elders - variations in volunteering benefits

8/12/2019 Elders - Variations in Volunteering Benefits

1/12


2/12

The Gerontologist92

Morgan, & Caudill, 2002 ), and life satisfaction(Van Willigen, 2000 ). In one of the oldest studiesof the effects of volunteering on late-life well-being, Moen, Dempster-McClain, and Williams(1992) followed women for a period of 30 yearsand documented that those who volunteered, evenon an intermittent basis across these years, hadhigher levels of functional ability at the end of theobservation period; they suggested that social in-tegration and meaningful engagement, especiallyin light of the discretionary nature of volunteeractivity, explained the positive health effect.

Findings are inconsistent as to whether somesubgroups of people benet from volunteering morethan others. There is some evidence that older adultswho are disadvantaged in terms of personal and so-cial resources experience more positive outcomesfrom volunteering. Morrow-Howell, Hinterlong,Rozario, and colleagues (2003) found that older

adults with functional limitations as well as olderadults of more advanced age beneted more fromvolunteering. Musick and colleagues (1999) foundthat older adults with less social interaction experi-enced a greater protective effect from volunteeringin terms of mortality. Yet, other studies documentedthat older adults who were married and employedand had higher levels of religious and social involve-ment experienced more benets ( Oman, Thoresen, &McMahon, 1999 ; Van Willigen, 2000 ). In regard tosociodemographic factors, there is evidence thatrace and gender have no moderating effects on out-comes associated with volunteering ( Morrow-Howell, Hinterlong, Rozario, et al., 2003 ; VanWilligen).

Analytic ApproachesMost commonly, the research reviewed previ-

ously was based on longitudinal analyses of largenationally representative data sets, like the Ameri-can Changing Lives Survey, the Health and Retire-ment Survey, and the Longitudinal Study of Aging.

In these studies, demographic information aboutthe individuals and a few basic descriptors of thevolunteer experience (like hours in the past yearand type of organizations) were associated withanother set of variables capturing well-being out-comes measured at a subsequent period. Outcomesusually were captured through standardized mea-sures of functional ability, health, mental health,and life satisfaction. Observation periods generallyvaried from 3 to 8 years, and outcomes were as-sessed in time frames consistent with the observa-

tion periods of the studies, as opposed to timeframes directly corresponding to the volunteer ex-perience. Further, the focus of the studies was onoutcomes of volunteers versus nonvolunteers, withno attention to the variation of outcomes withinvolunteers. Explanatory factors were limited to de-mographics and a few descriptors of the volunteerexperience.

This analytic strategy lends itself well to conclu-sions about the public health benets of volunteer-ing. Yet, this methodology has not shed light onvolunteers perceptions of positive outcomes, andprevious work has suggested that satisfaction andretention are associated with the benets perceivedby the volunteer ( Clary et al., 1998 ). Further, Siegrist,Von Dem Knesebeck, and Pollack (2004) suggestedthat health effects depended on a favorable assess-ment of the rewards associated with the activity.Additionally, previous methodologies did not ac-

knowledge the variation of outcomes experiencedwithin volunteers, nor identied program-level fac-tors that might affect outcomes.

This study s analytic approach differed fromprevious work in three ways. First, we studied onlyactive volunteers, those participating in a programat the time the sample was identied. Thus, we canstudy variation in the outcomes within volunteers.Second, we assessed outcomes of volunteering witha different measurement approach. We queried ac-tive volunteers about their perceived outcomes inrelation to their current involvement with specicprograms. Thus, the outcomes were self-perceivedas well as concurrent with the volunteer activity.Third, we studied a wider range of variables re-garding the volunteer experience, like adequacy oftraining and type of volunteer activity. We testedvolunteer characteristics and characteristics of thevolunteer experience as well as the interaction be-tween these two sets of variables.

Conceptual Framework

Previous literature has largely explored individ-ual factors related to volunteer outcomes, but weassert that factors related to the volunteer experi-ence are also important in understanding differen-tial effects of volunteering. We used a conceptualframework that views volunteer outcomes asa product of both individual and organizationalfactors ( Beverly & Sherraden, 1999 ; Sherraden,Morrow-Howell, Hinterlong, & Rozario, 2001 ).As in the aging and society paradigm (Riley,Foner, & Riley, 1999 ), we emphasized the


3/12

93Vol. 49, No. 1, 2009

interplay between individual lives and social orga-nizations to explain volunteer outcomes. Organi-zational arrangements can promote volunteerengagement unevenly (Putnam, 1993 ), and pro-grams vary in terms of the activities available toolder volunteers and the supports offered to attractand sustain volunteers in these roles ( Morrow-Howell, Hinterlong, Sherraden, et al., 2003 ;Sherraden, Schreiner, & Beverly, 2002 ). We pro-posed that organizational-level variables, like in-centives, training, and ongoing support, explainvariance in the experience of older volunteers.

