Citation
Assessing suicide hotline volunteers' empathy and motivations

Material Information

Title:
Assessing suicide hotline volunteers' empathy and motivations
Creator:
Barz, Michelle Lee, 1967-
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Altruism ( jstor )
Crisis intervention ( jstor )
Empathy ( jstor )
Motivation ( jstor )
Motivation research ( jstor )
Psychology ( jstor )
Questionnaires ( jstor )
Suicide ( jstor )
Volunteer labor ( jstor )
Volunteerism ( jstor )
Alachua County ( local )

Record Information

Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
26982310 ( ALEPH )
47243262 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text










ASSESSING SUICIDE HOTLINE VOLUNTEERS'
EMPATHY AND MOTIVATIONS












By

MICHELLE LEE BARZ


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2001

























To my parents -
with love and appreciation














ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to voice my deepest appreciation of Dr. Paul

Schauble, my doctoral committee chair. His support, understanding, and guidance were

essential in the undertaking and completion of this dissertation. Paul exemplifies not

only a true scientist/practitioner, but also a person of the highest quality, integrity and

inner strength. He will always be a great source of inspiration for me. I would also like

to thank the members of my committee: Dr. Martin Heesacker, who provided helpful

research design, statistical guidance, and insightful comments; Dr. Marshall Knudson, for

all his support, encouragement, teaching and access to the best participants a researcher

could desire; Dr. David Miller, for being a first-rate statistics teacher and for asking

helpful questions to strengthen this study; Dr. Barbara Probert for her insightful

suggestions and warm encouragement; and Dr. Robert Ziller for his helpful input and

perspective on the beginnings of empathy. Kudos to Jim Probert, past fellow trainer, who

remembers what it is like to be a student. His encouragement, support and helpful

suggestions through the data collection and beyond are appreciated. I thank Wendy

Marsh for her assistance with data collection, Teraesa Vinson for her willingness to help

a "stranger," and Jim McNulty for statistical assistance. I give heartfelt gratitude to my

dear friend Mary Pedersen for her time, friendship and support. To the Crisis Center

staff, whom I admire deeply, thank you. I am grateful to all of the Crisis Center staff,

volunteers and trainees, who give of themselves in countless ways to help others.








Finally, to my parents and my husband Stuart, I give very special thanks for continually

providing me with the time, love, faith and encouragement to achieve my goals.














TABLE OF CONTENTS



ACKN OW LED GM ENTS ................................................................................................. i,

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................ vii

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... viii

CHAPTERS

1 INTROD UCTION ........................................................................................................... 1

Crisis Intervention Volunteers........................................................................................ 2
Em pathy.......................................................................................................................... 4
M otivations of V volunteers ............................................................... ...................... ........ 6
Current Study ............................................................................................................... 8

2 REVIEW OF LITERA TURE .......................................................................................... 9

Contem porary Perspectives on Em pathy........................................................................ 9
M otivations .................................................................................................. ............... 15
Prosocial Behavior Versus Altruism ......................................................................... 15
Relationship Between A ltruism and Em pathy.......................................................... 16
Evaluation of Effectiveness .......................................................................................... 18
Em pathic Skills......................................................................................................... 18
Professionals Versus N onprofessionals.................................................................... 19
Effects of Training and Experience.......................................................................... 20
Volunteers..................................................................................................................... 22
Characteristics of V olunteers.................................................................................... 23
Volunteer M otivations.............................................................................................. 24
Relationship Between Volunteer Motivations and Abilities.................................... 27
Sum m ary ................................................................................................................... 28
Current Study................................................................................................................ 28
Hypotheses.................................................................................................................... 29
Key Definitions............................................................................................................. 30









3 M ETHOD ..................................................................................................................... 32

Design.................................... ................. .................. 32
Participants .................................................................................................................... 33
Instrum ents ................................................................................................................ 34
Empathy ................................................................................................................... 34
Scales used ............................................................................................................ 34
Other scales considered........... .. ........ ............................................- ...... 38
M otivation ................................................................................... .......... ....... ....... 41
Procedure...................................................................................................... ................ 43
Control Group........................................................................................................... 43
Training Group................................................................................... ....................... 43
Volunteer Group....................................................................................................... 44
Statistical Analyses....................................................................................................... 46

4 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 47

Descriptive Statistics ....................................................................... ........................47
Hypothesis I.................................................................................................................. 51
Hypothesis 2 .................................................................................................................. 54
Hypothesis 3 .......................................................................................................... ........ 56
Additional Analyses .................................................................... ...... ....................... 57

5 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................ 59

Hypothesis 1 .................................................................................................................. 60
Hypothesis 2 .............................................................................................................. .... 62
Hypothesis 3.............................................................................. ....................................64
Consideration of Gender D ifferences............................................ ............................... 65
Study Lim itations................................................................... ....................................... 67
Implications for Future Research.................................................................................. 68
Conclusion................................................................................................. ............... 70

APPENDICES

A INFORM ED CON SENT .................................................................... .......................... 72

B INSTRUCTION S .......................................................................................................... 74

C IN STRUM ENTS ...................................................................................................... ..... 75

LIST OF REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 79

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ......................................................... .................................... 90




vi














LIST OF TABLES


Table Page

Table 4-1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Measured..................................... 48

Table 4-2. Frequencies of the Measured Variables .............................................................. 50

Table 4-3. Mean Ages in the Three Study Groups ............................................................... 51

Table 4-4. Group Differences in M ean Age......................................................................... 51

Table 4-5. Group Means on the Empathy Measures............................................................. 53

Table 4-6. Group Differences in Empathy ......................................................................... 53

Table 4-7. Correlations Among Experience, Age and Empathy .......................................... 55

Table 4-8. Gender Differences on Measures of Empathy and Motivation........................... 58














Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
SRequirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

ASSESSING SUICIDE HOTLINE VOLUNTEERS'
EMPATHY AND MOTIVATIONS

By

Michelle Lee Barz

May 2001

Chairman: Paul G. Schauble
Major Department: Psychology

Suicide is a major mental health problem. Consequently, suicide prevention

agencies have become very important in helping communities deal with this crisis.

Volunteers are often the backbone of suicide prevention and crisis intervention agencies,

and their effectiveness is critical to the services that these agencies provide. This study

investigated general therapeutic empathy and motivations for engaging in helping

behavior among suicide hotline volunteers. The study consisted of three groups: trained

crisis center volunteers (with varying levels of experience), crisis center applicants

accepted for volunteer training, and a control group similar in age, background and

education, By using questionnaires, I measured differences in empathy and in motivation

for volunteering among the groups. I used a nonequivalent control groups design. It was

hypothesized that paraprofessionals volunteering at a suicide/crisis intervention agency

would exhibit more empathy in the form of perspective-taking and empathic

understanding than would untrained individuals, but they would display less empathy as








their length of experience increased compared to less experienced volunteers. It was also

hypothesized that volunteers would display higher levels of altruistic motivation than

would a nontrained control group.

The first hypothesis, that trained volunteers would exhibit greater empathy than

the trainees or the control group, was supported. The second hypothesis, that an inverse

relationship would exist between crisis volunteers' length of experience and amount of

empathy, was not supported. A significant positive correlation was found between length

of experience volunteering and levels of empathic understanding. The variable of

experience was windsorized in order to correct for extreme values (outliers) in the data

set. The third hypothesis, that crisis volunteers would exhibit higher levels of alfruistic

motivation than the control group, was not supported. The volunteer group had the

lowest mean score for altruistic motivation of the three groups studied. Overall results

indicated that crisis intervention volunteers, especially those with more experience, have

effective empathic skills. Results lend support for the use of trained volunteers in suicide

prevention/crisis intervention agencies. The findings also suggest that attempts to retain

volunteers over longer periods would be beneficial to the agency. Reasons for

volunteering consisted of both altruistic and egoistic motivations, and results indicate that

volunteers can be effective regardless of their reasons for volunteering.












CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Worldwide suicide rates have risen over the last five decades (Lester, 1993). In

the United States, few would disagree that suicide continues to be a major mental health

problem. In industrialized nations, it is among the top ten leading causes of death for

people of all ages (Centers for Disease Control, 1985), and in the United States, it is the

third leading cause of death for individuals aged 15-24 (U.S. Bureau of the Census,

1996), These statistics are supported by the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance study

conducted by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) researchers, who found

that 13% of all deaths among young adults (ages 10-24) result from suicide (Kann et al.,

1998). Nationwide, these same researchers found that 21% of students in grades 9-12

had seriously considered suicide during the 12 months preceding the survey.

Even more alarming is that suicide is probably underreported and thus statistics

underestimate the true incidence of suicide. Although it is well accepted in the literature

on suicide that suicidal ideation is an important risk factor related to future suicide

attempts, Rudd (1989) provided evidence that the true magnitude of the incidence of

suicidal thoughts and behavior is not accurately estimated from national suicide figures.

Some researchers suggest that inaccurate estimates are also due to a lack of standard

nomenclature for referring to suicide-related behaviors (O'Carroll et al., 1996). In

addition, it is estimated that 30% to 40% of individuals who completed suicide made at

least one prior suicide attempt (Maris, 1992).








Crisis and suicide intervention services have proliferated rapidly in the last

several decades (Daigle & Mishara, 1995). This phenomenon may be a response to the

increasing numbers of individuals considering suicide, alarming death rates, and the fact

that suicide attempters are more likely than nonattempters to cope by relying on others to

solve problems rather than on themselves (Orbach, Bar-Joseph, & Dror, 1990). The

modern crisis center movement developed out of the community mental health

philosophy of the 1960s and 1970s, and by the mid-70s, there were over 500 telephone

crisis centers in the United States (Stein & Lambert. 1984).


Crisis Intervention Volunteers

In general, human service agencies rely on significant numbers of volunteers to

serve their client populations (Miller, Powell, & Seltzer, 1990); crisis intervention and

suicide prevention centers are no different. The shortage ofmental health professionals

in many parts of the country has necessitated this use of volunteers, the majority of whom

are non- or paraprofessionals (Rosenbaumn & Calhoun, 1977). In fact, Seely (1992)

points out that crisis and suicide prevention agencies often have paraprofessionals as the

backbone of their services. Miller, Coombs, Leeper, and Barton (1984) found an

association between suicide prevention facilities and a reduction of suicide in young

white females (the most prevalent users of such agencies). The authors suggest that

research should focus on attempting to analyze factors that are responsible for this

reduction. One factor in reducing suicides is crisis counselor effectiveness. In fact, the

growing crisis center movement was supported by the belief that volunteers could be

effective crisis counselors. This belief grew out of the influential work of researchers in

the 1960s (e.g., Litman, Farberow, Shneidman, Helig, & Kramer, 1965; Shneidman,








Farberow, & Litman, 1961) who pioneered the use of nonprofessionals in suicide

prevention. They outlined the specific duties of crisis center workers: to build rapport

and secure communication; to evaluate potential danger to the caller, including suicide

lethality; and to formulate an action plan to mobilize the caller's available resources

(Fowler & McGee, 1973). However, given the prevalence of suicide, as well as the

numerous suicide risk assessment instruments available (see recent reviews by Gutierrez,

Osman, Kopper, Barrios, & Bagge, 2000; Range & Knott, 1997), it is somewhat

surprising that empirical assessments of the effectiveness of paraprofessionals in suicide

intervention agencies have not kept pace (Frankish, 1994; Neimeyer & Pfeiffer, 1994).

McGee and Jennings (1973) cite experts in crisis intervention and suicide

prevention, such as Robert Litman, Edwin Shneidman, and Norman Farberow, to explain

why nonprofessionals, at times, may be better than professionals in providing crisis

services. They suggest that the lack of professional armor and sophisticated categorical

approaches to psychopathology would enable nonprofessionals to connect more

effectively with those in crisis. Their findings (and other studies) are explored in more

depth in the literature review section of this study. However, other than a few studies

(e.g., Homes & Howard, 1980; Knickerbocker & McGee, 1973; McGee & Jennings,

1973), very little research has focused specifically on the difference between

professionals and paraprofessionals in crisis/suicide intervention effectiveness.

The trend of incorporating volunteer and paraprofessional workers into the

treatment of diverse emotional problems has even been referred to as the "third revolution

in mental health" (Tapp & Spanier, 1973, p. 245). These paraprofessionals offer clients

advice, counseling, information, or simply empathic listening. Since crisis situations tend








to be time-limited, here-and-now problems, it appears that the ability to convey warmth

and personal interest, as well as to provide some direction, may be more central to

successful crisis intervention than professional training (which often includes therapeutic

dogma and efforts to probe past experience and personality problems). Two questions

emerge, however, with respect to paraprofessionals providing crisis intervention: how

effective are these individuals (i.e,, can they provide adequate empathy to establish a

therapeutic relationship with individuals in crisis) and what motivates individuals to
volunteer to be part of this thirdd revolution?"



Empathy
Empatheia, a term coined by the early Greeks, suggests affection and passion,

with a quality of suffering. The Latin equivalent, largely borrowed from the Greek word,

ispathos, which means feeling-perception. More modern usage of empathy, however,

came closer to the concept of knowing someone through entering his or her lived world

and feeling an awareness of his or her experience. This concept of knowing someone

was called Einfuhlung, a word initially used in German aesthetics (Davis, 1994). Alfred

Adler (1931), one of the pioneers of psychoanalysis, proposed this more modern view

and asserted that treatment can only be successful if the helper is genuinely interested in

the person being helped. He suggested that the primary method to convey this genuine

interest is through seeing, hearing, and experiencing the world through the other person.

This idea, however, does not distinguish empathy from sympathetic identification. Carl

Rogers (1957) brought this distinction into prominence with his classical paper on

conditions of therapeutic personality change and his well-known "as if' condition of

experience.








Research on and interest in empathy surged in the 1960s and 1970s when Carl

Rogers (1957) proposed his "necessary and sufficient therapeutic conditions." By then,

Truax and his colleagues (Truax & Carkhuff, 1967; Truax & Mitchell, 1971)

accumulated evidence that suggested correlations between empathy and therapeutic

outcome. In fact, more research attention has been focused on the construct of empathy

than on any other variable posited as relevant to the therapeutic process (Patterson, 1984),

Inconsistencies in the research, however, led many researchers to conclude that sufficient

empirical support was lacking (see review by Patterson, 1984), On one hand, many

therapists saw empathy as important (in terms of being warm and supportive). On the

other hand, the stronger contention of empathy as a central ingredient to therapeutic

change was generally not accepted (Bohart & Greenberg, 1997). Consequently, research

on empathy in the 1980s dropped dramatically.

Bohart and Greenborg point out that we live in a "paradoxical age" with respect to

empathy. On one side, empathy has again emerged as an important topic of study in

areas such as social and developmental psychology. Numerous popular books argue that
"emotional intelligence," which includes empathy, may be even more important than IQ

(Goleman, 1995, 1998). In addition, empathy training is now being used in various areas,

including schools, business, and medicine. However, despite evidence that the

therapeutic relationship is the best predictor of success in therapy, and that Rogers' work

on relational conditions specifies that empathy is one of the key ingredients in creating a

therapeutic relationship, "opinions in academic psychology as well as the influence of

managed care often minimize the importance of the relationship in therapy, treating it as








a background variable and assuming all clinicians know how to establish a therapeutic

relationship" (Bohart & Greenberg, 1997, p. 3).

Recently however, interest in empathy has resurged, and numerous researchers

believe that empathy demands to become a major focus of psychological research (for

example, Barrett-Lennard, 1993; Bohart & Greenberg, 1997; Davis. 1994; Duan & Hill,

1996; Hart, 1999; Ickes, 1997; and Orlinski, Grawe, & Parks, 1994), The resurgence of

interest in empathy, the numerous arguments for a need to return to studying empathy,

and the diversity of ways empathy can be conceptualized all prompted this author to

examine empathy in the current study.



Motivations of Volunteers
People who volunteer to provide crisis intervention and suicide prevention

services should possess at least minimal levels of effective, therapeutic empathy. But do

all people with empathic skills volunteer their time in crisis intervention agencies? Of

course not The question then is why do people volunteer to work in crisis/suicide

prevention settings? There is very little in the literature about what motivates individuals

to volunteer to work specifically in crisis intervention agencies. This is surprising given

the fact that so many crisis agencies rely on volunteers as the backbone of their existence

and services. Clary and Snyder (1991) suggest good reasons to study volunteers'

motivations:

The questions that arise in thinking about volunteer work as...
[voluntary], sustained and nonspontaneous help are fundamentally
motivational in nature. That is, they ask about the motives that are
involved when one decides whether to commit oneself to an ongoing
task and then must regularly decide whether or not to continue to
participate in it. (p. 123)








By understanding the motivations behind people's volunteer efforts, we can better

understand why they volunteer and what keeps them volunteering. In other words,

inquiring about motivations that dispose individuals to volunteer and to sustain their

volunteer involvement over time may help us better understand how crisis intervention

agencies can best attract and retain volunteers.

