Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 653658

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivational orientations and the volunteer process

Marcia A. Finkelstien *
Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, PCD 4118G, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, Tampa, FL 33620, United States

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 15 October 2008
Received in revised form 6 January 2009
Accepted 12 January 2009
Available online 6 February 2009
Keywords:
Motivation
Intrinsic
Extrinsic
Volunteerism
Role identity
Motive
Prosocial

a b s t r a c t
The present study incorporated the constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation into an investigation
of dispositional factors that contribute to volunteering. Recent research has conceptualized motivational
tendencies as akin to personality variables, stable across time and situations. Volunteer motives, volunteer role identity, and prosocial personality were assessed, along with motivational orientation and time
devoted to volunteering. Intrinsic motivation was positively associated with a volunteer self-concept,
prosocial personality, volunteer time, and motive strength. This was particularly true for internal
motives, those that are satised by the volunteer activity itself. Extrinsic orientation was most closely
associated with external motives (specically career aspirations), which require an outcome separate
from the volunteer work in order to be fullled. The study was the rst to consider constructs from
the prevailing conceptual view of the volunteer process in the context of motivational orientation. The
wider theoretical perspective offers insight into human behavior beyond volunteerism.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The present study incorporated the constructs of intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation into an investigation of dispositional factors
that contribute to volunteering. We dene volunteerism as ongoing, planned, and discretionary prosocial behavior that benets
non-intimate others and offers little or no tangible reward (Penner,
2002). To explore the factors that contribute to volunteerism, we
adopted a conceptual perspective that integrates two theories of
long-term helping: functional analysis and role identity theory.

understanding function when the individual seeks to acquire new

learning experiences and/or exercise skills that might otherwise
go unused. Protective motives reect a desire to reduce negative affect caused, for example, by personal problems or guilt over being
more fortunate than others. In contrast, enhancement motives
serve the function of increasing positive affect through personal
growth and increased self-esteem. Functional analysis holds that
people continue volunteering to the extent their experiences fulll
relevant motives.
1.2. Role identity theory

1.1. Functional analysis

According to functional analysis (e.g., Clary & Snyder, 1999;
Clary et al., 1998; Omoto & Snyder, 1995; Omoto & Snyder,
2002), people volunteer in order to satisfy one or more needs or
motives. The same work can serve disparate functions for different
individuals (e.g., Fitch, 1987), and ones motivations for helping can
change over time. The Volunteer Function Inventory (VFI) developed by Clary et al. (1998) identies six motivational functions
served by volunteering. Values motives refer to the desire to express values related to altruistic and humanitarian concerns for
others. Career motives are distinguished by the desire to gain career-related experience and increase job prospects. Social motives
describe volunteering undertaken in order to spend time with
important others or gain their approval. Volunteering serves an
* Tel.: +1 813 974 0377; fax: +1 813 974 4617.
E-mail address: marcie@cas.usf.edu.
0191-8869/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.01.010

Piliavin and Colleagues (Callero, Howard, & Piliavin, 1987;

Grube & Piliavin, 2000; Piliavin & Callero, 1991; Piliavin, Grube,
& Callero, 2002) used role theory to understand volunteering. They
viewed the self as comprising multiple identities that emerge from
ongoing social interactions and others expectations. The more others identify one with a particular role, the more the individual
internalizes the role and incorporates it into the self-concept. Over
time, the inuence of others on the behaviors that emerge from
that role dissipates. Instead, the role identity guides future behavior as the individual strives to remain consistent with his or her
self-concept. Thus, with the development of a volunteer identity,
helping becomes not so much what one does, but who one is and
is recognized as being.
The strength of a volunteer identity has been shown to correlate
with donations of time, money, and blood (e.g., Finkelstein & Brannick, 2007; Finkelstein, Penner, & Brannick, 2005; Lee, Piliavin, &
Call, 1999). Grube and Piliavin (2000) found that role identity

