- Email: [email protected]
Understanding individual characteristics of adolescents who volunteer
Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Understanding individual characteristics of adolescents who volunteer Zeynep Cemalcilar * Department of Psychology, Koç University, Rumeli Feneri Yolu, 34450 Sariyer, Istanbul, Turkey
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 28 April 2008 Received in revised form 21 September 2008 Accepted 12 November 2008 Available online 19 December 2008 Keywords: Volunteerism in adolescence Social responsibility Self-selection in volunteerism
a b s t r a c t Volunteering has positive effects on adolescents’ psychological and social development. However, few studies have marked a self-selection bias, suggesting that the significance of these positive consequences may decrease when volunteers’ pre-participation characteristics are controlled for (e.g. Johnson, Beebe, Mortimer, & Snyder, 1998). The present short-term longitudinal study investigates the underlying dynamics of adolescents’ volunteerism. First time volunteering adolescents are accessed at the time of their initial decision to volunteer on a social responsibility project and their self-perceptions (self-concept, self-esteem) and civic attitudes (social responsibility, community belonging) are compared to their peers’ with similar backgrounds but did not volunteer to participate in the project. MANOVA results yielded that volunteers were more likely to be females, younger and scored higher on all measured individual characteristics compared to the non-volunteers. No significant effects of this participation were observed when pre-existing individual characteristics were controlled for. Findings are discussed in relation to developing appropriate recruitment strategies that would encourage more adolescents to be actively involved in social responsibility projects. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Volunteerism is one form of civic participation which includes long-term, planned, and nonobligatory prosocial activities that benefit another person, cause or a group (Penner, 2004). Within the last decade, civic participation has become widespread and frequent, a global issue with significance for social policies and social well-being. According to the 2001–2003 statistics, in six countries (Japan, Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK, and the US) percentages of adults regularly volunteering ranged between 25% to 48% of the populations (Penner, 2004). Volunteerism has positive effects for both the society and the volunteering individual. Engaging in prosocial tasks, building social relationships and acquiring new knowledge and skills empower volunteers, and result in various psychological and social gains (Wilson, 2000). Most early research is based on the experiences of adult volunteers. A more recent and developing line of research investigates civic engagement among high school and college students, in terms of their participation in student governments, sports teams, religious organizations and community volunteering (Marta & Pozzi, 2008). These studies point out additional beneficial developmental consequences of volunteerism for youngsters, such as personal growth (Switzer, Simmons, Dew, Regalski, & Wang, 1995), development of pro-social attitudes and empathy for others (Atkins, Hart, & Donnelly, 2005) and changes in self-perception * Tel.: +90 212 338 1515; fax: +90 212 338 3760. E-mail address: [email protected] 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.11.009
(Callero, Howard, & Piliavin, 1987) as volunteer role becomes part of their identity. Mostly for the disadvantaged and at-risk students, civic engagement is also observed to improve academic achievement and future academic and occupational goals and decrease likelihood of dropping out from school (Taylor & Pancer, 2007). Yet, a number of empirical studies reported null or negative effects of civic involvement on volunteers (Metz & Youniss, 2005; Schmidt, Shumow, & Kackar, 2007). One of the reasons cited for these inconsistencies in findings is the specific characteristics of those who volunteered. Individuals who self select to partake in volunteer activities differ from their counterparts who do not in terms of some important background characteristics (e.g. parental education, ethnicity) and individual difference factors (e.g. motivation, civic involvement). These predetermined dispositions, in turn, may nullify the effect of civic participation (Stukas, Clary, & Snyder, 1999). In this paper, I aim to shed light on the effects of ‘‘self-selection” on the consequences of civic participation of youngsters. In a field study, I investigate self-perceptions (self-esteem, general self-concept, social responsibility, community belonging) of first time volunteers in contrast to their peers who do not volunteer. Secondarily, I also analyze the pre- to post- project score changes of volunteers to test the impact of this participation. 1.1. Volunteerism in perspective Volunteering makes substantial social and economic contributions to society, however they are rather costly in a number of
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
ways; they require investments of large amounts of money, time, goods, and human effort (Penner, 2004). This makes the ability to effectively recruit and retain volunteers of vital interest to social scientists, practitioners, and policy makers. One of the key factors for ensuring initiation and sustainability of volunteerism is to identify its determinants (Smith, 1994). At the same time, if volunteerism is beneficial for the volunteers themselves, unraveling the dynamics of civic participation can also be useful in attracting larger numbers of individuals for service, specifically those who would benefit most from this experience, but hold back due to a variety of reasons. Researchers consider various dispositional, situational, and structural factors as determinants of volunteerism. Two of the most prominent models of volunteerism, the volunteer process model by Omoto and Snyder (1995) and the prosocial personality model by Penner (2002) emphasize the importance of identifying dispositional characteristics of volunteers in understanding the factors that lead them to volunteer in the first place and then continue volunteering for extended periods. Omoto and Snyder (1995) further claim that since there are fewer situational constraints on the initial decision to volunteer, it is dispositional factors that play an especially important role in this decision. Penner (2004) has also defined the initial decision to volunteer as a personal decision, which is likely to be affected by individuals’ preexisting personality dispositions. However, in further empirical studies, researchers studying the volunteer process model limited their focus more on motives and values as individual characteristics influencing the initial decision to volunteer, whereas those studying the prosocial personality model focused on other-oriented empathy and helpfulness as individual characteristics that predictor sustained volunteerism. Recent attempts in understanding the profile of volunteers yielded important, yet inconclusive findings (Reed & Selbee, 2000). In a review article, Wilson (2000) suggested that females were more likely than males to volunteer, volunteerism peaked during middle adulthood, and people with more education, higher income and/or higher prestigious jobs volunteered more than people from lower socio-economic groups. On a sample of college students, Carlo, Okun, Knight, and de Guzman (2005) demonstrated that extraversion and agreeableness were positively associated with volunteerism. In a large scale study of about 18.000 Canadians aged 15 years and older, Reed and Selbee (2000) compared active volunteers to less active volunteers and non-volunteers on 47 variables covering a wide range of social and economic characteristics and demonstrated that generosity and caring, household characteristics, religious factors, education, occupation, assessment of one’s life situation, motivation, region, and community size were the most salient determinants of volunteerism. Two other research streams also study the dispositional characteristics of volunteers, but they seek to understand the effects of individual characteristics on the consequences of volunteerism. The first group of studies suggest that the positive consequences of volunteering disappear when individuals’ pre- existing characteristics are taken into account. For instance, in a longitudinal study using data from the four waves of the Youth Development Study with high school students, Johnson, Beebe, Mortimer, and Snyder (1998) demonstrated that significant program effects students’ on students’ well-being, self-esteem, and academic performance were nullified when their pre-program characteristics that predicted volunteerism four years before were controlled for analyses. The second group of studies derives from the observation that most direct requests to become a volunteer are targeted at people who are perceived as being the kinds of individuals who would be interested in becoming a volunteer (Penner, 2004). Hence those who volunteer are already different from the less inclined ones
