I will recommend train trips to my friends .767 a Completely standardized loadings from LISREL b The average variance extracted (AVE) was computed as an indicator of convergent validity using the formula in Fornell and Larcker (1981). c Construct reliability was computed using the formula in Fornell and Larcker (1981).

168

After the assessment of the overall model, the validity of each construct was examined (Table 4-7). First, the t-values associated with each factor loading were significant for each construct. The results show that each observed variable is significantly correlated with the latent variables (t >1.96, p <.05); the factor loadings were over .4 except for the one variable of motivation 4 (i.e., have time for myself) whose loading were fairly low being .264. Second, completely standardized factor loadings, average variance extracted (AVE), and the construct reliability (CR) were reviewed. If AVE is greater than .5 and CR is greater than.7, each construct is considered to exhibit internal consistency in the scale. In exploratory research, CR values of between

.6 and .7 are considered desirable (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994). The AVE for most of the constructs and indicators was greater or close to the cut-off level except for motivation. The AVE values for motivation 2 to 4 were not high enough to show convergent validity, which means that the variances of the latent construct of motivation may not be explained sufficiently by its indicators. Most CR estimates are adequate while motivation 4 showed a value lower than the threshold.

In sum, these statistics demonstrate the construct reliability, but indicate a lack of validity for the three motivation constructs. Thus, after removing these constructs, the structural model testing was proceeded with one latent variable for motivation (i.e., motivation 1: experience Korea & feel Koreanness), one for satisfaction, two for attachment (i.e., place identity & place dependence), and three for loyalty (i.e., loyalty to domestic tourism, loyalty to Railo, and loyalty to train).

169

Structural Model Results

Next, the structural model was evaluated with the maximum likelihood estimation method using LISREL 9.1. The same fit indices used for testing the measurement model were also used for the structural model. The chi-square value for the theoretical model was 856.15 with 244 degrees of freedom (p < .05). The NNFI and CFI values of .880 and .894 were relatively low. The RMSEA was .107 and the SRMR was .152, which were higher than the recommended value. Since the result didn’t show an acceptable fit of the theoretical model to the data, some post-hoc modification was made based on the suggested modification indices (Table 4-8 & Figure 4-4).

Table 4-8. The Comparison of Fit Statistics between the Theoretical Model and the Modified Model Models χ² χ² df RMSEA NNFI CFI SRMR Theoretical model 856.15* - 244 .107 .880 .894 .152 Motivation 1  Identity 745.05 111.10 243 .097 .901 .913 .120 Loyalty to Railo 662.84 82.21 242 .089 .917 .927 .112  Loyalty to domestic tourism Loyalty to Railo 586.74 76.10 241 .081 .931 .940 .094  Loyalty to train (*p = .000)

170

Figure 4-4. Theoretical Model and Modified Model

< Theoretical Model >

< Modified Model>

Based on the modification indices and literature review (Kyle, Mowen, & Tarrant,

2004; Park, 2010), a direct path from “motivation 1 (experience Korea & feel

Koreanness)” to “place identity” was added to develop a competing model. With this path added, the chi-square value dropped from 856.15 to 745.05 (χ² =111.10) and NNFI and

CFI also increased (CFI=.901; NNFI=.913). However, RMSEA and SRMR values are still higher than the recommended values.

171

Based on the modification indices, the two additional paths from “loyalty to Railo” to “loyalty to domestic tourism” and to “loyalty to train” were added one by one.

According to the preliminary interviews, Railers described the contribution of Railo to their loyalty to domestic tourism as well as train, which made the addition of these paths plausible. It substantially reduced the chi-square value (χ² = -82.21, -76.10), made

RNSEA and SRMR smaller (RMSEA= .081; SRMR= .094), and increased the fit-ness

(CFI=.940; NNFI= .931).

According to the analysis result, the hypotheses were partly supported by SEM testing (Figure 4-5). First of all, motivation 1 (experience Korea & feel Koreanness) was the only latent variable for motivation that showed positive influence on satisfaction (H1a) at a .05 level of significance (completely standardized coefficient β=.32, t =3.92) while the other four were not found significant (H1b-e). It also indicated strong direct effects to place identity (β=.73, t =10.45), which was the added path from post-hoc modification.

Second, the results provided support for the direct effect of satisfaction toward loyalty to

Railo (H2b) (β=.24, t =2.34) while the paths from satisfaction to loyalty to domestic tourism and to loyalty to train were not significant (H2a, c). Third, satisfaction also showed direct influence respectively on the two latent variables of attachment, place identity and place dependence, indicated by the standardized coefficients of .27 and .50 and the t- values of 4.36 and 5.59 (H3a, b). Fourth, the influence of place dependence on loyalty to domestic tourism was also significant (H4a) (β =.16, t =2.07), but not the influence of place identity on loyalty to domestic tourism (H4b). Lastly, the two added paths, from loyalty to Railo to loyalty to domestic tourism (β =.88, t =7.39) and to loyalty to train (β

=.73, t =7.04), were significant, too.

172

Figure 4-5. Results of Testing Hypothetical Model

χ² = 586.74 df =241 p =.000 RMSEA =.081 CFI =.940 NNFI =.931 SRMR =.094

Note: Motivation 1= Experience Korea & Feel Koreanness; p < .05

173

Discussion

The relationships among motivation, satisfaction, loyalty and attachment to the country were examined using structural equation modeling. The empirical results indicated that the modified theoretical model is acceptable and provided support for the proposed hypotheses; full support for the relationship between satisfaction and attachment to the country (H3a,b) and partial support for the relationships between motivation and satisfaction (H1a), between satisfaction and loyalty (H2b), and between attachment and loyalty (H4b).

