VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
1
Predicting Future Volunteering Intentions through a Self-Determination Theory
2
Perspective
3
4
Yandan Wu
5
Fujian Normal University
6
Chunxiao Li
7
Hong Kong Institute of Education
8
Selina Khoo
9
University of Malaya
10
11
Author Note
12
Correspondence concerning this manuscript should address Dr. Chunxiao Li, Department of
13
Health and Physical Education, Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, Tel: +852
14
2948 8913, E-mail: [email protected]
15
16
Acknowledgment
17
This study was supported by the China Disabled Persons’ Federation (number 2014&ZC006)
18
and the Federation of The Disabled in Fuzhou (number HN-447).
19
20
Citation to this article:
21
Wu, Y., Li, C., & Khoo, S. (2015). Predicting future volunteering intentions through a self-
22
23
24
determination theory perspective. Voluntas. DOI: 10.1007/s11266-015-9570-6
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
2
1
Abstract
2
Using Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci and Ryan 1985), we conducted a cross-
3
sectional survey to test the relationship among competence, intrinsic motivation, job
4
satisfaction, and intention to continue volunteering. A total of 180 Special Olympics
5
volunteers from China participated in this study. The results showed that competence
6
positively predicted intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. Intrinsic motivation was a
7
partial mediator for the relationship between competence and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction
8
positively influenced intention and it acted as a full mediator in the relationship between
9
intrinsic motivation and intention. It was concluded that SDT is a useful theoretical
10
framework in understanding intention to continue volunteering. Theoretical and practical
11
implications are provided.
12
Keywords competence, volunteer motivation, satisfaction, intention
13
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
3
1
Predicting Future Volunteering Intentions through a Self-Determination Theory
2
Perspective
3
Volunteering is defined as “any activity in which time is given freely to benefit
4
another person, group or cause” (Wilson 2000, p. 215). It benefits both the organization as
5
well as the volunteer. Voluntary activities or labor force provided by volunteers add
6
significantly to governmental and non-governmental organizations. Volunteers gain
7
knowledge, increase social networks, and enhance career prospects through their volunteer
8
activities (Brooks et al. 2014; Hall et al. 2004; Ridge and Montoya 2013). Despite the
9
importance and benefits of volunteering, retention of volunteers has been a challenge for
10
organizations (Bidee et al. 2013; Netting et al. 2005). As such, it is important to understand
11
the mechanisms underlying volunteerism and increasing volunteers’ intention to continue
12
volunteering. Motivation has been identified as a critical factor for predicting retention of
13
volunteers (Bidee et al. 2013; Ghose and Kassam 2014; Lai et al. 2013; MacLean and Hamm
14
2007; Wang and Wu 2014). The aim of the present study was therefore to examine volunteers’
15
continuing intention via the lens of a motivational theory − Self-Determination Theory (SDT;
16
Deci and Ryan 1985, 2000).
17
Self-Determination Theory
18
SDT is a broad framework that has been widely applied in the study of human
19
motivation (Deci and Ryan 2000). SDT consists of five mini-theories and two (Organismic
20
Integration Theory, OIT and Basic Psychological Needs Theory, BPNT) will be discussed in
21
detail given the scope of the current study. According to OIT, volunteering is a planned
22
behavior that can either be intrinsically or extrinsically motivated. Intrinsic motivation is
23
defined as doing an activity for its own sake (e.g., participating in a voluntary activity for the
24
pleasure of the activity itself). By contrast, extrinsic motivation refers to participating in an
25
activity for its instrumental outcomes (e.g., participating in a voluntary activity for contingent
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
4
1
rewards; Deci and Ryan 1985). There are four types of extrinsic motivation: integrated
2
motivation, identified motivation, introjected motivation, and external motivation (c.f., Deci
3
and Ryan 2000). External motivation and introjected motivation are controlled forms of
4
motivation, whereas identified motivation, integrated motivation, and intrinsic motivation are
5
autonomous forms of motivation. Controlled motivation and autonomous motivation are
6
believed to be associated with negative and positive motivational outcomes, respectively
7
(Deci and Ryan 2000). For example, evidence has shown that autonomous motivation
8
predicted satisfaction and intentions to continue participation in sport (Vallerand 2007). This
9
implies the importance to facilitate one’s autonomous motivation such as intrinsic motivation.