433
on a variety of socio-demographic factors, such as parental education and ethnicity and other civic attitudes, such as intended future voting or civic involvement (Metz & Youniss, 2005). Taken together the studies mentioned above imply that when participation is voluntary, only those who are already well-equipped self-select to volunteer, whereas, those who are most in need of this experience refrain from engaging in community service on their own accounts (Henderson, Brown, Pancer, & Ellis-Hale, 2007). However, as Henderson et al., also showed students do benefit from civic participation even when they are mandated to participate: those who are less likely to volunteer (who usually lack some social and economic resources) benefit more than those who are already involved, and an accumulation of these experiences may even compensate for any background differences and equalize opportunity for these disadvantaged students. Extant research on profiling volunteers is limited in an important way. Most of these studies are cross-sectional and/or collect data retrospectively. They access individuals who have already undertaken at least one voluntary activity and analyze their dispositional characteristics and motivations in relation to the non-volunteers in the same sample. However, as Finkelstein, Penner, and Brannick (2005) have also suggested, it is possible that individuals’ motives and values change over time as they become involved in prosocial behaviors. Hence, identifying individual characteristics that lead individuals to volunteer in the first place using such retrospective designs is impractical. 1.2. The present study The present short-term longitudinal study is novel in the sense that it accessed adolescents at the time of their initial decision to undertake a volunteer activity for the first time in their lives and compared their individual characteristics to non-volunteers with similar backgrounds. Additionally, pre- and post- project measures are compared to assess the effects of this participation on the same individual difference factors. Volunteers and non-volunteers in the sample came from the same schools and constituted a fairly homogenous group in terms of their family backgrounds and the school contexts they attend to. Hence, rather than focusing on the frequently studied demographic and socio-economic factors as dispositional factors that influence volunteerism (Reed & Selbee, 2000), I chose to study individual characteristic which are often studied as factors influenced analyses civic engagements. Various researchers suggest that civic mentioned above produces character-related changes in youngsters (Reed, Jernstedt, Hawley, Reber, & DuBois, 2005; Schmidt et al., 2007). In a number of studies with a variety of samples, the most often reported outcomes were self- related perceptions; self-esteem, self- identity and self-worth and civic attitudes; social responsibility and community belonging (e.g. Penner & Finkelstein, 1998; Reed et al., 2005; Stukas et al., 1999; Taylor & Pancer, 2007; Yates & Youniss, 1998). Accordingly, in this study, I chose to study these individual characteristics to investigate whether volunteers differed from non-volunteers in systematic ways. I argue that, one’s belief in his/herself and his/her values regarding the community they belong to would have the utmost effect on their initial decision to volunteer. Hence in accordance with previous research regarding self-selection effects, I expect the volunteering group to be higher on all individual characteristic factors compared to the non-volunteers. To summarize, by comparing self-perceptions of volunteers with those of non-volunteers, I aim to identify characteristics that enable adolescents to undertake social responsibility projects for the first time. At the same time, by comparing pre- to post- project scores, I test whether participation in a year long social responsibility project had an effect on volunteers.
434
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
The social responsibility program studied in this research is the ‘‘Little Steps for a Great Future” program of the Turkish Community Volunteers Foundation (TOG), which brings primary school students from low to middle-low income public schools together with university student mentors so that they cooperate in various social responsibility activities in their communities. This program has been implemented in primary schools across Turkey, since 2005. The current paper focuses on the experiences of the primary school student participants only. After being trained by TOG, university student mentors contact the administrators of the primary schools in their communities, and upon their agreement, make presentations about the project in the school, separately for students, teachers, and parents. After the presentations students volunteer to partake in the project. Even though participation is strongly supported by the school administrators, in no way is it enforced. Besides, there are no known cases in which participation was denied by the student’s parents. Volunteers meet with their mentors as a group in their schools periodically for the whole academic year. The first few meetings are devoted to raising awareness to social problems, encouraging civic engagement, and project planning. Then, students are asked to identify some social problems in their schools or communities that they deem important and finally, choose one or more problems that they would like to work on as a group. It is made sure that all group members agree on the selected project(s). The main responsibility for planning and implementing the activities and finding funding is on the students. Mentors only intervene in case of problems.
of the 505 students who participated in the pre-project phase, only 131 also responded to the post-project questionnaires. The high attrition rate (77%) was mostly due to a timing problem: in some schools, post-project data collection took place after the semester was over and most of the students had already left for summer vacation. T-test comparisons on demographics and pre-project measures on all study variables conducted separately for the control and project groups revealed negligible differences between those who participated both phases and those who dropped out after the pre-project phase. Within the control group, those who provided the post data had a significantly higher score on one sub-dimension of the social responsibility scale (contribution to the classroom and school community) and within the project group, those who provided the post data had a significantly higher score on one sub-dimension of the social-concept scale (intellectual and school status) than the drop-outs. Hence it was concluded that those who participated in both phases were not significantly different from those who provided only the pre-project data. In the 2007/08 sample, the attrition rate was less than 10% (only 30 participants out of 315). Post-project questionnaires were administered after the planned projects were completed, approximately six months following the pre-test administration. Comparisons of post- and pre- project responses tested the effects of the program on volunteers. The types of civic projects implemented ranged from raising environment awareness in the community (by writing reports based on literature reviews, giving seminars in the school and in the neighborhood, or cleaning trash and planting trees), helping schools nearby (building a library or starting campaigns for donations to meet various needs of schools in nearby villages), to helping cancer patient children actualize one wish with the money they raised from writing and performing a theater play.
