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, \nespecially for youth. Although researchers have found positive outcomes, there has been \na notable decline in youth participation over the past few years (Statistics Canada, 2000). \nGiven the positive outcomes and current decline, it has been argued that youth should be \nencouraged to get involved in service activities. In the present study, quantitative and \nqualitative data were collected to determine factors that would help youth to initiate and \nsustain service, along with examining the quality of their experience. Eighty-two \nuniversity undergraduate students (23 men), ranging in age from 17-20 years completed a \n60-minute self-report questionnaire. Initiating and sustaining factors, motivational \nsystems (similar to approach and avoidance dimensions), activity dimensions {Structure, \nSupportive Social Environment), quality of experience {Positive, Stress-Challenge), and \nfuture intention to participate in community service were measured. Eight participants \nalso completed a 20-minute telephone interview to complement and expand on the \nquantitative data collected. \nSome initiating and sustaining factors were specific to individuals higher on the \navoidance dimension, while others were relevant to those higher on the approach \ndimension. Several factors also were important to individuals regardless of their \nmotivational system orientation. Positive quality of experience was related positively to \nexperiencing a supportive social environment. In addition, women rated their community \nservice as more positive than did men. A predicted interaction between the avoidance \ndimension and Structure in predicting positive quality of experience was not supported; \nhowever, positive quality of experience was predicted by the interaction of the approach \ndimension and Structure. A tested interaction between the avoidance dimension and \nSupportive Social Environment in predicting positive quality of experience was not \nsupported. Similarly, a predicted interaction between the approach dimension and \nSupportive Social Environment in predicting positive experience quality was not \nsupported. However, Supportive Social Environment was positively related to positive \nquality of experience. No support was found for a mediational role for positive quality of \nexperience or stress-challenge quality of experience in exploring the relation between \nmotivational orientation and fiiture intention to engage in service activities. \nThe results of this study suggest that participating in a service environment that is \nsupportive and provides the opportunity for social interactions with others would promote \npositive quality of experience and help youth sustain involvement. Thus, to help youth \nhave positive experiences and to remain active in service, it is important for service \nagencies to promote these types of environments. In addition, some initiating and \nsustaining factors were specific to youth higher on the avoidance dimension and some \nwere relevant to youth higher on the approach dimension. Therefore, service agencies \nmay need to consider using different recruitment and retention strategies, depending on \nthe 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".