10
BPNT postulates that the three basic psychological needs are nutriments for one’s
11
intrinsic motivation. In other words, volunteers’ three basic psychological needs (autonomy,
12
competence and relatedness) must be nurtured to enhance intrinsic motivation (Deci and
13
Ryan 2000). Autonomy concerns the need to experience ownership of one’s own behaviors or
14
choices. Competence refers to the need to feel efficacy in doing activities while achieving
15
desirable outcomes. Relatedness means the need to sense belonging and connectedness (Deci
16
and Ryan 1985). Compared with relatedness, autonomy and competence often have a more
17
proximal or essential role in facilitating intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000). For
18
example, Haivas et al. (2013) revealed that autonomy and competence positively predicted
19
autonomous motivation while relatedness failed to influence autonomous motivation. BPNT
20
also holds that the three basic psychological needs are closely related to one’s psychological
21
health and well-being (Deci and Ryan 2000). Thus, the satisfaction of the three basic
22
psychological needs not only enhance one’s intrinsic motivation but also his/her
23
psychological well-being (e.g., life satisfaction and job satisfaction).
24
25
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
2
5
SDT and Volunteering
Although SDT has been an important motivational theory in areas such as social,
3
education, and sport psychology (Gagné et al. 2010), little research has been done to
4
understand intentions to continue volunteering within this theoretical framework (Haivas et al.
5
2013). One of the few research conducted found that Canadian volunteers’ motivation
6
positively influenced job satisfaction and negatively predicted turnover intentions (Millette &
7
Gagné, 2008). More recently, Haivas et al. (2013) investigated the relationship among the
8
three basic psychological needs, motivation, and turnover intentions in Romanian volunteers.
9
They found that autonomy and competence predicted volunteers’ autonomous motivation as
10
well as the two psychological needs directly influenced turnover intentions (i.e., the path
11
between autonomous motivation and turnover intention was not significant).
12
While past studies shed some light on understanding turnover intentions among
13
volunteers through SDT, more work needs to be done within the field. For example, although
14
variables such as motivation, job satisfaction, and turnover intention were included in the
15
study by Millette and Gagné (2008), the relations among them were not tested and unclear.
16
Given that job satisfaction has been identified as a key factor in predicting the retention of
17
volunteers (Barraza 2011; Millette and Gagné 2008; Jacobsen et al. 2012; Silverberg et al.
18
2001), it could be also useful to extend the study by Haivas et al. (2013) by including job
19
satisfaction in their model (i.e., the relationship among the three basic psychological needs,
20
motivation, and turnover intention). In other words, examining the relationship among the
21
three basic psychological needs, motivation, and job satisfaction will extend our
22
understanding of volunteers’ turnover intention within the SDT framework. Past studies
23
conducted on Western populations may produce certain cultural bias which could limit the
24
generalization of their findings (Haivas et al. 2013). Consequently, future research should be
25
conducted to fill the gap in the volunteering literature.
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
6
Volunteering at the Special Olympics
2
The Special Olympics is an international sport organization that organizes training
3
and competitive events for individuals with intellectual disabilities. The Special Olympics
4
holds World Summer/Winter Games every four years and other competitions at local,
5
regional, and national levels (Special Olympics 2009). There are also Special Olympics
6
organizations at the national level. For example, Special Olympics China was established in
7
1985 and organizes competitions at various levels for 500,000 athletes with intellectual
8
disabilities in the country (Chen et al. 2011). Apart from organizing training and competition,
9
the Special Olympics has established many other programs. This includes the “Special
10
Olympics China University Initiative” project which aimed to recruit and train university
11
volunteers through workshops and to promote social inclusion (Chen et al. 2011). The
12
Special Olympics programs have brought many benefits to athletes and volunteers (e.g.,
13
Baran et al. 2013; Hutzler et al. 2013; Li and Wang 2013). The Special Olympics has become
14
a trully international program with more than 3.4 million participations from all over the
15
world (Chursov 2007).