Volunteers provide necessary crisis intervention and suicide prevention services,

but how do agencies come by this invaluable resource? Why would people knowingly
commit their time and energy, not to mention undergo intense feelings and emotions

themselves, in order to help others deal with crises and/or a desire to die? Are these

individuals somehow more altruistic than those who do not volunteer? Stoffer (1968)

asserts that some people are more inherently helpful than others, and one can surmise that

individuals who display high levels of empathy may also volunteer for more altruistic

reasons. Some developmental researchers have studied the relationship between empathy

and prosocial behavior, such as altruism (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987a, 1987b), or how

empathy can lead to the development and practice of altruism (Hoffinan, 1987). Is the

empathy that might motivate individuals to volunteer in crisis intervention settings simple

altruism or are there more egoistic factors at work? Wiehe and Isenhour (1977) found

that personal satisfaction was seen as the most important motivation for people's interest

in serving as a volunteer. This finding has obvious implications for agencies that require

volunteers. Crisis service agencies typically require more extensive training and

supervision than other volunteer agencies. However, the payoff in the end may be greater

for both the volunteer and the agency. Tasks requiring greater effort, specific skills, good








judgment, emotional involvement and creativity may produce a more satisfied volunteer,

which in turn may have effects on the volunteer's length of service to the agency.

People volunteer at crisis and suicide prevention agencies for many reasons, not

all of them selfless. For example, psychology students may volunteer in order to acquire

clinical skills and experience that can be included in their curriculum vitas or to gain

information about career possibilities. Others may volunteer to increase their self-

understanding in order to enhance personal growth. Still others may volunteer because

they have friends who are either volunteering or already have involvement with an

agency. However, the fact remains that crisis intervention and suicide prevention

agencies rely on the belief, however idealistic, that volunteers within a community will

come forward, with a willingness to invest their time and themselves, in order to achieve

meaningful human interactions (Probert & Fogel, 1997). With a better understanding of

why people volunteer to provide crisis intervention and suicide-prevention services,

perhaps crisis agencies could be even more effective in recruiting and retaining

volunteers.


Current Study

This study examines two important variables in crisis intervention and suicide.

prevention volunteers: their levels of empathy and their motivation for volunteering.

The question as to whether volunteers' level of empathy increases or decreases with

experience is addressed, as is the question of whether volunteers are motivated to become

involved in crisis service agencies for altruistic or egoistic reasons.














CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE


This chapter begins with an overview of empathy and motivations for helping.

Next, a review of crisis intervention and suicide prevention effectiveness in service

providers is presented. A look at volunteers then follows, including the relationship

between paraprofessionals' abilities and their motivations for helping others. At the end

of the literature review, the purpose of the current study is presented. The chapter

concludes with the specific research questions to be studied as well as key definitions.



ContemRporary Perspectives on Empathy

Godfrey T. Barrett-Lennard, one of the pioneers of empathy research, studied

interpersonal relationships for over four decades (e.g., Barrett-Lennard, 1959, 1963,

1976, 1978, 1981, 1986, 1993). He began his work as a student of Carl Rogers at the

University of Chicago, when Rogers (1957) first circulated his classic formulation of the

"necessary and sufficient conditions of therapy." At the time, no means existed for

measuring each of the posited relationship conditions, nor was it clear what kind of

design might be both feasible and effective. It was from this context that Barrett-Lennard

began to develop the underpinnings of his original Relationship Inventory for his doctoral

dissertation research (see Barrett-Lennard, 1962, 1993). The Relationship Inventory, an

instrument used to measure empathic understanding, congruence, level of regard, and

unconditionality of regard, is discussed in Chapter 3 of this study. The Relationship








Inventory is based on the proposition that therapeutic personality changes occur in

proportion to the degree that a client experiences certain qualities in the therapist's

response to the client.

Although all therapeutic conditions are important, this study primarily focused on

the condition of empathy. Barrett-Lennard (1976) suggests that for empathic

understanding to occur, it is not essential for the person who is being empathized with to

be literally present. Stated another way, a person may be empathized with through an

audio. or videotape recording, or perhaps through written words or other expressive or

artistic acts, without being present. If physically present (but not attending to the

empathizing person), the person being empathized with could be understood empathically

without realizing it, since empathic understanding refers to a process that is occurring in

the empathizing person (Barrett-Lennard, 1981). Therefore, as Barrett-Lennard (1976)

states, "empathic understanding or empathic knowing, is first and foremost an inner

experience" (p. 175, italics in original). Broadly stated, empathy is concerned with

responsively knowing the moment-to-moment experience of another.

Three main phases in a complete empathic process are distinguished by

Barrett-Lennard (1981, 1993): (a) reception and resonation by the listener, (b) expressive

communication of this responsive awareness by the empathizing person (listener), and

(c) received empathy (or the awareness of being understood). Although Barrett-Lennard

systematically illuminates interpersonal empathy as a multi-stage process occurring

within and between individuals, he stresses that it is a subtle, complex, and multifaceted

phenomenon. The phases he suggests are not a single, closed system and do not

necessarily occur in predictable steps. In fact, considerable discrepancy is possible








among the inner resonation, communication (expression) and reception phases; and at

each stage, considerable latitude exists for empathy to occur.

Davis (1994) suggested that the nature of empathy continues to be a matter of

some disagreement. Specifically, he believed that the term empathy actually refers to

two distinctly Separate phenomena: affective reactivity and cognitive role-taking. This is

similar to Hoffman's (1984, 1987) theoretical framework of empathy which includes

cognitive role-taking and affective responding to others' situations. The affective

response dimension can be distinguished further into feelings of sympathy or concern for

others and feelings of personal distress produced by others' distress.

Davis proposed an organizational model of empathy-related constructs that makes

clear the differences and similarities between empathy's various constructs based on an

inclusive definition of empathy. The constructs include both processes taking place in

the person empathizing and the outcomes that result from these processes. Similar to

Barrett-Lennard's (1981, 1993) conception of a listener (who empathizes) and a receiver,

Davis (1994) proposed that the typical empathy "episode" consists of an observer (e.g.,

the listener) being exposed in some way to a target (e.g., the receiver) and then

responding (either cognitively, effectively or behaviorally).

Davis' model is different from Barrett-Lennard's conception, however, in that

Davis expands the definition of the empathic process. He identifies four related

constructs within this typical episode: antecedents (person or situation characteristics),

processes (mechanisms that generate empathic outcomes), intrapersonal outcomes (both

affective and cognitive responses produced in the observer as a result of exposure to the

target), and interpersonal outcomes (overt behavioral responses to the target). Davis'








model hypothesized associations between the constructs, and he suggested that stronger

relationships exist between constructs that are adjacent (e.g., between antecedents and

processes) than those that are not adjacent (e.g., between antecedents and interpersonal

outcomes). Although Davis' (1994) model borrowed its framework somewhat from

Hofflman (1984) and Staub (1987), he argued that his model allows for examination of
empathy in a multidimensional fashion that accounts for similar outcomes (e.g., helping

behavior) through a multitude of person characteristics and processes (e.g., perceptions,

associations, affective reactions and cognitions).

Changming Duan's (2000) findings supported Davis' contention that empathy is

multidimensional. Duan found that a distinction can be made between intellectual

empathy (the extent to which an observer takes the perspective of the target) and

empathic emotion (the extent to which the observer feels the target's emotions) and that

the two types of empathy may correlate in certain situations. Bohart and Greenberg

(1 997) argued that empathy's multiple dimensions include "... a cognitive or

understanding dimension, ... an affective or experiential dimension, ... action [or a]

communication [dimension], ... a way of being together in relationships, ... [and]

interpersonal confirmation or validation" (p. 419, italics in original).

The argument that empathy research is best served by adopting a

multidimensional approach to the overall construct is convincing (see Davis, 1983b) and

his empathy measure, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980) reflects this

multidimensionality. The empathy measure, discussed in Chapter 3 of this study,

includes measures of perspective-taking (cognitive role-taking), fantasy (identification

with characters in movies, novels, plays, and other fictional situations), empathic concern








(feelings of warmth, compassion and concern for others) and personal distress (feelings

of discomfort and anxiety resulting from others' distress). There has been a call in the

literature for more comprehensive approaches to studying and measuring empathy (e.g.,

Chlopan, McCain, Carbonell, & Hagen, 1985; Duan & Hill, 1996), especially in terms of

its multifaceted nature (e.g., Strayer, 1987) and in terms of therapy and helping (Bohart &

Greenberg, 1997; Hall, Davis, & Connelly, 2000). Davis' (1980) measure may partially

meet this research need.

Another prominent empathy researcher, William Ickes, is concerned primarily

with empathic accuracy. He and his colleagues (Ickes, 1993; Ickes, Stinson, Bissonnette,

& Garcia, 1990) defined empathic accuracy as "the ability to accurately infer the specific

content of other people's thoughts and feelings" (Ickes, 1997, p. 3). Although the study

of empathic accuracy is still fairly new, its roots can be traced back over 50 years to the

study of interpersonal perception. Most of Ickes' work differs from that of

Barrett-Lennard's or Davis' in that he is less concerned with the reactions of a perceiver

to emotion expressed by a target (for example, by exhibiting or reporting the same

emotion or correctly identifying another's emotion through cues provided) than with how

well an individual is able to "read" other people's thoughts and feelings. Empathic

accuracy appears to put a greater demand on participants' inferential abilities (Graham &

Ickes, 1997). In theory, empathic accuracy is most synonymous with empathic

understanding; however, when operationally defined for empirical study, empathic

accuracy must necessarily include empathic expression as well (Marangoni, Garcia,

Ickes, & Teng, 1995). An innovative methodological approach developed by Ickes and

his colleagues (Ickes, Bissonnette, Garcia, & Stinson, 1990; Ickes, Stinson et al., 1990;








Ickes & Tooke, 1988) in order to study empathic accuracy is described in Chapter 3 of

this study.

The research on empathic accuracy most relevant to the current study is the work

by Marangoni et al. (1995) regarding empathic accuracy in client-therapist relationships

(see also Ickes, Marangoni, & Garcia, 1997). They found that empathic accuracy

improves with increased exposure to a person, feedback about a person's actual thoughts

and feelings, and increasing the "readability" of the target person. They also found

relatively stable individual differences in the consistency of a perceiver's empathic

accuracy across different people. Ickes (1997) pointed out that these findings have clear

implications for the selection and training of individuals in areas where empathic

accuracy is an essential skill, and crisis intervention is certainly no exception. In addition

to the importance of being able to use empathy accurately, Hall, Davis, and Connelly

(2000) found a relationship between dispositional empathy and therapeutic effectiveness.

This is one of the first studies to assess a personality measure of empathy (specifically

empathic concern and perspective-taking ability) in psychologists and their satisfaction

with therapy.

Although there is disagreement about how best to define and operationalize

empathy (Bohart & Greenberg, 1997), the construct of empathy has a long and

distinguished history of theory and research in helping arenas. The current resurgence of

research into this interesting and important construct attests to the fact that the questions

raised about empathy will cause it to remain a central focus for years to come.








Motivations

Batson (1987, 1991), in his extensive reviews of prosocial motivation and

altruism, addressed the question of whether or not helping behavior is ever altruistic. He

asserts that the dominant view in Western thought for the past four centuries, as well as in

all major psychological views of motivation (including Freudian, behavioral, and even

humanistic or "third force" theories), is that all prosocial behavior is ultimately motivated

by some form of self-benefit. However, he also acknowledges an alternate view in

Western thought: humans are capable of acting from unselfish motives. This alternate

view suggests the existence of motivations directed toward the benefit of others as

opposed to benefit to oneself. Although an exclusively egoistic view of motivation has

been dominant in Western ideology, the term altruism has reappeared in contemporary

psychology.


Prosocial Behavior Versus Altruism

According to Jane Piliavin and her associates (Piliavin, Dovidio, Gaertner, &

Clark, 1981), prosocial behavior means "behavior that is positively evaluated against

some normative standard applicable to interpersonal acts" (p. 4). Prosocial behavior can

be distinguished from antisocial and nonsocial behavior, and its designation generally

depends on both the culture in which the behavior occurs and the person making the

judgment about the behavior. Davis (1994) calls prosocial behavior "helping behavior."

His comprehensive review of the literature suggests that a distinction can be made

between helping behavior and altruism, based on the motivations) underlying the act

Helping acts carried out in order to gain material rewards, social approval or internal

rewards (such as pride), or to avoid social sanctions for failing to help or internal








punishment (such as guilt), would simply be helping behavior. Helping acts carried out

solely for the purpose of benefiting or increasing the welfare of another would be deemed

altruistic. Although one might argue that the outcome (that is, the overt behavior of

helping another) is the same regardless of the underlying motivation, "more recent

theorizing and'research has increasingly focused on questions of motivation... with the

result that more sophisticated theoretical accounts and empirical techniques have

evolved" (Davis, 1994, p. 129) to clarify the distinction between altruism and

prosocial/helping behavior.


Relationship Between Altruism and Empathy

Many contemporary psychologists, including Martin Hoffminan (1976, 1981, 1982,

1987, 2000), Dennis Krebs (1975), Melvin Lerner (1982) and Norma Feshbach (1982),

proposed that empathy is the basis for altruistic motivation. Krebs clarified the

motivational distinction:

Psychologists have manipulated various antecedents of helping behavior and
studied their effects, and they have measured a number of correlated prosocial
events; however, ... it is the extent of self-sacrifice, the expectation of gain, and
the orientation to the needs of another that define acts as altruistic.... [We may]
cast some light on the phenomenon of altruism by investigating the idea that
empathic reactions mediate altruistic responses. (p. 1134)


Hoffminan (1982) has studied altruistic motivation using a model that depends on

the interaction between affective and cognitive processes that change with age. He states

that "the basic concept in the model is empathy, defined as a vicarious affective response,

that is,... [a] response that is more appropriate to someone else's situation than to one's

own situation" (p. 281). Davis (1994), in his summary of reviews of the literature on

empathy and altruism, found that reliable and significant positive associations exist








between empathy-related constructs and altruistic behavior. Indeed, Batson (1987,1991)

argued that the source of helping that is intended solely to benefit another (i.e., altruism)

is the reactive emotional response of empathic concern. He and his colleagues conducted

numerous experimental studies demonstrating a relationship between empathic concern

and helping behavior, and they carefully and cleverly designed experiments in which a

distinction between altruistic (sympathy-based) helping and egoistic (guilt-based) helping

was built into the study (Batson et al., 1988). Essentially this was done by making some

participants feel like a decision not to help was justified, thereby eliminating guilt as a

motivating force to help. However, one could still argue that, even though it is "justified"

not to help another, a person might not feel that it is morally acceptable. Overall, though

the research evidence has gone further to establish a link between empathy and altruism,

it is not clear why such a relationship exists.

Cialdini, Brown, Lewis, Luce, and Neuberg (1997) suggested that an alternative

to the altruism-egoism debate regarding motivation to help others is the construct of

"oneness," which they defined as "shared, merged or interconnected personal identities"

(p.483). Essentially, oneness suggests that people help others because they feel more "at

one with" those others. Cialdini et al. state that perceived oneness offers a nonaltruistic

(though not an egoistic) alternative to previous research findings that attributed helping

behavior to empathically driven altruistic motivation. Based on the explanations

presented in the literature review, the debate about what motivates people to help others

is not yet clearly decided, though thought-provoking studies continue to increase our

knowledge about the empathy-altruism connection.









Evaluation of Effectiveness

Two levels of evaluation strategies for suicide prevention services have emerged:

macroanalytic assessments of outcomes for entire programs on suicide rates in

communities, including client satisfaction; and microanalyses of crisis counselors' skill

levels and/or their ability to provide effective help. This study is concerned with the

latter analyses, typically assessed by rating either actual calls, simulated calls or

roleplays, and by developing written tests of skills and knowledge. In one of the most

recent reviews of suicide intervention effectiveness, Neimeyer and Pfeiffer (1994)

examined both macro- and microevaluations. They pointed out that although a variety of

research methodologies were used in the studies evaluating suicide intervention

effectiveness, each methodology has both benefits and inherent limitations on the

information obtained.


Empathic Skills

At the microanalytic level, several studies focused on the general Rogerian factors

of warmth, empathy, and genuineness (e.g., Carothers & Inslee, 1974; Knickerbocker &

McGee, 1973; Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky, 1991; Truax & Lister, 1971), assessing

whether volunteers are able to provide the factors, with mixed results. These researchers

generally used scales like Carkhuffs (1969). Such scales rate the ability of counselors to

provide facilitative conditions, especially the Rogerian factors mentioned above.

Carkhuff (1969) theorized that research results were partially confounded by the fact that

the people who were rating facilitative effectiveness might not have functioned at high

enough levels of the facilitative dimensions (especially empathy) themselves. Others

(Duan & Hill, 1996) suggest that the diverse nature of empathy, and the lack of









distinction between different types of empathy, may also have confounded its study.