In our model, we captured individual character-istics through age, gender, race, marital status,income, education, and employment status. Char-acteristics of the volunteer experience, largelyshaped through organizational arrangements, werecaptured at the program level and included amountof volunteering in the program (intensity and du-

ration), type of volunteer activity, adequacy oftraining and support, and whether or not the vol-unteer work was stipended. Thus, we used bothcharacteristics of volunteers and characteristics ofthe volunteer experience to explain variation in thebenets perceived by the volunteers.

We hypothesized that the level of perceived ben-ets depended on individual factors as well as fac-tors regarding the volunteer experience. Despitesome inconsistencies in previous work regardingindividual characteristics and volunteer outcomes,we proposed that older adults who were more dis-advantaged in terms of socialization and socioeco-nomic status (SES) perceived more benets fromvolunteering. Although there is no previous em-pirical work to guide hypotheses regarding charac-teristics of the volunteer experience, we expectedthat those volunteers who were better trained andsupported would report more favorable outcomes.We took an exploratory approach to test whetherthe effects of the characteristics of the volunteerexperience on benets were moderated by thecharacteristics of the volunteer. For example, we

tested whether the relationship between adequacyof training and perceived benets was moderatedby education of the volunteer.

MethodsSample and Data Collection

This study was part of a larger project on thecapacity of organizations to engage older volun-teers. In this parent study, we identied 51 volun-teer programs and described their organizational

characteristics ( Hong, Morrow-Howell, Tang, &Hinterlong, 2006 ). Next, we identied 14 of theparticipating programs to survey volunteers. Wethen combined program information with infor-mation about the individual volunteer to accom-plish the analytic objectives of this study.

In the parent study, we identied 51 programsin the United States by way of the Internet thatmeet the following criteria: It was a namedprogram (e.g., Family Friends, OASIS Person-to-Person), it had a goal to improve a specic areaof human or environmental affairs, and it speci-cally recruited older adults as volunteers. Theseprograms recruited older adults to tutor children,mentor youth, address safety issues in a givencommunity, or focus on an environmental con-cern. In a telephone interview with the programdirector, we collected information about the pro-gram, including major service activity of the vol-

unteers, training protocols, and efforts to supportvolunteers.To collect information about volunteers who

participated in these programs, we selected 14 of51 programs in the parent study. We purposivelyselected these programs because they were largeprograms with many volunteers and because ofhigh levels of cooperation of the program adminis-tration in distributing and collecting the surveys.

Of the 640 hard copy surveys sent out betweenMay and December 2005, we received 405 com-pleted surveys. We dropped one program becausethere was only a 25% response rate. Thus, the cur-rent study had a response rate of 65%. This sampleof 401 volunteers aged 51 or older were selectedfrom 13 programs, which represent diverse pro-gram types in terms of geographic location, activ-ity type, and population served.

Like all the programs in the parent study, the13 programs in this sample were named programsin which older adults were recruited to do specicservice tasks. Examples include Senior MedicarePatrol, Computer Buddies, and Tax Counseling

for the Elderly. Volunteer activities included teach-ing, tutoring, assisting with instrumental activities,mentoring, policing/public safety activities, coun-seling/technical advice, conservation activities,and supportive counseling. Most of the programswere run by public agencies (police departments,city and state governments), a few were operatedby nonprot agencies, and one was sponsored bya religious organization (this program gave month-ly stipends to all volunteers with no income eligi-bility requirements). One was a Senior Companion


4/12

The Gerontologist94

program funded by the federal government throughthe Senior Corps program of the Corporation forNational and Community Service. In this program,volunteers had an income of less than 125% of thepoverty line and committed to 15 hr a week; a sti-pend of $2.65 an hour was provided.

Instrumentation and MeasurementThe survey instrument was developed in a pre-

vious study of self-perceived benets of volunteer-ing (Morrow-Howell, Kinnevy, & Mann, 1999 ).At the time of this previous study, no existing in-strument was available. However, a wide varietyof benets were suggested in qualitative, quantita-tive, and conceptual writings on volunteering.These outcomes included contribution to others,self-esteem, personal growth, meaningful engage-ment, socialization, life satisfaction, and health.

Thus, we devised a set of items that captured therange of benets suggested by the literature. Forthe current study, we modied our original instru-ment, tested it with 38 volunteers from local pro-grams, and revised for clarity and simplicity.

The survey instrument contained 11 closed-endedquestions that queried directly about types of bene-ts: contribution (2 questions), meaningful activity(2 questions), improved life (1 question), socializa-tion (2 questions), self-worth (1 question), personalgrowth (2 questions), and health (1 question). Thequestions were worded to attribute any perceivedchange to program participation. For example,items were: To what extent has (program name)increased your social activities ? (1 = not at all to 3 =a great deal ) and I feel better about myself sincejoining this program (1 = strongly disagree to 5 =strongly agree ). Response options were either 3 or 5points, but all items were collapsed to 3 points forthe purpose of this analysis. Given high internalconsistency among these 11 items, we summed themto a total benet score for the regression analysis(Cronbach s a = .85).

