Psychological Reports, 1975, 37, 307-310. @ Psychological Reports 1975
PERSONALITY CORRELATES OF HELPING BEHAVIOR BERNADElTE M. M. SMITH A N D L. D. NELSON Virginia Commonwealth University Summary.-571 male members of volunteer groups and 699 nonvolunteers scored significantly differently on Cattell's 16 PF scale, volunteers being extroverted (out-going, happy-gcducky, venruresome, and tenderminded) , and scoring lower on shrewd, liberal, and self-sufficient.
The utility of personality factors in predicting helping behavior has not been systematically examined. The range of personality factors included in previous research has been limited to such factors as extroversion, ego-strength, assertiveness, and achievement motivation; effects of several other personality variables on helping behavior are unknown. The literature indicates that voluntary organization members tend to be extroverted, self-assured, optimistic and trusting (Jackson & Winkler, 1964; Reddy & Smith, 1972; Smith, 1966). They tend to report higher levels of "happiness" and positive affect (Bradburn, 1969; Bradburn & Caplovitz, 1965; Sills, 1968; Phillips, 1967). In this study a broad range of personality characteristics of volunteers and non-volunteers were compared to facilitate assessment of rhe utility of personality in predicting helping behavior and to identify personality traits associated with helping behavior.
METHOD Personality data were collected from samples of volunteers and non-volunteers. The volunteer sample was composed of male rescue squad members and members of Big Brothers organizations in Virginia; questionnaires were mailed to the directors of these organizations who distributed them among their members ( N = 571). The non-volunteer sample was drawn from a statewide probability sample of male Virginia residents ( N = 699). Two questionnaires were administered to each of these respondents approximately 1 yr. apart. The return rate from the first adrninistrarion was 62%; 65% of the initial respondents who could be contacted with the follow-up also completed the second questi0nnaire.l Non-volunteers were excluded from this sample by omitting from the analysis all members of the probability sample who indicated membership in a helping organization ( N = 566). Cattell's Personality Factor Questionnaire, which 'The sampling frame was a set of 35 telephone directories, randomly selected from all the public telephone directories in Virginia. The number of names drawn from each directory was selected to match the relative proportion of Virginia residents living in communities with the same population size as that by which the directory was named (or in rural areas, generally identified by county names). A comparison of the sample characteristics with 1970 Census data indicated that the sample does not differ significantly from the stare population in terms of the distribution of populations of places of residence. Nonwhites and persons having low incomes, however, are underrepresented in the sample.
B. M. M. SMITH
308
&
L. D. NELSON
provides a comprehensive coverage of personality traits, was used to measure personality.
RESULTSAND DISCUSSION Raw scores on each personality factor for both samples were weighted and then standardized and combined in order to obtain an over-all population mean and standard deviation. The means, standard deviations and t-test scores for the volunteer and non-volunteer samples are indicated in Table 1. TABLE 1
MEANS2 STANDARD DEVIATIONS (T SCORES)ON 16 P F AMONG VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS 16 PF Outgoing ( A ) Inrelligence ( B ) Ego strength ( C ) Dominance (E) Happy-go-lucky ( F ) Superego strength ( G ) Venturesome ( H ) Tender-minded ( I ) Suspicious ( L ) Imaginative ( M ) Shrewd ( N ) Apprehensive ( 0 ) Liberal ( Q l ) Self-sufficient ( 4 2 ) Self-concept control ( 4 3 ) Frustrated (Q4)
Volunteers
Non-volunteers
r
51.83210.05 50.48C10.07 50.64210.09 50.272 9.85 51.77C 9.98 50.892 9.82 51.36210.30 50.242 9.70 49.912 9.48 49.332 9.85 43.162 9.84 49.48k10.19 49.052 9.95 47.962 9.91 50.19210.02 49.542 9.96
48.1729.95 49.512 9.94 49.362 9.91 49.73e10.16 48.23k10.02 49.12210.19 48.662 9.70 49.762 10.30 50.10210.52 50.63210.16 50.83c10.16 50.532 9.80 50.942 10.05 52.05210.09 49.812 9.97 50.46&10.03
6.13 1.62 2.13 .90 5.93 2.98 4.52 .81 .32 2.09 2.79 1.78 3.17 6.87 .68 1.54
P
PERSONALITY CORRELATES OF HELPING BEHAVIOR BERNADElTE M. M. SMITH A N D L. D. NELSON Virginia Commonwealth University Summary.-571 male members of volunteer groups and 699 nonvolunteers scored significantly differently on Cattell's 16 PF scale, volunteers being extroverted (out-going, happy-gcducky, venruresome, and tenderminded) , and scoring lower on shrewd, liberal, and self-sufficient.
