Personality Characteristics of Hospice Palliative Care Volunteers: The ‘‘Big Five’’ and Empathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to examine the personality characteristics of hospice palliative care volunteers by measuring the so-called big five personality traits and 4 separate aspects of empathy. A total of 99 hospice palliative care volunteers completed the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) of Costa Jr and McCrae and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) of Davis. The vast majority (84%) of the volunteers were females. Compared to the norms for adult females on the NEO-FFI, female hospice palliative care volunteers scored significantly higher on the traits of agreeableness, extraversion, and openness and significantly lower on the trait of neuroticism. On the empathy measure, female hospice palliative care volunteers scored significantly higher on the empathic concern and perspective taking subscales compared to the female norms, and significantly lower on the personal distress and fantasy subscales. The results of this study may have implications for the recruitment and retention of hospice palliative care volunteers.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".