However, difficulties in understanding or studying empathy should not preclude its

empirical examination. After all, Linehan (1997) stressed that conveying empathic

understanding with suicidal individuals is a critical component of therapy.


Professionals Versus Nonprofessionals

McGee and Jennings (1973) discovered that many volunteer counselors were

effective at becoming genuinely engaged with clients in crisis. They asserted that

nonprofessionals sometimes might be even better suited than professionals for crisis

intervention and suicide-prevention work. Nonprofessionals may naturally provide more

connected, non-detached contact with clients in crisis, whereas professionals may have a

more detached and categorical approach to what might be seen as psychopathology. In

addition, Knott and Range (1998) found that nonprofessionals often hear from someone

with suicidal intentions, are able to recognize signs of suicidality and are willing to help.

This suggests that they might be more able than professionals to help suicidal individuals,

in an informal setting, to explore alternatives other than suicide and to feel hopeful about

the future.

Knickerbocker and McGee (1973) compared "lay" volunteers working at a crisis

center (who had undergone a phone counselor training course) with a group of

professionals and graduate students preparing for professional psychology careers. Using

multiple measures, the three groups were rated for empathy, warmth, and genuineness,

considered in much of the literature as essential for therapeutic change. Across all three

dimensions, the nonprofessional group scored as high as, or higher than, the two

professional groups. All groups scored in the effective range on the dimensions. The








results have often been cited as justification for using trained lay volunteers in crisis

center settings.

Homes and Howard (1980) specifically studied both professional and

paraprofessional crisis workers' ability to recognize suicide lethality factors. They

developed the'Lethality Scale, a 13-item scale that contains questions about suicide-

related factors such as age, gender, immediate stress, suicide plan and sleep disturbance.

The items, which are in multiple choice format, were completed by different groups of

professionals and paraprofessionals. Results indicated that general/family practice

physicians were more aware of lethality factors than were psychiatrists, followed by

psychologists, social workers, ministers and college students. A disturbing finding was

that doctoral-level psychologists only recognized correct responses to about half of the

items, masters-level social workers recognized fewer than half, and ministers recognized

no more than college students! Although definite criteria for a "good" score were not

specified, the findings do suggest that more training and/or experience are related to

greater effectiveness. The results also indicate a need for improved training on suicide

risk factors for both professionals and paraprofessionals alike if they are working with

suicidal clients.


Effects of Training and Experience

Some studies involving roleplays have generally shown that phone counselors can

provide better facilitative conditions with training and experience (France, 1975; Hart &

King, 1979; Neimeyer & Pfeiffer, 1994). In these studies, the counselors actively

participated in the roleplay situation. However, studies involving simulated calls made to

crisis centers in which the phone counselors were not aware that the calls were simulated








have led researchers to conclude that crisis line counselors often do not reach minimum

levels of therapeutic effectiveness (France, 1975; Genther, 1974; Neimeyer & Pfeiffer,

1994; Stein & Lambert, 1984). The outcome of these studies suggests that when

counselors are not aware that they are being assessed on their ability to provide

facilitative conditions, their effectiveness is sub-par. Elkins and Cohen (1982), using

independently developed scales, studied the effects of both training and experience on

counseling skills, knowledge and dogmatic attitudes. The scales contained both written

questions designed to measure attitudes and knowledge and hypothetical callers'

statements that were used to elicit written responses. They found that volunteers'

counseling skills and knowledge improved with training, but not with experience, and

that attitudes were not affected by either training or experience. The research cited above

indicates that while further training and experience can affect how well counselors

provide facilitative conditions, such as empathy, the results are clearly mixed.

Interestingly, some studies suggest that a counselor's length of experience is

inversely related to empathic accuracy. Truax and Carkhuff(1967) argued that most

psychotherapy training programs stress theory and client psychodynamics over how to

create a facilitative relationship. The researchers emphasized that the skills of
relationship building are of primary importance in training good therapists. If such skills

are not continually emphasized, therapeutic empathy may diminish over time (even with

increased therapeutic experience). In a study on the effects of extended, didactic training

on the therapeutic functioning of professional psychology trainees, Carkhuff, Kratochvil,

and Friel (1968) found that over the course of several years training, therapists' ability to








discriminate therapeutic conditions improved, while their ability to offer these conditions

declined.

Polenz and Verdi (1977) found that paraprofessionals' ability to discriminate and

communicate facilitative conditions in psychotherapy were not affected by length of

experience. It other words, paraprofessionals with more experience were no better

functioning with respect to realizing and displaying empathy in therapy than

paraprofessionals with less experience. In another study, no difference was found

between newly trained and experienced paraprofessionals on facilitative conditions,

although both were rated higher than untrained controls (ODonnell & George, 1977).

Therefore, the question remains as to whether crisis line workers with more experience

would display lower levels of empathy than those with less experience. Indeed, Kalafat,

Boroto, and France (1979) suggested that a complex relationship exists between

performance of facilitative conditions, values and experience. Although there is a

resurgence in stressing the significance of empathy, to date no research has investigated

how effectively paraprofessionals trained to work in crisis intervention settings utilize

their specific empathic skills (i.e., perspective-taking ability) or whether these skills

decrease as their experience increases.


Volunteers

Volunteerism has existed for centuries, but formalized volunteer programs have

arisen only recently (Ellis, 1985). Volunteerism, especially for college students, became

popular in the 1960s and 1970s as more community service was encouraged through

campus-based programs (Ellis, 1978). However, from the 1980s there has been a decline

in volunteer involvement. Newman (1985) suggested that this decline may be partially








due to both individual and societal trends toward egocentrism and self-development.

Others argued that social and economic forces are increasingly making volunteerism a

luxury that can be undertaken only by the wealthy, and suggested that people are now

seeking growth and self-satisfaction from their volunteer experiences in addition to the

more traditionally hypothesized motivations of helping others (Henderson, 1985).


Characteristics of Volunteers

In their study on the personal characteristics of volunteer phone counselors, Tapp

and Spanier (1973) concluded that mental health volunteers are flexible, spontaneous,

and self-actualizing with the capacity for warmth, understanding, and openness to others.

The researchers stated that this description resembles the description of altruists, and they

suggested that the volunteer mental health counselor is "an altruistic individual whose

desire to make a contribution to his world manifests] itself in his volunteerism" (p. 249).

However, Hobfoll (1980) found that undergraduate volunteer mental health workers

cannot be clearly distinguished from nonvolunteers in regard to personality

characteristics usually associated with the "helping personality" (Carkhuff, 1969), such as

empathy, self-acceptance, and tolerance. Volunteers were found to score higher with

respect to social responsibility, which Hobfoll suggested may partially explain their

motivation for volunteering.

Amato (1985), in his study of planned helping behavior (as opposed to

spontaneous helping behavior), found that people involved in formal, organizational

helping scored higher on adherence to the norm of social responsibility and had an

internal locus of control, compared to those involved in informal helping activities that

involved friends and/or family members. He also suggested that involvement in formal,








planned helping behavior is high if people feel responsible for others' welfare, feel their

helping behavior can have an impact, and hold positive, nonpunitive views towards

others. Interestingly, these are traits similar to those suggested by Rushton (1980) as

being characteristic of an "altruistic personality." In order to assess whether or not

community health volunteers appear to possess characteristics associated with the

altruistic personality, Allen and Rushton (1983) reviewed 19 studies assessing

volunteers' personality characteristics. They found that community volunteers tend to be

more empathic, have higher internal moral standards, possess more positive attitudes

towards themselves, have greater feelings of self-efficacy and are more emotionally

stable than nonvolunteers. These characteristics are also in accord with Rushton's

conception of the altruistic personality. Clearly, the evidence suggests that some people

are more likely to help than others, but are some people truly seeking to help others

(altruistic motivation) or are they ultimately seeking self-benefit? Both Staub (1974) and

Rushton (1980) suggested that altruism is not an alternative to egoism, but rather, it is a

special form of egoism; the rewards for acting prosocially are internal or self-

administered rather than external or socially administered. Their research, however, did

not address the question of underlying motivation.


Volunteer Motivations

In order to address the question of underlying motivation, Daniel Batson and his

colleagues used a research paradigm that would enable them to infer participants'

ultimate goal when helping (Batson, Bolen, Cross, & Neuringer-Benefiel, 1986). First,

they examined four personality variables identified as contributing to an altruistic

personality: social responsibility, self-esteem, ascription of responsibility and








dispositional empathy. They then observed helping under specific systematically varied

conditions, where escape from the negative consequences for self of not helping another

(e.g., shame and guilt) was either easy or hard. Batson et al. found no evidence that any

of the four "altruistic" personality variables was associated with altruistic motivation,

although three bf the variables (self-esteem, ascription of responsibility and empathic

concern) were associated with prosocial motivation (i.e., helping others). From these

results, should it be concluded that the "altruistic personality" is not really altruistic?

Such a conclusion may be premature based on the fact that other personality variables

that contribute to an altruistic personality (e.g., self-actualization, flexibility and

tolerance) were not measured and that helping responses were examined in only one need

situation.

Traditionally, volunteer motivations were assumed to be altruistic. Perhaps our

conception of volunteers falls into a special subgroup of those who provide prosocial

behavior. Nonetheless, this view of volunteers influenced the way in which volunteer

programs are designed, operated and studied. Clary and Snyder (1991) addressed the

question of volunteer motivations in terms of a functional analysis. According to the

researchers, a functional analysis is concerned with the needs, motives and

social/psychological functions being served by volunteer activities. They asserted that

volunteer activity based on altruistic concern for others in need and/or a desire to

contribute to society serves a "value-expressive function." This function incorporates the

idea that a person's values about others' well-being influences helping behavior.

Additionally, researchers focused on other motivations that cause people to

volunteer. In her study of 4-H volunteers, Henderson (1981) found that the primary








motivation for adult volunteers was affiliation, or the desire to interact with others. This

reason for volunteering serves a "social-adjustment function" (Clary & Snyder, 1991),

which reflects normative influences from one's social network. Fitch (1987), in his study

of the motivations of college students volunteering for community service, found that

motives are both egoistic and altruistic; Wiehe and Isenhour (1977), studying community

agency volunteers, found similar results. Gidron (1978) asked volunteers in health and

mental health institutions to report the extent to which they expected to receive extrinsic

rewards (rewards controlled by the institution) and intrinsic rewards (rewards associated

with the subjective meaning of the work for the volunteer). While two-thirds of the

sample expected some extrinsic rewards, the vast majority expected primarily intrinsic

rewards. Gidron's findings did not explicitly address which rewards would be deemed

altruistic or egoistic; thus, it is not clear how those two motivations impacted volunteers'

reasons for volunteering.

Henderson (1980) suggested that each volunteer has unique motivations and

expectations of his or her experience. Ascertaining these motivations can contribute to

providing volunteers with a satisfactory experience while simultaneously staffing

community agencies. In addition, the possibility that volunteers in different

organizations are very different types of people, and have unique motivations for

volunteering, has implications for recruitment and retention of volunteers (Sergent &

Sedlacek, 1990). However, the question remains as to whether crisis/suicide

paraprofessionals have different levels of altruistic reasons for volunteering than those

individuals engaging in other forms of volunteer work; or if crisis intervention volunteers

are more altruistic than those who do not volunteer at all. Research suggests that those








involved in helping professions (and possibly in similar volunteer activities as well) do

tend to have more of an altruistic personality than those in other arenas (Amato, 1985).


Relationship Between Volunteer Motivations and Abilities

Very few studies have examined the way in which people's motivations for

volunteering have impacted their ability to display necessary skills in particular

community agency settings, yet it is certainly plausible that a person's motivation for

volunteering could directly impact their willingness to take risks, learn new skills and

perhaps even adopt new ways of thinking or conceptualizing. Some researchers have

argued that helping behavior involves more than just willingness to help; abilities are an

important feature of effective helping. Clary and Orenstein (1991) studied the

relationship between crisis counselors' motives for volunteering and abilities to provide

therapeutic responses to their actual helping behavior. Black and DiNitto (1994)

examined the motivations, among other variables, of volunteers who work with survivors

of rape and battering. From these two studies, volunteers' motivations were found to

impact a multitude of areas, including amount of help given to clients, length of volunteer

service, and volunteer satisfaction. Research has also demonstrated links between

altruistic motivation and situational empathic concern (Batson, 1987) as well as

commitment to crisis-counseling volunteer work (Clary & Miller, 1986). In addition,

Clary and Orenstein (1991) found a direct relationship between altruistic motives for

volunteering and the length of time people spent as a volunteer. They predicted that

early-terminating volunteers (i.e., volunteers who decide, of their own volition, to

terminate their 9-month volunteer commitment early) would report lower levels of

altruistic motivation for volunteering at the beginning of training than completed-service








volunteers (who served as volunteer counselors for 9 or more months). All the

completed-service volunteers in Clary and Orenstein's study had served more than 12

months. Analyses supported their prediction and were statistically significant to the

p <. 005 level.


Summary

Research, then, has demonstrated that a helper's characteristics and motives can

affect helping behavior, particularly the amount of help (i.e., deciding whether to help

and how much). Still to be answered are questions about the effectiveness of help (i.e.,

does the helper have the ability to help and is the help actually helpful). As pointed out

by Neimeyer and Pfeiffer (1994) and others (e.g., Frankish, 1994; Clary & Orenstein,

1991), this aspect of help has been relatively ignored, and when it has been examined, the

focus has tended to remain on its impact on the amount of help. Thus, it is important to

separate intentions to help from ability to help, since these two components are not

synonymous.



Current Study
In response to the paucity of research evaluating the effectiveness of

paraprofessionals in suicide prevention, and to address some of the issues and questions

raised above, this study proposes to examine two major areas that are important in suicide

and crisis intervention. The purpose of this study is to investigate what differences exist

in general therapeutic empathy and motivations for engaging in helping behavior between

suicide hotline volunteers and untrained individuals. The benefits that may develop from








this study include helping to predict an individual's likelihood of volunteering in a crisis

intervention agency as well as his or her success as a crisis intervention volunteer.


Hypotheses

Paraprofessionals who volunteer at a suicide/crisis intervention agency will

exhibit more empathy in the form of perspective-taking ability and empathic

understanding than untrained individuals, but display less empathy as length of

experience increases compared to less experienced volunteers, and express higher levels

of altruistic motivation for volunteering than a nontramined control group. The specific

hypotheses to be tested are:

Hypothesis 1: Individuals who are trained crisis/suicide intervention volunteers

will exhibit greater empathy, in the form of perspective-taking ability and empathic

understanding, than will volunteers who have not yet undergone training or

undergraduate psychology students untrained in crisis intervention (including active

listening skills). Hol; There will be no difference in amount of empathic perspective-

taking ability and empathic understanding between trained crisis center volunteers and

untrained volunteers or psychology undergraduates.

Hypothesis 2: As a crisis intervention volunteer's length of experience increases,

the amount of empathy will decrease. H02: There will be no difference in the amount of

empathic perspective-taking ability and empathic understanding between trained crisis

center volunteers who have more experience and those who have less experience

volunteering at the agency.

Hypothesis 3: When subjects consider reasons why they would volunteer,

suicide/crisis hotline volunteers will express higher levels of altruistic motivation than








nontrained psychology undergraduates. H03: There will be no difference in amount of

altruistic motivation as a reason for volunteering between crisis center volunteers and

undergraduate psychology students.


Key Definitions

Altruism: helping behavior based on concern for the welfare of another rather

than concern for the welfare of the self (i.e., egoism).
Altruistic Motivation: the extent to which a person volunteers out of concern for

others as opposed to concern for self.

Empathic Understanding: "an active process of desiring to know the full, present

and changing awareness of another person, of reaching out to receive his communication

and meaning, and of translating his words and signs into experienced meaning that

matches ... aspects of his awareness that are most important to him .... It is an

experiencing of the consciousness 'behind' another's outward communication, but with

the continuous awareness that this consciousness is originating and proceeding in the

other" (Barrett-Lennard, 1962, p. 3). It is not "essential for the person with whom one is

empathizing to be literally present ... [for it is] an inner experience" (Barrett-Lennard,

1976, p. 175).

Empathy: the ability to accurately perceive and understand the specific content of

another person's thoughts and feelings and the ability to infer and communicate that

person's emotional statess.

Paraprofessional: volunteers specifically trained in crisis intervention and suicide

prevention (including training using active listening skills) in order to answer telephone

calls from individuals in suicidal, personal, and/or emotional crisis.






31


Perspective-Taking: the tendency or ability of the respondent to spontaneously

adopt the perspective of other people and see things from their point of view.

Success as a Volunteer: completion of crisis intervention training and continuing

to volunteer beyond the six-month time requirement.

Volunteer: "someone who contributes services without financial gain to a

functional subeommunity or cause" (Henderson, 1985, p.31).














CHAPTER 3
METHOD


In this chapter, the methods used to test the research hypotheses will be discussed.