2.2. The participants
2.3. Measures
Data for the present study were collected in two different implementations of the Little Steps project in the 2006/07 and the 2007/08 academic years. The types of schools selected to participate and the procedures followed were identical. There was only a difference in the assignment of control groups. In 2006/07, participants in the control group were randomly selected among students who had listened to the project presentation but chose not to participate, whereas in 2007/08, they were selected among students who did not know about the project. Thus, only the 2006/07 sample was used in comparing the characteristics of volunteers to the non-volunteers at the time of initial decision to participate. Pre- to post-project comparisons were conducted on the combined sample. Detailed information regarding group differences is presented when necessary. Pre-project questionnaires were administered before the program presentation. A total of 569 students responded, and 505 who had not participated in any previous social responsibility projects constituted the sample of this study. A comparison of those who had participated in one or more social responsibility projects before to those who had not, yielded significant main effects; ‘‘already volunteers” scored higher than the non-experienced on all individual characteristics measures. To control for any confounding effects of previous civic engagement, only students who had never volunteered before were included in the sample of this study. Pre-project scores of the project and the control groups were compared to identify the characteristics of the adolescents who volunteered. A total of 416 students responded to both pre- and post-project questionnaires: 130 participated in the 2006/07 academic year and 285 in the 2007/08 academic year. Within the 2006/07 sample, out
Community belonging is assessed with a 5–items constructed for this study. Responses were given on a 5-point Likert scale with higher scores indicating higher community belonging. Sample item is ‘I feel like home in this neighborhood’. The internal consistency of the items was .60. Social responsibility is assessed with a15-item short version of the Quick Social Responsibility Scale (BC Ministry of Education, 2001). The scale had 4 subscales, assessing adolescents’ levels of (1) contribution to the classroom and school community; (2) valuing diversity and defending human rights; (3) self-perceived ability of solving problems in peaceful ways; and (4) self-perceived ability of exercising democratic rights and responsibilities. A 5-point Likert scale was used with higher scores indicating higher social responsibility. The scale had an internal consistency of .72 Self-esteem is assessed with the Turkish version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Cuhadaroglu, 1986). It is a 10-item self-report measure with a 5-point Likert response scale. Higher scores indicate higher self-esteem. The scale had an internal consistency of .73. Self-concept is assessed with the Turkish version of the Piers– Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale (Oner, 2005). It is an 80-item instrument measuring one’s self-attitudes reflecting both a description and evaluation in six domains; happiness, anxiety, intellect and school status, behavioral adjustment, popularity, and physical appearance and attributes. Respondents answer yes/ no to each item. Higher scores represent a positive self-concept. The physical appearance and attributes subscale was irrelevant to this study and thus not used. The remaining 57 items had an internal consistency of .91.
2. Method 2.1. The program and procedure
435
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
3. Results First, I demonstrate that the first time volunteers differ from their non-volunteering counterparts in the selected individual difference charactersitics. Then, I test the effects of this civic participation on volunteers. 3.1. Characteristics of volunteers
Table 1 Control and project group means in the pre-project phase (N = 505).
Community belonging Social responsibility (overall) Contribution to the school community Valuing diversity and defending human rights Solving problems Exercising democratic rights/ responsibilities Self-esteem Self-concept (overall) Happiness and satisfaction Freedom from anxiety Intellectual and school status Behavioral adjustment Popularity
Control group
Project group
F
p
3.96 3.57 3.69
4.19 3.74 3.85
10.293 10.951 4.136
.00 .00 .04
3.65
3.74
1.189
NS
3.97 2.93
4.06 3.13
.862 17.616
NS .00
3.67 .71 .73 .58 .65 .73 .83
3.88 .77 .79 .61 .82 .80 .82
8.397 16.211 6.193 2.807 53.539 16.632 .145
.00 .00 .01 NS .00 .00 NS
Among the 505 students who responded to the pre-project questionnaires (from the 2006/07 sample), 388 volunteered and 117 did not volunteer to participate in the program. Eighty-seven percent of students in the control group had participated in the project presentation. Fifty six percent of volunteers and 45% of non-volunteers were females, indicating a significant difference by gender, v2 = 4.0, p < .05. Volunteers were, on average, one year younger than non-volunteers [Xproject = 12.31 and Xcontrol = 13.31, F (1, 500) = 10.32, p < .001]. MANOVA was used to compare the two groups’ self-reported individual characteristics. Mean scores are presented in Table 1. The analysis yielded a significant multivariate effect of group on the linear composition of the dependent variables [Wilks k (13, 472) = 8.48, p < .000, gp2 = .21]. Univariate comparisons indicated a significant effect of the group status on community belonging and overall social responsibility scores with the project group scoring higher on both. A further examination of the social responsibility subscales yielded that volunteers’ scores were higher on the contribution to the classroom and school community and the exercising democratic rights and responsibilities subscales compared to non-volunteers. Univariate comparisons also indicated a significant effect of the group status on self-esteem and overall self-concept, favoring volunteers in all variables.1 When the domains of self-concept are investigated, the differences were on perceived intellectual and school status and behavioral adjustment subscales. To test the relative effects of the individual characteristics that significantly differentiated volunteers from non-volunteers, a stepwise logistic regression analysis was conducted with the same 505 participants. All individual difference variables at the pre-project phase are entered as predictors of the volunteer status after controlling for age and gender. The model fit the data significantly and explained 26% of the probability of group membership. Those who were younger (B = .436, Exp(B) = .647, p < .000) and who perceived themselves as having high intellect (B = .551, Exp(B) = 1.736, p < .000) were more likely to volunteer. The odds of volunteering increased 36% for those who were a year younger and 73% for each unit increase in the perceived intellectual and school status score.
sented in Table 2. The results revealed no significant changes at the post- project phase in the volunteer group’s scores compared to those of the non-volunteers. No positive effect of this participation was observed when volunteers’ pre-existing individual characteristics are controlled for. The analyses yielded the same results when run separately for the 2006/07 and 2007/08 samples.
3.2. The effects of participation
4. Discussion
The combined pre- and post-project data received from participants of the two implementations of the project were used to test the effects of this participation on volunteers. At the post-project data collection, 20 students who were originally in the control group mentioned having participated in the yearlong activities of the program at least more than once, and are included in the project group. The number of volunteers totaled to 194, and non-volunteers to 139. The project and control group’s pre- to post- project score changes were compared using a 2 (pre-post) by 2 (control-project group) Repeated Measures of ANCOVA. Gender was included as a control variable and age as covariate. Estimated means are pre-
Understanding the dynamics of youth volunteering is important because civic engagement has positive effects on adolescents’ development and also because youth volunteerism is a strong predictor of adult volunteerism (Atkins et al., 2005). To ensure that more citizens start volunteering at earlier ages and then continue throughout their adulthood requires severe planning on the part of the volunteer dependent agencies. The findings of the present study suggest that, among a group of adolescents who were given the chance to participate in a social responsibility project for the first time, those who volunteered were different from their peers who chose not to volunteer on a number of demographic and individual difference factors. Regarding demographics, as suggested before (Wilson, 2000), the volunteers in the present study were more likely to be females and younger than non-volunteers. Regarding individual difference factors, volunteers had significantly higher community belonging, social responsibility, and self-evaluations (esteem and concept)
1 The analysis yielded no significant difference when run on the 2007/08 sample only. The control group in this sample was composed of students from other schools with similar backgrounds, who did not know about Little Steps program.
Table 2 The estimated marginal means of pre- and post- project scores by group (N = 333).