16
As a non-profit organization, the success of the Special Olympics depends on
17
volunteers’ commitments and contributions (Chen et al. 2011). For example, volunteer
18
involvement has contributed a lot to Special Olympics achievements in China (Lu 2004).
19
From a practical perspective, it would be easier to retain volunteers rather than recruit new
20
ones as it takes more time and resources to recruit and train new volunteers. Retraining high-
21
quality volunteers relieves the concern regarding the quality and readiness of volunteers for
22
taking on assigned duties (Kim et al. 2007). According to SDT (Deci and Ryan 2000),
23
volunteers who have lower levels of motivation are more likely to have higher turnover
24
intentions. In an effort to retain volunteers for the Special Olympics events, it is necessary to
25
understand volunteer motivation and its correlates. Although few studies have been
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
7
1
conducted to understand volunteer motivation in Special Olympics events (e.g., Khoo and
2
Engelhorn 2011), little is known about the motivational predictors (e.g., competence) and
3
outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction and intention to continue volunteering) among Special
4
Olympics volunteers.
5
The Current Research
6
Given the aforementioned theoretical and practical significance, the aim of this study
7
was to investigate the relationship among competence, intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction,
8
and intention to continue volunteering among Chinese Special Olympics volunteers (see
9
Figure 1a). According to SDT, we hypothesized that competence positively predicted
10
intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction (Hypotheses 1 and 2) as well as intrinsic motivation
11
partially mediated the relationship between competence and job satisfaction (Hypothesis 3).
12
Based on the study by Millette and Gagné (2008), we proposed that job satisfaction positively
13
influenced intention to continue volunteering (Hypothesis 4). Finally, because Haivas et al.
14
(2013) found that there was no direct relationship between autonomous motivation and
15
turnover intention, we proposed that job satisfaction fully mediated the relationship between
16
intrinsic motivation and intention to continue volunteering (Hypothesis 5). However, the
17
partial mediation effect (i.e., an additional path between intrinsic motivation and intention
18
was added at the top of the baseline model) was tested given there was a negative relationship
19
between intrinsic motivation and turnover intention (Millette and Gagné 2008).
20
(Insert Figure 1a about here)
21
Method
22
23
Participants
The participants (N = 180) of this study were volunteers at the Special Olympics
24
University Program held in Fuzhou, China in September 2013. They were Chinese
25
undergraduate students, majoring in a variety of subjects such as finance, Chinese literature,
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
8
1
and music. Most of the participants were female (n = 126, 70%) and 54 (30%) of them were
2
male. Their ages ranged from 17 to 24 years (M = 20.64, SD = 1.10).
3
Measures
4
The questionnaire included four measures and a few demographic items (e.g., gender
5
and age). For each subscale, participants responded on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = “not true at
6
all”, 7 = “very true”).
7
Competence. The 4-item Perceived Competence Scale (Williams et al. 1998), one of
8
the most face valid instruments designed to evaluate SDT constructs, was adapted to evaluate
9
participants’ feelings of competence on volunteering (e.g., “I feel confident in my ability to
10
11
manage my volunteer work”).
Intrinsic Motivation. The Volunteer Motivation Scale is a SDT-based scale
12
developed by Millette and Gagné (2008) for assessing volunteer motivation. We used the
13
intrinsic motivation subscale of the scale to measure participants’ intrinsic motivation
14
towards volunteering. The subscale has three items (e.g., “Because I enjoy volunteering very
15
much”).
16
Job Satisfaction. We assessed participants’ job satisfaction using a 3-item Job
17
Satisfaction Scale validated by Mitchell et al. (2001). They used this subscale for determining
18
volunteers’ job satisfaction. An example of an item in this subscale is “All in all, I am
19
satisfied with my volunteer job at organization”.
20
Intention to Continue Volunteering. We borrowed three items used by Kim et al.
21
(2007) to tap participants’ intention to continue volunteering. The subscale was used by Kim
22
et al. to measure volunteers’ intention to continue volunteering. An example of an item is “If
23
I have the opportunity, I would be volunteering for the organization for a long time”.
24
The English version of the four subscales was translated by a bilingual Chinese
25
graduate student to Chinese and back translated into English by a bilingual psychology
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
9
1
researcher (Brislin 1980). Two other bilingual psychology researchers verified the translation
2
and a few items of the subscales were reworded. Reliability and validity of the four subscales
3
are presented in the Results section.