It includes a discussion of the research design, along with its strengths and weaknesses; a

description of the participants, including demographic information; and a presentation of

the instruments used, as well as other instruments considered but found lacking for this

study. In addition, the procedures followed in the study, as well as the specific analyses

used, are discussed.


Design

The sample studied consisted of three groups: crisis center volunteers, crisis

center applicants who were accepted for volunteer training, and undergraduate

psychology students. Participants were not randomly assigned to conditions in that the

applicants and volunteers were self-selected groups. Since participants in the control

group did not choose to volunteer for the crisis center, some pre-existing differences in

attitudes and motivations between the control group and the volunteer group may have

existed. However, since most applicants and volunteers for this particular crisis center

comprised upper-division undergraduates majoring in psychology, the control group was

drawn from an upper-division psychology course required for psychology majors in order

to be as similar as possible in composition to the research groups. The study measured

the differences in empathy and in motivation for volunteering between trained

paraprofessionals (with differing levels of experience), applicants accepted for training,

32








and a control group similar in age, background and education. Data were gathered

through the use of paper and pencil tests (see Instruments section), with an initial goal of

having 30 people in each group. The actual number of participants in each group is

discussed under Participants. The overall design was a nonequivalent control groups

design.


Participants

The three participant groups were (a) paraprofessional volunteers with varying

amounts of experience at the crisis agency, (b) individuals who had been accepted for

volunteer training at the crisis agency (but had not yet completed training), and (c)

undergraduate psychology students enrolled in Personality Theory at a large southeastern

university. All paraprofessional volunteers were from a prominent southeastern crisis

intervention agency. Any control group participants who had either previously

participated in, or were currently enrolled in. the crisis center training program were not

included as part of the control group in the analyses.

An initial goal of 30 participants in each research group (volunteers and trainees)

was approved by the dissertation committee. In actuality, there were 75 participants in

the volunteer group, 27 in the training group and 46 in the control group. The training

group was predicted to be the most difficult group from which to collect data due to the

relatively small number of people who participate in training classes. However, it was

determined, after seeking statistical consultation, that 27 participants in the training group

was an adequate number of respondents for the analyses.

Overall, 148 people participated in the study (26 men and 122 women); 115 of the

participants were students and 33 were not; most of the participants were








single/unmarried (123); and racial composition of the participants was as follows: 116

Caucasian, 12 Hispanic, 10 Asian/Pacific Islander, 6 African American, and 4 Other.

The age range of participants was 18-57, with an average age of 26.2 years (SD = 9.6).



Instruments


Empathy


Scales used

In order to assess participant's empathy, two instruments were used. The first

instrument is a subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980), a 28-item

instrument that measures four aspects of empathy. Carey, Fox, and Spraggins (1988)

designed a study to verify the multidimensional nature and item composition of the

Interpersonal Reactivity Index subscales through factor analysis. It is important to

replicate the factor structure of the instrument with varying samples to demonstrate that

the factors have a wider range of applicability as generalized constructs (to the extent that

invariance is found across changes in either variables or individuals). The Interpersonal

Reactivity Index subscales measure four discernibly different empathy dimensions and

the constructs measured by the Interpersonal Reactivity Index have generalizability

outside the original samples used to develop the instrument (Carey et al., 1988). The

subscale most relevant to the current study is the perspective-taking (PT) scale, which is

related to the cognitive ability to judge other people accurately (Davis, 1983b). It

involves the "tendency to spontaneously adopt the psychological view of others" (Davis,

1983a, pp. 113-114), which is quite compatible with Rogerian empathic understanding.

Carey et al. (1988) suggest that the PT scale is a useful measure of empathic effectiveness








in counseling. In addition, Clary and Orenstein (1991) found that perspective-taking is

involved in helping, but "is more relevant for effectiveness than for amount of help" (p.

63). It seems that perspective-taking focuses on collecting information and improving

understanding, clearly cognitive processes, rather than engaging in altruistic behavior,

which may be more emotional (Davis, 1983b). The coefficient alpha of the PT scale is

.78. Okun, Shepard, and Eisenberg (2000) used the PT scale to assess volunteers-in-

training at the Humane Society and Parents Anonymous. The coefficient alpha for the

scale in their study was .81.

The other three subscales of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, which were not

used in this study, are the fantasy scale (a tendency to become deeply involved in

fictitious situations), the personal distress scale (a tendency to experience emotions

related to discomfort and distress when faced with a needy other), and the empathic

concern scale (a tendency to experience emotions of concern and sympathy when

exposed to a person in distress). The fantasy and personal distress subscales were not

used in the current investigation since no studies have indicated their usefulness as

measures for empathic effectiveness in counseling situations. The empathic concern

subscale was not used since it has been shown to have no relationship to measures of

interpersonal functioning (Davis, 1983a). In addition, people with higher scores on this

subscale reported more unease and anxiety around others; that is, Davis found a generally

positive relationship between scores on the empathic concern subscale and measures of

shyness, social anxiety and audience anxiety as well as slight tendencies toward chronic

fearfulness and vulnerability. Each of the four subscales consists of seven items rated on

a scale of 0 (does not describe me well) to 4 (describes me very well). For each scale,








overall scores can range from 0 to 28, with 28 indicating a high degree of that particular

aspect of empathy.

The other instrument used to measure participants* empathy was Barrett-

Lennard's Relationship Inventory (Barrett-Lennard, 1978). This instrument "is designed

to measure fou dimensions of interpersonal relationships adapted from Rogers'(1957,

1959) conception of the necessary conditions for therapeutic... change" (Barrett-Lennard,

1978, p. 1). It measures empathy, congruence, level of regard, and unconditionality.

These four theoretically critical variables of therapist/counselor-to-client responses can

be assessed from the perceptions of either the client or the therapist. For the purpose of

this study, the variable of interest is empathy from crisis volunteer's (counselor's)

perspective. Hundreds of studies have used various adaptations and research applications

of the Relationship Inventory (Barrett-Lennard. 1986: Barrett-Lennard & Bergerson,

1975). One useful application of the Relationship Inventory is that an ordinary person

can respond to questions in reference to any significant relationship with another person,

which is consistent with the usefulness of the instrument in a counseling or therapy

research context.

The Relationship Inventory is a 64-item questionnaire, in which a person judges

statements with respect to how true or untrue they are about him/her. Gurman (1977), in

his extensive review of the Relationship Inventory, reports mean split-half (internal)

reliability and test-retest coefficients of.80 or above for each of the four Relationship

Inventory subscales. Reliability, or consistency, is centrally concerned with whether an

instrument yields the same result whenever it is applied to something that it is designed to

measure which has remained constant from one occasion of measurement to another.









Barrett-Lennard (1986) states that official norms for the Relationship Inventory

do not exist. Such norms would indicate that in a certain percent of cases, scores on a

given subscale exceed or fall below a specified value. Fortunately, such norms are not

essential for most research. The task of calculating norms for the Relationship Inventory,

where there are at least 10 principal variants of the 64-item version of the instrument, and

at least as many significant revisions and adaptations, seems particularly complex.

Relationship Inventory data have been collected in various contexts (e.g., diverse therapy

research studies, education-based studies, marital and family sphere studies, and

communication studies.), through different viewpoints, and in a wide array of

relationships of varying duration and significance. These different variables suggest that

accumulating and organizing data into meaningful normative form would be a formidable

task.

For the purpose of the current study, the hypotheses state that differences between

groups will exist (e.g., volunteers will exhibit greater empathy than will trainees or

controls); since the Relationship Inventory scores are measured as a dependent variable,

norms or score cut-offs are not necessary to measure differences or compare groups. In

addition, it should not be taken for granted that "more [i.e., a higher score] means better

on all Relationship Inventory scales, in all cases" (Barrett-Lennard, 1986, p.455).

The Empathic Understanding subscale of the Relationship Inventory consists of

16 statements designed to measure participants' empathy. The items in each subscale are

rated on a 6-point scale (+3, +2, +- 1, -1, -2, -3), with +3 indicating yes, I strongly feel it is

true about me and -3 indicating no, I strongly feel it is not true about me. Half of the

items in each subscale are negatively worded and reverse-scored. Overall scaled scores









can range from -48 to 48, with a positive 48 indicating the highest degree of empathic

understanding. Gurman (1977) reviewed a substantial range of contexts and

investigations using the Relationship Inventory. He found a mean coefficient alpha of

.84 for the empathy subscale. The positive results of a range of independent predictive

studies concerted with the association between relationship conditions measured by the

Relationship Inventory and outcome in therapy or helping situations form strong

evidence of construct (predictive) validity. Gurman concludes that "there exists

substantial, if not overwhelming evidence in support of the hypothesized relationship

between.., therapeutic conditions and outcome in individual therapy and counselling"

(p. 523).

In general, the issue of validity is rather complex in psychosocial measurement. It

depends on the clarity of a concept and on the definition of what is intended to be

measured, on the meaningfulness of viewing the construct as variably falling along a low

to high continuum or sequence, and on the congruence between the conceptualized

dimension and the actual variable being measured. Different types of validity, such as

content, predictive, factoriall," and construct, address some of the above issues. Both the

Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980) and the Relationship Inventory (Barrett-

Lennard, 1978), understood and applied appropriately, can be treated as valid scales.


Other scales considered

Although not easily adaptable to the current study, Ickes and various colleagues

developed the "unstructured dyadic interaction paradigm" to measure empathic accuracy

used in a naturalistic setting (e.g., see Ickes, 1993; Ickes, Bissonnette, Garcia, & Stinson,

1990; Ickes, Stinson, Bissonnette, & Garcia, 1990; Ickes & Tooke, 1988). Members of a








dyad are unobtrusively audio- and videotaped while interacting in a "waiting room." At

the end of the observation period, participants are partially debriefed, then each member

of the dyad is asked to separately review the videotape and assess the thoughts and

feelings he or she had during the "waiting room" interaction. Participants are then

directed to view the tape a second time and asked to infer the content of their partner's

thoughts and feelings during the interaction. Finally, both participants are asked to

complete a posttest questionnaire assessing their perceptions of themselves and their

partner during the interaction. A global measure of empathic accuracy is then computed

by trained, independent raters making similarity judgments. The resulting percentage

measure of empathic accuracy (which controls for individual differences in total number

of inferences made as well as reliability of similarity judgments) ranges from .00 (total

inaccuracy) to 1.00 (perfect accuracy). The eclectic approach of this method is appealing

in that it compensates for weaknesses found in using just one approach to assess

empathy. However, this method would be extremely difficult to use as intended (in a

naturalistic setting) with crisis hotline volunteers, whose interactions transpire over the

telephone with callers who typically have complete anonymity and tend to be in

relatively high levels of distress.

In a review of research on the reliability of raters for scales based on the Carkhuff

and Truax facilitative dimensions (e.g., empathy), Wolber and McGovern (1977) found

that higher interrater reliabilities are more likely when raters are extensively trained in

communication skills. In addition, Kurtz and Grummon (1972) found that correlations

between observer ratings of empathy with client perceptions have generally been low.

This does leave the construct validity of ratings open to question (Bohart & Greenberg,








1997). Marangoni, Garcia, Ickes, and Teng (1995) suggest that paper and pencil

measures of empathic ability are a viable alternative to the time-intensive performance

measure that Ickes and his colleagues developed.

Other tests considered for measuring empathy, but found to be lacking for the

current study, icluded the Human Empathic Listening Test (HELT; Coonfield, Nida, &

Gray, 1976), the Crisis Center Discrimination Index (CCDI; Delworth, Rudow, & Taub,

1972), and the Helpful Responses Questionnaire (HRQ; Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky,

1991). The HELT consists of 12 tape-recorded crisis vignettes and 60 questions

regarding the vignettes. It is designed to measure three aspects of empathic listening:

Understanding, Interest, and Response-Ability. Gray, Nida, and Coonfield (1976) found

mixed results regarding the HELTs reliability and validity: the instrument was valid

discriminantt validity), however the Understanding subscale had an internal consistency

of only .29, the Response-Ability scale, .40, and the Interest subscale was .88. The

reliability estimates of the first two subscales are quite low, suggesting that the HELT

may not be a reliable measure of empathic listening ability.

The CCDI is another measure developed for the selection and evaluation of

paraprofessionals. It is based on Carkhuffs (1969) research with the facilitative and

action-oriented dimensions relevant in the helping process, which include empathy,

respect, and confrontation. The CCDI consists of 16 audiotaped excerpts of crisis center

calls, with topics such as suicidal ideation, pregnancy, school difficulties, and

relationship problems. Although scoring criteria are included with the instrument, no

reliability or validity data are given.








Finally, the HRQ is a brief free-response questionnaire that measures participants'

ability to generate empathic responses. The instrument requires that each response be

rated on a "5-point ordinal scale of depth of reflection" (Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky,

1991, p. 445), with a score of 1 indicating no reflection and an interruption in the flow of

communication; and a score of 5 indicating that the reflection includes inferred meaning

and a reflection of feeling. The interrater reliability in the Miller et al. (1991) study is

high (.93), but test-retest reliability was only .45. The authors acknowledge that other

variables probably account for variance in empathic skills and suggest further study. No

validity data for the study is given nor are cutoff scores suggested for adequate or good

scores.


Motivation

In order to measure participants' altruistic motivation, an adaptation of Clary and

Orenstein's (1991) Measure of Altruistic Motivation was used. Altruistic motivation, as

opposed to egoistic motivation, is operationally defined as the extent to which a person

volunteers out of concern for others versus concern for self. The measure consists of 25

possible reasons for performing crisis counseling, of which five are identified as

representing altruistic reasons (75% agreement in a sample evaluating the reasons by

raters knowledgeable about motivational issues) and 20 as egoistic reasons. To assess

altruistic motivation, participants are asked to indicate their top five reasons for

volunteering. Ranks are then reverse-scored (i.e., the most important reason receives a

score of 5, the next most important reason receives a score of 4, and so on) and

participants' overall altruistic motivation score is computed from the reverse ranks of any








altruistic reasons included in their top five choices. Scores on the measure range from 0

(only egoistic reasons chosen) to 15 (only altruistic reasons chosen).

This measure is derived from ratings by an independent group of raters

knowledgeable about motivational issues and appears to be a reasonable instrument In

addition, this scale can be presumed and treated as valid based on the conclusions of the

independent raters. Lastly, Clary and Orenstein's (1991) measure is one of the only

published instruments that assess motivations for performing crisis hotline volunteer

work. However, it should be noted that internal consistency would not be expected from

this scale due to the nature of the measure. It would be expected that participants'

reasons for volunteering would not necessarily be related to each other, and choosing one

altruistic reason for volunteering does not mean that other altruistic reasons are more

likely to be chosen. For example, one reason an individual might volunteer is because it

is a "chance to help others" (an altruistic reason) but this does not suggest that the person

is only volunteering for altruistic reasons. This same person may also choose additional

reasons to volunteer, such as "to gain skills which will be applicable to other situations"

and "for personal growth" (both egoistic reasons). Walsh and Betz (1990) state that

internal consistency often refers to homogeneity of items. Since the Measure of

Altruistic Motivation scale contains both altruistic and egoistic reasons for volunteering,

homogeneity of items would not be expected. Thus, estimates of internal consistency

would likely reflect that items are heterogeneous.








Procedure

Control Group

For the control group, a brief verbal explanation of the study was given and

questionnaire packets were handed out to students in a Personality Theory class during

the Fall 2000 semester. The Informed Consent form and a brief instruction sheet were

attached to the front of the questionnaire packet, which included a personal information

(demographic) sheet, and the three instruments (the Relationship Inventory, Interpersonal

Reactivity Index and Measure of Altruistic Motivation) in one of six assigned orders (to

ascertain for order effects). An opportunity to be debriefed after the study was offered to

any interested participants. All students in attendance completed a questionnaire packet

and answered every question. Of the 47 packets returned, one was not used as part of the

control group data in the study since the participant had already filled out a questionnaire

packet in Crisis Center training. All participants (i.e., all groups in the research study)

were given questionnaire packets that contained a consent form, an instruction page, and

the three instruments in one of six assigned orders.


Training Group

For the training group, the Crisis Center Training Director agreed to give

questionnaires to potential volunteers undergoing training during the Fall 2000 training

class; forty potential volunteers attended the initial Saturday training. The Training

Director gave questionnaire packets to one trainer for each group after the all-day

Saturday training. Volunteers-in-training are divided into several groups, each run by

two trainers, one of whom directs the training for a particular evening. The trainer

handed out questionnaires to the volunteers-in-training during their first Tuesday evening








session and asked them to return the questionnaires by the following training class (the

next Thursday). Since two potential volunteers "dropped out" of training after the initial

Saturday training, a total of 38 trainees received questionnaire packets. The

questionnaire packets were the same as the packets handed out to the control group,

except that a letter written by the dissertation study researcher was attached to the front of

the packet. The letter briefly described the study, gave some background on the

researcher's volunteer experiences with the Crisis Center, and asked trainees to

participate. Twenty-three questionnaire packets were collected by trainers at the

beginning of the next training class; trainers told the volunteers-in-training who had not

returned a packet that they could return their packet at the next training class (the next

week) and four more questionnaire packets were collected at that training class. Thus,

the return rate (27 out of 38) was 71.1%. All questionnaire packets returned by potential

volunteers were complete and used in the training group data set. Trainers gave all

questionnaire packets to the Training Director, who sent them directly to the researcher.