We also asked study participants to rate the ex-tent to which they were better or worse off be-cause of this volunteer experience, as well as theextent to which those who received the serviceswere better off because of the volunteer work.Finally, we used open-ended questions to queryabout positive effects on their families, positive ef-fects on their communities, and negative effects ofvolunteering. There is little empirical work toguide the study of these specic outcomes of vol-unteering; thus, we took an exploratory approach.

For example, we rst asked, Has your familybeneted from your volunteer work ? If the re-spondent replied yes, we asked, How has yourfamily beneted ?

Volunteers reported their gender, race, maritalstatus, employment status, education, income, andage. They also reported hours per month (intensityof volunteering) and how long they had volun-teered for this program (duration of volunteering).In addition, volunteers reported the extent towhich they received adequate training and whetherthey have received adequate ongoing support (fromstrongly disagree to strongly agree ).

Program directors provided information fortwo variables in the study: whether the programprovided a stipend to volunteers and the majortype of service activity provided by the program.For major types of volunteer activity, four catego-ries were used: tutoring/mentoring, instrumental/

supportive/nonskilled, skilled assistance/technicaladvice, and public safety.

Data AnalysisTo analyze the information from the open-ended

questions about benets to family and communi-ty, we used content analysis to identify themes,categorize responses, and determine the number ofresponses per category. The research team workedtogether to derive the categories, and then all re-sponses were categorized by two coders, whoworked together (and with the team if needed)until agreement was reached and nal codes wereassigned.

To analyze factors associated with benets, wecombined program-level data about the type ofactivity and provision of stipend with individual-level data about the volunteers. That is, all volun-teers in the same program were assigned the samevalue on the activity type and stipend variable.Thus, in the regression analyses, individual respon-dents were clustered by each of the 13 programs

included in the study. To handle the correlationbetween observations on a given program, we usedgeneralized estimating equations (GEE). The GEEmethod, introduced by Liang and Zeger (1986) , wasdeveloped to extend generalized linear models toaccommodate correlated data, and this procedureis widely used by researchers in a number of elds(Horton & Lipsitz, 1999 ). To assess the model asa whole, a pseudomeasure of explained variancewas computed by using log-likelihood estimates(Nagelkerke, 1991 ).


5/12

95Vol. 49, No. 1, 2009

We completed two GEE regressions: one withonly volunteer characteristics and one with bothvolunteer characteristics and the characteristics ofthe volunteer experience. Given that previous workhas largely focused only on volunteer characteris-tics, we wanted to fully understand the effects ofthese characteristics separate from and in combi-nation with the variables capturing aspects of thevolunteer experience. After estimating the modelwith both sets of independent variables, we testedinteraction terms one at a time. That is, we createdinteraction terms between the volunteer character-istics and characteristics of the volunteer experi-ence and tested them for statistical signicance byconsidering their unique marginal effect.

Three variables needed to be modied for use inthe regression analysis. Given that the large major-ity of volunteers were Caucasian and few wereHispanic or Asian, we collapsed race into White

and non-White for purposes of this analysis. Giventhe skewness of the measure of intensity of volun-teering ( 2.79) and duration of volunteering(1.21), we transformed these variables to be moresymmetric by using square root transformations.

Less than 3% of the observations had missingvalues, with the exception of income, where 14%of the observations had missing values. A hot deck-ing imputation procedure was used to completethe missing data ( Kotz, Johnson, & Read, 1982 )so that all observations could be used in the regres-sion analyses. This procedure involved identifyingan observation with complete data that was simi-lar to the observation with missing data (similar interms of nonmissing variables). Then, the missingdata were lled in using the values of the nonmiss-ing data from the similar observation.

ResultsCharacteristics of the Volunteers and the VolunteerExperience

As shown in Table 1 , these programs recruited

older adults, aged 51 90 years. As expected, vol-unteers were disproportionately women (66%)and Caucasian (80%). As in most samples of vol-unteers, they were highly educated. About 12%were employed and more than one quarter earnedan annual household income of less than$25,000.

As seen in Table 2 , older volunteers, on average,contributed 31 hr per month. However, there waslarge variation in the intensity of volunteering,ranging from 1 to 260 hr a month, with a median

of 17 hr per month. (One program involved volun-teers spending some time residing in the commu-nity being served; thus, the high number of hoursper month.) Forty percent volunteered more than20 hr per week, whereas 15% did less than 5 hrper week. In terms of the duration of volunteering,volunteers participated in the program for an aver-age of 62 months (or just more than 5 years), butthere was a large variation. Less than 10% hadbeen volunteering for the program for less than 6months and 10% for more than 10 years. More

than half had volunteered for the program for atleast 3 years. Most volunteers reported that theyhad received adequate training from their volun-teer programs and that they had received adequateongoing support.