First, satisfaction was shown to be a predictor of attachment to the country. As previous research has shown, both latent variables of attachment (i.e., place identity and place dependence) were strongly influenced by satisfaction (Hou et al., 2005; Lee, 1999;

Lee & Allen, 1999). Park (2010) stated, “Domestic heritage tourism is not just an act of touristic consumption of heritage artifacts but also a reaffirmation of national meanings and values” (p. 133). It is logical to think that satisfied Railers build a sense of identity and dependence in association with their country during their Railo travel which results in what some researchers have called, “domestic heritage tourism.”

Second, the added path from “motivation 1 (experience Korea & feel Koreanness)” to “place identity” was highly significant. This result suggests that Railers who were motivated to experience Railo to learn more about Korea and feel Koreanness tend to feel more sense of identity with Korea. Despite the paucity of the research about the direct effect of motivation toward attachment, there is some suggestion in the literature that this makes sense. Kyle, Mowen, and Tarrant (2004) examined the relationship between

174 motivation and place attachment in the setting of an urban park. Their results indicated that the motivation of “learn” directly influences place identity. In the context of heritage tourism, Park (2010) also discussed the link between Korean people’s visits to national heritage sites and their sense of national belonging. As Palmer (2005) noted, visitors to cultural heritage sites often build or confirm their belonging to the nation.

Third, the relationship between satisfaction and loyalty was also supported indicating that satisfaction is an important antecedent of loyalty (Chi & Qu, 2008; Yoon

& Uysal, 2005; Yüksel et al., 2010). The results showed that Railers’ satisfaction with their Railo experience influences loyalty to Railo. It is in line with the preliminary interview result that Railers who were highly satisfied with their experiences tend to exhibit loyal behaviors such as recommendation to friends and make additional Railo trips until they reach the age of 25. Surprisingly, however, the results showed no direct effect from satisfaction to loyalty to domestic tourism and loyalty to train which were rather significantly influenced by loyalty to Railo. It indicates that loyalty to Railo plays an important role in encouraging domestic tourism as well as train use.

Fourth, place dependence turned out to be associated with loyalty to domestic tourism. But, interestingly, the influence of place identity on loyalty to domestic tourism was not significant in this study while other researchers found that loyalty was significantly predicted by both dimensions (i.e., place dependence and place identity) of place attachment (Alexandris, Kouthouris, & Meligdis, 2006; Prayag & Ryan, 2012;

Yüksel et al., 2010). It indicates that the loyalty to domestic tourism is more influenced by the functional aspect of attachment (i.e., perceived importance of the setting to enjoy pursued activities) rather than by Railers’ identity as a Korean.

175 This research provides much insight about an emerging phenomenon, Railo. It has contributed to the current literature theoretically. First, simultaneous testing of motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty was accomplished to document their interrelationships. It could help both researchers and practitioners examine a travel product/phenomenon in a comprehensive perspective although these constructs have largely been investigated individually, examination (Yoon & Uysal, 2005).

In addition, while many tourism scholars have examined loyalty to ‘tourism destinations’ (Chi & Qu, 2008; Gallarza & Gil Saura, 2006), loyalty was applied into the three different targets in this research: loyalty to travel experiences based on a rail pass

(i.e., Railo), loyalty to domestic tourism, and loyalty to a mode of transportation (i.e., train). Railers’ loyalty was more relevant to their domestic tourism experiences created around train travel rather than one specific destination. Unlike the application of the concept of loyalty to a certain product or corporation in business, it has been somewhat broadly used in the tourism research. Tourism researchers would need to specify what kind of loyalty they would like to measure.

Moreover, the place attachment scale was revisited and expanded in the context of domestic tourism based on the interview results. Despite the popularity of the two constructs for attachment, place identity and place dependence, there have been few specified measurements for attachment at a country level with the scale being mainly used for more specific natural areas in recreation research (Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000;

Kaltenborn, 1997; Kyle, Graefe, & Manning, 2004; Moore & Graefe, 1994). The examination of ‘attachment to the country’ with motivation, satisfaction, and loyalty offered a more precise model to examine Railers’ behaviors in the context of domestic

176 tourism.

It is also recognized that the items for Railers’ motivation were developed and categorized through exploratory factor analysis. Although the reliability of the factors was not found to be strong, this study offers a baseline to modify and expand the items for Railers’ motivations, which would help develop a motivation scale for domestic tourism experiences associated with a specific mode of transportation.

Study Limitations, Future Research Directions, and Practical Implications

Railo is not just a rail pass, but a cultural phenomenon among youths in Korea

(see Chapter 3). Since its inception, it has exerted a great deal of influence on domestic tourism. In spite of its contribution, little research about Railo and Railers’ tourism behaviors has been conducted in the context of domestic tourism. To expand Railo research, limitations of this research should be recognized and improved upon in the future.

Above all, modification of the motivation scale requires attention in order to conduct more research about Railo or replicate this research in a similar context. A more reliable and accurate scale of motivation would improve examination of its relationship with satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment. It is also essential to have a larger sample to ensure stronger reliability of the constructs. The sample size was large enough to proceed with the SEM, but having a larger and more diverse sample would enable researchers to attain a more stable and robust model and also run analyses on groups such as by gender.

Moreover, the examination of Railers’ intrapersonal behavior also would be meaningful.

Since Railers’ tend to repeat their Railo trips every school break or every year until they

177 reach the age of 25, more focused research would expand the scope of Railo research based on their frequency of Railo travels and their repeat travel. As the history of Railo develops, longitudinal research would be also helpful.

This study provides practical implications for Korail managers and local tourism managers as well. First, the exploratory factor analysis showed 23 motivation items for

Railo experiences which could possibly influence satisfaction, attachment, and loyalty.

Specifically, the influence of motivation to learn and experience Koreanness was significantly associated with place identity. Railers feel attachment to the country through their rail travel with a Railo pass which was originally intended to provide them a mode of transportation for travel. Managers need to develop promotion ideas for Railo by maximizing the merit of Railo as an “opportunity to experience the attractiveness of

Korea.” It would be also helpful to consider a way to fully utilize Railers’ word-of-mouth since the sharing of Railo culture is highly contagious among Railers.