Volunteer Group

The volunteer group was divided into two groups for the purpose of disseminating

the questionnaire packets: active and inactive volunteers. It was decided, in consultation

with the Crisis Center Director, that active volunteers would receive questionnaire

packets in their mailboxes at the Crisis Center, whereas inactive volunteers (i.e.,

volunteers not actively or currently volunteering at the Crisis Center) would receive

questionnaires in the mail. All volunteer data was collected during Fall 2000 semester.

Questionnaire packets were sent to the Crisis Center Director for dissemination into

active volunteers' mailboxes. A letter similar to the one attached to the trainees' packets








was attached to the front of each questionnaire packet In addition, the Crisis Center

Director included a cover letter with each of the active volunteers' packets encouraging

their participation in the study. Questionnaires were placed in the 102 active volunteers'

mailboxes. Of the 102 active volunteers, 90 checked their mailboxes during the research

period. Completed questionnaires were returned to a Staff mailbox.

This researcher sent 102 questionnaire packets to inactive volunteers (along with

an introduction letter similar to the one for active volunteers) via the U.S. Postal Service.

Stamped return envelopes, marked "surveys" were included in the mailed packets. After

consultation with the Director of the Crisis Center, it was decided that the return

envelopes would be addressed to the Director, rather than the researcher, with an

expectation that doing so would increase the return rate. However, no additional cover

letter from the Director was included with the mailed questionnaire packets. Of the

initial 102 questionnaire packets mailed, eight were returned by the Postal Service as

undeliverable or unable to forward due to non-current addresses. In addition, three

packets were not delivered to student participants (who were inactive volunteers) because

their campus addresses were not current. Therefore, 91 questionnaire packets went out to

participants.

The return rate goal was, as stated earlier, 30 completed questionnaire packets

from the entire volunteer group. The goal was exceeded: 40 packets were returned from

the inactive volunteers (a 44% return rate) and 35 from the active volunteers (a 39%

return rate) for a total of 75 packets. The overall return rate for the volunteer group was

41.4% (75 returns out of 181 questionnaires disseminated). The Director mailed all

returned packets to the researcher. Only the volunteer group had protocols with answers








omitted on the empathy and motivation instruments. Protocols with omitted answers

were included only in analyses that did not pertain to the omissions. In other words, if a

participant did not list country of origin, but all the instruments were completed, then the

participant's data regarding the instruments were used in the analyses; however, if a

participant did hot answer questions on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, for example,

then the data were not used.


Statistical Analyses

With respect to the three hypotheses, the following statistical analyses were used:

Hypothesis 1: One-way, between participants MANOVA for unequal n's, with

group (either trained, untrained, or college students) serving as the independent variable

and with perspective-taking ability and empathic understanding serving as the dependent

variables.

Hypothesis 2: Simultaneous multiple regression with the variables in the analysis

being number of months of post-training experience, perspective-taking and empathic

understanding.

Hypothesis 3: Independent t-tests, with group (volunteers vs. untrained college

students) serving as the independent variable and altruistic motivation serving as the

dependent variable.













CHAPTER 4
RESULTS


This chapter begins with a summary of the results supplied through descriptive

statistics and includes four tables. The chapter then expounds on the specific results for

the three hypotheses and explains the analyses used. It concludes with some post-hoc

analyses.


Descriptive Statistics

With respect to the perspective-taking subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity

Index, which measures empathy through the tendency of a person to spontaneously adopt

the psychological view of others (answers range from 0 = does not describe me well to 4

= describes me very well, with an overall score range from 0 to 28 on the seven

questions), respondents scored a mean of 20.3 (SD = 1.06). On the Relationship

Inventory empathic understanding subscaie (where answers could be -3, -2, -1, +1, +2,

+3, with -3 = no. I strongly feel it is not true about me and +3 = yes, I strongly feel it is

true about me, and the overall score range for the 16 questions is -48 to +48), the mean

score was 17.1 (SD = 10.3). On the Measure of Altruistic Motivation, only the five

altruistic reasons are scored by reverse-scoring the rankings and then adding the scores

together, with overall scores ranging from 0 to 15; the mean of the Measure of Altruistic

Motivation was 5.3 (SD = 3.5). The average age of participants was 26.2 (SD = 9.6) and

the average amount of time (in months) that volunteers worked at the Crisis Center was

11.3 (SD = 15.6). Means, standard deviations, ranges, and measures of internal


- 47








consistency are listed in Table 4-1. Seven respondents did not answer one or more items

on the Relationship Inventory measure: consequently, the number of respondents on that

scale is 141.




Table 4-1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Measured

Variable N Mean SD Range a coefficient

IRIa 148 20.3 3.6 8,27 0.64b

RI 141 17.1 10.3 -12,46 0.78

AM 148 5.3 3.5 0,14 -

AgeC 148 26.2 9.6 18,57

Timed 74 11.3 15.6 2,42

Note. Dashes indicate that internal reliability was not calculated for this measure since
the nature of the measure suggests that it would not make sense to test for internal
consistency. If a respondent chooses one altruistic reason, s/he would not be expected to
necessarily choose other altruistic reasons. In addition, although the range of scores was
0 to 14, only one participant scored a 14. Five respondents scored a 10 and three
respondents scored a 12; no one scored an 11 or a 13, and all other respondents' scores
fell below 10.
a IRI is the Interpersonal Reactivity Index; RI is the Relationship Inventory; and AM is
the Measure of Altruistic Motivation.
b Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.64 is considered borderline for internal consistency,
however previous research indicates that the Interpersonal Reactivity Index has a
coefficient alpha of 0.78.
C Age of participants is in years.
d Time volunteering is in months. This statistic only applies to active and inactive
volunteers. The mean, standard deviation and range reported were Windsorized (see
Hypothesis 2 section for a complete explanation). Before Windsorizing, the mean for
length of experience was 17.5 (SD = 36.7) and the range was 2, 242. One participant in
the volunteer group did not indicate the number of months volunteering, thus n = 74.


Frequencies for demographic information, major, enrollment in the Crisis Center

volunteer training, and additional/other training in counseling or crisis intervention are








presented in Table 4-2. A nonequivalent control groups design suggests that statistically

significant differences between the groups may exist. If analyses yield results indicating

that significant differences do exist, then an analysis of covariance would potentially

need to be performed in order to control for the initial differences.

Overall, 26 males and 122 females participated in the study. In the control group,

there were 12 males and 34 females. In the training group, there were four males and 23

females. In the volunteer group, there were 10 males and 65 females. Since there was a

greater number of women participating in the study, a chi square statistic was performed

in order to determine if there was a significant gender difference between the three

groups. There was no significant difference in the proportion of males to females in any

of the three groups (z (2) = 3.4, p = 0.19). In addition, no significant differences in

racial composition existed between the groups (2 (2) = i2.3, p = 0.14). Although

significant differences were found in marital status between the groups (X2 (2) = 29.4,

p < .01), t-tests revealed that marital status did not significantly affect empathy or

motivation.

The two most frequent participant responses for major were psychology (41.2%)

and not currently a student (22.3%). Counselor Education and Sociology were the next

most frequent responses, with 4.7% and 4.1% respectively. Eighty of the participants

responded that they had been enrolled in the Crisis Center training program, and 60

responded that they had not. All of the 75 participants in the volunteer group marked

"yes" to being enrolled in the training program, and five participants in the training group

marked "yes." It appears that the majority (n = 22) of the participants in the training

program marked "no,"' since they were currently undergoing training when they








responded. The five participants in the training group who marked "yes" may have been

enrolled in (but not completed) a previous training class, or they may have interpreted the




Table 4-2. Frequencies of the Measured Variables

Variable n Percent
Gender
Males 26 17.6%
Females 122 82.4%
Marital Status
Single (never married) 117 79.1%
Married 24 16.2%
Divorced 6 4.1%
Remarried 1 0.7%
Race
Caucasian 116 78.4%
Hispanic 12 8.1%
Asian/Pacific Islander 10 6.7%
African American 6 4.1%
Other 4 2.7%
Major a
Not a student 33 22.3%
Psychology 61 41.2%
Counselor Education 7 4.7%
Sociology 6 4.1%
Mental Health Counseling 5 3.4%
Counseling Psychology 4 2.7%
Rehab Services 4 2.7%
Clinical Psychology 3 2.0%
Criminology 3 2.0%
History 2 1.4%
Zoology 2 1.4%
Communication Sciences 2 1.4%
Have you ever been enrolled in the volunteer training program at the ACCC?
Yes 80 54.1%
No 68 45.9%
Have you had additional or other training in counseling or crisis intervention?
Yes 45 30.4%
No 103 69.6%
a Majors listed with a frequency of 1 (0.7%) were English, Pre-med., Entomology, Linguistics,
Telecom News, Public Relations, Political Science, Business, Finance, Nutrition, Religion, Rehab
Counseling, Graduate Sociology, Divinity/Theology, Law School and Social Work.








question as including the training they were currently undergoing. Clearly, none of the

control group participants had been enrolled in the training. In response to the question

about additional training in counseling or crisis intervention, 45 participants marked

"yes" and 103 marked "no."

Since there were pre-existing differences in mean age for the three groups (see

Table 4-3), a univariate F-test was computed for the differences between group means.

The test revealed that the age differences were statistically significant, F (0o5, 2, 145) =

14.7,p < .001. In addition, the mean age difference between each group was statistically

significant (see Table 4-4).


Table 4-3. Mean Ages in the Three Study Groups

Group n Mean Age (years) SD
Control Group 46 20.8 3.9
Training Group 27 25.6 10.2
Volunteer Group 75 29.7 10.3



Table 4-4. Group Differences in Mean Age

Test Mean Difference Confidence Interval p value
Control vs. Training -4.79 -9.0, -0.6 .026*
Control vs. Volunteer -8.93 -12.2, -5.7 .000*
Training vs. Volunteer -4.14 -8.05, -0.23 .038*
Note. = Difference is significant


Hypothesis 1

The first hypothesis of the study was that trained volunteers would exhibit greater

empathy, in the fotbrm of perspective-taking ability and empathic understanding, than

would trainees who have been accepted for volunteer training (but have not completed








training) or upper-level psychology undergraduates with no training in crisis intervention.

Since more than one dependent variable was employed (i.e., both the Interpersonal

Reactivity Index and the Relationship Inventory were used as empathic measures), a one-

way, between participants multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) for unequal n's

was initially proposed as the statistical analysis to be performed. However, once it was

determined that statistically significant mean age differences existed between the three

groups (see Tables 4-3 and 4-4), which essentially means that a portion of the total

variability among the dependent variables' scores was explained by the relationship

between age and empathy, a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was

performed in order to extract the explained variability. This statistical adjustment of a

concomitant variable (age, in this case) allowed comparison between the groups that

could not be equated through the use of random assignment of participants. This

statistical technique also reduces error variance, thereby gaining statistical power.

With MANCOVA controlling for the age differences, an omnibus F-test revealed

that age had no effect, Pillai's Trace F (05, 2, 136) = 0.7,p > 0.4. For each scale, again,

no age differences were found: for the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, F (.05, 1,137) =

0.7,p > 0.4 and for the Relationship Inventory, F(.05, 1,137) = 1.3,p > 0.2. However,

as hypothesized, statistically significant differences (again using an omnibus F-statistic)

in amount of empathy were found between the groups when controlling for age, Pillai's

Trace F(.05,4,274) = 5.8, p < .001. For the Interpersonal Reactivity Index scale, F(.05,

2,137) = 8.2, p < .001; for the Relationship Inventory, F(os, 2,137) = 10.1, p < .001.

Since no age effect was found, the MANOVA results are reported for both scales;

Table 4-5 contains the group means for each scale. On both the Interpersonal Reactivity






53

Index and the Relationship Inventory, the volunteer group mean was significantly

different from the control group mean and the training group mean (see Table 4-6), but

on the Relationship Inventory, the difference between volunteers and trainees was

marginal.


Table 4-5. Group Means on the Empathy Measures

Scale and Group Mean SD
Interpersonal Reactivity Index
Control 18.8 4.1
Training 19.8 3.6
Volunteer 21.5 3.1
Relationship Inventory
Control 12.5 9.0
Training 16.3 9.8
Volunteer 20.5 10.1
F(05, 2, 138)
*=p<.001


F


F
8.2*



9.7*


Table 4-6. Group Differences in Empathy

Scale and Test Mean Difference
Interpersonal Reactivity Index
Control vs. Training -3.9
+Control vs. Volunteer* -8.1
+Training vs. Volunteer -4.2
Relationship Inventory
Control vs. Training -1.0
+Control vs. Volunteer* -2.5
+Training vs. Volunteer* -1.7
Note. = predicted differences between these groups
= difference is significant
a Difference is marginally significant


Confidence Interval

-8.5, 0.8
-11.7, -4.4
-8.5, 0.2

-2.7, 0.7
-4.0, -1.3
-3.2, -0.01


p value

.10
.000
.058

.25
.000
.038






54

Hypothesis 2

The hypothesized inverse relationship between a crisis volunteer's length of experience

and amount of empathy was not obtained. Volunteers' length of experience was

measured by number of months working as a volunteer at the Crisis Center and amount

of empathy was measured using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and the Relationship

Inventory. In order to correct for extreme values (outliers) in a data set, statistical

methods can be employed to transform the entire data set or to substitute extreme values

with less extreme values. One of these methods is called windsorized statistics. In order

to help eliminate the influence of outlying data points in length of experience that might

skew the results, the variable was windsorized. Windsorizing is a process whereby

extreme data points (or outliers) are set to the highest value (data point) within the cluster

of data points; that is, extreme values in the data set are replaced by the value of a cut-off

criterion (Barnett & Lewis, 1978). Windsorizing comprises a compromise between

eliminating the strong influence of extreme values on the mean while still using all of the

information in the data set. A boxplot was used to determine the outliers in the data set

(see Agresti & Finlay, 1997). Boxplots are essentially charts that summarize the

distribution of a variable by displaying the median, quartiles and outliers. With respect to

the results of the boxplot, there were 19 cases that were determined to be outliers. The

outliers were (in months of experience): 242,204,180,144,132,96,72,60 (n = 4), 55,

54, 52, 50,48 (n = 3), and 47. The next highest value (or case) that was not an outlier

was 42 (months of experience), which became the cut-off criterion. Therefore, when the

19 outliers for the length of experience variable were windsorized, they were all set to 42.

Before windsorizing, the mean length of volunteers' experience was 17.5 months

(SD = 36.7). Results of correlations using the non-windsorized length of experience data





55

set were not statistically significant. This makes sense in light of the large standard

deviation. After windsorizing, the mean was 11.3 (SD = 15.6). Standard deviation was

more than halved, the mean dropped by 6.2 months of experience, and the correlational

results were significant Correlations between the windsorized length of experience

variable and the two empathy measures are presented in Table 4-7. Age was also

included in the correlational analyses since it was a possible confounding variable.



Table 4-7. Correlations Among Experience, Age and Empathy

Length of Interpersonal Relationship Age
Experience Reactivity Index Inventory
Length of
Experience 1.0
Interpersonal
Reactivity Index 0.20* 1.0
Relationship
Inventory 0.27** 0.52** 1.0
Age 0.61** 0.07 0.06 1.0
*=P<.05. **=p <.01.


Both the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and the Relationship Inventory were

significantly positively associated with length of experience, but they were also

significantly associated with each other. Therefore, a multiple regression was performed,

entering the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and Relationship Inventory simultaneously.

The two empathy measures accounted for 7% of the variability in length of experience

(R = 0.28, adj. R2 = 0.07), and at least one of the scales was associated with length of

experience, F(2, 137) = 5.98,p < .01. When each scale was tested individually,

controlling for the other scale, the following results were found: for the Interpersonal

Reactivity Index scale, t = 1.1, p = .273 and for the Relationship Inventory scale, t = 2.25,








p = .026. Therefore, controlling for the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the Relationship

Inventory significantly accounts for the variance in length of experience. However,

controlling for the Relationship Inventory, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index does not

account for the variance in length of experience.

Since age was also significantly positively associated with experience, another

simultaneous multiple regression was performed (with the Interpersonal Reactivity Index,

Relationship Inventory and age as the predictor variables in order to control for shared

predictive variance). The three variables accounted for 41% of the variance in length of

experience (R = 0.653, adj. R?2 = 0.41), and at least one of the variables was associated

with length of experience, F(3, 136) = 33.76,p < .001. Controlling for age and the

Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the Relationship Inventory once again accounted for the

variance in length of experience, t = 2.7, p = .008. In addition, age significantly predicted

length of experience, controlling for the two empathy measures, t = 9.1, p = .000. It is

not a surprise that the older a person is, the more experience that person typically has as a

crisis volunteer.