Five of the programs in the sample assisted oth-er people with more technical needs (tax prepara-tion, Medicare ling, legal issues); thus, most ofthe volunteers participated in these types of activi-ties. Four programs and 23% of the volunteersprovided nontechnical support to other people,

Table 1 . Characteristics of the Volunteers ( N = 401)

Variables Frequency (%)

GenderFemale 263 (65.6)

RaceWhite/Caucasian 319 (79.6)African American 50 (12.5)Hispanic/Latino/Chicano 22 (5.5)Asian and other 8 (2.0)

Marital statusMarried/partnered 191 (47.6)

EmploymentCurrently employed 46 (11.5)

EducationLess than high school (0 11 years) 17 (4.2)High school graduate (12 years) 64 (16.0)College level (13 16 years) 166 (40.4)Graduate level (17 or more years) 158 (39.4)

IncomeLess than $9,999 22 (5.5)$10,000 $14,999 24 (6.0)

$15,000 $19,999 30 (7.5)$20,000 $24,999 34 (8.5)$25,000 $29,999 29 (7.2)$30,000 $39,999 46 (11.5)$40,000 $59,999 109 (27.2)$60,000 $79,999 59 (14.7)$80,000 or more 48 (12.0)

Age (years)5160 35 (8.7)6170 143 (35.7)7180 166 (41.4)8190 57 (14.2)


6/12

The Gerontologist96

like meal preparation or transportation. Two pro-grams and 24% of the volunteers in the sampletutored children and mentored youth. Two pro-grams and the fewest number of volunteers direct-ed efforts to neighborhood safety or the detectionof consumer fraud.

Perceived BenetsWhen asked to rate the extent to which their

volunteer activities beneted others as well asthemselves, more than 90% of volunteers reportedthat the people or community served by the pro-

gram were better off because of their volunteerwork, with one third of respondents reporting thatservice recipients were a great deal better off.About 50% of volunteers reported that they them-selves were somewhat better off because of theirvolunteer experience, whereas 31% reported beinga great deal better off. The remaining 18% report-ed that they were neither better off nor worse off,and only one person said she or he was worse off.These ndings suggest that these volunteers per-ceived that they made a difference in the lives of

Table 2. Characteristics of the Volunteer Experience( N = 401)

Variables Mean ( SD , range)

IntensityTotal hours of volunteering

for a month31.2 (44.2, 1 260)

DurationTotal months of volunteering 61.6 (52.7, 1 264)

Frequency (%)Training was adequate

Strongly disagree (1) 4 (1.0)Disagree 17 (4.2)Neutral/neither agree nor disagree 53 (13.2)Agree 218 (54.4)Strongly agree (5) 109 (27.2)

Ongoing support was adequateStrongly disagree (1) 2 (0.5)Disagree 13 (3.2)Neutral/neither agree nor disagree 51 (12.7)Agree 212 (52.9)Strongly agree (5) 123 (30.7)

StipendedYes (2 programs) 44 (11.0)No (11 programs) 357 (89.0)

Type of volunteer activityTutoring/mentoring (2 programs) 98 (24.4)Instrumental/supportive/nonskilled

(4 programs)91 (22.7)

Skilled assistance/technical advice(5 programs)

183 (45.6)

Public safety (2 programs) 29 (7.2)

other people, and as they helped others throughtheir service, they also beneted themselves.

Table 3 indicates the extent to which the vol-unteers endorsed each of the benets specied inthe survey. It is noteworthy that 20% of volun-teers reported that their health was better sincejoining the program. Also, almost all volunteersagreed that participation in the program had im-proved their lives in some way. When the benetswere aggregated into one summary measure, themean benet was 23.11 ( SD = 4.31), with a theo-retical range of 11 33 and an empirical range of1233.

Fifty-eight percent of volunteers reported bene-ts to family and friends. As seen in Table 4 , vol-unteers most frequently mentioned two benets tofamilythat family members were less concernedabout them and that the family gained knowledgeabout information and resources. Eighty-six per-

cent of study participants named a benet to thecommunity that stemmed from their volunteerwork. Most reported that communities were betteroff because the individuals receiving the services ofthe volunteer programs were better off. But theyalso reported higher levels of awareness about so-cial issues and higher levels of intergenerationalunderstanding. When asked about negative effects,eight volunteers reported interference with familyactivities due to volunteer schedules and one re-ported intrusion into family life.

Factors Associated With BenetsIn Table 5 , there are two models, one with only

characteristics of the volunteers and one wherecharacteristics of the volunteer experience are add-ed. When only volunteer characteristics were con-sidered, income was associated with perceivedbenet ( p < .05); and education and marital statushad marginally signicant associations ( p < .10).Together, these associative factors suggest that lower- income, lower-educated, and single older volun-

teers perceived more benet from their volunteerexperience. These ndings thus offer some supportfor the hypothesis that older adults who were moredisadvantaged in terms of socialization and SESperceived more benets from volunteering.

However, when adding characteristics of thevolunteer experience to the model, the explanatorypower of the model increased signicantly. Theamount of variance in benets explained by indi-vidual characteristics was 6%. Yet, with the addi-tion of variables capturing aspects of the volunteer


7/12

97Vol. 49, No. 1, 2009

experience, the pseudo R 2 increased to 29%, astatistically signicant change ( c 2 = 96.04, p < .001).Clearly, ndings support the hypothesis that per-ceived benets depend on both individual factorsand factors regarding the volunteer experience.