4
Procedures
5
Ethics approval to conduct this study was granted by the Special Olympic University
6
Program and the principal researcher’s university. Written informed consent was obtained
7
from all participants. There were 208 volunteers who were Chinese undergraduate students
8
from five universities involved in the Special Olympics University Program. Volunteers
9
participated in the one-day Program, which aimed to promote disability awareness and
10
inclusion. Volunteers were assigned tasks such as organizing the Program opening ceremony
11
and playing games with persons with intellectual disabilities at sports venues. Immediately
12
after the event, the researchers administered the questionnaire to the volunteers in a quiet
13
classroom. Participants were encouraged to answer the survey honestly and were informed
14
that there were no correct or wrong answers. They were allowed to withdraw from the study
15
at any time without penalty. One hundred and eighty volunteers returned the survey (i.e., 86.5%
16
response rate).
17
Data Analyses
18
The data was preliminarily analyzed using SPSS 20. Subscale scores were reported as
19
means and standard deviations. Cronbach’s α was used to determine internal reliability of
20
subscales with an α value greater than .70 indicating adequate internal consistency (Kidder
21
and Judd 1986). Zero-order correlations between subscales were also computed. Because of
22
the small age range and the disproportionate number of female participants, we did not
23
compare age and gender differences on subscale scores.
24
In the main analyses, we tested the proposed model and hypotheses using structural
25
equation modeling in AMOS 21 (Arbuckle 2011). Maximum likelihood estimation that has
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
10
1
been demonstrated to withstand departure from normality was used (skewness = -1.30 to -
2
0.51; kurtosis = -0.42 to 1.60, Mardia’s coefficient = 50.44). Given the relative simplicity of
3
the proposed model (see Figure 1a) and the relatively large number of participants, our
4
sample size was deemed appropriate for the main analyses (Kline 2005). As suggested by
5
Brown (2006), we first applied a confirmatory factor analysis to examine the measurement
6
model (i.e., factorial validity) of the subscales. Four subscales were included in the
7
confirmatory factor analysis: competence (four items), intrinsic motivation (three items), job
8
satisfaction (three items), and intention (three items). We then examined the structural model
9
of the proposed model, which was re-specified from the measurement model (cf., Brown,
10
2006). The following fit indices were used to evaluate model fit: χ² to degree of freedom ratio
11
(χ²/df), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and root mean squared error
12
of approximation (RMSEA). A value of χ2/df smaller than 3.0 indicated good model fit (Kline,
13
2005). CFI/TLI values of .90 or higher indicated adequate fit and values of over .95
14
represented good fit (Hu and Bentler 1999; Marsh et al. 2004). RMSEA values smaller
15
than .08 indicated adequate fit and values less than .06 represented good fit (Hu and Bentler
16
1999; Marsh et al. 2004). The sizes of explained variance (R2) were used to interpret the
17
practical use of independent variables in predicting dependent variables. Values for R2 around
18
2%, 13%, and 26% represented small, moderate, and strong effects, respectively (Cohen
19
1988).
20
21
Results
Descriptive Statistics
22
Table 1 shows the results of mean and standard deviations of subscale scores, internal
23
reliability, and zero-order subscale correlations. Moderate to high subscale scores were found
24
(M = 5.87 to 6.29 out of 7.00). All subscales had adequate internal reliability (α = .74 to .92),
25
supporting the internal reliability of the subscale used. As expected, competence was
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
11
1
positively correlated with intrinsic motivation (r = .51, p < .01) and job satisfaction (r = .67, p
2
< .01). Job satisfaction was positively related to intention (r = .64, p < .01).
3
4
(Insert Table 1 about here)
Structural Equation Modeling
5
The results of the confirmatory factor analysis showed that the measurement model
6
had adequate fit to the data, χ2 (59) = 104.41, χ2/df = 1.77, CFI = .971, TLI = .961, RMSEA
7
= .066 (90%CI = .044 to .086). Item factor loadings ranged from .49 to .94 (M = .79). The
8
latent factor correlations between subscales shown in Table 1 were consistent with the
9
findings of the zero-order correlations. These findings supported the factorial validity of the
10
subscales used in this study. The structural model fit the data adequately, χ2 (61) = 105.33,
11
χ2/df = 1.73, CFI = .971, TLI = .963, RMSEA = .064 (90%CI = .043 to .084).
