The role of motivational systems in community service involvement : initiating and sustaining factors and quality of experience /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community service participation can have a positive impact on development, especially for youth. Although researchers have found positive outcomes, there has been a notable decline in youth participation over the past few years (Statistics Canada, 2000). Given the positive outcomes and current decline, it has been argued that youth should be encouraged to get involved in service activities. In the present study, quantitative and qualitative data were collected to determine factors that would help youth to initiate and sustain service, along with examining the quality of their experience. Eighty-two university undergraduate students (23 men), ranging in age from 17-20 years completed a 60-minute self-report questionnaire. Initiating and sustaining factors, motivational systems (similar to approach and avoidance dimensions), activity dimensions {Structure, Supportive Social Environment), quality of experience {Positive, Stress-Challenge), and future intention to participate in community service were measured. Eight participants also completed a 20-minute telephone interview to complement and expand on the quantitative data collected. Some initiating and sustaining factors were specific to individuals higher on the avoidance dimension, while others were relevant to those higher on the approach dimension. Several factors also were important to individuals regardless of their motivational system orientation. Positive quality of experience was related positively to experiencing a supportive social environment. In addition, women rated their community service as more positive than did men. A predicted interaction between the avoidance dimension and Structure in predicting positive quality of experience was not supported; however, positive quality of experience was predicted by the interaction of the approach dimension and Structure. A tested interaction between the avoidance dimension and Supportive Social Environment in predicting positive quality of experience was not supported. Similarly, a predicted interaction between the approach dimension and Supportive Social Environment in predicting positive experience quality was not supported. However, Supportive Social Environment was positively related to positive quality of experience. No support was found for a mediational role for positive quality of experience or stress-challenge quality of experience in exploring the relation between motivational orientation and fiiture intention to engage in service activities. The results of this study suggest that participating in a service environment that is supportive and provides the opportunity for social interactions with others would promote positive quality of experience and help youth sustain involvement. Thus, to help youth have positive experiences and to remain active in service, it is important for service agencies to promote these types of environments. In addition, some initiating and sustaining factors were specific to youth higher on the avoidance dimension and some were relevant to youth higher on the approach dimension. Therefore, service agencies may need to consider using different recruitment and retention strategies, depending on the type of youth they wish to recruit.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".