Hypothesis 3

The third hypothesis, that crisis volunteers would exhibit higher levels of altruistic

motivation than upper-level psychology undergraduates (with no crisis training) was not

supported. An independent t-test was performed, with group (volunteers vs. controls)

serving as the independent variable and the Measure of Altruistic Motivation serving as

the dependent variable. A one-way ANOVA was conducted (using the entire sample's

standard deviation) and revealed no differences in altruistic motivation across the three

groups, F (.05,2,145) = 0.756, p> 0.4. The mean scores on the Measure of Altruistic








Motivation for each of the three groups were: control group mean = 5.8 (SD = 4.0),

training group mean = 5.1 (SD = 3.3), and volunteer group mean = 5.0, (SD = 3.2). As

stated earlier, the difference between volunteers and controls on the Measure of Altruistic

Motivation measure was not statistically significant. Consistent with the above findings,

a specific comparison between the mean for the control group and the mean for the

volunteer group revealed that the members of these two groups did not report different

levels of altruistic motivation (mean difference -0.78), CI -0.5,2.1, p=.24. The

frequencies for respondents' choices of the five altruistic reasons were: "a chance to help

others," 108; "to express concern to people in need," 38; "to provide a good experience

for people in need," 28; "to help those less fortunate than I," 20; and "a chance to give of

myself without expecting some sort of'pay-off ," 19. The top egoistic reasons chosen

were: "personal growth," 80; "to acquire new skills, experience," 80; "to gain skills

which will be applicable to other situations," 54; "to develop better human relation

skills," 49; "to help build my resume," 38; "to increase my self-understanding," 33;

"academic internship/experiential learning," 30; "to become more sensitive to others,"

25; and "to use the special talents that I have," 24. Interestingly, the most frequently

chosen reason (which would have been among respondent's top five rankings of reasons

to volunteer) was an altruistic reason: "a chance to help others."



Additional Analyses

As previously stated in the section on descriptive statistics, no gender differences

existed across the three research groups. Since there is, however, a body of literature that

discusses gender differences in empathy and in altruism (e.g., Eisenberg and her

colleagues, 1983, 1989; Feshbach, 1982; Graham & Ickes, 1997; Hoffman, 1977; Lennon








& Eisenberg, 1987; Manstead, 1992; Snodgrass, 1992), a comparison of gender

differences was performed on all three measures. An analysis of these differences was

not indicated by the primary hypotheses, but since it was readily available, a post-hoc

analysis was conducted as a potentially rich source of descriptive research for future

studies. A significant difference was found between males and females on both the

Relationship Inventory and Measure of Altruistic Motivation scales (see Table 4-8).




Table 4-8. Gender Differences on Measures of Empathy and Motivation

Gender Relationship Interpersonal Measure of Altruistic
Inventory Reactivity Index Motivation
Mean SD n Mean SD n Mean SD n
Males 13.3 11.4 25 19.3 3.7 26 3.6 3.1 26
Females 17.9 9.9 116 20.5 3.6 122 5.6 3.5 122
t-statistic -2.1 -1.6 -2.7
p value .04* .07 .008*
Note. = difference is significant













CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION


This chapter includes a discussion of the findings for each hypothesis, as well as

the additional findings regarding gender differences. Future research suggestions are also

included, as are limitations of this study. A summary of findings concludes the chapter.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not trained crisis center

volunteers would exhibit greater empathy and altruistic motivation than untrained

individuals. In addition, the correlation between crisis center experience and empathy

was also investigated. The literature on the empathic skills of professionals versus

paraprofessionals suggests that lay volunteers are an important and even necessary

component of crisis intervention and suicide prevention agencies. Some studies (e.g.,

Knickerbocker & McGee, 1973. McGee & Jennings, 1973) found that paraprofessionals

are fully capable of becoming genuinely engaged with clients in crisis, and may even

display higher levels of empathy, warmth and genuineness towards these same clients

than professionals. The literature generally suggests that training and experience are both

important components of volunteers' abilities to successfully connect empathically with

clients in crisis (e.g., France, 1975: Hart & King, 1979; Kalafat, Boroto, & France, 1979;

Knickerbocker & McGee, 1973; Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky, 1991; Neimeyer &

Pfeiffer; 1994; O'Donnell & George, 1977; Truax & Lister, 1971).








Hypothesis 1

The results support the assertion in the first hypothesis that trained volunteers

would exhibit greater empathy than pre-volunteers or nonvolunteers who have not

undergone training. The results suggest a pattern that is consistent with the assumption

that crisis intervention training can significantly impact levels of empathy, with trained

individuals having the most empathy; however, a causal relationship cannot be drawn

from the current study. The results indicate that trained crisis volunteers are able to

effectively engage with clients in crisis, and suggest that the training and experience they

have undergone may increase their empathic skills. This conclusion lends support for the

use of trained volunteers in crisis intervention agencies. Such a finding seems positive

for those concerned with, or involved in, crisis intervention, since funding, community

support, and other factors affecting a service agency might at least partially rely on the

ability of the agency to demonstrate effectiveness.

The fact that volunteers currently just beginning training were significantly

different from trained volunteers on the Relationship Inventory and marginally

significantly different on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index suggests that training does

have an impact on empathy, although pre-existing group differences could also account

for differences in empathic ability. However, the fact that there was no significant

difference found between volunteers-in-training and a similar control group suggests that

people who volunteer for a crisis intervention agency are not measurably different in

terms of their ability to empathize than those who do not volunteer (i.e., trainees are not a

self-selected group based on their empathic abilities). In addition, out of the original 38

people who began the Fall training, only 23 people completed the training and graduated








to volunteer status: this indicates that not everyone who is interested in becoming a

volunteer is able or willing to complete the training.

It should be noted that the range of participants" scores on the Relationship

Inventory (refer to Table 4-1) included some negative scores (recall that the overall score

range for the Empathic Understanding subscale is -48 to +48). Barrett-Lennard (1986)

points out that while it is true that the majority of scale scores generated from individual

respondents are usually positive, a (sometimes generous) sprinkling of negative scores

within a sample is not unusual, even in client therapist relationships. Barrett-Lennard

states that "there is no absolute meaning to the zero point in the middle of the

theoretical range and significance has not been attributed a priori to any scoring values"

(p. 454). A negative score would most likely imply that a respondent answered "no" to

positive items and/or answered "yes" to negative items, which suggests, with respect to

the current study, that the respondent's general relationships (e.g., interpersonal

relationships that exist outside of the volunteer counseling situation) may be lacking in

empathic understanding.

With the standard scoring method, a scale score of 40 (or higher) would require a

mean response of at least 2.5 (i.e., perhaps by selecting an equal number of+3's and +2's

on positively-worded items and -3's and -2's on negatively-worded items). Barrett-

Lennard (1986) suggests that this score would seem about as high as could plausibly be

expected in terms of honest and discriminating perception. He states that "in practice,

scores above 40 occur but are infrequent" (p. 456). A score of 32 represents an average

item score of 2 (after converting answers on negative items); it implies "clear affirmation

that the referent person was experienced as very substantially empathic" (p.456, italics in








original). Similarly, a scale score of 24 (at the boundary of the third and fourth quartiles

of the theoretical range) suggests that this level of empathy would tend to be adequate in

helping relationships, whereas a score of 16 would be expected to represent a less than

adequate level of therapeutic empathy.

Recall the empathic understanding mean scores for each of the research groups

(from Table 4-5): volunteers = 20.5 (SD = 10.1), trainees = 16.3 (SD = 9.8), and controls

= 12.5 (SD = 9.0). Based on the above assumptions, none of the study groups was

substantially empathic. Volunteers scored at an adequate level of empathic

understanding, whereas trainees' and controls' empathic levels were less than adequate.


Hypothesis 2

The direct relationship between a crisis volunteer's length of experience and

amount of empathy found in the study did not support the second hypothesis, which

projected that an inverse relationship would exist. Previous findings in the literature on

how experience affects empathy are mixed. On the one hand, France (1974), Hart and

King (1979), Neimeyer and Pfeiffer (1994), O'Donnell and George (1977), and Polenz

and Verdi (1977) all found that paraprofessionals can provide better facilitative

conditions with experience and training. As reported earlier, results regarding the first

hypothesis show a pattern consistent with the assertion that training enhances crisis

intervention effectiveness, though a causal relationship cannot be drawn from the current

research. On the other hand, Carkhuff, Kratochvil, and Friel (1968) and Elkins and

Cohen (1982) found that counseling skills did not improve with experience; while

counselors' ability to discriminate facilitative conditions improved with experience, their

actual ability to offer these conditions declined.









With respect to the results regarding the second hypothesis, one cannot

completely surmise how well volunteers are actually able to ojfer empathy to clients,

since observational studies were not conducted in this research. However, based on

volunteers' reports of how well the statements of feelingsireactions in the study describe

them, it can besurmised that their ability to empathically connect with clients is

positively associated with their length of experience.

The positive relationship between length of crisis volunteers' experience and

amount of empathy found in the study indicates that as the length of experience increases

for paraprofessionals trained to work in crisis intervention settings, their empathic skills,

specifically perspective-taking and empathic understanding, increase. This finding

suggests that crisis intervention and suicide prevention agencies might be well-served to

make more attempts to retain their volunteers over extended periods. Gidron (1978)

found that most volunteer "dropping out" occurs during the first six months of volunteer

work. He attributed this to "the negative discrepancies found among short-term

volunteers' concern [with] rewards pertaining to interaction with professional staff'

(p.23). Gidron asserted that short-term volunteers expect training, professional

supervision, consultation opportunities and praise from the staff. Meeting short-term

volunteers' expectations may well provide agencies with more long-term volunteers who,

ultimately, are more effective than those with less experience.

Although this study found a positive relationship between experience and

empathy, the two measures of perspective-taking and empathic understanding were

positively associated with each other, so a simultaneous multiple regression was

performed in order to assess the unique contribution of each empathy measure. Results









of the multiple regression indicated that only the measure of empathic understanding

significantly accounted for the variance in length of experience; that is, volunteers' levels

of empathic understanding were a significant predictor of the number of months they

were likely to volunteer at the crisis center. It should be noted that the relatively low

internal consistency found on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Cronbach's alpha

measure) may have impacted the results and the fact that the Interpersonal Reactivity

Index did not significantly account for the variance in length of experience. When both

age and perspective-taking were controlled, empathic understanding still significantly

accounted for the variance in the length of volunteer experience.


Hypothesis 3

The third hypothesis, that crisis center volunteers would have higher levels of

altruistic motivation than the control group, was not supported. The literature regarding

whether or not people volunteer for altruistic reasons or egoistic reasons is sparse. A few

researchers have looked at motivations of volunteers in general (e.g., Clary & Snyder,

1991; Fitch, 1987; Henderson, 1980, 1981, 1985; Sergent & Sedlacek, 1990; Wiehe &

Isenhour, 1977), but fewer still have investigated the motivations of volunteers who work

specifically in crisis intervention settings (e.g., Black & DiNitto, 1994; Clary & Miller,

1986; Clary & Orenstein, 1991). Clary and Orenstein (1991) found a direct relationship

between altruistic motives for volunteering and the length of time spent as a volunteer.

Their finding was not examined in the current study; however, it is interesting to note that

the current study's results indicate that volunteers who work in a crisis intervention

agency do not have significantly higher levels of altruistic motivation. In fact, the








volunteer group had the lowest mean on the Measure of Altruistic Motivation of the three

groups examined.

The volunteer group had significantly higher levels of empathy than the training

or control groups. The literature suggests that there is a positive relationship between

empathy and altruism (e.g., Amato, 1985; Eisenberg et al., 1989; Hoffman, 1976, 1981;

Krebs, 1975; Rushton, 1980), but clearly, the relationship is complex, since the

volunteers in this study (who had relatively high levels of empathy) did not have higher

levels of altruistic motivation.

For all participants, the most frequently ranked reason they would (or do)

volunteer at the Crisis Center was an altruistic reason ("a chance to help others"). The

next four most frequently ranked choices were egoistic reasons, and the fifth most

frequently ranked choice was a tie between an altruistic and an egoistic reason.

Obviously, people volunteer for a variety of reasons, and one can speculate that the

reasons chosen (whether altruistic or egoistic) do not seem to make a difference in the

effectiveness (or the ability to provide empathy) of the volunteer.


Consideration of Gender Differences

Post-hoc analyses regarding gender differences on empathy and motivation

suggested that there was a significant difference between males and females on the

Relationship Inventory and the Measure of Altruistic Motivation, with females displaying

higher levels of both empathic understanding and altruistic motivation. The widely held

stereotype that females are more empathic than males has led to numerous studies of

gender differences in empathy (Lennon & Eisenberg, 1987). Overall, the conclusions of








reviews on gender differences in empathy have been inconsistent, primarily due to the

fact that empathy has been operationalized and measured in a variety of ways.

Eisenberg and Lennon's (1983) meta-analysis of the data from 16 studies found

that females scored higher than males on self-report questionnaire measures of emotional

empathy, with-an effect size of .99! However, they asserted that the demand

characteristics of self-report questionnaires render these findings less than conclusive,

especially in light of much smaller differences or no differences found for other empathy

measures (such as self-report in simulated emotional situations, facial/gestural and

physiological indices). Based on the reviews of the literature regarding gender

differences in empathy, a need for greater conceptual and methodological precision in

future research is evident. Then, perhaps, the meaning of gender differences found in

previous research will be clarified (Lennon & Eisenberg, 1987).

Graham and Ickes (1997) found no reliable gender differences in empathic

accuracy. They suggested that gender differences found in other studies on empathy

may, in fact, be more a matter of motivation than of ability. Males and females may not

differ in their ability to empathize, but their gender-role socialization may provide them

with more or less motivation to do so.

In the current study, the fact that both empathy and altruism were measured by

self-report questionnaires, suggests that, although gender differences were found, further

investigation needs to occur in order to more fully understand the nature of those

differences. Future research should consider both the demand characteristics of the

assessment or measurement device as well as the motivational set within the participants.








Indeed, further clarification of this issue may be gained by investigating empathic

motivation rather than ability.


Study Limitations

Since the study gathered information through the use of paper and pencil tests,

one limitation of the study may have been the willingness and ability of individuals to

respond at all andior respond in an accurate fashion. Participants were not required to

produce responses and instead chose responses already listed on their questionnaire.

Therefore, it is difficult to conclude with complete certainty that their responses during a

crisis call would be similar. Indeed, a pencil and paper test cannot completely reflect a

counselor's ability to paraphrase powerful emotions accurately and at the appropriate

time. Also, the borderline internal consistency of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (.64

in the current study) may have impacted the results.

In addition, the study used psychology undergraduates as a control group, which

constituted a nonequivalent control groups design. This suggests that pre-existing

differences in attitudes, skills and motivations between the research groups may have

existed. However, since many of the individuals who volunteer for this particular crisis

intervention center were undergraduate psychology students (or others with similar

demographics), the results are still somewhat generalizable. Also, participants in the

study were not randomly assigned to the three study groups; therefore, no conclusions

regarding causal relationships are drawn.

Another limitation of the study was the relatively small sample size. There were

only 27 participants in the training group, compared to 75 participants in the volunteer

group and 46 in the control group. Perhaps the small sample size was one reason that no








significant difference was found between the control group mean and the training group

mean on the Relationship Inventory empathy measure (see Tables 4-5 and 4-6) even

though s significant difference was found between the training group mean and the

volunteer group mean.

In order to keep data collection manageable, only participants from one crisis

intervention center were tested. This study did not include outcome measures of

effectiveness (e.g., caller satisfaction), but it is hoped that results can be used in

conjunction with other outcome findings. Numerous factors go into creating an

"effective" suicide prevention volunteer; this study only examined one of those factors

(empathy) and the motivations behind volunteering in such a critical service area.


Implications for Future Research

The complex relationship between empathy and motivation in volunteers who

provide suicide prevention services could also be investigated; specifically, further study

is warranted to investigate whether or not an interaction between empathy and motivation

exists in these volunteers. In addition, Barrett-Lennard (1981) pointed out that there is

"wide intraindividual variation in empathic accuracy from one instance to another,

occurring even in very similar situations" (p. 99). This suggests that future research on

empathy as a generalized trait or ability would be a potentially important (and complex)

area of study in its own right Indeed, some people do consistently act more generous,

helping and kind than others. Thomas and Fletcher (1997) suggested that although

studies are sparse, there is some evidence that implies "the existence of stable individual

differences in the ability to make accurate empathic judgments, [although] the basis and

nature of such abilities has yet to be determined" (p. 213).