Community belonging Social responsibility Contribution to the school community Valuing diversity and defending human rights Solving problems Exercising democratic rights/ responsibilities Self-esteem Self-concept (overall) Happiness and satisfaction Freedom from anxiety Intellectual and school status Behavioral adjustment Popularity
Control group
Project group
Pretest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
Wilk’s F
4.11 3.64 3.92
4.14 3.61 3.82
4.17 3.71 3.79
4.29 3.73 3.88
.15 .03 .25
3.62
3.68
3.64
3.53
.21
3.98 3.11
3.81 3.06
3.96 3.46
4.05 3.51
.23 .32
3.80 .76 .78 .61 .75 .79 .85
3.63 .71 .76 .58 .71 .73 .79
3.79 .74 .80 .58 .80 .76 .82
3.65 .74 .76 .60 .76 .73 .82
2.37 1.57 2.06 1.09 .05 1.13 1.73
436
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
than non-volunteers at the time of the decision to volunteer, also confirming previous studies (e.g. Metz & Youniss, 2005; Reed et al., 2005). In terms of self-evaluations, students who were more likely to be satisfied with who they were, who had better behavioral adjustment, and perceived themselves as intelligent were more likely to undertake volunteer responsibility than nonvolunteers. When relative effects of these individual characteristics were analyzed, only age and self-perceived intellectual level emerged as factors significantly predicting volunteerism. Those who were younger and who perceived themselves as having high intellectual and school status were more likely to volunteer. The reason why older students refrained from participating may be related to their relatively heavy course-work. The reason why students with high intellectual and school status participated may be twofold; it is either that those who are doing better in academic work can devote time to extracurricular activities, or that those who are more confident in their ability to make a difference on others’ lives select to participate. Analysis on the effects of the program yielded no significant effects on the measured individual characteristics. This finding is also in line with the self-selection bias observed in other studies (e.g. Johnson et al., 1998; Stukas et al., 1999; Walker, 2002; Yates & Youniss, 1998). Individuals with already positive psychological states volunteer and when their individual characteristics are statistically controlled for, the post-project gains lose significance. Overall the results of this study suggest that when civic participation is introduced as a personal choice, adolescents with more positive psychological states volunteer, yet, this experience has only a limited effect on further enhancing their already positive characteristics. Recent demonstrations on the positive effects of mandated civic participation on especially those who are less inclined to volunteer suggest requiring participation as a method of recruitment at least for some disadvantaged youth (e.g. Henderson et al., 2007; Metz & Youniss, 2005). Additionally, studies spanning long time intervals are explicit in showing a formative influence of early civic engagement in later adult years. In the present study, too, an initial comparison of those who have participated in social responsibility projects before with those who have not, yielded significant differences; experienced students were higher on all individual characteristics both from those who volunteered in this project and those who did not. This observed difference implies that accumulation of civic experiences contributes to the volunteers’ psychological and social development. An alternative explanation may be that the effects of civic participation on volunteers become observable in the log-run. More systematic analysis is required to understand this. Regardless, in light of the existing research on mandated participation, findings of the current study also suggest that civic engagement is beneficial for the youths and recruitment strategies should be adjusted to encourage those who are less likely to volunteer. At the same time, this study also responds to the question whether personality leads to volunteering or volunteering shapes personality (Atkins et al., 2005). At the time of initial decision, being equipped with certain individual characteristics does lead one to volunteer. However, in the long run, civic involvement may have positive effects on volunteers’ dispositions. Reaching out to adolescents as early as possible to increase their awareness to social problems and help them see that they can
make a difference as conscientious citizens is important. More research is needed to get an in-depth understanding of the reservations of potential volunteers who are less likely to self-nominate. Then these research findings can be used to guide practitioners and policy makers to develop appropriate strategies to recruit larger numbers of adolescents to participate in civic projects, who would benefit from this experience while at the same time serve communities in need. References Atkins, R., Hart, D., & Donnelly, T. (2005). The association of childhood personality type with volunteering during adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 51, 145–162. BC Ministry of Education (2001). BC performance standards. Social responsibility: A framework. Victoria, BC: Ministry of Education. Callero, P. L., Howard, J. A., & Piliavin, J. A. (1987). Helping behavior as a role behavior: Disclosing social structure and history on the analysis of prosocial actions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 247–256. Carlo, G., Okun, M. A., Knight, G. P., & de Guzman (2005). The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1293–1305. Cuhadaroglu, F. (1986). Adolesanlarda benlik saygisi (Self-esteem of adolescents). Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ankara, Turkey: Hacettepe University. Finkelstein, M., Penner, L. A., & Brannick, M. (2005). Motive, role identity, and prosocial personality as predictors of volunteer activity. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 403–418. Henderson, A., Brown, S. D., Pancer, S. M., & Ellis-Hale, K. (2007). Mandated community service in high school and subsequent civic engagement: The case of the ‘‘double cohort” in Ontario, Canada. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 849–860. Johnson, M. K., Beebe, T., Mortimer, J. T., & Snyder, M. (1998). Volunteerism in adolescence. A process perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 8(3), 309–332. Marta, E., & Pozzi, M. (2008). Young people and volunteerism: A model of sustained volunteerism during the transition to adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 15, 35–46. Metz, E., & Youniss, J. (2005). Longitudinal gains in civic development through school-based required service. Political Psychology, 26, 413–437. Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained help without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 671–686. Oner, N. (2005). Piers Harris children’s self-concept scale manual. Ankara: Turkish Psychological Association. Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organizational influences on sustained volunteerism: An integrationists perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 447–467. Penner, L. A. (2004). Volunteerism and social problems: Making things better or worse? Journal of Social Issues, 60, 645–666. Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and structural determinants of volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 525–537. Reed, P. B., & Selbee, L. K. (2000). Distinguishing characteristics of active volunteers in Canada. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 571–592. Reed, V. A., Jernstedt, G. C., Hawley, J. K., Reber, E. S., & DuBois, C. (2005). Effects of a small-scale, very short-term service learning experience on college students. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 359–368. Schmidt, J. A., Shumow, L., & Kackar, H. (2007). Adolescents’ participation in service activities and its impact on academic, behavioral and civic outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 127–140. Smith, D. (1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23, 243–263. Stukas, A. A., Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). Service learning: Who benefits and why? Social Policy Report, 13, 1–19. Switzer, G. E., Simmons, R. G., Dew, M. A., Regalski, J. M., & Wang, C. (1995). The effect of a school- based helper program on adolescent self-image, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15, 429–455. Taylor, T. P., & Pancer, S. M. (2007). Community service experiences and commitment to volunteering. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 320–345. Walker, Y. (2002). Service as a pathway to political participation. What research tells us. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 183–188. Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240. Yates, M., & Youniss, J. (1998). Community service and political identity development in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 495–512.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Understanding individual characteristics of adolescents who volunteer Zeynep Cemalcilar * Department of Psychology, Koç University, Rumeli Feneri Yolu, 34450 Sariyer, Istanbul, Turkey