All the variables capturing aspects of the volun-teer experience were statistically signicant. Vol-unteers who put in more time on a monthly basisand who volunteered for more months reportedhigher levels of benets from volunteering. As pre-

dicted, those volunteers who felt better trained andsupported reported more favorable outcomes.Those volunteers who were stipended reportedhigher levels of benet, and those working in pub-lic safety activities reported higher benet com-pared with those providing skilled assistance/ technical advice.

Table 6 presents the results of our explorationof interactions among volunteer characteristicsand characteristics of the volunteer experience.We presented only the terms that were statisti-

cally signicant when added to the full modelshown in Table 5 . It is notable that the relation-ships between the dependent variable of perceivedbenets and the independent variables of dura-tion of volunteering, adequacy of training, andadequacy of support were not moderated by anyvolunteer characteristics. The moderating effectsof volunteer characteristics were concentrated ontwo variables: type of volunteer activity and sti-pend. Findings indicated that women and those

with lower income reported more benet fromparticipating in public security programs. Fur-thermore, lower-income and lower-educated per-sons participating in instrumental/nonskilledservice programs experienced less benet thanthose in skilled/technical service programs. Final-ly, the positive relationship between stipend andperceived benets was weaker for the oldest ofthe 55+ volunteer sample, for non-White olderadults, and for those volunteers with lower edu-cation and lower income.

Table 3. Extent of Agreement Regarding Benets of Volunteering ( N = 401)

Item from closed-ended questionsabout benets of volunteering

Disagree/not at all,frequency (%)

Agree/to some extent,frequency (%)

Strongly agree/a great deal,frequency (%)

I have contributed to thewell-being of others servedby the program.

16 (4.0) 193 (48.1) 192 (47.9)

As a program volunteer,I have contributed to mycommunity.

27 (6.7) 226 (56.4) 148 (36.9)

To what extent has theprogram enabled you toparticipate in meaningfulactivities?

20 (5.0) 219 (54.6) 162 (40.4)

I use my time moreproductively since joiningthe program.

132 (32.6) 175 (43.6) 94 (23.4)

To what extent has theprogram improved your life?

32 (8.0) 252 (62.8) 117 (29.2)

I have enlarged my circle offriends and acquaintancessince joining the program.

93 (23.2) 228 (56.9) 80 (20.0)

To what extent has theprogram increased socialactivities?

136 (33.9) 226 (56.4) 39 (9.7)

I feel better about myselfsince joining the program.

87 (21.7) 221 (55.1) 93 (23.2)

Volunteering has increasedmy ability to interact withdifferent kinds of people.

81 (20.2) 207 (51.6) 113 (28.2)

To what extent has theprogram expandedleadership ability?

87 (21.7) 243 (60.6) 71 (17.7)

Since joining the program, myhealth status is

Worse, 32 (8.0) Same, 289 (72.1) Better, 80 (19.9)


8/12


9/12

99Vol. 49, No. 1, 2009

objective of volunteering is to serve others and thecommunity, but clearly there are secondary gainsas volunteers experience personal benet. Almost30% of study participants strongly agreed thattheir lives were improved due to volunteer involve-ment. The benets enumerated in our study sug-

gest that this improvement in life might beassociated with increased self-esteem (feeling betterabout self), increased efcacy (increased ability tointeract with diverse people, increased leadershipability), and increased socialization (interactionwith others, enlarged circle of friends).

Variation in BenetsWhen considering only the characteristics of the

volunteers, these ndings suggest that benets donot vary by age, race, and gender. In general, thisis consistent with prior research. These ndingssupport universal recruitment of volunteers tomaximize benets. Yet, individuals with lower in-come systematically reported more benet fromvolunteering, and there was a trend toward thosewith lower education reporting more benet. Inthe model with characteristics of the volunteer ex-perience, education was signicant. These ndingssuggest that lower-SES individuals have more togain from the valued role of the volunteer, interms of resources and recognition ( Martinez et al.,

2006 ). Findings imply that targeting lower-SESolder adults may yield more overall benet amongolder volunteers. However, it is clear that there arechallenges to recruiting lower-SES individuals.McBride (2007) described numerous barriers tovolunteering, including competing demands of care-giving, lack of transportation, and poor health barriers disproportionately encountered by lower-SESolder adults. Increasing the number of lower-SESindividuals will require a concerted effort supportedby programs and funders.

It is interesting that race was not signicant inthe model including only characteristics of the vol-unteer, but race became statistically signicantwhen controlling for program characteristics. Thissuggests that only when all aspects of the volunteersituation are equal, older non-Whites experience

more benets than Whites from volunteering. Inthe presence of facilitators, like stipends, training,and support, African Americans and Hispanic old-er adults may experience more positive outcomesfrom volunteering.