12
Figure 1b shows the standardized path estimates of the hypothesized model. In line
13
with our Hypotheses 1 and 2, competence positively predicted intrinsic motivation (β = .64, p
14
< .01) and job satisfaction (β = .46, p < .01). Hypothesis 3 was supported as the result of
15
bootstrapping analysis with 5,000 bootstrap samples indicated that intrinsic motivation was a
16
partial mediator in the relationship between competence and job satisfaction (β = .29, [95%CI
17
= 0.17 to 0.46]; Preacher and Hayes 2008). Job satisfaction positively influenced intention (β
18
= .77, p < .01), supporting Hypothesis 4. Model comparison between the baseline model as
19
depicted in Figure 1a and the partial mediation model showed no difference, ∆ χ2 (1) = 0.64,
20
p > .05; ∆CFI = 0 (Byrne 2006). The path between intrinsic motivation and intention was not
21
significant (β = .11, p > .05). Given the baseline model was more parsimonious than the
22
partial mediation model, the baseline model was preferred (Bollen 1989). This result
23
supported Hypothesis 5 that job satisfaction acted as a full mediator in the relationship
24
between intrinsic motivation and intention. We also conducted an additional analysis to
25
explore whether there was a direct relationship between competence and intention (i.e., the
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
12
1
model with an additional path from competence to intention at the top of the baseline model).
2
The path between competence and intention was not significant (β = .07, p > .05), and the
3
baseline model was again preferred, ∆ χ2 (1) = 0.46, p > .05; ∆CFI = 0. Finally, the three
4
independent variables (i.e., competence, intrinsic motivation, and job satisfaction) explained
5
a large variance of intention (R2 = 59%).
6
7
Discussion
The success of non-profit organizations such as the Special Olympics relies greatly on
8
volunteers. Given the importance of retaining volunteers, the current study aimed to
9
understand volunteers’ intention to continue volunteering within the theoretical framework of
10
SDT (Deci and Ryan 1985). This study adds to the literature by examining the relationship
11
among competence, intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, and intention. The data showed
12
adequate fit to the hypothesized model. Competence, intrinsic motivation, and satisfaction
13
explained a large amount of variance of intention (59%; Cohen 1988). That means SDT is a
14
useful theoretical framework in understanding volunteer intention. The five proposed
15
hypotheses were supported by our study findings. The rest of our discussion will mainly
16
revolve around the hypotheses and their implications.
17
We found that competence positively predicted intrinsic motivation, which indicates
18
that volunteers who satisfy their competence need show higher degree of intrinsic motivation
19
(Hypothesis 1). This finding is consistent with early SDT-based findings in volunteering and
20
non-volunteering contexts (e.g., Haivas et al. 2013; Ryan and Deci 2000). According to SDT,
21
competence should be facilitated to nurture one’s intrinsic motivation. SDT also postulates
22
that satisfying competence promotes optimal consequence (Deci and Ryan 2000). Our finding
23
agrees with this contention showing that competence positively influenced job satisfaction
24
(Hypothesis 2).
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
13
The result of mediation analysis demonstrated that intrinsic motivation was a partial
2
mediator in the relationship between competence and job satisfaction (Hypothesis 3). This
3
finding, for the first time, enables us to understand the underlying mechanisms among these
4
three variables. It also implies that increasing volunteer competence has a direct impact on
5
their job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was found to positively predict intention (Hypothesis 4),
6
supporting the finding by Millette and Gagné (2008). It seems that the above findings, where
7
applicable (i.e., Hypotheses 1 and 4), were not context- or culture- specific as they are
8
parallel to earlier study results found in the western context (Haivas et al. 2013; Millette and
9
Gagné 2008). We innovatively examined the relationship among intrinsic motivation, job
10
satisfaction, and intention (Hypothesis 5) to extend the study by Millette and Gagné (2008)
11
and understand the underlying processes among these variables. We found that job
12
satisfaction was a full mediator rather than a partial mediator in the relationship between
13
intrinsic motivation and intention. In order words, there was no direct effect of intrinsic
14
motivation on intention.