Second, it would be important to follow up Railers’ satisfaction constantly, which not only increases place identity that builds up loyalty to domestic tourism, but also directly influences loyalty to Railo. Currently, Korail has not conducted any surveys about Railers’ perception of Railo passes and their travel behaviors. A constant review of

Railers’ satisfaction would help improve the travel environment and develop better products for long-term sustainability. The cooperation between Korail and local tourism managers would be essential for successful operation of a Railo pass.

The cultural travel phenomenon, Railo, has gained much popularity among youth in Korea and influenced domestic tourism for the last 6 years. This research provides a structural model to understand the interrelationships among Railer’s motivation,

178 satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment to the country. The concept of loyalty in tourism experiences was applied in the context of domestic tourism and a mode of transportation.

Also, the scale of attachment was revisited in the domestic tourism context. More research in the future and constant cooperation in tourism and transportation will provide a comprehensive understanding of Railo which could then be expanded to other domestic travel experiences based on a certain mode of transportation.

179 References

Alexandris, K., Kouthouris, C., & Meligdis, A. (2006). Increasing customers’ loyalty in a

skiing resort: The contribution of place attachment and service quality,

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(5), 414-425.

Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A

review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411.

Bricker, K. S. & Kerstetter, D. L. (2000). Level of specialization and place attachment:

An exploratory study of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences, 22(4), 233-

257.

Brocato, E. D. (2006). Place attachment: an investigation of environments and outcomes

in service context. Doctoral Thesis. The University of Texas at Arlington.

Burt, R. S. (1976). Interpretational confounding of unobserved variables in structural

equation models. Sociological Methods & Research, 5(1), 3-52.

Cadotte, E. R., Woodruff, R. B., & Jenkins, R. L. (1987). Expectations and norms in

models of consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 305-314.

Chi, C. G. Q. & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination

image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach.

Tourism Management, 29(4), 624-636.

Cho, H. J. (1994). Chontong kwa hanguk munhwa e taehan tammon punsok [An analysis

of the discourses on Korean tradition and culture]. Tonganghakji, 96, 175-210.

Chon, K. (1989). Understanding recreational travelers’ motivation, attitude and

satisfaction. The Tourist Review, 44(1), 3-7.

Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

180 Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research,

6(4), 408-424.

Dann, G. M. (1977). Anomie ego-enhancement and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,

4(4), 184-194.

Devesa, M., Laguna, M., & Palacios, A. (2010). The role of motivation in visitor

satisfaction: Empirical evidence in rural tourism. Tourism Management, 31(4),

547-552.

Ferguson, E. & Cox, T. (2007). Exploratory factor analysis: A users’ guide. International

Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1(2), 84-94.

Franklin, S. B., Gibson, D. J., Robertson, P. A., Pohlmann, J. T., & Fralish, J. S. (1995).

Parallel analysis: a method for determining significant principal components.

Journal of Vegetation Science, 6(1), 99-106.

Gallarza, M. G. & Gil Saura, I. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction

and loyalty: An investigation of university students’ travel behaviour. Tourism

Management, 27(3), 437-452.

George, B. & George, B. (2004). Past visits and the intention to revisit a destination:

Place attachment as the mediator and novelty seeking as the moderator. The

Journal of Tourism Studies, 15(2), 51-66.

Gerbing, D. W. & Anderson, J. C. (1985). The effects of sampling error and model

characteristics on parameter estimation for maximum likelihood confirmatory

factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 20(3), 255-271.

Gitelson, R. J. & Crompton, J. L. (1984). Insights into the repeat vacation phenomenon.

Annals of Tourism Research, 11(2), 199-217.

181 Grinstein, A. & Nisan, U. (2009). Demarketing, minorities, and national attachment.

Journal of Marketing, 73(2), 105-122.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate analysis.

Englewood: Prentice Hall International.

Halpenny, E.A. (2006). Environmental behaviour, place attachment and park visitation: A

case study of visitors to Point Pele National Park. Doctoral Thesis. University of

Waterloo.

Hoe, S. L. (2008). Issues and procedures in adopting structural equation modeling

technique. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 3(1), 76-83.

Horne, D. (1984). The great museum: The re-presentation of history. London: Pluto.

Hou, J. S., Lin, C. H., & Morais, D. B. (2005). Antecedents of attachment to a cultural

tourism destination: The case of Hakka and non-Hakka Taiwanese visitors to Pei-

pu, Taiwan. Journal of Travel Research, 44(2), 221-233.

Howard, K. I. & Gordon, R. A. (1963). Empirical note on the "number of factors"

problem in factor analysis. Psychological Reports, 12(1), 247-250.

Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural

equation modeling: Concepts, issues and application (pp. 76-99). Thousand Oak,

CA: Sage Publications.

Iso-Ahola, S. (1982). Toward a social psychology theory of tourism motivation. Annals

of Tourism Research, 12, 256-262.

Jorgensen, B. S. & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of place as an attitude: Lakeshore

owners’ attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology,

21(3), 233-248.

182 Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User's reference guide. Scientific

Software International.

Kaltenborn, B. P. (1997). Nature of place attachment: A study among recreation

homeowners in southern Norway. Leisure Sciences, 19(3), 175-189.

Katz, S. (1985). The Israeli teacher-guide: The emergence and perpetuation of a role.

Annals of Tourism Research, 12(1), 49-72.

Kendall, L. (2011). Consuming Korean tradition in early and late modernity:

Commodification, tourism, and performance. University of Hawai’i Press.

Kerstetter, D. L., Bricker, K. S., & Li, H. (2010). Vanua and the people of the Fijian

Highlands: Understanding sense of place in the context of nature-based tourism

development. Tourism Analysis, 15(1), 31-44.

Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2004). Effect of activity involvement

and place attachment on recreationists' perceptions of setting density. Journal of

Leisure Research, 36, 209-231.

Kyle, G. T., Mowen, A. J., & Tarrant, M. (2004). Linking place preferences with place

meaning: An examination of the relationship between place motivation and place

attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 439-454.

Lee, C. C. (1999). Investigating tourist attachment to selected coastal destinations: An

application of place attachment. Doctoral Thesis. Clemson University.

Lee, C. C., & Allen, L. (1999). Understanding individuals’ attachment to selected

destinations: An application of place attachment. Tourism Analysis, 4, 173-185

Lee, J., Graefe, A., & Burns, R. (2007). Examining the antecedents of destination loyalty

in a forest setting. Leisure Science, 29, 463-481.

183 Meng, F., Tepanon, Y., & Uysal, M. (2008). Measuring tourist satisfaction by attribute

and motivation: The case of a nature-based resort. Journal of Vacation Marketing,

14(1), 41-56.

Moon, O. (2011). Guests of lineage houses; Tourist commoditization of Confucian

cultural heritage in Korea. In L. Kendall (Ed.), Consuming Korean tradition in

early and late modernity: Commodification, tourism, and performance, pp. 88-

104. University of Hawai’i Press.

Moore, R. L. & Graefe, A. R. (1994). Attachments to recreation settings: The case of

rail‐trail users. Leisure Sciences, 16(1), 17-31.

Mowen, A. J., Graefe, A. R., & Virden, R. J. (1997, April). A typology of place

attachment and activity involvement. In Proceedings of the 1997 Northeastern

Recreation Research Symposium (pp. 89-92). USDA Forest Service, Northeastern

Forest Experiment Station.

Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd edition). New York:

McGraw-Hill.

O’Leary, S. & Deegan, J. (2005). Ireland’s image as a tourism destination in France:

Importance and performance. Journal of Travel Research, 43(3), 247-256.

Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of

satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 46-49.

Oliver, R. L. & Swan, J. E. (1989). Consumer perceptions of interpersonal equity and

satisfaction in transactions: A field survey approach. Journal of Marketing, 53,

21-35.

Oppermann, M. (2000). Tourism destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 39(1),

184 78-84.

Palmer, C. (1999). Tourism and the symbols of identity. Tourism Management, 20(3),

313-321.

Palmer, C. (2005). An ethnography of Englishness: Experiencing identity through

tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 7-27.

Park, H. (2010). Heritage tourism: Emotional journeys into nationhood. Annals of

Tourism Research, 37(1), 116-135.

Petrick, J. F. & Backman, S. J. (2001). An examination of golf travelers’ satisfaction,

perceived value, loyalty, and intentions to revisit. Tourism Analysis, 6(3/4), 223-

237.

Prayag, G., & Ryan, C. (2012). Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to Mauritius: The role and

influence of destination image, place attachment, personal involvement, and

satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 342-356.

Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 10(2),

147-169.

Qu, H. & Ping, E. W. Y. (1999). A service performance model of Hong Kong cruise

travelers’ motivation factors and satisfaction. Tourism Management, 20(2), 237-

244.

Reisinger, Y. & Turner, L. (1999). Structural equation modeling with Lisrel: Application

in tourism. Tourism Management, 20(1), 71-88.

Ross, E. L. D. & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1991). Sightseeing tourists’ motivation and

satisfaction. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(2), 226-237.

Schatz, R. T., Staub, E., & Lavine, H. (1999). On the varieties of national attachment:

185 Blind versus constructive patriotism. Political Psychology, 20(1), 151-174.

Schreyer, R., Jacobs, G. R., White, R. G., Frazier, J. W., & Epstein, B. J. (1981).

Environmental meaning as a determinant of spatial behaviour in recreation. In

Proceedings of Applied Geography Conferences, Volume 4. (pp. 294-300).

Department of Geography, State University of New York.

Scott, D. & Vitartas, P. (2008). The role of involvement and attachment in satisfaction

with local government services. International Journal of Public Sector

Management, 21(1), 45-57.

Tse, D. K. & Wilton, P. C. (1988). Models of consumer satisfaction: An extension.

Journal of Marketing Research, 25, 204-212.

Turner, L. W. & Reisinger, Y. (2001). Shopping satisfaction for domestic tourists. Journal

of Retailing and Consumer Services, 8(1), 15-27.

Vaske, J. J. (2008). Survey research and analysis: Applications in parks, recreation and

human dimensions. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.

Wickham, T. D. (2000). Attachment to places and activities: the relationship of

psychological constructs to customer satisfaction. Unpublished Doctoral

Dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University.

Williams, D. R. & Roggenbuck, J. W. (1989, October). Measuring place attachment:

Some preliminary results. In Abstracts: 1989 Leisure Research Symposium (p. 32).

Arlington, VA: National Recreation and Park Association.

Williams, D. R. & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The measurement of place attachment: Validity

and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830-840.

Yoon, Y. & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and

186 satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management,

26(1), 45-56.

Yüksel, A. & Yüksel, F. (2007). Shopping risk perceptions: Effects on tourists’ emotions,

satisfaction and expressed loyalty intentions. Tourism Management, 28(3), 703-

713.

Yüksel, A., Yüksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer

satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management,

31(2), 274-284.

187 Appendix A

Questionnaire (English/Korean)

188

Questionnaire (English)

1. Please rate how relevant each of the following items is to your motivation for Railo trips.

“I experienced Railo in order to ______” Not Of little Somewhat Very Items important Important importance important important at all Plan a trip by myself Enjoy the Railo opportunity before reaching 25 Experience train trips Travel all around the country Practice backpacking trips Visit other regions in Korea Spend time with friends Visit friends or relatives living in other regions Communicate with other people (e.g., Railers, locals) Try local food Experience adventure Enjoy various sport and leisure activities Experience guesthouse culture Enjoy nature of Korea Visit historic and cultural heritage Know more about Korea Feel the pride as a Korean Feel belonged to a group of Railers Experience something new Make unforgettable memories Have time for rest

189 2. Please indicate your level of satisfaction on your Railo experience.