654

M.A. Finkelstien / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 653658

predicted the number of hours worked and the degree of intention

to remain a volunteer.
1.3. Prosocial personality
Penners (2002) description of the volunteer process also included the prosocial personality as an antecedent to sustained
helping. As measured by the Prosocial Personality Battery (PSB;
Penner, Fritzsche, Craiger, & Freifeld, 1995), the prosocial personality comprises two dimensions: other-oriented empathy (the tendency to feel empathy and responsibility for others; altruistic
feelings) and helpfulness (the propensity for engaging in prosocial
behaviors). The rst factor primarily measures the cognitive and
affective components of the prosocial personality, while the latter
measures behavior. Penner et al. (1995) examined the relationship
between each factor and the big ve personality traits (McCrae &
Costa, 1987). Other-oriented empathy correlated strongly with
agreeableness while helpfulness was related to measures of selfcondence and assertiveness.
Results linking the PSB to volunteerism are mixed. Other-oriented empathy and helpfulness were correlated with time spent volunteering and length of service in a variety of organizations
(Penner, 2002; Penner & Finkelstein, 1998), and Lee and Chang
(2007) reported a positive association between empathy and likelihood of volunteering. However, Finkelstein et al. (2005) found no
correlation between either dimension of the PSB and volunteer
time or tenure. Similarly, Davis, Hall, and Meyer (2003) reported
that dispositional empathy was unrelated to amount of involvement or longevity of service.

key component of functional analysis is the recognition that people

engage in the same volunteer work for very different reasons (e.g.,
Clary et al., 1998), and these variations in motive may reect individual differences in motivational orientation. In fact, the Clary
et al. objectives are separable into two broad categories analogous
to the intrinsic/extrinsic distinction. For ve of the six motives (all
but career), the individual may nd fulllment in volunteer work
itself. The motives do not necessarily require a separable outcome
in order to be satised. In the hypotheses below, we refer to such
motives as internal. In contrast, career goals are by denition
external because they require an outcome outside the behavior
in order to be satised. The results of a factor analysis providing
support for the division into these two categories are provided in
Section 2.
We propose the internal/external distinction as a starting point
for discussion rather than a mutually exclusive division among
motives. Each motive likely comprises multiple dimensions, and
their fulllment may satisfy both intrinsic and extrinsic needs.
Nonetheless, the internal/external categorization provides a useful
framework for re-examining the volunteer experience.
The current work investigated the relationship between motivational orientation and constructs (motives, prosocial personality,
and role identity) proposed in Penners (2002) formulation of the
volunteer process. Our focus on dispositional variables does not
discount the importance of organizational variables on volunteering. A complete understanding of the volunteer experience also
must consider characteristics of the organization and the interaction of the individual with the organization.
1.5. Hypotheses

1.4. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations

The aim of this study was to explore aspects of Penners (2002)
volunteer model within the broader context of motivated behavior.
The issue of motivation is fundamental to psychology, whether
pertaining to biological drives or social inuence, and one enduring
topic is the distinction between intrinsically and extrinsically
motivated behaviors (e.g., Deci, 1971; Lepper, Greene, & Nisbett,
1973; Ryan & Deci, 2000). The former refers to actions undertaken
because they are inherently interesting or in some way satisfying.
The individual participates in an activity for its inherent interest or
enjoyment. Because the objective resides in the behavior itself,
intrinsically motivated activities have been characterized as a form
of self-expression (Amabile, 1993). In contrast, extrinsically motivated behaviors are performed in order to obtain some separable
outcome. The individual engages in the activity because it holds
some instrumental value (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Traditionally, motivational orientation was conceptualized as
situation-specic, determined by the social environment. Consequently, many studies examined aspects of the situation that enhance or undermine intrinsic motivation (e.g., Deci, 1971; Kunda
& Schwartz, 1983; Lepper et al., 1973). More recently, researchers
have begun viewing motivational tendencies as akin to personality
variables, stable across time and situations (Amabile, 1993; Amabile, Hill, Hennessey, & Tighe, 1994; Sturman, 1999). According
to this perspective, people differ in the extent to which they see
their behaviors as generally intrinsically or extrinsically motivated.
The idea of intrinsic and extrinsic tendencies as predominantly
trait- rather than state-determined does not preclude environmental inuences on them. Rather, the social environment is thought to
modify inherent tendencies. Amabiles (1993) examination of orientations toward work showed that intrinsic and extrinsic orientations are not opposing ends of a motivational continuum but
relatively orthogonal dimensions.
That motivational orientation may be more dispositional than
contextual offers a new perspective on the volunteer process. A

