Understanding Parks And Recreation Volunteers: A Functionalist Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selon le bureau de recensement, 50 pour cent de la population adulte américaine fait du travail bénévole. Comme les bénévoles font partie intégrante de la population active, les responsables des services auxquels ils sont affectés cherchent à connaître leur motivation pour le travail. S’appuyant sur une approche fonctionnaliste du bénévolat, la présente étude vise à déterminer s’il existe un rapport entre le rôle du bénévole, le cadre de travail de ce dernier et le niveau de satisfaction au travail. À partir d’un échantillonage de bénévoles affectés aux services des parcs et des lieux de loisir, on examine le rapport entre le rôle du bénévole et des caractéristiques sociodémograhiques. L’étude montre que le rôle psychologique du bénévole varie selon le cadre de travail et selon des variables sociodémographiques précises. Elle suggère également que la satisfaction au travail résulte, en partie, de l’interaction entre le cadre du travail et la fonction psychologique de celui-ci.AbstractAccording to the Bureau of the Census, approximately 50% of American adults volunteer their time to serve the public good. As volunteers have become an integral part of public service provision, there has been an increased need for a greater understanding of volunteer motives on the part of the people who manage those volunteers. Using a functionalist perspective of volunteerism, this study assesses whether a relationship exists between volunteer function, volunteer job setting and volunteer job satisfaction and examines the relationship between volunteer function and sociodemographic characteristics among a sample of parks and recreation volunteers. Results of this study indicate that psychological functions of volunteers vary across volunteer job settings and by specific sociodemographic variables that would be expected to give rise to shared meanings. Results also suggest that volunteer job satisfaction is, in part, a result of the interaction of job setting and psychological function served by job setting.RÉSUMENSegún la oficina de censo, 50 por ciento de la población adulta en los Estados Unidos realiza trabajo benévolo. Como los benévolos forman parte integrante de la población activa, los responsables de los servicios a los cuales éstos son asignados tratan de comprender su motivación por el trabajo. Apoyándose en un enfoque funcionalista del voluntariado, el presente estudio tiene como objetivo determinar si existe una relación entre el papel del benévolo, condiciones de trabajo de éste y el nivel de satisfacción en el trabajo. A partir de un muestreo de benévolos designados en los servicios de los parques y en los sitios de diversión, se examina la relación entre el papel del benévolo y de las características sociodemográficas. El estudio muestra que el papel psicológico del benévolo varía según la condición de trabajo y según las variables sociodemográficas determinadas. El estudio sugiere igualmente que la satisfacción en el trabajo resulta, en parte, de la interaccón entre la condición de trabajo y la función psicológica de éste.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".