Not Somewhat Very Items satisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied satisfied satisfied at all How was your Railo experience compared to your expectation? Was your Railo experience worth your time? Was your Railo experience worth your money? Was your Railo experience worth your effort? Overall, how satisfied were you with your Railo experience?

3. The following includes the statements about attachment to Korea. Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the statement.

“During my Railo experience, ______” Not Of little Somewhat Highly Items relevant Relevant relevance relevant relevant at all I thought Korea is the best travel destination even compared to the other countries I felt more satisfied in traveling domestically (compared to traveling other countries) I thought domestic travel is more important to me (compared to traveling other countries) I felt pride as a Korean I felt attached to Korea I felt a sense of belonging as a Korean I wanted to know more about Korean culture and history I felt responsibility toward Korea I felt Korea is a much greater country than I thought

190 4. The following includes questions about your willingness to recommend and repeat Railo trips and domestic trips in the future. Not at all Somewhat Extremely Items Unlikely Likely likely likely likely How likely will you make domestic travels in the future? Will you recommend domestic travels to your friends? During the next summer break, how likely is it that you will make another Railo trip? Will you recommend Railo to your acquaintances (e.g., friends, family, colleagues)?

5. The following includes questions about demographic information.

1) What is your gender?  Male  Female

2) What is your age?  17 or under  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25

191 3) What is your status?  High school student  College student  Graduate student  Post-graduation  Others

4) How many times have you experienced Railo?  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 or more

5) How many people did you travel with (including yourself) during your 2013 Railo experience?  1 (I traveled alone)  2  3  4  5 or more

6) How much money did you spend during your 2013 Railo experience (including the Railo ticket cost)?  150,000-200,000  200,001-250,000  250,001-300,000  300,001-350,000  350,001-400,000  400,001-450,000  450,001-500,000  Greater than 500,001

192 Questionnaire (Korean)

1. 아래 각각의 사항들이 귀하께서 내일로를 다녀오게 된 동기와 얼마나 관련이 있는지 표시해 주십시오.

"나는 ______를 경험하기 위해 ( ______를 이유로) 내일로를 다녀왔다"

전혀 거의 다소 매우 관련이 관련이 보통이다 관련이 관련이 없다 없다 있다 있다 혼자 여행 계획해보기 (25 세 이전에) 내일로 여행기회 누리기 기차여행 경험해보기 전국일주하기 배낭여행 연습해보기 우리나라의 다른 지역 방문해보기 친구 또는 이성친구와 시간 보내기 다른 지역에 살고 있는 가족/친지/친구 방문하기 다른 사람들 (내일러, 지역주민 등)과 소통하기 지역음식 먹어보기 모험해보기 다양한 스포츠/레저활동 즐기기 게스트하우스 문화체험해보기 우리나라의 대자연 만끽하기 우리나라의 문화유산 답사하기 우리나라에 대해 더 알아가기 한국인으로서 자부심 느끼기 내일러로서 소속감 느껴보기 새로운 것 경험하기 특별한 추억 만들기 휴식의 시간 가지기

193

2. 내일로 경험과 관련된 귀하의 전반적인 만족도를 표시해 주십시오.

매우 대체로 대체로 매우 보통 불만족 불만족 만족 만족 이다 한다 한다 한다 한다 내일로 여행경험에 대해 전반적으로 만족하십니까? 내일로 떠나기 전에 가지고 있던 기대치에 비해 만족하십니까? 내일로에 투자한 비용 대비 만족도는 어떠하십니까? 내일로에 투자한 시간 대비 만족도는 어떠하십니까? 내일로에 투자한 노력 대비 만족도는 어떠하십니까?

3. 다음은 내일로와 우리나라에 대한 애착에 대해 묻는 질문입니다. 각 항목에 대해 얼마나 동의하는지 표시해 주십시오.

"나는 내일로를 하며, ______"

전혀 그렇지 보통 매우 그렇지 그렇다 않다 이다 그렇다 않다 한국인으로서 자부심을 느꼈다. 한국은 다른 나라들과 비교해도 손색없는 최고의 여행지다. 우리나라의 역사와 문화에 대해 더 알고 싶어졌다. 이전에 생각했던 것 보다 한국이 더 멋진 나라라고 느꼈다. (다른 나라를 여행하는 것에 비해) 우리나라 여행에서 더 만족을 느꼈다. (다른 나라를 여행하는 것에 비해) 우리나라 여행이 더 중요하다고 생각했다. 우리나라에 애착을 느꼈다. 한국인이라는 소속감을 느꼈다. 우리나라에 대한 책임감을 느꼈다.

194

4. 다음은 귀하의 내일로와 국내여행에 대한추천 및 재이용 의향에 관한 질문입니다.

매우 그렇지 보통 매우 그렇지 그렇다 않다 이다 그렇다 않다 기회가 주어진다면, 내일로 여행을 다시 하실 의향이 있으십니까? (25 세 이하의) 주변 지인들에게 내일로를 추천하시겠습니까? 앞으로 국내여행을 다시 하실 의향이 있으십니까? 주변의 지인들에게 국내여행을 추천하시겠습니까?

5. 다음은 간단한 개인정보에 관한 질문입니다.