The rst set of hypotheses addressed the relationship between

motivational orientation and volunteer motives. We proposed that
intrinsically orientated individuals will volunteer when they nd
the reward in their helping behavior per se; they will be less attracted to activities for which the reward is separable from the
activity. Conversely, those who are extrinsically oriented are more
likely to examine costs and benets and to give consideration to
rewards that may accrue as a result of volunteering.
Hypothesis 1a: Intrinsic motivational orientation will show a
stronger correlation with internal motives for volunteering than
with external motives. The correlation with internal motives will
also be stronger than the association between an extrinsic orientation and internal motives.
Hypothesis 1b: Extrinsic orientation will show a stronger correlation with external volunteer motives than internal motives; the
relationship will be signicantly stronger than that observed for
intrinsic orientation and external motives.
The next hypothesis predicted the association between motivational orientation and prosocial personality. We reasoned that
intrinsically motivated individuals volunteer when the activity is
inherently satisfying, and satisfaction occurs for those with prosocial tendencies, particularly other-oriented empathy. In contrast,
extrinsically motivated individuals tend to volunteer when they
perceive opportunities for external rewards. Therefore, the association with a prosocial personality will be less evident.
Hypothesis 2a: Intrinsic motivation will correlate positively with
both factors of the PSB (other-oriented empathy and helpfulness).
The correlation with other-oriented empathy will be greater.
Hypothesis 2b: Other-oriented empathy will show a signicantly
stronger relationship with intrinsic than extrinsic motivation.
Hypothesis 3 examined the relationship between motivational
orientation and role identity. Intrinsically motivated volunteers
help because of personal conviction rather than external pressures
or rewards, and therefore should establish a volunteer role identity. For the extrinsically oriented, the perception of external con-

M.A. Finkelstien / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 653658

trols on behavior will interfere with development of a volunteer

identity.
Hypothesis 3a: Role identity will show a signicant positive correlation with intrinsic motivational tendencies.
Hypothesis 3b: Role identity will show a stronger relationship
with intrinsic than extrinsic motivation.
With regard to motivational orientation and time spent volunteering, we made no specic predictions. Prior studies do not reveal a consistent relationship between type of motive and
amount of activity (cf., Clary & Orenstein, 1991; Finkelstein et al.,
2005; Omoto & Snyder, 1995; Penner & Finkelstein, 1998).
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Participants were 287 undergraduates (247 female, 40 male) at
a metropolitan university in the southeastern United States. Age
was measured by presenting respondents with a choice of four categories. Ninety-one percent (n = 262) were between the ages of 18
and 24; 4.9% (n = 14) were between 25 and 30; 2.1% (n = 6) between 31 and 39; and 1.7% (n = 5) 40 years or older. All had volunteered within the past 12 months. We checked for effects of age
and gender by adding them to the regression analyses below. Because we found no signicant effects of either, demographic variables are omitted from the results.
Participants completed questionnaires in exchange for extra
course credit. The questionnaires were administered online
through the psychology departments participant pool management software. An introductory paragraph explained that the purpose of the study was to learn about participants volunteer
experience. They were assured there were no right or wrong responses, and they could withdraw at any time without penalty.
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Volunteer activity
Time spent volunteering was measured with a 25-item checklist (Gillath et al., 2005). The list enumerates a variety of volunteer
activities, and respondents indicated how frequently they engaged
in each during the past year. Items include helping people who
are less fortunate than yourself (e.g., at soup kitchens, battered womens shelters, Salvation Army centers) and conventional political activities (e.g., campaigning, stufng envelopes, answering
phones). A Likert response format was used, with alternatives
ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (almost every day).
2.2.2. Volunteer motives
The 30-item VFI (Clary et al., 1998) assessed participants
motives for volunteering. As discussed, the inventory contains six
subscales, and examples of each include: I am genuinely concerned
about the particular group I am serving (values); volunteering lets
me learn through direct hands on experience (understanding);
people I know share an interest in community service (social);
volunteering will look good on my resume (career); no matter
how bad Ive been feeling, volunteering helps me to forget about
it (protective); and volunteering makes me feel needed (enhancement). Response alternatives ranged from 1 (not at all accurate/
important for you) to 5 (extremely important/accurate for you).
The distinction noted in the introduction between internal
external motives led us to conduct a factor analysis of the motive
data to determine whether in fact they indicated this dichotomy.
We subjected the data to a principal axis factor analysis with a promax (oblique) rotation with Kaiser normalization. The two-factor
solution accounted for 50% of the common variance.