15
Several theoretical and practical implications can be derived from the above findings
16
to retain volunteers. First, our study findings showed that the mechanisms underpinning the
17
relationship between competence and intention via intrinsic motivation/job satisfaction
18
further our understanding of the relationship for the selected variables and is important for
19
theory building. Second, it is meaningful for administrators to increase volunteers’
20
competence to enhance their job satisfaction and intention. For example, administrators may
21
allow volunteers to choose tasks/duties that they are more confident in doing and providing
22
positive feedback to increase their competence (Deci and Ryan 2000). Third, as intrinsic
23
motivation positively predicted intention via job satisfaction, administrators should make
24
volunteer activities more intrinsically interesting for volunteers. Last, according to our
25
findings, job satisfaction was an important predictor of intention. In addition to promoting
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
14
1
competence and intrinsic motivation, administrators can customize job characteristics (e.g.,
2
skill variety and task significance) to increase volunteers’ job satisfaction (Millette and
3
Gagné 2008). Overall, these findings shed some light on training, managing, and retaining
4
volunteers in China, which might also be applicable elsewhere.
5
There are a few limitations in this study. First, similar to early studies within this field
6
(i.e., Haivas et al. 2013; Millette and Gagné 2008), we used cross-sectional data to examine
7
our hypothesized model. Thus, the casual relationship among the variables should be
8
interpreted with caution. Future studies should use longitudinal or experimental designs to
9
test the model. Second, our research exclusively relied on self-reported measures, which may
10
induce common-method biases (Podsakoff et al. 2003). Third, our participants were from one
11
event (i.e., the Special Olympics University Program), so the findings may not be generalized
12
to other contexts. Thus, replication of the current study is necessary. Last, although this is the
13
first study to investigate the relationship among competence, intrinsic motivation, job
14
satisfaction, and intention, only some SDT-based constructs were used. Future research may
15
integrate other SDT-based constructs (e.g., autonomy and controlled motivation) into the
16
current model to provide a full picture of volunteer motivation. Future investigations could
17
also integrate SDT with other theoretical frameworks (e.g., Theory of Planning Behavior;
18
Ajzen 1991) to understand intention given the large unexplained variance (41%).
19
In conclusion, this study contributes to the existing literature, which was the first to
20
examine the relationships among competence, intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, and
21
intention among volunteers. Our study supports SDT as a significant framework in explaining
22
intention as well as revealed that competence, intrinsic motivation, and job satisfaction were
23
important predictors of intention. It is through this research that the underlying processes
24
among competence, intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, and intention are better understood.
25
The current study provides a basis for future research of volunteering intention.
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
15
1
References
2
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
3
Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
4
Arbuckle, J. L. (2011). IBM SPSS AMOS 20 User's Guide. IBM Corporation, Armonk.
5
Baran, F., Ö zer, D., Aktop, A., Nalbant, S., Ağlamış, E., Barak, S., & Hutzler, Y.
6
(2013). The effects of a Special Olympics Unified Sports soccer training program on
7
anthropometry, physical fitness and skilled performance in Special Olympics soccer
8
athletes and non-disabled partners. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 695-
9
709. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2012.10.003
10
11
12
Barraza, J. A. (2011). Positive emotional expectations predict volunteer outcomes for new
volunteers. Motivation and Emotion, 35, 211-219. doi: 10.1007/s11031-011-9210-4
Bidee, J., Vantilborgh, T., Pepermans, R., Huybrechts, G., Willems, J., Jegers, M., &
13
Hofmans, J. (2013). Autonomous motivation stimulates volunteers’ work effort: A
14
self-determination theory approach to volunteerism. VOLUNTAS: International
15
Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 24, 32-47.
16
doi: 10.1007/s11266-012-9269-x
17
18
19
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Brislin, R. W. (1980).Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In
20
H. C. Triandis & G. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology
21
(pp. 398-444). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
22
Brooks, A., Farquharson, L., Burnell, K., & Charlesworth, G. (2014). A narrative enquiry of
23
experienced family carers of people with dementia volunteering in a carer supporter
24
programme. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology.