1) 귀하의 성별은 무엇입니까?  남  여

2) 귀하의 연령은 어떻게 되십니까?  만 17세 이하  만 18세  만 19세  만 20세  만 21세  만 22세  만 23세  만 24세  만 25세

195

3) 귀하의 직업은 무엇입니까?  고등학생  대학생  대학원생  직장인  기타

4) 2013 내일로를 포함하여, 그동안 내일로를 다녀온 회수는 총 몇 회 입니까? (숫자로 기입해 주세요.)  1

 2  3  4  5  6  7  8 회 이상

5) 2013 내일로 당시, (자신을 포함하여) 몇 명이 함께 여행을 했습니까?  1 명 (혼자 여행)  2 명  3 명  4 명  5 명 이상

6) 2013 내일로 당시 지출한 여행경비는 대략 얼마입니까? (티켓가격 포함, 숫자로 기입해주세요.)  150,000-200,000 원  200,001-250,000 원  250,001-300,000 원  300,001-350,000 원  350,001-400,000 원  400,001-450,000 원  450,001-500,000 원  500,001원 이상

196

Chapter 5

Summary

My dissertation deals with an emerging novel travel phenomenon, Railo, among youth in Korea. The purpose of this research was to understand the travel culture of

Railo. Using ethnographic tools to statistical analysis, I (a) identified and described the travel culture of Railo; (b) determined whether Railo experience exists as a shared cultural domain among Railers and the degree to which Railers (or subgroups of Railers, such as males and females, Railers by age group, first-time Railers and repeat Railers) agree on it; and (c) examined the relationships among Railers’ motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and their attachment to the country.

Summary of Key Findings

The key findings of this study include the three following areas: (a) meanings of

Railo, (b) Railo experiences as a coherent culture, (c) the interrelationships among motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment.

Meanings of Railo

According to the results, Railo was not just a rail pass among youth, but perceived as an exclusive right of mainly college students to make a week-long domestic rail travel.

This study explored the nature of the phenomenon (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994) and illustrated four meanings that Railers identified about Railo: (a) Railo is a perfect opportunity for Railers which initiates their leadership on their very first travel experience; (b) Railo is perceived as a privilege exclusively given to young generations,

197 which motivates Railers strongly to do Railo in their early 20s; (c) Railo enables Railers to realize the forgotten beauty of Korea and feel a sense of attachment to Korea; and (d)

Railo makes Railers to become more skilled and thoughtful travelers.

Railo Experience as a Coherent Culture

This study demonstrated a coherence of Railo experience according to Gatewood and Cameron’s (2009) criteria for determining cultural consensus. The list of 38 items about Railo experience was developed and used in the cultural consensus questionnaire.

The results showed Railo experiences to be a cultural domain with “moderately high agreement” (Weller, 2007, p. 360) which means the Railo experience is not just a trend shared by a few, but a culture agreed upon by in-group members. In all subgroups by gender, age, and years of experiences, the results showed a consensus among Railers, but there was no significant sub-group difference in cultural knowledge in Railo experiences.

The Interrelationships among Motivation, Satisfaction, Loyalty, and Attachment

According to the findings from structural equation modeling analysis, the modified theoretical model was found to be acceptable (χ²= 586.74, df= 241, p= .000,

RMSEA= .081, CFI= .940, NNFI= .931, SRMR= .094) and the results provided support for the proposed hypotheses. First, the findings indicated that satisfaction is a predictor of attachment to the country, which supported previous research (Hou, Lin, Morais, 2005;

Lee, 1999; Lee & Allen, 1999). Second, satisfaction was found to be an important antecedent of loyalty (Chi & Qu, 2008; Yoon & Uysal, 2005; Yüksel, Yüksel, & Bilim,

2010). Third, loyalty to domestic tourism was influenced by place dependence while the influence of place identity was not found to be significant (Alexandris, Kouthouris, &

198 Meligdis, 2006; Prayag & Ryan, 2012; Yüksel et al., 2010). Fourth, the motivation of

“experience Korea and feel Koreanness” showed a significant influence to place identity

(Kyle, Mowen, & Tarrant, 2004; Park, 2010).

Theoretical Implications

The findings from this research can improve theoretical groundings of youth travel, culture, and transportation, as well as the relationships among several predictors of tourists’ behaviors. First, my dissertation provides a rich and in-depth ethnography of a popular emerging travel phenomenon using various research tools based on in-group members’ perspectives. Despite the increasing popularity of Railo experiences, there is limited research about Railo. This ethnographic research will help researchers have insiders’ perspectives about the Railo phenomenon (Binder, 2004), and also provide an example of ethnography applied in tourism, considering the lack of ethnography in tourism research in Korea (Park, 2010).

In terms of the method, cultural consensus analysis was very helpful in producing insights into a novel travel phenomenon. It provided rich and in-depth understanding of

Railo using data rooted in ethnographic methods such as observations, interviews, and freelisting surveys (Paolisso, 2007). In part, the success of this method was possible thanks to Railers’ passion for sharing their Railo experience and their interest in this study throughout the multi-phased data collection process.

This study also helps demonstrate that Railo experiences exist as a coherent culture among Railers using Romney, Weller, and Batchelder’s (1986) method of cultural consensus analysis based on their theory of culture as consensus. It is meaningful in that

199 it supports a new view that travel culture can arise from the development of a transportation pass. Although the original purpose of the development of a Railo pass was not directly associated with domestic tourism, Railo has become a “rite-of-passage” as well as a popular “culture code” among youth in Korea. This study offers a case in the current literature and will be used for the study of transportation, travel, and culture.

In addition, the results of this study offer a proper model to analyze the relationship among motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment in the context of

Railo and domestic tourism. Throughout this analysis, I made several efforts to provide new insights for the tourism literature. This study offers a starting line to expand the study of Railers’ motivation in which the scale was developed based on various methods

(i.e., literature review, in-depth interviews, content analysis of an on-line travel log). It is also noteworthy that the concept of loyalty was applied into a tourism product/experience while it has been mainly used for a specific destination (Chi & Qu, 2008; Gallarza & Gil

Saura, 2006). Lastly, this study also revisited and expanded the scale of place attachment in the context of domestic tourism.