655

Twenty-two items comprised the rst factor, with a coefcient

alpha of .95. The second factor, which consisted of the ve items
from the career subscale, had a coefcient alpha of .85; three items
that did not load on either factor. The correlation between factors
was .63. Because the results supported our internal/external distinction, we used these two categories of motive rather than the
six specied in Clary et al. (1998) in all subsequent analyses.
2.2.3. Volunteer role identity
A volunteer identity was assessed with a modication of the
Finkelstein et al. (2005) measure of role identity in hospice volunteers. The ve items include volunteering is an important part of
who I am and for me, being a volunteer means more than just
volunteering. The ve-point rating scale had alternatives ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Coefcient alpha
was .86.
2.2.4. Work preference inventory (WPI)
The WPI (Amabile et al., 1994) assesses college students and
employed adults intrinsic and extrinsic motivation toward their
work. We used the form developed specically for students. The
30-item instrument contains 15 items designed to measure intrinsic motivation (e.g., curiosity is the driving force behind much of
what I do) and 15 measuring extrinsic motivation (e.g., Im less
concerned with what work I do than what I get for it). The Likert
response format ranged from 1 (never or almost never true of you) to
4 (always or almost always true of you). Coefcient alpha was .72 for
intrinsic orientation and .73 for extrinsic orientation.
2.2.5. Prosocial personality
Prosocial tendencies were measured with the PSB (Penner,
2002; Penner et al., 1995). As noted, the 30-item self-report measure comprises two dimensions: other-oriented empathy (e.g., I
sometimes try to understand my friends better by imagining
how things look from their perspective and helpfulness (e.g., I
am usually pretty effective in dealing with emergencies). Response options ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree). Cronbachs alphas for the two scales were .83 (other-oriented empathy) and .73 (helpfulness).
While no counterbalancing procedures were used, we employed all but the work preference inventory in varying sequence
in previous studies with no apparent order effects.
3. Results
Our goal was to understand the role of motivational orientation
in the volunteer experience as conceptualized by Penner (2002).
The results and discussion are organized around this objective
and the hypotheses that were tested. Table 1 presents the correlations among the variables along with their means and standard
deviations. Consistent with Amabile et al. (1994), intrinsic and
extrinsic motivational orientations were found to be orthogonal
traits as indicated by their nonsignicant correlation (r = .10).
The rst set of hypotheses concerned motivational orientation
and motives for volunteering. The data largely supported the predictions. Intrinsic motivation showed a signicant association with
internal motives (r = .39, p < .001), and as expected, the correlation
was signicantly stronger than that between intrinsic orientation
and external motives (r = .21, p < .001), t(284) = 3.34, p < .01. While
internal motives correlated signicantly with extrinsic motivation
(r = .13, p < .05), the relationship with intrinsic motivation was
stronger, t(284) = 3.54, p < .01. Also as predicted, extrinsic orientation showed a stronger relationship with external motives (r = .26,
p < .001) than internal (r = .13, p < .05), t(284) = 2.30, p < .05. However, contrary to expectation, the relationship between extrinsic

656

M.A. Finkelstien / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 653658

Table 1
Means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and intercorrelations for motivational
orientation, volunteer motives, prosocial personality, role identity, and time.

Table 3
Summary of regression analysis for time spent volunteering from antecedents and
aspects of the volunteer experience.