Along these same lines, though there is evidence that empathy is related to

therapeutic outcome (e.g., Orlinski, Grawe, & Parks, 1994; Truax & Carkhuff, 1967), the

empathy studied was viewed as a situation-specific affective or cognitive process (or

experiential) variable experienced by a therapist for the client. However, no research

currently exists regarding the relationship between experiential and dispositional empathy

(Duan & Hill, 1996). Future investigations might focus on how empathic processes

possibly relate to dispositional empathy and therapeutic outcome. Another interesting

avenue of study is expanding the research examining the empathy-altruism hypothesis to

assess whether alternative explanations, such as oneness, can explain findings.

It is not fully clear what processes take place when participants are told to engage

in empathic perspective-taking. Specifically, "it is not known whether role-taking

instructions also trigger the operation of other empathy-related processes, such as... the

use of elaborated cognitive networks" (Davis, 1994, pp. 207-208). Careful assessment

and study of what participants actually do when told to engage in perspective-taking is a

potentially rich source of information that would help clarify this empathy process. In

addition, a deeper understanding of how personal and situational characteristics affect

empathic processes (or even act as mediating variables) is another rich source of

information for future study. For example, previous research has demonstrated that

perspective-taking (or role-taking) is a reliable and accurate measure of empathy;

however, little is known about how a person's disposition or how observer-target

similarity affect that individual's ability to take on the perspective of another, since

studies examining such characteristics have primarily focused on empathy outcomes.

Duan's (2000) conclusion that situation-specific empathic experiences may vary with








situations exemplify this discrepancy between antecedents and processes. Duan suggests

that any research on empathy or empathy-related behaviors should consider the

characteristics of the situation where participants' empathic experiences are measured.

Finally, as noted in the Introduction of this study, the fact that young white

females are the most prevalent users of crisis intervention agencies suggests that research

should be focused on analyzing the factors that are responsible for the reduction of

suicide for this specific group when they use suicide prevention service agencies. It is

interesting to note however, that young white females have overall lower suicide rates

than other groups.


Conclusion

The Empathic Understanding subscale of the Relationship Inventory appears to be

a good measure for empathy in crisis center volunteers. The Perspective-Taking subscale

of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index may also prove to be an accurate measure of

volunteer empathy, provided adequate internal consistency is found. The ability to

demonstrate empathy has been shown to be a necessary component of crisis intervention

counseling. Data indicate significant differences between fully-trained crisis intervention

volunteers and either trainees or nontrained individuals on the examined measures of

empathy. In addition, results of this study indicate that a volunteer's ability to provide

empathic understanding increases with crisis intervention experience. A volunteer's

reasons for choosing to work in a suicide prevention/crisis intervention agency are both

altruistic and egoistic, and volunteers do not have higher levels of altruism compared to

nonvolunteers.








Volunteers and paraprofessionals are often the backbone of crisis and suicide

prevention agencies. This study is consistent with a pattern indicating that training as a

volunteer and experience as a crisis counselor can increase volunteers' abilities to work

with clients, thereby allowing crisis intervention and suicide prevention agencies the

ability to provide more effective services to their community. Since it appears from the

results of this study that volunteers are motivated to work in crisis intervention settings

for both egoistic and altruistic reasons, agencies would be well-served to appeal to both

of these motivations in recruiting and retaining volunteers. In this era of high suicide

rates and increasing demands on crisis intervention/suicide prevention agencies, it seems

imperative that volunteers working in this area be highly trained and supported in ways

that encourage them to remain long-term, only then can we hope stop the trend of

increasing suicide rates.













APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT


Principal Investigator: Michelle L. Barz, M.S.


The purpose of this research project is to measure some personal variables, such
as empathy and motivation, related to people's volunteer activities. The goal of this
study is to learn the effect of crisis intervention training and experience on these
variables. If you choose to participate, this study will take approximately 15-20 minutes
of your time and will involve filling out a packet containing three brief questionnaires.
Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary, and you do not have to answer any
question you do not wish to answer.
Alachua County Crisis Center trainees and volunteers, as well as students in a UF
psychology class, will receive a packet during the Fall 2000 semester. No compensation
will be awarded for participation in this study. The study is not designed to benefit you
directly, but it is hoped that it will provide valuable information for improving the
effectiveness of crisis intervention volunteers. This research does not involve any known
risks to you as a participant
All personal information collected as part of this study will be held strictly
confidential to the extent provided by law. Data collected will be coded so that no
identifying information appears on your questionnaire. This signed consent form
(required by the UF Institutional Review Board) will be placed in a sealed envelope and
will not be consulted as part of the study. Results from this study will only be reported in
general terms and will not identify any individuals.
If you have any questions regarding procedure, please contact my supervisor, Dr.
Paul G. Schauble, at the University of Florida Counseling Center, 301 Peabody Hall,
392-1575. If you have any concerns about your rights as a research participant in this








study, please contact UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
32611-2250.
I, ____________________ (print name) freely volunteer to

participate in the research project described above, conducted by Michelle Barz, a

doctoral student in the Counseling Psychology Program, Department of Psychology, at

the University of Florida. I have been informed in advance what my tasks will be and

what procedures will be followed.

I have read the description above and I understand that I have the right to
withdraw consent and discontinue participation at any time. My signature below may be
taken as my agreement to participate in the study and I acknowledge that I have received
a copy of this description.


Signature___________________ Date


Last 4 digits of Social Security Number













APPENDIX B
INSTRUCTIONS

After completing the information sheet below, please carefully read and follow

the directions printed at the top of each of the following three brief questionnaires. Your

responses will be kept confidential and will be reported only in general terms with no

identifying information. Thank you for your participation in this study!


Name (print): ________

Last 4 Digits of Social Security Number: ____

Gender: ______

Marital Status (check one): 1
____ Single (never married)
____ Divorced
____ Separated
______ Widowed
____ Remarried


Age: ______


Race (check one):
____ African American
____ Asian/Pacific Islander
____ Caucasian
Hispanic
____ Native American
___ Other


Country of Origin: ________

If you are a student, what is your major? ________

Have you ever been enrolled in the volunteer training program at the Alachua County Crisis
Center? Yes No

If you are currently a volunteer, or have been one in the past, how long (to the nearest month)
have you volunteered for Alachua County Crisis Center? ________

Have you had additional or other training in counseling or crisis intervention? Yes No
If yes, please describe:













APPENDIX C
INSTRUMENTS



In the space before each question, please write the number 0, 1, 2,3, or 4 to indicate how
you feel using the following scale: 0 (does not describe me well) to 4 (describes me very
well).


1___ Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in that
person's place.

___ 2. If I'm sure I'm right about something, I don't waste much time listening to
other people's arguments.

___ 3. I sometimes try to understand my friends better by imagining how things look
from their perspective.

___ 4. I believe that there are two sides to every question and I try to look at them
both.

___ 5. I sometimes find it difficult to see things from the other person's point of view.

___ 6. 1 try to look at everybody's side of a disagreement before I make a decision.

___ 7. When I'm upset at someone, I usually try to "put myself in his/her shoes" for a
while.











The following is a list of possible reasons for volunteering at the Alachua County Crisis
Center. As honestly and accurately as possible, please indicate your top five reasons for
volunteering. If you are not a volunteer, indicate the top five reasons you most likely
would have for volunteering at the Alachua County Crisis Center. Place a I before the
item that represents your major reason for volunteering, a 2 before the next most
important reason, and so on until your fifth most important reason.

___ personal growth
___ to acquire new skills, experience
___ a chance to help others
___ to acquire information about career possibilities
___ to use special talents that I have
___ to express concern to people in need
___ to meet new people
___ to increase my self-confidence
___ to "repay" previous use of volunteer services
___ to enhance my self-image
___ academic internship/experiential learning
___ a chance to give of myself without expecting some sort of "pay-off'
___ to learn about some of the social services available in Alachua County
___ to increase my self-understanding
___ to provide a good experience for people in need
___ to help maintain a social service agency
___ to become more sensitive to others
___ to develop better human relations skills
___ to help those less fortunate than I
___ to become a better citizen
___ to gain skills which will be applicable to other situations
___ to have fun and do something constructive at the same time
___ to help build my resume
___ other people (e.g., parents, spouse) want me to do volunteer work
___ my friend (or friends) is (are) volunteering












Please do not write your name on this form. It will be coded anonymously and
your answers used for research purposes only. Below are listed a variety of ways one
person could feel or behave in relation to other people. Please carefully consider each
statement with respect to whether you think it is true or not true about you. Mark each
statement in the space next to the number according to how strongly you feel it is true or
not true. Please mark every one. Write in +3, +2, +1, or -I, -2, -3 to stand for the
following answers:
+3: Yes, I strongly feel that it is true.
+2: Yes, I feel it is true.
+ 1: Yes, I feel that it is probably true, or more true than untrue.
-1: No, I feel that it is probably untrue, or more untrue than true.
-2: No, I feel it is not true.
-3: No, I strongly feel that it is not true.


__I I want to understand how others see things.
___ 2. I understand other people's words but do not know how they actually feel.
___ 3. I nearly always know exactly what others mean.
___ 4. I look at what others do from my own point of view.
___ 5. I usually sense or realize how others are feeling.
___ 6. What others say or do sometimes arouses feelings in me that prevent me from
understanding them.
___ 7. Sometimes I think that others feel a certain way because that's the way I feel
myself
___ 8. I can tell what others mean even when they have difficulty in saying it.
___ 9. I usually understand the whole of what others mean.
10. I ignore some of other people's feelings.
11. I appreciate just how others' experiences feel to them.
12. At times I think that others feel strongly about something and then it turns out
that they don't.






78


13. At the time I don't realize how touchy or sensitive others are about some of the
things we discuss.
___ 14. I understand others.
15. I often respond to others rather automatically, without taking in what they are
experiencing.
16. When others are hurt or upset I can recognize just how they feel, without
getting upset myself














LIST OF REFERENCES


Adler. A. (1931). What life should mean to you. New York; Little, Brown.

Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (1997). Statistical methods for the social sciences. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Allen, N. J., & Rushton, J. P. (1983). Personality characteristics of community mental
health volunteers: A review. Journal of Voluntary Action Research, 12, 36-49.

Amato, P. R. (1985). An investigation of planned helping behavior. Journal of Research
in Personality, 19, 232-252.

Bamrnett, V., & Lewis, T. (1978). Outliers in statistical data. New York: Wiley.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1959). Therapeutic personality change as a function of
perceived therapist response. American Psychologist, 14, 376.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1962). Dimensions of therapist response as causal factors in
therapeutic change. Psychological Monographs, 76 No. 43, Whole no. 562.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1976). Empathy in human relationships: Significance, nature
and measurement. Australian Psychologist, 11, 173-184.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1978). The Relationship Inventory: Later development and
adaptations. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 8, 68.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1981). The empathy cycle: Refinement of a nuclear concept.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 91-100.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1986). The Relationship Inventory now: Issues and advances in
theory, method and use. In L. S. Greenberg & W. M. Pinsof(Eds.), The
psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook (pp. 439-476). New York:
Guilford Press.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1993). The phases and focus of empathy. British Journal of
Medical Psychology, 66, 3-14.

Barrett-Lennard, G. T., & Bergerson, S. G. (1975). Resource bibliography of reported
studies using the Relationship Inventory, part C, mimeo, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Canada.









Batson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic? In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 20, pp. 65-122). Orlando,
FL: Academic Press.

Batson, C. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer.
Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.

Batson, C. D., Bolen, M. H., Cross, J. A., & Neuringer-Benefiel, H. E. (1986). Where is
the altruism in the altruistic personality? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 5, 212-220.

Batson, C. D., Dyck, J. L., Brandt, J. R., Batson, J. G., Powell, A. L., McMaster, M. R.,
& Griffitt, C. (1988). Five studies testing two new egoistic alternatives to the
empathy-altruism hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55
52-77.

Black, B., & DiNitto, D. (1994). Volunteers who work with survivors of rape and
battering: Motivations, acceptance, satisfaction, length of service, and gender
differences. Journal of Social Service Research, 20, 73-97.

Bohart, A. C., & Greenberg, L. S. (Eds.). (1997). Empathy reconsidered: New
directions in psychotherapy. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association.

Carey, J. C., Fox, E. A., & Spraggins, E. F. (1988). Replication of structure findings
regarding the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Measurement and Evaluation in
Counseling and Development, 21, 102-105.

Carkhuff, R. R. (1968). Differential functioning of lay and professional helpers. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 15, 117-126.

Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations, Vols. I and II. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.

Carkhuff, R. R., Kratochvil, D., & Friel, T. (1968). The effects of professional training:
The communication and discrimination of facilitative conditions. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, j5 68-74.

Carothers, J. E., & Inslee, L. J. (1974). Level of empathic understanding offered by
volunteer telephone services. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 21, 274-276.

Centers for Disease Control. (1985). Suicide surveillance, 1970-1980. Atlanta, GA:
Author.








Chlopan, B. E., McCain, M. L., Carbonell, J. L., & Hagen, R. L. (1985). Empathy:
Review of available measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 48,
635-653.

Clary, E. G., & Miller, J. (1986). Socialization and situational influences on sustained
altruism. Child Development, 57,1358-1369.

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, 58-64.

Clary, E. G., & Snyder, M. (1991). A functional analysis of altruism and prosocial
behavior: The case of volunteerism. Review of Personality and Social Psychology
12, 119-148.

Coonfield. T. J., Nida, R. A., & Gray, B. (1976). Research report: The assessment of
telephone crisis workers. Crisis Intervention, 7, 2-9.

Daigle, M. S., & Mishara, B. L. (1995). Intervention styles with suicidal callers at two
suicide prevention centers. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 25, 261-275.

Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy.
JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 10, 85.

Davis, M. H. (1983a). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a
multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44,113-
126.

Davis, M. H. (1983b). The effects ofdispositional empathy on emotional reactions and
helping: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality. 51, 167-184.

Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Madison, WI:
Brown & Benchmark.

Delworth, U., Rudow, E. H., & Taub, J. (1972). Crisis center/hotline: A guidebook to
beginning and operating. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Duan, C. (2000). Being empathic: The role of motivation to empathize and the nature of
target emotions. Motivation and Emotion, 24, 29-49.

Duan, C., & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of empathy research. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 43, 261-274.

Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities.
Psychological Bulletin, 94, 100-131.








Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987a). Empathy and prosocial behavior. Psychological
Bulletin 101, 91-119.

Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987b). Empathy, sympathy, and altruism: Empirical
and conceptual links. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its
development (pp. 292-316). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Eisenberg, N., Miller, P. A., Shaller, M., Fabes, R. A., Fultz, J., Shell, R., & Shea, C. L.
(1989). The role of sympathy and altruistic personality traits in helping: A
reexamination. Journal of Personality, 57, 41-67.

Elkins, R. I., & Cohen, C. R. (1982). A comparison of the effects ofprejob training and
job experience on nonprofessional telephone crisis counselors. Suicide and Life-
Threatening Behavior, 12, 84-89.

Ellis, S. J. (1978). American traditions of volunteerism and service-learning: The
twentieth century. Synergist. Spring, 37-39.

Ellis, S. J. (1985). Research on volunteerism: What needs to be done. Journal of
Voluntary Action Research, 14, 11-14.

Feshbach, N. D. (1982). Sex differences in empathy and social behavior in children. In
N. Eisenberg (Ed.), The development of prosocial behavior (pp. 315-338). New
York: Academic Press.

Fitch, R. T. (1987). Characteristics and motivations of college students volunteering for
community service. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28 424-431.

Fowler, D. E., & McGee, R. K. (1973). Assessing the performance of telephone crisis
workers: The development of a technical effectiveness scale. In D. Lester & G.
Brockopp (Eds.), Crisis intervention and counseling by telephone. Springfield, 1L:
Charles C. Thomas.

France, K. (1975). Evaluation of lay volunteer crisis telephone workers. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 3, 197-200.

Frankish, C. J. (1994). Crisis centers and their role in treatment: Suicide prevention
versus health promotion. Death Studies 18, 327-339.

Genther, R. (1974). Evaluating the functioning of community-based hotlines.
Professional Psychology, 5, 409-414.

Gidron, B. (1978). Volunteer work and its rewards. Volunteer Administration, 11
18-32.


Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.









Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.

Graham, T., & Ickes, W. (1997). When women's intuition isn't greater than men's. In
W. Ickes (Ed.), Empathic accuracy. New York: Guilford Press.

Gray, B., Nida, R. A., & Coonfield, T. J. (1976). Empathic Listening Test: An
instrument for the selection and training of telephone crisis workers. Journal of
Community Psychology. 4, 199-205.

Gurman, A. S. (1977). The patient's perception of the therapeutic relationship. In A. S.
Gurman and A. M. Razin (Eds.), Effective psychotherapy: A handbook of research
(pp. 503-543). New York: Pergamon.

Gutierrez, P. M., Osman, A., Kopper, B. A., Barrios, F. X., & Bagge, C. L. (2000).
Suicide risk assessment in a college student population. Journal of Counseling
Psychology 47, 403-413.