25
doi: 10.1002/casp.2188
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
16
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York:
The Guilford Press.
Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications,
and programming (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
Chen, S., Li, C., & Wu, Y. (2011). Development of Special Olympics in China: Competition,
inclusion, research and future. Asian Journal of Exercise and Sports Science, 8, 30-38.
Chursov, A. (2007). The campaign for Special Olympics: Celebrating growth. Retrieved
October 1, 2009, from http://www.specialolympics.org
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and
14
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
15
doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
16
Gagné, M., Forest, J., Gilbert, M. H., Aubé, C., Morin, E., & Malorni, A. (2010). The
17
Motivation at Work Scale: Validation evidence in two languages. Educational and
18
Psychological Measurement, 70, 628-646. doi:10.1177/0013164409355698
19
Ghose, T., & Kassam, M. (2014). Motivations to Volunteer Among College Students in
20
India. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
21
Organizations, 25, 28-45. doi: 10.1007/s11266-012-9327-4
22
Haivas, S., Hofmans, J., & Pepermans, R. (2013). Volunteer engagement and intention to quit
23
from a self‐determination theory perspective. Journal of Applied Social
24
Psychology, 43, 1869-1880. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12149
25
Hall, D., Hall, I., Cameron, A., & Green, P. (2004). Student volunteering and the active
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
17
1
community: Issues and opportunities for teaching and learning in sociology. Learning
2
and Teaching in the Social Sciences, 1, 33-50. doi:10.1386/ltss.1.1.33/0
3
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
4
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
5
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
6
Hutzler, Y., Oz, M., & Barak, S. (2013). Goal perspectives and sport participation
7
motivation of Special Olympians and typically developing athletes. Research in
8
Developmental Disabilities, 34, 2149-2160. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2013.03.019
9
Jacobsen, S. K., Carlton, J. S., & Monroe, M. C. (2012). Motivation and satisfaction
10
of volunteers at a Florida natural resource agency. Journal of Park & Recreation
11
Administration, 30, 51-67.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Khoo, S., & Engelhorn, R. (2011). Volunteer motivations at a National Special Olympics
event. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 28, 27-39.
Kidder, L.H., & Judd, C.M. (1986). Research methods in social relations (5th ed.).
New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Kim, M., Chelladurai, P., & Trail, G. T. (2007). A model of volunteer retention in youth
sport. Journal of Sport Management, 21, 151-171.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd
ed.).New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Lai, M. H., Ren, M. Y., Wu, A., & Hung, E. P. (2013). Motivation as mediator between
21
national identity and intention to volunteer. Journal of Community & Applied Social
22
Psychology, 23, 128-142. doi: 10.1002/casp.2108
23
Li, C., & Wang, C. K. J. (2013). Effect of exposure to Special Olympic Games on attitudes of
24
volunteers towards inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of
25
Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 26, 515-521. doi: 10.1111/jar.12053
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
18
1
Lu, W. P. (2004). Important role of Special Olympics volunteers. Paper presented at The First
2
National Adapted Physical Education and Sports Conference. Nanjing, China.
3
MacLean, J., & Hamm, S. (2007). Motivation, commitment, and intentions of volunteers at a
4
large Canadian sporting event. Leisure, 31, 523-556.
5
doi: 10.1080/14927713.2007.9651394
6
Marsh, H.W., Hau, K-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on
7
hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in
8
overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling: A
9
Multidisciplinary Journal, 11, 320-341.
10
Millette, V., & Gagné, M. (2008). Designing volunteers’ tasks to maximize motivation,
11
satisfaction and performance: The impact of job characteristics on volunteer
12
engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 11-22. doi:10.1007/s11031-007-9079-4
13
Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T.W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M. (2001). Why
14
people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Academy
15
of Management Journal, 44, 1102-1121.