Variables

Variable

1. Intrinsic
2. Extrinsic
3. Internal
motives
4. External
motives
5. Otheroriented
6. Helpfulness
7. Role identity
8. Time

(.73)
.10
.39***

(.72)
.13*

(.94)

.21***

.26***

.52***

(.85)

.41***

.07

.33***

.08

(.83)

.46
.32***
.16**

.05
.02
.04

***

.28
.66***
.41***

.03
.33***
.20**

.32***
.41***
.06

(.73)
.30***
.25***

(.86)
.40***

42.44
5.45

40.37
5.79

65.49
17.30

16.57
4.73

79.59
9.60

25.33
4.75

16.65
4.17

Mean
SD

***

Time
B

Intrinsic
Extrinsic
Internal
External
Other-oriented
Helpfulness
Role identity
R2

40.93
13.65

Note: n = 287.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
***
p < .001.

tendencies and external motives was not stronger than that between intrinsic tendencies and external motives for volunteering,
t(284) = .66, ns.
Hypothesis 2 examined the relationship between motivational
orientation and a prosocial personality, and the data were consistent with predictions. Intrinsic motivation correlated signicantly
with both other-oriented empathy and helpfulness (r = .41, p < .001
and r = .46, p < .001, respectively). Though we expected the relationship with other-oriented empathy to be stronger, there was no
signicant difference [t(284) = .85, ns]. Extrinsic motivation
showed no signicant relationship with either dimension of the
PSB (r = .07 for other-oriented empathy and .05 for helpfulness).
We found, as anticipated, that intrinsic tendencies correlated signicantly more strongly than extrinsic with both other-oriented
empathy, t(284) = 6.62, p < .01 and helpfulness, t(284) = 5.77, p < .01.
Turning to Hypothesis 3, as anticipated, role identity showed a
signicant positive correlation with an intrinsic motivational orientation (r = .32, p < .001), and the relationship was stronger than
that between role identity and extrinsic motivation (r = .02, ns),
t(284) = 4.49, p < .01.
The correlations in Table 1 suggested systematic differences in
the relationship between motivational orientation and constructs
fundamental to functional analysis and role identity theory. However, the correlation matrix also revealed large intercorrelations
among many of the variables. To determine the unique contributions of motives, role identity, and prosocial personality to intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation, regression equations were calculated. All
variables were simultaneously entered as predictors of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation, respectively.

SE B
.10
.02
.21
.00
.24
.47
.93

.16
.13
.06
.18
.09
.18
.24

b
.04
.01
.26**
.00
.17**
.16**
.28***
.25

Note: n = 286.
p > .01.
***
p < .001.
**

As Table 2 (left) shows, both dimensions of the PSB emerged as

unique predictors of intrinsic motivation: other-oriented empathy,
b = .24; and helpfulness, b = .33. The beta weight for internal motives also was signicant (b = .20). The only signicant predictor
of extrinsic motivation (Table 2, right) was external motives for
volunteering (b = .27). There was no evidence of multicollinearity
in either regression; the maximum variance ination factor (VIF)
was 2.23.
From a practical standpoint, we were interested in how antecedents and aspects of the volunteer experience inuence volunteer activity. We therefore conducted an additional regression
analysis, evaluating the contributions of motive, motivational orientation, prosocial personality, and role identity to time spent volunteering. Table 3 summarizes the results.
Neither motivational orientation emerged as a unique predictor
of volunteer time. Signicant predictors did include the formation
of a volunteer role identity (b = .28) and internal motives for helping (b = .26), while the beta weight for external motives was nonsignicant. Consistent with the zero-order correlations,
helpfulness was a signicant predictor of time spent volunteering
(b = .16). However, other-oriented empathy, which was not signicantly correlated with time, showed a signicant negative regression weight (b = .17). Thus other-oriented empathy appears to be
acting as a suppressor variable. Removing other-oriented empathy
from the regression equation slightly reduced the beta weights
for the signicant predictors, but they remained signicant:
b = .25, p < .01 (internal motives); b = .16, p < .05 (helpfulness), and
b = .21, p < .01 (role identity); variance accounted for decreased
from 24% to 22%. The explanation for the suppression effect is
not obvious; there were no other suppressors evident. Collinearity
did not appear to be a problem, as the maximum VIF was 2.29.
4. Discussion

Table 2
Summary of regression analysis for motivational orientation from antecedents and
aspects of the volunteer experience.
Variable

Intrinsic
B

Internal
External
Other-oriented
Helpfulness
Role identity
R2
Note: n = 286.
p < .01.
p < .001.

