I am a couchsurfer. When I travel, I do not pay for a hotel, but rather contact other couchsurfers, usually strangers, before I arrive and ask if I may stay them. In return, I host foreign travelers in my apartment when circumstances permit. While in Los Angeles, it is not uncommon for me to host up to four couchsurfers— all previously strangers— in my bedroom and living room. Oftentimes they will contact their fellow traveling friends, and groups of up to ten foreigners may gather to meet at my apartment on certain Saturday nights. In essence, I have allowed a group of strangers who often do not even speak my own language to come to my house and throw a party. Yet I am not crazy, having no outstanding psychiatric disorders. Upon my initial announcement to my roommates back in September that I was having a stranger from Germany come live with me for a few days, however, I was looked at as if I was out of my mind.
I was not surprised by their first reactions. True, only the bravest of souls would invite a complete “stranger” right off the streets into their house. Need one be so bold, however, to arrange the stay a week or two ahead of time, with the opportunity to meet them online beforehand and assess compatibility? A fast growing website known as Couchsurfing.com has been doing just that since 2004.
Couchsurfing, in the broadest sense of the word, has been around for thousands of years. Yet it was not until 2003 that the aforementioned internet version was first dreamt up by avid traveler Casey Fenton. Booking a last-minute flight to Iceland and not wanting to pay for a “touristy” hotel, he sent a mass email to University of Iceland students asking if anyone could accommodate him. The response was inspiring: “Fenton ultimately received more than fifty offers of accommodation… [and] On the return flight to Boston he began to develop the ideas that would underpin the CouchSurfing Project." In January 2004 the project, now known as Couchsurfing.com, became a public website, and by the end of 2005 “membership stood just under 45,000." The website launched CouchSurfing 2.0 in July 2006, and, after garnering international media coverage, grew in excess of one million members, with over 40,000 new accounts made each month on average. Proudly and boldly displaying the slogan “Participate In Creating A Better World, One Couch At A Time,” Couchsurfing.com is quickly making couchsurfing a much more accessible and global phenomenon.
This prospect of creating a better world and forming strong social ties certainly provides a fair share of bait. The question remains, however, as to whether people will bite. Certainly, Couchsurfing.com’s statistical success seems to affirm this hope, representing over 232 countries and nearly 60,000 cities as of late. Yet others I have spoken to have been adamant in their decision to travel by more traditional methods. Clearly, Couchsurfing.com is not for everyone. What then, are the obtained beliefs that underlie one’s drive to be either enticed or repulsed by the idea of this online couchsurfing system? The purpose of this current study is to discover and assess the opinions that people have of the system, thereby determining what causes and motivates one to be a couchsurfer (or hotel surfer, for that matter). The hypothesis of this report is as follows: people join Couchsurfing.com in order to gain a rich “local” experience, are usually (but not always) quite outgoing and interested in making new acquaintances, and are attempting to save money, given that couchsurfing is free of charge. In addition, they will generally not have many concerns as to the dangers of the system, although they will be aware. Those who report that they would not consider participating will be more concerned with the risks of inviting couchsurfers into their home, as well as less social. They will more often describe themselves as introverts when compared to those who said they would participate in the system, and not as concerned with saving money when they travel. In addition, forming broad social networks will be more heavily favored among those who participate as compared to those who do not.
Methodology
Two methods of qualitative data collection were employed in this study. In a non-random sample, three roommates, each one with a Couchsurfing account of his own, was thoroughly interviewed. They were asked a list of questions, concerning what brought them to participate in Couchsurfing.com, what initial fears (if any) they had, if they were in it more for the experiences or to save money, and if they would prefer a hotel if it were also free. Two other roommates, observed prior to this study as being against the system, were also given a very similar interview. These interviews asked such questions as to how they made the decision to not participate in the program and why. In addition to these interviews, seven questionnaires were returned from either former couchsurfers who stayed in my apartment or from peers with whom their opinion on the matter was initially unclear. The questionnaires consisted of the same set of questions as the conducted interviews, but given the nature of the method solicited much shorter responses in most occasions.
As with most studies, there are several limitations as to the methods of data collection used in this research project. A small sample size is often a limiting factor in such studies, and this project was no exception. Although the five interviews and seven questionnaires were within the recommended parameters for the study, a truly accurate study would perchance require even more studies. A larger population of subjects, for example, would no doubt increase the range and diversity of responses, thus giving new insight into the motivations behind one’s decision to be a couchsurfer. Subjects were also not chosen randomly, although there seems to be no inherent connection between subjects that would alter the obtained results. However, one could argue that the fact that all personal interviews with fellow couchsurfers and hosts were living within the same building is indeed not a limitation. For instance, all hosts decided independently, and at different times throughout the past two years, to sign up, and conducted all couchsurfing activities independently of each other. Still, further studies with a broader population sample should be conducted in order to obtain more certain results. In any case, the findings of the study were both inspiring and surprising, bolstering and challenging the validity of the hypothesis.
Results
As predicted, those against the online couchsurfing system were primarily concerned with the potential dangers involved. Safety seemed to be their main concern, with one subject stating “new and inexperienced travelers need to be careful of the website because, all in all, you really don’t know who you are going to be staying with.” One interviewee stressed his claim that couchsurfers were potential thieves when he said “they know where you live, but you don’t know where they do. You could fall asleep one night and the next night wake up without a laptop, with absolutely no way of tracing the person, who had probably created a fake identity on the website anyway.” A final interviewee offered an even grimmer prospect: “when you meet someone online at couchsurfing.com, it is no different than a dating website. People probably exaggerate their features and lie about who they are all the time.” The subject went on to state, “with such dishonesty, who knows what psychopathic killers could be lurking on the site?”
