MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312063993 · doi:10.1177/08997640221138764

Individual- and Community-Level Factors Associated With Voluntary Participation

2022· article· en· W4312063993 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus Lam, Nathan J. Grasse, Lindsey M. McDougle

Bibliographic record

VenueNonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoluntary associationTurnoverAttendanceCommunity organizationCommunity participationDemographic economicsPsychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyEconomic growthSocioeconomicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voluntary participation in local groups or organizations varies by individual and across communities. Few studies examine the influence of structural resources on voluntary participation, with prior studies often considering it a single, binary action. Drawing from three data sources, we examined the extent to which individual-level and community-level factors—including the presence of nonprofit organizations—were associated with voluntary participation. We model participation as two distinct actions and estimate the likelihood of respondents participating in one organization or group compared with the likelihood of participating in multiple organizations or groups. We found individual characteristics such as homeownership, marriage, and better health were associated with participation in only one group or organization. Identifying as White, having some college education, more children per household, and church attendance were positively associated with participating in one group or organization and subsequent participation. At the community level, nonprofit density was positively associated with voluntary participation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNonprofit and Voluntary Sector QuarterlySame topicNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringFrench-language works237,207