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 28 April 2008 Received in revised form 21 September 2008 Accepted 12 November 2008 Available online 19 December 2008 Keywords: Volunteerism in adolescence Social responsibility Self-selection in volunteerism
a b s t r a c t Volunteering has positive effects on adolescents’ psychological and social development. However, few studies have marked a self-selection bias, suggesting that the significance of these positive consequences may decrease when volunteers’ pre-participation characteristics are controlled for (e.g. Johnson, Beebe, Mortimer, & Snyder, 1998). The present short-term longitudinal study investigates the underlying dynamics of adolescents’ volunteerism. First time volunteering adolescents are accessed at the time of their initial decision to volunteer on a social responsibility project and their self-perceptions (self-concept, self-esteem) and civic attitudes (social responsibility, community belonging) are compared to their peers’ with similar backgrounds but did not volunteer to participate in the project. MANOVA results yielded that volunteers were more likely to be females, younger and scored higher on all measured individual characteristics compared to the non-volunteers. No significant effects of this participation were observed when pre-existing individual characteristics were controlled for. Findings are discussed in relation to developing appropriate recruitment strategies that would encourage more adolescents to be actively involved in social responsibility projects. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Volunteerism is one form of civic participation which includes long-term, planned, and nonobligatory prosocial activities that benefit another person, cause or a group (Penner, 2004). Within the last decade, civic participation has become widespread and frequent, a global issue with significance for social policies and social well-being. According to the 2001–2003 statistics, in six countries (Japan, Australia, Canada, Germany, the UK, and the US) percentages of adults regularly volunteering ranged between 25% to 48% of the populations (Penner, 2004). Volunteerism has positive effects for both the society and the volunteering individual. Engaging in prosocial tasks, building social relationships and acquiring new knowledge and skills empower volunteers, and result in various psychological and social gains (Wilson, 2000). Most early research is based on the experiences of adult volunteers. A more recent and developing line of research investigates civic engagement among high school and college students, in terms of their participation in student governments, sports teams, religious organizations and community volunteering (Marta & Pozzi, 2008). These studies point out additional beneficial developmental consequences of volunteerism for youngsters, such as personal growth (Switzer, Simmons, Dew, Regalski, & Wang, 1995), development of pro-social attitudes and empathy for others (Atkins, Hart, & Donnelly, 2005) and changes in self-perception * Tel.: +90 212 338 1515; fax: +90 212 338 3760. E-mail address: [email protected] 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.11.009
(Callero, Howard, & Piliavin, 1987) as volunteer role becomes part of their identity. Mostly for the disadvantaged and at-risk students, civic engagement is also observed to improve academic achievement and future academic and occupational goals and decrease likelihood of dropping out from school (Taylor & Pancer, 2007). Yet, a number of empirical studies reported null or negative effects of civic involvement on volunteers (Metz & Youniss, 2005; Schmidt, Shumow, & Kackar, 2007). One of the reasons cited for these inconsistencies in findings is the specific characteristics of those who volunteered. Individuals who self select to partake in volunteer activities differ from their counterparts who do not in terms of some important background characteristics (e.g. parental education, ethnicity) and individual difference factors (e.g. motivation, civic involvement). These predetermined dispositions, in turn, may nullify the effect of civic participation (Stukas, Clary, & Snyder, 1999). In this paper, I aim to shed light on the effects of ‘‘self-selection” on the consequences of civic participation of youngsters. In a field study, I investigate self-perceptions (self-esteem, general self-concept, social responsibility, community belonging) of first time volunteers in contrast to their peers who do not volunteer. Secondarily, I also analyze the pre- to post- project score changes of volunteers to test the impact of this participation. 1.1. Volunteerism in perspective Volunteering makes substantial social and economic contributions to society, however they are rather costly in a number of
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
ways; they require investments of large amounts of money, time, goods, and human effort (Penner, 2004). This makes the ability to effectively recruit and retain volunteers of vital interest to social scientists, practitioners, and policy makers. One of the key factors for ensuring initiation and sustainability of volunteerism is to identify its determinants (Smith, 1994). At the same time, if volunteerism is beneficial for the volunteers themselves, unraveling the dynamics of civic participation can also be useful in attracting larger numbers of individuals for service, specifically those who would benefit most from this experience, but hold back due to a variety of reasons. Researchers consider various dispositional, situational, and structural factors as determinants of volunteerism. Two of the most prominent models of volunteerism, the volunteer process model by Omoto and Snyder (1995) and the prosocial personality model by Penner (2002) emphasize the importance of identifying dispositional characteristics of volunteers in understanding the factors that lead them to volunteer in the first place and then continue volunteering for extended periods. Omoto and Snyder (1995) further claim that since there are fewer situational constraints on the initial decision to volunteer, it is dispositional factors that play an especially important role in this decision. Penner (2004) has also defined the initial decision to volunteer as a personal decision, which is likely to be affected by individuals’ preexisting personality dispositions. However, in further empirical studies, researchers studying the volunteer process model limited their focus more on motives and values as individual characteristics influencing the initial decision to volunteer, whereas those studying the prosocial personality model focused on other-oriented empathy and helpfulness as individual characteristics that predictor sustained volunteerism. Recent attempts in understanding the profile of volunteers yielded important, yet inconclusive findings (Reed & Selbee, 2000). In a review article, Wilson (2000) suggested that females were more likely than males to volunteer, volunteerism peaked during middle adulthood, and people with more education, higher income and/or higher prestigious jobs volunteered more than people from lower socio-economic groups. On a sample of college students, Carlo, Okun, Knight, and de Guzman (2005) demonstrated that extraversion and agreeableness were positively associated with volunteerism. In a large scale study of about 18.000 Canadians aged 15 years and older, Reed and Selbee (2000) compared active volunteers to less active volunteers and non-volunteers on 47 variables covering a wide range of social and economic characteristics and demonstrated that generosity and caring, household characteristics, religious factors, education, occupation, assessment of one’s life situation, motivation, region, and community size were the most salient determinants of volunteerism. Two other research streams also study the dispositional characteristics of volunteers, but they seek to understand the effects of individual characteristics on the consequences of volunteerism. The first group of studies suggest that the positive consequences of volunteering disappear when individuals’ pre- existing characteristics are taken into account. For instance, in a longitudinal study using data from the four waves of the Youth Development Study with high school students, Johnson, Beebe, Mortimer, and Snyder (1998) demonstrated that significant program effects students’ on students’ well-being, self-esteem, and academic performance were nullified when their pre-program characteristics that predicted volunteerism four years before were controlled for analyses. The second group of studies derives from the observation that most direct requests to become a volunteer are targeted at people who are perceived as being the kinds of individuals who would be interested in becoming a volunteer (Penner, 2004). Hence those who volunteer are already different from the less inclined ones