Moreover, this study provided extended knowledge about passengers’ perceptions on train associated with their travel experiences. The aspects of the rail service quality or traveling time have gained more attention among researchers while research about understanding passengers who ride trains for tourism purposes is limited (Bel, 1997;

Cavana, Corbett, & Lo, 2007; Lyons, Jain, & Holley, 2007; Nathanail, 2008; Wardman,

1994). By focusing on a coherent group of tourist passengers, this study not only illustrated Railers’ perception of the train, but also the influence of their travels on their identity as a Railer and their attachment to Korea.

200 Lastly, this study contributed to examine travel culture of youth tourists in the context of domestic tourism which has been marginalized (Theuns, 1991). While previous literature on youth tourism has focused on the international tourism, this study provided understanding of domestic youth backpackers who could be loyal visitors and supporters of the future domestic tourism. Specifically, it is meaningful that this study highlighted that young travelers’ perception of domestic tourism has been positively changed considering Korean government’s continuous effort to encourage domestic tourism for sustainable tourism development (Kim, 2010; Shim, 2007).

Managerial Implications

This study also provides several managerial implications that would help practitioners develop successful plans for sustainable operation of Railo and revitalize domestic tourism.

First of all, Korail needs to understand that Railo is not just a product, but instead is a culture shared by many Railers. They have formed a travel culture during their Railo experiences on their own. It is very important to have constant communication with them and to develop a better understanding of them and their needs in order to improve the quality of their experiences. For example, Railers’ satisfaction could influence loyalty to

Railo as well as place dependence, which has been found to influence loyalty to domestic tourism. Since there are no surveys administered by Korail about Railo or Railers’ behaviors, it is strongly recommended that practitioners maintain an ongoing review of

Railers’ satisfaction.

201 Second, Korail should consider expanding the scope of a Railo pass by working with other public transport to create travel packages. There are still a number of destinations in Korea that are difficult to access by train. Similar to Wayfarer in the UK, which guarantees a ride on both tram and train, Railo might include an option to take a bus or a ferry that would enable Railers to travel to the utmost end of the land as well as to a number of beautiful islands in Korea.

Third, it is important for practitioners to develop promotional ideas for Railo considering the Railers’ perception of Railo as an ‘opportunity to experience the attractiveness of Korea.’ Among the 23 motivation items identified in this study, motivation to learn and experience Koreanness showed significant effect on place identity. Railers think that their sense of attachment to the country is strengthened during their Railo experience. Therefore, Railo needs to be promoted with appealing benefits to experience the beauty of Korea.

Fourth, constant cooperation between Korail and local tourism planners is essential not only to encourage domestic tourism among Railers but also to operate a

Railo pass successfully in the long-term. Railo has changed younger generations’ perception of domestic tourism and achieved their high level of satisfaction and loyalty to both Railo and domestic tourism. It is imperative to manage the quality of their rail ride as well as their overall travel experience with a Railo pass because this group of young passengers is active producers of information as well as potential loyal customers and tourists even after they pass 25 years of age. To provide more advanced experience, both

Korail and local tourism planners should introduce various local opportunities

202 continuously so Railers can enjoy this total experience of domestic rail travel and build up their loyalty to domestic tourism and also to trains for their future travel.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Despite the contribution of this study in expanding the knowledge about a novel cultural travel phenomenon, Railo, there are some limitations in this study which could be improved and further investigated in the future. Several avenues for future research on

Railo will be also discussed to fill a gap in current literature on travel, transportation, and culture.

First of all, this study includes a limited number of respondents although the size was sufficient for the required statistical analyses. In the future, it will be essential to include more respondents to ensure reliability of the results. A larger-scale survey with a larger and more diverse sample will provide a more comprehensive understanding of

Railo since there is the substantial number of Railo passes purchased. Respondents could be also subdivided by how frequent they make Railo trips and how many times they repeat the trips.

In addition, longitudinal research would add more depth in understanding Railo culture. Considering the remarkable increase of the number of Railers over the last 6 years, researchers will be able to examine the evolution and change of culture through the observation of Railo in the long-term perspective. Also, it will offer an opportunity to demonstrate a new view that the use of public transportation can create a culture and encourage domestic tourism.

203 Another area to be further investigated is the link between culture and behaviors.

Respondents’ belief used in cultural consensus analysis may not be identical with their actual behaviors. Cultural consonance is the degree to which individuals’ behavior matches with their belief about a certain cultural domain (Dressler & Bindon, 2000). It would be useful to apply this concept for the examination of Railo culture and Railers’ beliefs and behaviors.

In this study, the scale of Railers’ motivation showed low reliability. The modification of the scale is essential not only for further research about Railo, but also for replication of this study in similar contexts. Interviews with more respondents would help understand various dimensions of Railers’ motivation. With a more reliable motivation scale, future research will be able to reexamine the relationship among motivation, satisfaction, loyalty, and attachment more accurately.

Despite the success of Railo, there might be some shortcomings in the operation of Railo as well as dissatisfaction among Railers. Considering the significant influence of

Railo in domestic tourism, it is highly encouraged to investigate various aspects of Railo from multiple perspectives (i.e., Korail, local residents, and local tourism governments).

More balanced and in-depth studies about the impact of Railo on rail use and domestic tourism would be required for both researchers and practitioners to have an appropriate understanding of the phenomenon and continue the success of Railo.

204 References

Alexandris, K., Kouthouris, C., & Meligdis, A. (2006). Increasing customers’ loyalty in a

skiing resort: The contribution of place attachment and service quality,

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18(5), 414-425.

Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation.

Handbook of qualitative research, 1, 248-261.

Bel, G. (1997). Changes in travel time across modes and its impact on the demand for

inter-urban rail travel. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and

Transportation Review, 33(1), 43-52.