16
Netting, F. E., O’Connor, M. K., Thomas, M. L., & Yancey, G. (2005). Mixing and phasing
17
of roles among volunteers, staff, and participants in faith-based programs. Nonprofit
18
and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34, 179-205. doi: 10.1177/0899764005275204
19
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method
20
biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended
21
remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
22
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
23
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing
24
and comparing direct effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research
25
Methods, 4, 879-891. doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
19
Ridge, R. D., & Montoya, J. A. (2013). Favorable contact during volunteer service: Reducing
2
prejudice toward Mexicans in the American southwest. Journal of Community &
3
Applied Social Psychology, 23, 466-480. doi: 10.1002/casp.2144
4
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
5
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
6
doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
7
Silverberg, K., Marshall, E., & Ellis, G. (2001). Measuring job satisfaction of volunteers in
8
public parks and recreation. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 19, 79-
9
92.
10
11
Special Olympics. (2009). Special Olympics. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from
http://www.specialolympics.org/
12
Vallerand, R. J. (2007). A hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for
13
sport and physical activity. In M. S. Hagger & N. L. D. Chatzisarantis (Eds.),
14
Self-determination theory in exercise and sport (pp. 255-279). Champaign, IL:
15
Human Kinetics.
16
Wang, C., & Wu, X. (2014). Volunteers’ motivation, satisfaction, and management in
17
large-scale events: An empirical test from the 2010 Shanghai World
18
Expo. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
19
Organizations, 25, 754-771. doi: 10.1007/s11266-013-9350-0
20
Williams, G. C., Freedman, Z.R., & Deci, E. L. (1998). Supporting autonomy to motivate
21
glucose control in patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care, 21, 1644-1651.
22
doi:10.2337/diacare.21.10.1644
23
24
25
Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215-240.
doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.215
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
1
20
Tab. 1 Internal reliability, descriptive statistics and correlations between studied variables
Mean (SD)
α
1.
2.
3.
4.
1. Competence
5.97(0.86)
.92
−
.64**
.74**
.60**
2. Intrinsic Motivation
5.87(0.96)
.74
.51**
−
.74**
.61**
3. Job Satisfaction
6.29(0.80)
.91
.67**
.60**
−
.76**
4. Intention
6.20(0.89)
.76
.46**
.44**
.64**
−
2
Note. SD = Standard Deviation; The latent factor correlations are presented above the
3
diagonal and the zero-order correlations are presented below the diagonal.
4
** p < .01.
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
21
(a)
(b)
Fig. 1 Hypothesized full structural equation model and standardized estimates for the
model. The partial mediation model refers the model with an additional path from
intrinsic motivation to intention at the top of the baseline model (Figure 1a). COM =
Competence, IM = Intrinsic Motivation, SAT = Job Satisfaction, INT = Intention. All
the estimated paths are significant at the .01 level.
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
22
Appx. 1 Descriptive statistics and zero-order correlation between individual items
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
1. COM1
−
2. COM2
.80**
−
3. COM3
.74**
.84**
−
4. COM4
.67**
.70**
.69**
−
5. IM1
.37**
.49**
.44**
.26**
−
6. IM2
.39**
.38**
.39**
.26**
.50**
−
7. IM3
.37**
.40**
.40**
.31**
.49**
.49**
−
8. SAT1
.55**
.68**
.66**
.48**
.58**
.40**
.37**
−
9. SAT2
.54**
.61**
.62**
.45**
.55**
.42**
.43**
.79**
−
10. SAT3
.51**
.59**
.64**
.43**
.51**
.42**
.41**
.74**
.84**
−
11. INT1
.13
.29**
.25**
.10
.34**
.16*
.20**
.33**
.31**
.28**
−
12. INT2
.41**
.47**
.43**
.25**
.45**
.22**
.28**
.54**
.51**
.52**
.47**
12.
−
13.
VOLUNTEERING MOTIVATION
.44**
.47**
.34**
.45**
.26**
.31**
.58**
.62**
.58**
.36**
.68**
−
M 6.02
6.14
6.20
5.55
6.08
5.69
5.85
6.22
6.31
6.36
6.40
6.11
6.10
SD 1.02
0.87
0.86
1.06
1.04
1.19
1.29
0.83
0.89
0.85
0.88
1.13
1.20
13. INT3
.44**
23
Note. COM = Competence, IM = Intrinsic Motivation, SAT = Job Satisfaction, INT = Intention, M = Mean, SD = Standard Deviation.
** p < .01, * p < .05.