433
on a variety of socio-demographic factors, such as parental education and ethnicity and other civic attitudes, such as intended future voting or civic involvement (Metz & Youniss, 2005). Taken together the studies mentioned above imply that when participation is voluntary, only those who are already well-equipped self-select to volunteer, whereas, those who are most in need of this experience refrain from engaging in community service on their own accounts (Henderson, Brown, Pancer, & Ellis-Hale, 2007). However, as Henderson et al., also showed students do benefit from civic participation even when they are mandated to participate: those who are less likely to volunteer (who usually lack some social and economic resources) benefit more than those who are already involved, and an accumulation of these experiences may even compensate for any background differences and equalize opportunity for these disadvantaged students. Extant research on profiling volunteers is limited in an important way. Most of these studies are cross-sectional and/or collect data retrospectively. They access individuals who have already undertaken at least one voluntary activity and analyze their dispositional characteristics and motivations in relation to the non-volunteers in the same sample. However, as Finkelstein, Penner, and Brannick (2005) have also suggested, it is possible that individuals’ motives and values change over time as they become involved in prosocial behaviors. Hence, identifying individual characteristics that lead individuals to volunteer in the first place using such retrospective designs is impractical. 1.2. The present study The present short-term longitudinal study is novel in the sense that it accessed adolescents at the time of their initial decision to undertake a volunteer activity for the first time in their lives and compared their individual characteristics to non-volunteers with similar backgrounds. Additionally, pre- and post- project measures are compared to assess the effects of this participation on the same individual difference factors. Volunteers and non-volunteers in the sample came from the same schools and constituted a fairly homogenous group in terms of their family backgrounds and the school contexts they attend to. Hence, rather than focusing on the frequently studied demographic and socio-economic factors as dispositional factors that influence volunteerism (Reed & Selbee, 2000), I chose to study individual characteristic which are often studied as factors influenced analyses civic engagements. Various researchers suggest that civic mentioned above produces character-related changes in youngsters (Reed, Jernstedt, Hawley, Reber, & DuBois, 2005; Schmidt et al., 2007). In a number of studies with a variety of samples, the most often reported outcomes were self- related perceptions; self-esteem, self- identity and self-worth and civic attitudes; social responsibility and community belonging (e.g. Penner & Finkelstein, 1998; Reed et al., 2005; Stukas et al., 1999; Taylor & Pancer, 2007; Yates & Youniss, 1998). Accordingly, in this study, I chose to study these individual characteristics to investigate whether volunteers differed from non-volunteers in systematic ways. I argue that, one’s belief in his/herself and his/her values regarding the community they belong to would have the utmost effect on their initial decision to volunteer. Hence in accordance with previous research regarding self-selection effects, I expect the volunteering group to be higher on all individual characteristic factors compared to the non-volunteers. To summarize, by comparing self-perceptions of volunteers with those of non-volunteers, I aim to identify characteristics that enable adolescents to undertake social responsibility projects for the first time. At the same time, by comparing pre- to post- project scores, I test whether participation in a year long social responsibility project had an effect on volunteers.
434
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
The social responsibility program studied in this research is the ‘‘Little Steps for a Great Future” program of the Turkish Community Volunteers Foundation (TOG), which brings primary school students from low to middle-low income public schools together with university student mentors so that they cooperate in various social responsibility activities in their communities. This program has been implemented in primary schools across Turkey, since 2005. The current paper focuses on the experiences of the primary school student participants only. After being trained by TOG, university student mentors contact the administrators of the primary schools in their communities, and upon their agreement, make presentations about the project in the school, separately for students, teachers, and parents. After the presentations students volunteer to partake in the project. Even though participation is strongly supported by the school administrators, in no way is it enforced. Besides, there are no known cases in which participation was denied by the student’s parents. Volunteers meet with their mentors as a group in their schools periodically for the whole academic year. The first few meetings are devoted to raising awareness to social problems, encouraging civic engagement, and project planning. Then, students are asked to identify some social problems in their schools or communities that they deem important and finally, choose one or more problems that they would like to work on as a group. It is made sure that all group members agree on the selected project(s). The main responsibility for planning and implementing the activities and finding funding is on the students. Mentors only intervene in case of problems.
of the 505 students who participated in the pre-project phase, only 131 also responded to the post-project questionnaires. The high attrition rate (77%) was mostly due to a timing problem: in some schools, post-project data collection took place after the semester was over and most of the students had already left for summer vacation. T-test comparisons on demographics and pre-project measures on all study variables conducted separately for the control and project groups revealed negligible differences between those who participated both phases and those who dropped out after the pre-project phase. Within the control group, those who provided the post data had a significantly higher score on one sub-dimension of the social responsibility scale (contribution to the classroom and school community) and within the project group, those who provided the post data had a significantly higher score on one sub-dimension of the social-concept scale (intellectual and school status) than the drop-outs. Hence it was concluded that those who participated in both phases were not significantly different from those who provided only the pre-project data. In the 2007/08 sample, the attrition rate was less than 10% (only 30 participants out of 315). Post-project questionnaires were administered after the planned projects were completed, approximately six months following the pre-test administration. Comparisons of post- and pre- project responses tested the effects of the program on volunteers. The types of civic projects implemented ranged from raising environment awareness in the community (by writing reports based on literature reviews, giving seminars in the school and in the neighborhood, or cleaning trash and planting trees), helping schools nearby (building a library or starting campaigns for donations to meet various needs of schools in nearby villages), to helping cancer patient children actualize one wish with the money they raised from writing and performing a theater play.