The utility of personality factors in predicting helping behavior has not been systematically examined. The range of personality factors included in previous research has been limited to such factors as extroversion, ego-strength, assertiveness, and achievement motivation; effects of several other personality variables on helping behavior are unknown. The literature indicates that voluntary organization members tend to be extroverted, self-assured, optimistic and trusting (Jackson & Winkler, 1964; Reddy & Smith, 1972; Smith, 1966). They tend to report higher levels of "happiness" and positive affect (Bradburn, 1969; Bradburn & Caplovitz, 1965; Sills, 1968; Phillips, 1967). In this study a broad range of personality characteristics of volunteers and non-volunteers were compared to facilitate assessment of rhe utility of personality in predicting helping behavior and to identify personality traits associated with helping behavior.
METHOD Personality data were collected from samples of volunteers and non-volunteers. The volunteer sample was composed of male rescue squad members and members of Big Brothers organizations in Virginia; questionnaires were mailed to the directors of these organizations who distributed them among their members ( N = 571). The non-volunteer sample was drawn from a statewide probability sample of male Virginia residents ( N = 699). Two questionnaires were administered to each of these respondents approximately 1 yr. apart. The return rate from the first adrninistrarion was 62%; 65% of the initial respondents who could be contacted with the follow-up also completed the second questi0nnaire.l Non-volunteers were excluded from this sample by omitting from the analysis all members of the probability sample who indicated membership in a helping organization ( N = 566). Cattell's Personality Factor Questionnaire, which 'The sampling frame was a set of 35 telephone directories, randomly selected from all the public telephone directories in Virginia. The number of names drawn from each directory was selected to match the relative proportion of Virginia residents living in communities with the same population size as that by which the directory was named (or in rural areas, generally identified by county names). A comparison of the sample characteristics with 1970 Census data indicated that the sample does not differ significantly from the stare population in terms of the distribution of populations of places of residence. Nonwhites and persons having low incomes, however, are underrepresented in the sample.
B. M. M. SMITH
308
&
L. D. NELSON
provides a comprehensive coverage of personality traits, was used to measure personality.
RESULTSAND DISCUSSION Raw scores on each personality factor for both samples were weighted and then standardized and combined in order to obtain an over-all population mean and standard deviation. The means, standard deviations and t-test scores for the volunteer and non-volunteer samples are indicated in Table 1. TABLE 1
MEANS2 STANDARD DEVIATIONS (T SCORES)ON 16 P F AMONG VOLUNTEERS AND NON-VOLUNTEERS 16 PF Outgoing ( A ) Inrelligence ( B ) Ego strength ( C ) Dominance (E) Happy-go-lucky ( F ) Superego strength ( G ) Venturesome ( H ) Tender-minded ( I ) Suspicious ( L ) Imaginative ( M ) Shrewd ( N ) Apprehensive ( 0 ) Liberal ( Q l ) Self-sufficient ( 4 2 ) Self-concept control ( 4 3 ) Frustrated (Q4)
Volunteers
Non-volunteers
r
51.83210.05 50.48C10.07 50.64210.09 50.272 9.85 51.77C 9.98 50.892 9.82 51.36210.30 50.242 9.70 49.912 9.48 49.332 9.85 43.162 9.84 49.48k10.19 49.052 9.95 47.962 9.91 50.19210.02 49.542 9.96
48.1729.95 49.512 9.94 49.362 9.91 49.73e10.16 48.23k10.02 49.12210.19 48.662 9.70 49.762 10.30 50.10210.52 50.63210.16 50.83c10.16 50.532 9.80 50.942 10.05 52.05210.09 49.812 9.97 50.46&10.03
6.13 1.62 2.13 .90 5.93 2.98 4.52 .81 .32 2.09 2.79 1.78 3.17 6.87 .68 1.54
P