Volunteers who accrued more volunteer experi-ence, through amount of time per month and num-ber of months, perceived more benet. Given thenature of this study, the relationship of these vari-ables cannot be interpreted causally. Perhaps thosewho put in more volunteer time did indeed gainmore benets. Alternatively, those who experi-enced benets may have put in more time andstayed in the volunteer role longer.

Although the same challenges to a causal argu-ment apply, it is notable that those volunteers whoreported better training and support experiencedmore benet. These ndings suggest that the facili-tation of volunteer participation by programs isimportant in achieving outcomes experienced bythe volunteers.

Additionally, volunteers participating in sti-pended programs reported more benet. Although

stipend levels for volunteering are minimal (e.g.,$2.65 an hour for programs sponsored by the Se-nior Corps of the federal government), stipendsare considered important incentives to attract indi-viduals who cannot afford the expenses of trans-portation or meals associated with participation(Wilson & Musick, 1997 ). In this study of currentvolunteers, we could not address the issue of howstipends are related to recruitment. Our ndings do,however, shed some light on the relationship be-tween receiving a stipend and self-perceived benets

Table 6. Interactions Between Volunteer Characteristics and Characteristics of the Volunteer Experience ( N = 401)

Interaction term Estimate ( SE) p Value

Volunteering intensity education 2.11 (0.92) .02Instrumental service program education 1.10 (0.29) .001Instrumental service program income 0.60 (0.14) .001Public security program gender 2.84 (0.44) .001Public security program income 0.44 (0.12) .001Stipend age 0.01 (0.00) .02Stipend race 3.29 (1.12) .001Stipend income 0.47 (0.14) .001Stipend education 1.11 (0.25) .001


10/12

The Gerontologist100

of participation, once a person joined the program.Overall, there is a positive relationship between re-ceiving a stipend and reporting benets from vol-unteering, but the link between receiving a stipendand higher levels of self-perceived benet is not asstrong for the oldest of the 55+ volunteers in thissample, lower-income, lower-educated, and non-White subgroups.

It is not surprising that there is an inconsistentdirect effect of stipends on outcomes perceived byvolunteers, given the ambiguity of the relationshipbetween compensation and volunteer work. Schol-ars have suggested that receiving a stipend threat-ens the altruistic nature of the work ( Cnaan,Handy, & Wadsworth, 1996 ) and has a negativeimpact on being perceived as a volunteer ( Handyet al., 2000 ). Previous research showed that onlyabout one quarter of older volunteers attached im-portance to receiving a stipend, partly because re-

ceiving compensation does not conform to thetraditional view of volunteering ( Tang, Morrow-Howell, & Hong, 2007 ). Thus, these ndings sug-gest that although stipends may bring diversepopulations into volunteering, the effects of sti-pends on benets of socialization, self-esteem, andself-perceived health are not as strong for certainsubgroups. Clearly, more research is needed on thedifferent effects of stipends across the process ofrecruiting, retaining, and maximizing benets ofparticipation in volunteer programs.

It is notable that race has a direct effect on per-ceived benets as well as moderates the relationshipbetween stipend and outcomes. That is, non-Whitesreport more benet, when controlling for aspects ofthe volunteer situation. In addition, although thereis a positive effect of stipends across both categoriesof race, the relationship is weaker for non-Whites.Thus, race and ethnicity play various roles in inu-encing the outcomes experienced by volunteers.

These ndings suggested that there may be somerelationship between type of volunteer activity andbenet. When compared with providing skilled

service/technical advice, volunteers involved inpublic safety activities reported more benet. Thetwo programs in this study that provided these ac-tivities to older volunteers were involved in estab-lishing neighborhood safety programs, doingpublic presentations, making vacation homechecks, serving as crossing guards/trafc control,and performing data collection for police depart-ments. It is notable that these activities were notdirected at individual service recipients but to alarger number of people in the community.

It is interesting that women and lower-incomevolunteers reported more benet from participat-ing in public security programs. We could specu-late that those older adults who traditionally hadless authority (women and low-income earners)thrived in roles involving law enforcement. Per-haps these volunteer activities provided these indi-viduals with an empowering responsibility. Further,the interactions suggested that lower-income andlower-educated persons participating in instru-mental service programs experienced less benetthan those participating in skilled/technical serviceprograms. Again, we speculated that lower-incomeand less-educated people felt more empowered orvalued doing volunteer tasks that highlighted ex-pertise rather than tasks that relied on less skill,like meal preparation or transportation.

These ndings about types of volunteer activi-ties and perceived benets are interesting, but we

need to be careful in drawing conclusions. We can-not rule out the fact that certain unmeasured as-pects of the older volunteers or the programs mayaccount for these ndings. Yet, we conclude thatthe nature of the volunteer activity merits closerexamination, as certain activities may lead to morepositive outcomes for certain individuals.