Binder, J. (2004). The whole point of backpacking: Anthropological perspectives on the

characteristics of backpacking. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), The global

nomad: Backpacker travel in Theory and Practice (pp. 60-76). Bristol, UK:

Channel View Publications.

Cavana, R. Y., Corbett, L. M., & Lo, Y. G. (2007). Developing zones of tolerance for

managing passenger rail service quality. International Journal of Quality &

Reliability Management, 24(1), 7-31.

Chi, C. G. Q. & Qu, H. (2008). Examining the structural relationships of destination

image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism

Management, 29(4), 624-636.

Dressler, W. W. & Bindon, J. R. (2000). The health consequences of cultural consonance:

Cultural dimensions of lifestyle, social support, and arterial blood pressure in an

African American community. American Anthropologist, 102(2), 244-260.

Gallarza, M. G. & Gil Saura, I. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction

205 and loyalty: An investigation of university students’ travel behaviour. Tourism

Management, 27(3), 437-452.

Gatewood, J. & Cameron, C. (2009). Belonger perceptions of tourism and its impact in

the Turks and Caicos Islands. Retrieved on August 21, 2013 from

http://www.lehigh.edu/~jbg1/Perceptions-of-Tourism.pdf

Hou, J. S., Lin, C. H., & Morais, D. B. (2005). Antecedents of attachment to a cultural

tourism destination: The case of Hakka and non-Hakka Taiwanese visitors to Pei-

pu, Taiwan. Journal of Travel Research, 44(2), 221-233.

Kim, S. (2010). Domestic tourism promotion plans. Korea Culture & Tourism Institute.

Kyle, G. T., Mowen, A. J., & Tarrant, M. (2004). Linking place preferences with place

meaning: An examination of the relationship between place motivation and place

attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 439-454.

Lee, C. C. (1999). Investigating tourist attachment to selected coastal destinations: An

application of place attachment. Doctoral Thesis. Clemson University.

Lee, C. C. & Allen, L. (1999). Understanding individuals’ attachment to selected

destinations: An application of place attachment. Tourism Analysis, 4, 173-185

Lyons, G., Jain, J., & Holley, D. (2007). The use of travel time by rail passengers in

Great Britain. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(1), 107-

120.

Nathanail, E. (2008). Measuring the quality of service for passengers on the hellenic

railways. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(1), 48-66.

Park, H. (2010). Heritage tourism: Emotional journeys into nationhood. Annals of

Tourism Research, 37(1), 116-135.

206 Prayag, G. & Ryan, C. (2012). Antecedents of tourists’ loyalty to Mauritius: The role and

influence of destination image, place attachment, personal involvement, and

satisfaction. Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 342-356.

Romney, A. K., Weller, S. C., & Batchelder, W. H. (1986). Culture as consensus: A

theory of culture and informant accuracy. American Anthropologist, 88(2), 313-338.

Shim, W. (2007). The mid/long-term policy development for revitalization of domestic

tourism. Korea Culture & Tourism Institute.

Wardman, M. (1994). Forecasting the impact of service quality changes on the demand

for inter-urban rail travel. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 287-306.

Weller, S. C. (2007). Cultural consensus theory: Applications and frequently asked

questions. Field methods, 19(4), 339-368.

Yoon, Y. & Uysal, M. (2005). An examination of the effects of motivation and

satisfaction on destination loyalty: A structural model. Tourism Management, 26(1),

45-56.

Yüksel, A., Yüksel, F., & Bilim, Y. (2010). Destination attachment: Effects on customer

satisfaction and cognitive, affective and conative loyalty. Tourism Management,

31(2), 274-284.

VITA So Young Bae

Education

Ph.D. (2013) Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA) Recreation, Park and Tourism Management

M.S. (2011) Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA) Recreation, Park and Tourism Management

B.B.A. (2007) Kyung Hee University (Seoul, Korea) Hotel Management / Business Administration

Professional Experiences

2012 (Fall) Instructor (RPTM460 Political and Legal Aspects of Recreation Services) Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Management Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA)

2010 - 2012 Teaching Assistant / Research Assistant Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Management Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA)

2008 Research Assistant, Tourism Development Team Korea Culture & Tourism Institute (Seoul, Korea)

2007 - 2008 Public Relations Manager (BRAUN/SK-II), Public Affairs Procter & Gamble (Seoul, Korea)

2004 - 2005 Activities Coordinator Resort Activities Sheraton Vistana Resort / Orange Lake Resort (Orlando, FL)

Recent Publications

Bae, S., Dong, E., Chick, G., & Kerstetter, D. (In press). Taxi Tour Guides as Culture Brokers on Jeju Island in South Korea. Journal of Tourism, Culture, and Communication.

Iarmolenko, S., Bae, S., & Chick, G. (2013). We are still Penn State: Tailgating as community at Penn State University. Proceedings of the 2013 Northeast Recreation Research Symposium.

Kerstetter, D., Bae, S., Dombroski, P., McKinney, M., Stansfield, M., & Usher, L. (2010). Meanings Associated with Tailgating: Family, Friends, Food, and More. Proceedings of the 2010 Northeast Recreation Research Symposium.

Professional Presentations

Bae, S., Chick, G., & Dong, E. (November 2011). Local Tour Guides as Culture Brokers. National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) Leisure Research Symposium 2011, Atlanta, Georgia.

Bae, S., Chick, G., & Dong, E. (April 2011). Taxi Tour Guides as Culture Brokers on Jeju Island, Korea. Northeast Recreation Research (NERR) Symposium, Bolton Landing, New York.

Bae, S., Dombroski, P., McKinney, M., Stansfield, M., Usher, L., & Kerstetter, D. (April 2010). Meanings Associated with Tailgating: Family, Friends, Food, and More. Northeast Recreation Research (NERR) Symposium, Bolton Landing, New York.