2.2. The participants
2.3. Measures
Data for the present study were collected in two different implementations of the Little Steps project in the 2006/07 and the 2007/08 academic years. The types of schools selected to participate and the procedures followed were identical. There was only a difference in the assignment of control groups. In 2006/07, participants in the control group were randomly selected among students who had listened to the project presentation but chose not to participate, whereas in 2007/08, they were selected among students who did not know about the project. Thus, only the 2006/07 sample was used in comparing the characteristics of volunteers to the non-volunteers at the time of initial decision to participate. Pre- to post-project comparisons were conducted on the combined sample. Detailed information regarding group differences is presented when necessary. Pre-project questionnaires were administered before the program presentation. A total of 569 students responded, and 505 who had not participated in any previous social responsibility projects constituted the sample of this study. A comparison of those who had participated in one or more social responsibility projects before to those who had not, yielded significant main effects; ‘‘already volunteers” scored higher than the non-experienced on all individual characteristics measures. To control for any confounding effects of previous civic engagement, only students who had never volunteered before were included in the sample of this study. Pre-project scores of the project and the control groups were compared to identify the characteristics of the adolescents who volunteered. A total of 416 students responded to both pre- and post-project questionnaires: 130 participated in the 2006/07 academic year and 285 in the 2007/08 academic year. Within the 2006/07 sample, out
Community belonging is assessed with a 5–items constructed for this study. Responses were given on a 5-point Likert scale with higher scores indicating higher community belonging. Sample item is ‘I feel like home in this neighborhood’. The internal consistency of the items was .60. Social responsibility is assessed with a15-item short version of the Quick Social Responsibility Scale (BC Ministry of Education, 2001). The scale had 4 subscales, assessing adolescents’ levels of (1) contribution to the classroom and school community; (2) valuing diversity and defending human rights; (3) self-perceived ability of solving problems in peaceful ways; and (4) self-perceived ability of exercising democratic rights and responsibilities. A 5-point Likert scale was used with higher scores indicating higher social responsibility. The scale had an internal consistency of .72 Self-esteem is assessed with the Turkish version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Cuhadaroglu, 1986). It is a 10-item self-report measure with a 5-point Likert response scale. Higher scores indicate higher self-esteem. The scale had an internal consistency of .73. Self-concept is assessed with the Turkish version of the Piers– Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale (Oner, 2005). It is an 80-item instrument measuring one’s self-attitudes reflecting both a description and evaluation in six domains; happiness, anxiety, intellect and school status, behavioral adjustment, popularity, and physical appearance and attributes. Respondents answer yes/ no to each item. Higher scores represent a positive self-concept. The physical appearance and attributes subscale was irrelevant to this study and thus not used. The remaining 57 items had an internal consistency of .91.
2. Method 2.1. The program and procedure
435
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
3. Results First, I demonstrate that the first time volunteers differ from their non-volunteering counterparts in the selected individual difference charactersitics. Then, I test the effects of this civic participation on volunteers. 3.1. Characteristics of volunteers
Table 1 Control and project group means in the pre-project phase (N = 505).
Community belonging Social responsibility (overall) Contribution to the school community Valuing diversity and defending human rights Solving problems Exercising democratic rights/ responsibilities Self-esteem Self-concept (overall) Happiness and satisfaction Freedom from anxiety Intellectual and school status Behavioral adjustment Popularity
Control group
Project group
F
p
3.96 3.57 3.69
4.19 3.74 3.85
10.293 10.951 4.136
.00 .00 .04
3.65
3.74
1.189
NS
3.97 2.93
4.06 3.13
.862 17.616
NS .00
3.67 .71 .73 .58 .65 .73 .83
3.88 .77 .79 .61 .82 .80 .82
8.397 16.211 6.193 2.807 53.539 16.632 .145
.00 .00 .01 NS .00 .00 NS
Among the 505 students who responded to the pre-project questionnaires (from the 2006/07 sample), 388 volunteered and 117 did not volunteer to participate in the program. Eighty-seven percent of students in the control group had participated in the project presentation. Fifty six percent of volunteers and 45% of non-volunteers were females, indicating a significant difference by gender, v2 = 4.0, p < .05. Volunteers were, on average, one year younger than non-volunteers [Xproject = 12.31 and Xcontrol = 13.31, F (1, 500) = 10.32, p < .001]. MANOVA was used to compare the two groups’ self-reported individual characteristics. Mean scores are presented in Table 1. The analysis yielded a significant multivariate effect of group on the linear composition of the dependent variables [Wilks k (13, 472) = 8.48, p < .000, gp2 = .21]. Univariate comparisons indicated a significant effect of the group status on community belonging and overall social responsibility scores with the project group scoring higher on both. A further examination of the social responsibility subscales yielded that volunteers’ scores were higher on the contribution to the classroom and school community and the exercising democratic rights and responsibilities subscales compared to non-volunteers. Univariate comparisons also indicated a significant effect of the group status on self-esteem and overall self-concept, favoring volunteers in all variables.1 When the domains of self-concept are investigated, the differences were on perceived intellectual and school status and behavioral adjustment subscales. To test the relative effects of the individual characteristics that significantly differentiated volunteers from non-volunteers, a stepwise logistic regression analysis was conducted with the same 505 participants. All individual difference variables at the pre-project phase are entered as predictors of the volunteer status after controlling for age and gender. The model fit the data significantly and explained 26% of the probability of group membership. Those who were younger (B = .436, Exp(B) = .647, p < .000) and who perceived themselves as having high intellect (B = .551, Exp(B) = 1.736, p < .000) were more likely to volunteer. The odds of volunteering increased 36% for those who were a year younger and 73% for each unit increase in the perceived intellectual and school status score.
sented in Table 2. The results revealed no significant changes at the post- project phase in the volunteer group’s scores compared to those of the non-volunteers. No positive effect of this participation was observed when volunteers’ pre-existing individual characteristics are controlled for. The analyses yielded the same results when run separately for the 2006/07 and 2007/08 samples.
3.2. The effects of participation
4. Discussion
The combined pre- and post-project data received from participants of the two implementations of the project were used to test the effects of this participation on volunteers. At the post-project data collection, 20 students who were originally in the control group mentioned having participated in the yearlong activities of the program at least more than once, and are included in the project group. The number of volunteers totaled to 194, and non-volunteers to 139. The project and control group’s pre- to post- project score changes were compared using a 2 (pre-post) by 2 (control-project group) Repeated Measures of ANCOVA. Gender was included as a control variable and age as covariate. Estimated means are pre-
Understanding the dynamics of youth volunteering is important because civic engagement has positive effects on adolescents’ development and also because youth volunteerism is a strong predictor of adult volunteerism (Atkins et al., 2005). To ensure that more citizens start volunteering at earlier ages and then continue throughout their adulthood requires severe planning on the part of the volunteer dependent agencies. The findings of the present study suggest that, among a group of adolescents who were given the chance to participate in a social responsibility project for the first time, those who volunteered were different from their peers who chose not to volunteer on a number of demographic and individual difference factors. Regarding demographics, as suggested before (Wilson, 2000), the volunteers in the present study were more likely to be females and younger than non-volunteers. Regarding individual difference factors, volunteers had significantly higher community belonging, social responsibility, and self-evaluations (esteem and concept)
1 The analysis yielded no significant difference when run on the 2007/08 sample only. The control group in this sample was composed of students from other schools with similar backgrounds, who did not know about Little Steps program.
Table 2 The estimated marginal means of pre- and post- project scores by group (N = 333).