Benets to Family and CommunityPerhaps this was the rst time that these volun-

teers were asked to articulate benets of their vol-unteering to family members; some studyparticipants mentioned that they had not thoughtof this before. Most volunteers did not identify anybenets to their families, but the benets that werementioned are very interesting. These ndings sug-gest that there are spillover effects to familymembers and that a full accounting of benets toservice recipients, volunteers, and volunteers fam-ilies is necessary to understand the full effects ofvolunteering.

LimitationsThe limitations of this study need to be consid-

ered. First, the programs included in this studyrepresent a subset of all volunteer opportunitiesavailable to older adults in the community. Theprograms identied for the parent study were allformal named volunteer programs, with specicservice goals and some expectations for commit-ment. This excluded volunteering in hospitals andchurches/temples, which is very common among


11/12

101Vol. 49, No. 1, 2009

older adults; yet, these volunteer jobs did not meetcriteria for more formal service programs. A com-plete enumeration of the formal volunteer pro-grams that met study criteria was not available toprovide a basis for a random sample.

Further, the questions regarding self-perceivedbenets may not be comprehensive, and a moresystematic set of questions, with established reli-ability and validity, could be developed. It is notclear to what extent social desirability inated re-spondents assessment of benet. Also, respondentswere not primed for thinking about negative out-comes of volunteering as they were for benets (viathe closed-ended questions on benets precedingthe open-ended questions). Thus, the negative ef-fects of volunteering may be underidentied. Fi-nally, study design limited the causal arguments,as surveying active volunteers probably resulted ina group of respondents who were, in general, more

contented with the volunteer experience. Volun-teers who were discontent may have discontinuedparticipation in this cross-sectional analysis.

Summary and ConclusionsThis study contributed to the knowledge base

about the benets of volunteering in two ways.First, it produced quantitative ndings about thevariety of benets perceived by older volunteers, aswell as the large proportion of volunteers who ex-perienced these benets. Theoretical work on vol-unteering suggests that an individual s perceptionof benet is important, and further work utilizingthis measurement approach is necessary to under-stand the relationship of perceived benets to re-tention, satisfaction, and more objective measuresof well-being outcomes. Second, ndings demon-strate that aspects of the volunteer experience andthus characteristics of the program are importantin understanding who benets from volunteering.Indeed, it is remarkable that all the variables cap-turing characteristics of the volunteer experience

related to benets.Program characteristics, like adequate training,ongoing support, and stipends, are more mutableby public policies and organizational proceduresthan individual characteristics. Thus, this knowl-edge can guide efforts to maximize the benets ofvolunteering to older adults. In conclusion, thisstudy supports the call to increase the involve-ment of older adults in volunteer roles to improvewell-being outcomes for themselves as well as toincrease the capacity of organizations to fulll

their missions ( Romero & Minkler, 2005 ), and itpoints to interventions at the program level tomaximize the benets experienced by the oldervolunteers.

FundingThe research reported in this article was sup ported by the MetLife

Foundation and the Longer Life Foundation.

AcknowledgmentsWe gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the Center for Social De-

velopment at Washington University in completing this project. We alsothank Jaime Goldberg, So Yeon Kim, Amy Luman, and Cal Halvorsen fortheir research assistance. This article was presented at the GerontologicalSociety of America 59th Annual Scientic Meeting, November 19, 2006.

ReferencesArnstein , P. , Vidal , M. , Wells-Federman , C. , Morgan , B., & Caudill , M.

(2002 ). From chronic pain patient to peer: Benets and risks of volun-teering. Pain Management Nursing , 3 , 94 103 .

Beverly, S. G. , & Sherraden , M. ( 1999 ). Institutional determinants of sav-ing: Implications for low-income households and public policy . Jour-nal of Socio-Economics , 28 , 457 473 .

Clary, E. G. , & Orenstein , L. (1991 ). The amount and effectivenessof help: The relationship of motives and abilities to helping behavior .Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 17 , 58 64.

Clary, E. G. , Snyder , M. , Ridge , R. D. , Copeland , J., Stukus , A. A. , Jaugen , J. A., et al. ( 1998 ). Understanding and assessing the motivations ofvolunteers: A functional approach . Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology , 74 , 1516 1530 .

Cnaan , R. A. , Handy , F. , & Wadsworth , M. ( 1996 ). Dening who is avolunteer: Conceptual and empirical considerations . Nonprot andVoluntary Quarterly , 25 , 364 383 .

Corporation for National and Community Service, Ofce of Research andPolicy Development . (2007 ). The health benets of volunteering: Areview of recent research . Washington, DC : Corporation for Nationaland Community Service .

Fried, L. P. , Carlson , M. C. , Freedman , M. , Frick , K. D. , Glass , T. A. , Hill ,

J., et al. ( 2004 ). A social model for health promotion for an agingpopulation: Initial evidence on the Experience Corps model . Journal ofUrban Health , 81 , 64 78.

Handy , F. , Cnaan , R. , Jeffery, L., Ascoli, U., Meiis , L., & Ranade , S.(2000 ). Public perception of who is a volunteer : An examination ofthe net-cost approach from a cross-cultural perspective . Voluntas: In-ternational Journal of Voluntary and Nonprot Organizations , 11 ,4565.