**

***

Extrinsic
SE B

.06
.11
.14
.37
.05

.02
.07
.03
.06
.09

b
.20**
.10
.24***
.33***
.04
.34

SE B
.03
.33
.05
.12
.22

.03
.08
.04
.08
.11

b
.09
.27***
.09
.10
.16
.10

The present study was the rst to link aspects of functional

analysis and role identity theory to the broader concept of motivational orientation. Constructs fundamental to the volunteer process were systematically related to intrinsic and extrinsic
tendencies. With higher intrinsic motivation came evidence of a
prosocial personality, internal motives for volunteering, and the
establishment of a volunteer role identity. In contrast, extrinsic
motivation was characterized by external motives for helping, with
no evidence of prosocial tendencies or a volunteer self-concept.
These relationships suggest that the umbrella of motivational orientation can provide a useful organizing framework for current
conceptualizations of the volunteer process (e.g., Penner, 2002).
Note that individual differences in motivational orientation did
not correspond to differences in the amount of time spent volun-

M.A. Finkelstien / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 653658

teering. Thus, while the construct may affect the nature of the volunteer commitment, motivational orientation does not seem to affect the strength of that commitment. Ryan and Deci (2000)
convincingly argued that, contrary to prevailing perceptions,
extrinsic objectives are not necessarily inferior to intrinsic motivations for engaging in a behavior. For example, a student who studies in order to gain admission into the college of his choice is
motivated by extrinsic factors. Nonetheless that individual can
appreciate the value of studying.
Similarly, the functional analysis of volunteerism posits that
different individuals can engage in the same volunteer work for
very different reasons. The task of an organization is to satisfy
the relevant motives. Clary and Snyder (1999) and Clary et al.
(1998) examined the role of motives and their fulllment in initiating and sustaining volunteerism in a variety of organizations.
When the experience satised their motives for volunteering, individuals reported greater satisfaction and stronger intentions to
continue volunteering than if those objectives remained unrealized. Motive fulllment also correlated with later volunteer activity (Omoto & Snyder, 1995).
Although motivational orientation may not predict volunteer
activity, differences do suggest different strategies for retaining
volunteers. One study of mandatory volunteerism by Stukas,
Snyder, and Clary (1999) suggested that external controls can inhibit the formation of a volunteer role identity and the desire to continue volunteering. Requiring college students to engage in
community service reduced their intentions to volunteer in the future. The negative effects of mandatory volunteerism even applied to students who previously had freely engaged in volunteer
work. Similar effects were found with blood donors (Callero
et al., 1987). For intrinsically oriented individuals, whom the
current data show are motivated by internal goals and develop a
volunteer role identity, mandatory volunteering may be counterproductive. However, the approach may help recruit extrinsically
oriented volunteers, spurred as they are by external motives.
Like external controls, the lure of external rewards can inhibit
intrinsic interest (e.g., Lepper et al., 1973). However, interference
is not a given. Deci (1971) observed that although money decreased intrinsic motivation, verbal reinforcement and positive
feedback about ones performance did not. Similarly, performance-contingent rewards, those reserved for a task done well,
were not the threat to intrinsic motivation that task-contingent
rewards were (Deci & Ryan, 1985). These studies suggest that
intrinsically motivated volunteers may prefer honest feedback to
unalloyed praise. Presumably the issue would not affect extrinsically oriented individuals; for them, fulllment of their external
goals (career advancement, stronger social ties) would be the more
important inuence.
4.1. Study limitations/future directions
That our sample consisted solely of college students limits the
generalizability of the ndings. At each stage in life, myriad variables can differentially affect reasons for volunteering and the extent of that commitment. Cross-sectional studies such as this
provide a snapshot of an individual at a single point in time, and
the inuences on volunteer activity change over time (e.g., Finkelstein, 2008). While our self-report procedure may raise questions
of accuracy, our interest was less in an objective accounting of volunteer activity than in peoples perceptions of their behavior and
its inuences.
Because of the large sample size, some statistically signicant
correlations were small, but they uniformly were consistent with
our theoretical framework. Future work is planned to further test
and rene that framework. Arguably more important than the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic is whether volunteering is