Community belonging Social responsibility Contribution to the school community Valuing diversity and defending human rights Solving problems Exercising democratic rights/ responsibilities Self-esteem Self-concept (overall) Happiness and satisfaction Freedom from anxiety Intellectual and school status Behavioral adjustment Popularity
Control group
Project group
Pretest
Posttest
Pretest
Posttest
Wilk’s F
4.11 3.64 3.92
4.14 3.61 3.82
4.17 3.71 3.79
4.29 3.73 3.88
.15 .03 .25
3.62
3.68
3.64
3.53
.21
3.98 3.11
3.81 3.06
3.96 3.46
4.05 3.51
.23 .32
3.80 .76 .78 .61 .75 .79 .85
3.63 .71 .76 .58 .71 .73 .79
3.79 .74 .80 .58 .80 .76 .82
3.65 .74 .76 .60 .76 .73 .82
2.37 1.57 2.06 1.09 .05 1.13 1.73
436
Z. Cemalcilar / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 432–436
than non-volunteers at the time of the decision to volunteer, also confirming previous studies (e.g. Metz & Youniss, 2005; Reed et al., 2005). In terms of self-evaluations, students who were more likely to be satisfied with who they were, who had better behavioral adjustment, and perceived themselves as intelligent were more likely to undertake volunteer responsibility than nonvolunteers. When relative effects of these individual characteristics were analyzed, only age and self-perceived intellectual level emerged as factors significantly predicting volunteerism. Those who were younger and who perceived themselves as having high intellectual and school status were more likely to volunteer. The reason why older students refrained from participating may be related to their relatively heavy course-work. The reason why students with high intellectual and school status participated may be twofold; it is either that those who are doing better in academic work can devote time to extracurricular activities, or that those who are more confident in their ability to make a difference on others’ lives select to participate. Analysis on the effects of the program yielded no significant effects on the measured individual characteristics. This finding is also in line with the self-selection bias observed in other studies (e.g. Johnson et al., 1998; Stukas et al., 1999; Walker, 2002; Yates & Youniss, 1998). Individuals with already positive psychological states volunteer and when their individual characteristics are statistically controlled for, the post-project gains lose significance. Overall the results of this study suggest that when civic participation is introduced as a personal choice, adolescents with more positive psychological states volunteer, yet, this experience has only a limited effect on further enhancing their already positive characteristics. Recent demonstrations on the positive effects of mandated civic participation on especially those who are less inclined to volunteer suggest requiring participation as a method of recruitment at least for some disadvantaged youth (e.g. Henderson et al., 2007; Metz & Youniss, 2005). Additionally, studies spanning long time intervals are explicit in showing a formative influence of early civic engagement in later adult years. In the present study, too, an initial comparison of those who have participated in social responsibility projects before with those who have not, yielded significant differences; experienced students were higher on all individual characteristics both from those who volunteered in this project and those who did not. This observed difference implies that accumulation of civic experiences contributes to the volunteers’ psychological and social development. An alternative explanation may be that the effects of civic participation on volunteers become observable in the log-run. More systematic analysis is required to understand this. Regardless, in light of the existing research on mandated participation, findings of the current study also suggest that civic engagement is beneficial for the youths and recruitment strategies should be adjusted to encourage those who are less likely to volunteer. At the same time, this study also responds to the question whether personality leads to volunteering or volunteering shapes personality (Atkins et al., 2005). At the time of initial decision, being equipped with certain individual characteristics does lead one to volunteer. However, in the long run, civic involvement may have positive effects on volunteers’ dispositions. Reaching out to adolescents as early as possible to increase their awareness to social problems and help them see that they can
make a difference as conscientious citizens is important. More research is needed to get an in-depth understanding of the reservations of potential volunteers who are less likely to self-nominate. Then these research findings can be used to guide practitioners and policy makers to develop appropriate strategies to recruit larger numbers of adolescents to participate in civic projects, who would benefit from this experience while at the same time serve communities in need. References Atkins, R., Hart, D., & Donnelly, T. (2005). The association of childhood personality type with volunteering during adolescence. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 51, 145–162. BC Ministry of Education (2001). BC performance standards. Social responsibility: A framework. Victoria, BC: Ministry of Education. Callero, P. L., Howard, J. A., & Piliavin, J. A. (1987). Helping behavior as a role behavior: Disclosing social structure and history on the analysis of prosocial actions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 247–256. Carlo, G., Okun, M. A., Knight, G. P., & de Guzman (2005). The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1293–1305. Cuhadaroglu, F. (1986). Adolesanlarda benlik saygisi (Self-esteem of adolescents). Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Ankara, Turkey: Hacettepe University. Finkelstein, M., Penner, L. A., & Brannick, M. (2005). Motive, role identity, and prosocial personality as predictors of volunteer activity. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 403–418. Henderson, A., Brown, S. D., Pancer, S. M., & Ellis-Hale, K. (2007). Mandated community service in high school and subsequent civic engagement: The case of the ‘‘double cohort” in Ontario, Canada. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 849–860. Johnson, M. K., Beebe, T., Mortimer, J. T., & Snyder, M. (1998). Volunteerism in adolescence. A process perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 8(3), 309–332. Marta, E., & Pozzi, M. (2008). Young people and volunteerism: A model of sustained volunteerism during the transition to adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 15, 35–46. Metz, E., & Youniss, J. (2005). Longitudinal gains in civic development through school-based required service. Political Psychology, 26, 413–437. Omoto, A. M., & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained help without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 671–686. Oner, N. (2005). Piers Harris children’s self-concept scale manual. Ankara: Turkish Psychological Association. Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organizational influences on sustained volunteerism: An integrationists perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 447–467. Penner, L. A. (2004). Volunteerism and social problems: Making things better or worse? Journal of Social Issues, 60, 645–666. Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and structural determinants of volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 525–537. Reed, P. B., & Selbee, L. K. (2000). Distinguishing characteristics of active volunteers in Canada. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29, 571–592. Reed, V. A., Jernstedt, G. C., Hawley, J. K., Reber, E. S., & DuBois, C. (2005). Effects of a small-scale, very short-term service learning experience on college students. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 359–368. Schmidt, J. A., Shumow, L., & Kackar, H. (2007). Adolescents’ participation in service activities and its impact on academic, behavioral and civic outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 127–140. Smith, D. (1994). Determinants of voluntary association participation and volunteering. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 23, 243–263. Stukas, A. A., Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). Service learning: Who benefits and why? Social Policy Report, 13, 1–19. Switzer, G. E., Simmons, R. G., Dew, M. A., Regalski, J. M., & Wang, C. (1995). The effect of a school- based helper program on adolescent self-image, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15, 429–455. Taylor, T. P., & Pancer, S. M. (2007). Community service experiences and commitment to volunteering. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 320–345. Walker, Y. (2002). Service as a pathway to political participation. What research tells us. Applied Developmental Science, 6, 183–188. Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240. Yates, M., & Youniss, J. (1998). Community service and political identity development in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 495–512.