Hong , S., Morrow-Howell , N. , Tang , F. , & Hinterlong , J. (2006, Novem-ber). Conceptualizing and measuring institutional capacity of volun-teer programs . Paper presented at the annual meeting of theGerontological Society of America, Dallas, TX .

Horton , N. J. , & Lipsitz , S. R. ( 1999 ). Review of software to t general-ized estimating equation regression models . American Statistician , 53 ,160 169 .

Kotz, S., Johnson , N. , & Read , C. B. ( 1982 ). Encyclopedia of statisticalsciences . New York : Wiley.

Liang, K.-Y. , & Zeger , S. L. (1986 ). Longitudinal data analysis using gen-eralized linear models . Biometrika , 73 , 13 22.

Lum, T. Y. , & Lightfoot , E. (2005 ). The effects of volunteering on thephysical and mental health of older people . Research on Aging , 27 ,3155.

Martinez , I., Frick , K., Glass , T. , Carlson , M. , Tanner , E., Ricks , M. , et al.(2006 ). Engaging older adults in high impact volunteering that enhanc-es health: Recruitment and retention in the Experience Corps Balti-more . Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy ofMedicine , 83 .

McBride, A. (2007 ). Civic engagement, older adults, and inclusion .Generations , 30 , 66 71.

Moen , P. , Dempster-McClain , D. , & Williams , R. ( 1992 ). Successful ag-ing: A life-course perspective on women s multiple roles and health .American Journal of Sociology , 97 , 1612 1638 .


12/12

The Gerontologist102

Morrow-Howell , N. , Hinterlong , J., Rozario , P. A. , & Tang , F. ( 2003 ).Effects of volunteering on the well-being of older adults . Journals ofGerontology: Social Sciences , 58 , S137 S145.

Morrow-Howell , N. , Hinterlong , J., Sherraden , M. , Tang , F. , Thirupathy ,P., & Nagchoudhuri , M. ( 2003 ). Instructional capacity for elder ser-vice. Social Development Issues , 25 , 189 204 .

Morrow-Howell , N. , Kinnevy, S., & Mann , M. ( 1999 ). The perceivedbenets of participating in volunteer and educational activities . Jour-nal of Gerontological Social Work , 32 (2), 65 80.

Musick , M. A. , Herzog , A. R. , & House , J. S. (1999 ). Volunteering andmortality among older adults: Findings from a national sample . Jour-

nals of Gerontology: Social Sciences , 54 , S173 S180.Musick , M. A. , & Wilson , J. (2003 ). Volunteering and depression: The

role of psychological and social resources in different age groups . So-cial Science & Medicine , 56 , 259 269 .

Nagelkerke , N. J. D. ( 1991 ). Miscellanea: A note on a general denition ofthe coefcient of determination . Biometrika , 78 , 691 692 .

Oman , D. , Thoresen , C. , & McMahon , K. (1999 ). Volunteerism and mor-tality among older adults: Findings from a national sample . Journal ofHealth Psychology , 4 , 301 316 .

Putnam , R. D. ( 1993 ). The prosperous community: Social capital and pub-lic life. The American Prospect , 13 , 35 42.

Riley, M. W. , Foner , A., & Riley , J. W. , Jr. (1999 ). The aging and societyparadigm . In V. L. Bengtson & K. W. Shaie (Eds.), Handbook of theo-ries of aging (pp. 327 343 ). New York : Springer .

Romero , L., & Minkler , M. ( 2005 ). Gold in gray: Senior volunteer leadersas an untapped public health resource . Generations , 2 , 36 40.

Sherraden , M. , Morrow-Howell , N. , Hinterlong , J., & Rozario , P. ( 2001 ).Productive aging: Theoretical choices and directions . In N. Morrow-Howell , J. Hinterlong , & M. Sherraden (Eds.), Productive aging:Concepts and challenges (pp. 260 284 ). Baltimore : Johns HopkinsUniversity Press .

Sherraden , M. , Schreiner , M. , & Beverly , S. (2002 ). Income, institutions,and saving performance in Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) .(Working paper 02-03). St. Louis: Center for Social Development,Washington University .

Siegrist, J., Von Dem Knesebeck , O. , & Pollack , C. E. ( 2004 ). Social pro-ductivity and well-being of older people: A sociological exploration .Social Theory & Health , 2 , 117.

Tang , F. , Morrow-Howell , N. , & Hong , S. (in press ). Inclusion of diverseolder populations in volunteering: The importance of institutionalfacilitation . Nonprot and Voluntary Sector Quarterly .

Van Willigen , M. ( 2000 ). Differential benets of volunteering across thelife course . Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciencesand Social Sciences , 55B , S308 S318.

Wilson , J., & Musick , M. ( 1997 ). Who cares? Toward an integrated theo-ry of volunteer work . American Sociology Review , 62 , 694 713 .

Received October 2 , 2007Accepted March 3 , 2008Decision Editor : William J. McAuley, PhD

elders - variations in volunteering benefits

Documents