It seems that the very risk decried by the above objectors to couchsurfing is what entices others to participate. Indeed, the fact that one does not know the person with whom he or she will be staying is part of the fun. According to some of the conducted interviews and completed questionnaires, “While you won’t really know who your host is at first, by the time you leave his home you will know him quite well, and possibly have gained a lifelong friend.” Others stated that they carefully analyzed the surfer’s profile prior to accepting, yet still believed that couchsurfing was relatively safe. One subject who herself had never been couchsurfing but liked the idea stated “I don’t believe there are that many things that can go wrong. Why would people that you give a place to stay rob you? It just doesn’t make sense or follow any type of norm.” In the same way, she stated that travelers themselves need not be afraid of being robbed by their hosts, as “you know where they live.”
Although most of those subjects against online couchsurfing stated that they would prefer to not be forced to socialize with the same people their whole trip, one interviewee gave an interesting and diverting response. She stated that, rather than couchsurf, she would “stay at a hostel because they are actually more social, with large groups of people meeting in a new place at the same time.” This desire for new social interactions was hypothesized to be a prime factor behind the choice to couchsurf, and the surveys certainly supported this. “I have been couchsurfing for three years, and it all started the day I decided to stop wasting time in hotel rooms and playing the tourist role,” cites one subject. Another subject gave a hearty response: “Those who prefer to travel around with a guidebook while checking off all the main attractions will probably not prefer couchsurfing. If you want to truly experience a country, live with the locals.” Indeed, this “When in Rome” mentality seems pervasive within nearly all decisions to become a couchsurfer. One subject stated, for instance: “living with a local means knowing the real hotspots, not just the touristy ones. It means not only getting the best burritos but knowing when to go to avoid the lines.”
Surprisingly, there were several other additional findings that went against the hypothesis. Although many cited that the nonexistent price of couchsurfing was attractive, nearly no one said that it would ever be a factor in their decision on how to travel. Those who prefer hostels and hotels cited that they felt an obligation to accommodate the host when they were living in the home. “I’d prefer to pay for a room in exchange to be free to do as I please,” stated one subject, adding “I just feel too guilty refusing anything they offer me.” One couchsurfer was interviewed later, and when asked what he thought of the previous statement, gave a counter reply. “I arrive with very little expectations of my hosts. Although they are usually polite and invite me along, I feel it is perfectly fine and not insulting at all if I do not choose to go.” It seems, therefore, that a significant part of the decision to couchsurf or not depends on the amount of freedom that the prospective traveler believes he or she will have whilst couchsurfing. Describing oneself as social or non-social, extroverted or introverted interestingly did not make much of a difference in one’s decision to couchsurf. Those who thought they were social were certainly more likely to participate, true, yet some who checked the “introvert” box still thought they might eventually sign-up online for the program. As one subject stated, “I think of myself as shy and would usually not ask anyone for a place to stay. But with an online couchsurfing site, where people actually sign up to be hosts, I might feel more comfortable.” The opportunity to assess a traveler’s potential compatibility with one’s own therefore abated most interviewee’s wariness towards trying the system.
This study ultimately obtained results that went both for and against the hypothesis. It was correct to hypothesize that safety would be a key issue among both groups, and that those against couchsurfing would consider the dangers to be far greater than those who had participated in the program. One subject even stated that he was afraid of hosting a “psychopath.” In deviating from the hypothesis, however, most were more concerned that their belongings would be stolen than they were about their own well-being. Participants in the couchsurfing program also surprised when they stated that the very fact that one does not know the person whom they will be staying with is part of the “fun.”
Perhaps the most compelling of findings that went against the hypothesis is that some people who do not couchsurf base their reasoning on entirely social, rather than anti-social, elements. For example, several believed that going to a hostel was actually more social than staying at a host’s place, stating that hostels provided an even greater context for meeting new people. People stating that they would not couchsurf were not always less social, and did not always describe themselves as “introverts,” as predicted earlier in this study. The hypothesis was correct, however, to assume that a desire for social interactions was what drove many to choose couchsurfing as their means of shelter. It was also right in its assumption that many couchsurfers were hoping for a more “local” experience, rather than playing the role of tourist once again.
The chance to save travel money was also not an issue affecting anyone’s decision to use or not use couchsurfing, as previously predicted. Some who were against the system stated that the cheap price was not enough to convince them, citing that they would rather not feel obligated to engage with their hosts. This does not mean that the money-factor was nonexistent, however. Many did mention that the chance to save money was enticing. However, they always stated that this was simply a bonus characteristic of the process, and that the real reason was to gain valuable experiences and friendships.
In summary, the hypothesis was mostly accurate in its predictions. Where it erred, it set up a grounds for discovering many intriguing reasons behind people’s decisions to cooperate with each other on such a personal level. To further such research in the near future, the chosen subjects for the current study should be interviewed again after the summer of 2009, after they will have had plenty of time to do much traveling themselves and been host to many others. Perhaps becoming more accustomed to the practice will make them even more accepting of the idea, and cause them to practice it more frequently. Although this research project called upon an adequate number of subjects set forth by the parameters, adding more participants to the study would no doubt increase the global accuracy of the results. In the end, however, it is safe to assume that based on the majority of people stating that they either do couchsurf or would strongly consider it that couchsurfing is quickly becoming a phenomenon. It seems that the “doveryai, no proveryai” (Russian proverb for “trust, but verify”) aspects of the popular website has turned couchsurfing into a virus that people are catching at an alarming rate. With the ability to verify that a traveler is compatible, the wariness felt by many potential hosts lessen, and lifelong, trusting friendships are soon made.