657

congruent with ones self-concept and core values (e.g., Deci &
Ryan, 2000). Activities undertaken because of internal pressures
are no more satisfying than those resulting from external controls
(Sheldon & Elliot, 1999; Sheldon et al., 2004). We are planning a
study to investigate congruence and its effect on volunteer satisfaction and longevity.
5. Conclusion
Examined within the framework of motivational orientation,
volunteering provides a means of studying basic psychological processes. Our ndings help to place constructs underlying functional
analysis and role identity theory in a more general psychological
context.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported in part by a Research & Development
grant from the University of South Florida College of Arts &
Sciences.
References
Amabile, T. M. (1993). Motivational synergy: Toward new conceptualizations of
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human Resource
Management Review, 3, 185201.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work
preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational
orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950967.
Callero, P. L., Howard, J. A., & Piliavin, J. A. (1987). Helping behavior as role behavior:
Disclosing social structure and history in the analysis of prosocial action. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 50, 247256.
Clary, E. G., & Orenstein, L. (1991). The amount and effectiveness of help: The
relationship of motives and abilities to helping behavior. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 17, 5864.
Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1999). The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and
practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 156159.
Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., Ridge, R. D., Copeland, J., Stukas, A. A., Haugen, J., et al.
(1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A
functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 15161530.
Davis, M. H., Hall, J. A., & Meyer, M. (2003). The rst year: Inuences on the
satisfaction, involvement, and persistence of new community volunteers.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 248260.
Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105115.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human
needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11,
227268.
Finkelstein, M. A. (2008). Predictors of volunteer time: The changing contributions
of motive fulllment and role identity. Social Behavior and Personality, 36,
13531364.
Finkelstein, M. A., & Brannick, M. T. (2007). Applying theories of institutional
helping to informal volunteering: Motives, role identity, and prosocial
personality. Social Behavior and Personality, 35, 101114.
Finkelstein, M. A., Penner, L. A., & Brannick, M. T. (2005). An examination of role
identity and motives among hospice volunteers. Social Behavior and Personality,
33, 403418.
Fitch, R. T. (1987). Characteristics and motivations of college students volunteering
for community service. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 424431.
Gillath, O., Shaver, P. R., Mikulincer, M., Nitzberg, R. E., Erez, A., & Van Ijzendoorn, M.
H. (2005). Attachment, caregiving, and volunteering: Placing volunteerism in an
attachment-theoretical framework. Personal Relationships, 12, 425426.
Grube, J., & Piliavin, J. A. (2000). Role identity, organizational experiences, and
volunteer experiences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 11081120.
Kunda, Z., & Schwartz, S. H. (1983). Undermining intrinsic moral motivation:
External reward and self-presentation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 45, 763771.
Lee, L., Piliavin, J. A., & Call, V. R. A. (1999). Giving time, money, and blood:
Similarities and differences. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62, 276290.
Lee, Y.-K., & Chang, C.-T. (2007). Who gives what to charity? Characteristics
affecting donation behavior. Social Behavior and Personality, 35, 11731180.
Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining childrens intrinsic
interest with extrinsic reward. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28,
129137.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the ve-factor model of personality
across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
52, 8190.

658

M.A. Finkelstien / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 653658

Omoto, A., & Snyder, M. (1995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivation,
longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 671687.
Omoto, A., & Snyder, M. (2002). Considerations of community: The context and
process of volunteerism. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 846867.
Penner, L. A. (2002). Dispositional and organizational inuences on sustained
volunteerism: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 447467.
Penner, L. A., & Finkelstein, M. A. (1998). Dispositional and structural determinants
of volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 525537.
Penner, L. A., Fritzsche, B. A., Craiger, J. P., & Freifeld, T. R. (1995). Measuring the
prosocial personality. In J. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.). Advances in
personality assessment (Vol. 10, pp. 147164). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Piliavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1991). Giving blood: The development of an altruistic
identity. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

Piliavin, J. A., Grube, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (2002). Role as resource for action in public
service. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 469485.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic
denitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 5467.
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal
well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 76, 482497.
Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Ryan, R. M., Chirkov, V., Kim, Y., Wu, C., et al. (2004). Selfconcordance and subjective well-being in four cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 35, 209223.
Stukas, A. A., Snyder, M., & Clary, E. G. (1999). The effects of mandatory
volunteerism on intentions to volunteer. Psychological Science, 10, 5964.
Sturman, T. S. (1999). Achievement motivation and type A behavior in motivational
orientation. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 189207.