Hall, J. A., Davis, M. H., & Connelly, M. (2000). Dispositional empathy in scientist and
practitioner psychologists: Group differences and relationship to self-reported
professional effectiveness. Psychotherapy, 37, 45-56.

Hart, L. E., & King, G. D. (1979). Selection versus training in the development of
paraprofessionals. Journal of Counseling Psychology 2, 6,235-241.

Hart, T. (1999). The refinement of empathy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 39,
111-125.

Henderson, K. A. (1980). Programming volunteerism for happier volunteers. Parks and
Recreation, September, 61-64.

Henderson, K. A. (1981). Motivations and perceptions of volunteerism and a leisure
activity. Journal of Leisure Research, 13, 208-218.

Henderson, K. A. (1985). Issues and trends in volunteerism. Journal of Physical
Education. Recreation, and Dance, 56, 30-32.

Hobfoll, S. E. (1980). Personal characteristics of the college volunteer. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 8, 503-506.

Hoffminan, M. L. (1976). Empathy, role-taking, guilt, and development of altruistic
motives. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory., research
and social issues (pp. 124-143). New York: Holt, Rinehart.

Hoffminan, M. L. (1977). Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors.
Psychological Bulletin 54, 712-722.









Hoffman, M. L. (1981). The development of empathy. In J. P. Rushton & R. M.
Sorrentino (Eds.), Altruism and helping behavior: Social, personality, and
developmental perspectives (pp. 41-63). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hoffman, M. L. (1982). Development of prosocial motivation: Empathy and guilt. In
N. Eisenberg (Ed)., The development of prosocial behavior (pp. 281-313). New
York: Academic Press.

Hoffman, M. L. (1984). Interaction of affect and cognition in empathy. In C. E. Izard, J.
Kagan & R- B. Zajonc (Eds.), Emotions, cognition and behavior (pp. 103-131).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hoffman, M. L. (1987). The contribution of empathy to justice and moral development
In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 47-80).
New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and
justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Homes, C. B., & Howard, M. E. (1980). Recognition of suicide lethality factors by
physicians, mental health professionals, ministers, and college students. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 48, 383-387.

Ickes, W. (Ed.). (1997). Empathic accuracy. New York: Guilford Press.

Ickes, W. (1993). Empathic accuracy. Journal of Personality, 61,587-610.

Ickes, W., Bissonnette, V., Garcia, S., & Stinson, L. (1990). Implementing and using the
dyadic interaction paradigm. In C. Hendrick & M. Clark (Eds.), Review of
personality and social psychology: Research methods in personality and social
sychology (Vol. II, pp. 16.44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Ickes, W., Marangoni, C., & Garcia, S. (1997). Studying empathic accuracy in a
clinically relevant context. In W. Ickes, (Ed.), Empathic accuracy (pp.282-310).
New York: Guilford Press.

Ickes, W., Stinson, L., Bissonnette, V., & Garcia, S. (1990). Naturalistic social
cognition: Empathic accuracy in mixed-sex dyads. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 59, 730-742.

Ickes, W., & Tooke, W. (1988). The observational method: Studying the interaction of
minds and bodies. In S. Duck, D. Hay, S. Hobfoll, W. Ickes & B. Montgomery
(Eds.), The handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research, and interventions
(pp. 79-97). Chichester, England: Wiley.








Kalafat, J., Boroto, D. R., & France, K. (1979). Relationships among experience level
and value orientation and the performance of paraprofessional telephone
counselors. American Journal of Community Psycholog, 7, 167-180.

Kann, L., Kinchen, S. A., Williams, B. I., Ross. J. G., Lowry, R., Hill, C. V., Grunbaum,
J. A., Blumson, P. S., Collins, J. L., & Kolbe, L. J. (1998, August 14). Youth risk
behavior surveillance-United States, 1997. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report: CDC Surveillance Summaries 47 1-89.

Knickerbocker, D., & McGee, R. (1973). Clinical effectiveness of nonprofessional and
professional telephone workers in a crisis intervention centre. In D. Lester & G.
Brockopp (Eds.), Crisis intervention and counseling by telephone (pp.298-309).
Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Knott, E. C., & Range, L. M. (1998). Content analysis of previously suicidal college
students' experiences. Death Studies, 22, 171-180.

Krebs, D. L. (1975). Empathy and altruism. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 3 1134-1146.

Kurtz, R. R., & Grummon, D. L. (1972). Different approaches to the measurement of
therapist empathy and their relationship to therapy outcomes. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology 39 106-115.

Lennon, R., & Eisenberg, N. (1987). Gender and age differences in empathy and
sympathy. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp.
195-217). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lemer, M. J. (1982). The justice motive in human relations and the economic model of
man: A radical analysis of facts and fictions. In V. J. Derlega & J. Grzelak (Eds.),
Cooperation and helping behavior: Theories and research (pp. 249-278). New
York: Academic Press.

Lester, D. (1993). Challenge in preventing suicide. Crisis, 14,187-1849.

Linehan, M. M. (1997). Validation and psychotherapy. In A. C. Bohart & L. S.
Greenberg (Eds.), Empathy reconsidered: New directions in psychotherapy.
Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.

Litman, R. E., Farberow, N. L., Shneidman, E. S., Helig, S. M., & Kramer, J. A. (1965).
Suicide-prevention telephone service. Journal of the American Medical
Association, 192, 107-111.

Manstead, A. (1992). Gender differences in emotion. In A. Gale & M. W. Eysenck
(Eds.), Handbook of individual differences: Biological perspectives. London:
Wiley.









Marangoni, C., Garcia, S., Ickes, W., & Teng, G. (1995). Empathic accuracy in a
clinically relevant setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68 854-
869.

Manrs, R. W. (1992). The relationship of nonfatal suicide attempts to completed
suicides. In R. W. Mars, A. L. Berman, J. T. Maltsberger & R. I. Yufit (Eds.),
Assessment and prediction of suicide (pp. 362-380). New York: Guilford Press.

McGee, R., & Jennings, B. (1973). Ascending to "lower" levels: The case for
nonprofessional crisis workers. In D. Lester & G. Brockopp (Eds.), Crisis
intervention and counseling by telephone (pp. 287-297). Springfield, IL: Charles
C. Thomas.

Miller, H. L., Coombs, D. W., Leeper, J. D., & Barton, S. N. (1984). An analysis of the
effects of suicide prevention facilities on suicide rates in the united states.
American Journal of Public Health. 74, 340-343.

Miller, W. R., Hedrick, K. E., & Orlofsky, D. R. (1991). The Helpful Responses
Questionnaire: A procedure for measuring therapeutic empathy. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 47,444-448.

Miller, L., Powell, G., & Seltzer, J. (1990). Determinants of turnover among volunteers.
Human Relations 43, 901-917.

Neimeyer, R. A., & Pfeiffer, A. M. (1994). Evaluation of suicide intervention
effectiveness. Death Studies, 18, 131-166.

Newman, F. (1985). Higher education and the American resurgence. Princeton, NJ:
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

O'Carroll, P. W., Berman, A. L., Maris, R. W., Moscicki, E. K., Tanney, B. L., &
Silverman, M. M. (1996). Beyond the Tower of Babel: A nomenclature for
suicidology. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior 26 237-252.

O'Donnell, J. M., & George, K. (1977). The use of volunteers in a community mental
health center emergency and reception service: A comparative study of
professional and lay telephone counseling. Community Mental Health Journal, !,
3-12.

Okun, M. A., Shepard, S. A., & Eisenberg, N. (2000). The relations of emotionality and
regulation to dispositional empathy-related responding among volunteers-in-
training. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 367-382.

Orbach, I., Bar-Joseph, H., & Dror, N. (1990). Styles of problem solving in suicidal
individuals. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 20, 56-64.









Orlinski, D. E., Grawe, K.. & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in
psychotherapy -- noch einmal. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook
of psychotherapy and behavior change (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Patterson, C. H. (1984). Empathy, warmth, and genuineness in psychotherapy: A
review of reviews. Psychotherapy, 21,431-438.

Piliavin, J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Clark, R. D., III (1981). Emergency
intervention. New York: Academic Press.

Polenz, D. D., & Verdi, P. (1977). Differences in the therapeutic functioning of
paraprofessionals with varying lengths of experience. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 33. 1115-1119.

Probert, J. S., & Fogel, J. (1997, April). More-Tensions:-_TiaininCrisis Center
Volunteers. Workshop presented at the American Association of Suicidology
conference, Memphis, TN.

Range, L. M., & Knott, E. C. (1997). Twenty suicide assessment instruments:
Evaluation and recommendations. Death Studies, 21 25-58.

Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality
change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95-103.

Rosenbaum, A., & Calhoun, J. F. (1977). The use of the telephone hotline in crisis
intervention: A review. Journal of Community Psychology, _, 325-339.

Rudd, M. D. (1989). The prevalence of suicide ideation among college students.
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior 19, 173-183.

Rushton, J. P. (1980). Altruism, socialization and society. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.

Seely, M. (1992). Hotlines -- our heritage and challenges. Crisis, 13, 14-15.

Sergent, M. T., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1990). Volunteer motivation across student
organizations: A test of person-environment fit theory. Journal of College Student
Development 31, 255-261.

Shneidman, E. S., Farberow, N. L., & Litman, R. E. (1961). Introduction. InN. L.
Farberow & E. S. Shneidman (Eds.), The cry for help (pp. 6-18). New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Snodgrass, S. (1992). Further effects of role versus gender on interpersonal sensitivity.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 62 154.158.









Staub, E. (1974). Helping a distressed person: Social, personality, and stimulus
determinants. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
(Vol. 7, pp. 293-341). New York: Academic Press.

Staub, E. (1987). Commentary on Part I. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy
and its development (pp. 103-115). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Stein, D. M., &Lambert, M. J. (1984). Telephone counseling and crisis intervention: A
critical review. American Journal of Community Psvchology. 12, 101-126.

Stoffer, D. L. (1968). An investigation of positive behavioral change as a function of
genuineness, non-possessive warmth, and empathic understanding. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.

Strayer, J. (1987). Affective and cognitive perspectives on empathy. In N. Eisenberg &
J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 218-244). New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Tapp, J. T., & Spanier, D. (1973). Personal characteristics of volunteer phone
counselors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41,245-250.

Thomas, G., & Fletcher, G. J. 0. (1997). Empathic accuracy in close relationships. In
W. Ickes (Ed.), Empathic accuracy (pp. 194-217). New York: Guilford Press.

Truax, C. B., & Carkhuff, R. R. (1967). Toward effective counseling and psychotherapy:
Training and practice. Chicago: Aldine.

Truax, C. B., & Lister, J. L. (1971). Effects of short-term training upon accurate empathy
and non-persuasive warmth. Counselor Education and Supervision, Winter, 120-
125.

Truax, C. B., & Mitchell, K. M. (1971). Research on certain therapist interpersonal
skills in relation to process and outcome. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.),
Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (1st ed.). New York: Wiley.

U. S. Bureau of the Census. (1996). Statistical abstract of the united states: 1996.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Walsh, W. B., & Betz, N. E. (1990). Tests and assessment (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall,

Wiehe, V. R., & Isenhour, L. (1977). Motivation of volunteers. Journal of Social
Welfare, 4, 73-79.







89

Wolber, G., & McGovern, T. V. (1977). A three component model for the evaluation of
telephone counselor effectiveness. Crisis Intervention, 8, 36-55.














BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH


Michelle Lee Barz was born January 30, 1967 in Colorado. She graduated from

Pomona (CO) High School in 1985 and then attended Rice University, in Houston,

Texas, on a track scholarship. Michelle received her Bachelor of Arts degree from Rice

University in 1990 with a double major in Psychology and English. She graduated with a

Master of Science degree in Counseling Psychology from the University of Florida in

1994, the same time she was newly pregnant with her first child. Her thesis was entitled,

"The Impact of Math Anxiety on the Behavior of Academically Talented Students,"

Michelle is a part-time faculty member at Metropolitan State College of Denver.
She also teaches relationship and marriage classes, and does leadership training and

development. Michelle currently resides outside of Denver, Colorado with her husband

Stuart and their two children.


1 90











I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Paul G. Schauble, Chair
Professor of Psychology


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Martin Heesacker
Professor of Psychology


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



Barbara Probert
Clinical Associate Professor Emeritus of
Psychology


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.



M. David Miller
Professor of Education Psychology




Full Text
CHAPTER 3
METHOD
In this chapter, the methods used to test the research hypotheses will be discussed.
It includes a discussion of the research design, along with its strengths and weaknesses; a
description of the participants, including demographic information; and a presentation of
the instruments used, as well as other instruments considered but found lacking for this
study. In addition, the procedures followed in the study, as well as the specific analyses
used, are discussed.
Design
The sample studied consisted of three groups: crisis center volunteers, crisis
center applicants who were accepted for volunteer training, and undergraduate
psychology students. Participants were not randomly assigned to conditions in that the
applicants and volunteers were self-selected groups. Since participants in the control
group did not choose to volunteer for the crisis center, some pre-existing differences in
attitudes and motivations between the control group and the volunteer group may have
existed. However, since most applicants and volunteers for this particular crisis center
comprised upper-division undergraduates majoring in psychology, the control group was
drawn from an upper-division psychology course required for psychology majors in order
to be as similar as possible in composition to the research groups. The study measured
the differences in empathy and in motivation for volunteering between trained
paraprofessionals (with differing levels of experience), applicants accepted for training,
32


27
involved in helping professions (and possibly in similar volunteer activities as well) do
tend to have more of an altruistic personality than those in other arenas (Amato, 1985).
Relationship Between Volunteer Motivations and Abilities
Very few studies have examined the way in which peoples motivations for
volunteering have impacted their ability to display necessary skills in particular
community agency settings, yet it is certainly plausible that a persons motivation for
volunteering could directly impact their willingness to take risks, learn new skills and
perhaps even adopt new ways of thinking or conceptualizing. Some researchers have
argued that helping behavior involves more than just willingness to help; abilities are an
important feature of effective helping. Clary and Orenstein (1991) studied the
relationship between crisis counselors motives for volunteering and abilities to provide
therapeutic responses to their actual helping behavior. Black and DiNitto (1994)
examined the motivations, among other variables, of volunteers who work with survivors
of rape and battering. From these two studies, volunteers' motivations were found to
impact a multitude of areas, including amount of help given to clients, length of volunteer
service, and volunteer satisfaction. Research has also demonstrated links between
altruistic motivation and situational empathic concern (Batson, 1987) as well as
commitment to crisis-counseling volunteer work (Clary & Miller, 1986). In addition,
Clary and Orenstein (1991) found a direct relationship between altruistic motives for
volunteering and the length of time people spent as a volunteer. They predicted that
early-terminating volunteers (i.e., volunteers who decide, of their own volition, to
terminate their 9-month volunteer commitment early) would report lower levels of
altruistic motivation for volunteering at the beginning of training than completed-service


training) or upper-level psychology undergraduates with no training in crisis intervention.
Since more than one dependent variable was employed (i.e., both the Interpersonal
Reactivity Index and the Relationship Inventory were used as empathic measures), a one
way, between participants multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) for unequal ns
was initially proposed as the statistical analysis to be performed. However, once it was
determined that statistically significant mean age differences existed between the three
groups (see Tables 4-3 and 4-4), which essentially means that a portion of the total
variability among the dependent variables scores was explained by the relationship
between age and empathy, a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was
performed in order to extract the explained variability. This statistical adjustment of a
concomitant variable (age, in this case) allowed comparison between the groups that
could not be equated through the use of random assignment of participants. This
statistical technique also reduces error variance, thereby gaming statistical power.
With MANCOVA controlling for the age differences, an omnibus F-test revealed
that age had no effect, Pillais Trace F ( 05,2, 136) = 0.7, p > 0.4. For each scale, again,
no age differences were found: for the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, F ( 05, 1,137) =
0.7, p>0A and for the Relationship Inventory, F(os,1,137)= 1.3, p> 0.2. However,
as hypothesized, statistically significant differences (again using an omnibus F-statistic)
in amount of empathy were found between the groups when controlling for age, Pillais
Trace F ( 05,4,274) = 5.8, p < .001. For the Interpersonal Reactivity Index scale, F ( 05,
2,137)= 8.2, p < .001; for the Relationship Inventory, F( 05,2, 137)= 10.1, ^<.001.
Since no age effect was found, the MANOVA results are reported for both scales;
Table 4-5 contains the group means for each scale. On both the Interpersonal Reactivity


10
Inventory is based on the proposition that therapeutic personality changes occur in
proportion to the degree that a client experiences certain qualities in the therapists
response to the client.
Although all therapeutic conditions are important, this study primarily focused on
the condition of empathy. Barrett-Lennard (1976) suggests that for empathic
understanding to occur, it is not essential for the person who is being empathized with to
be literally present. Stated another way, a person may be empathized with through an
audio- or videotape recording, or perhaps through written words or other expressive or
artistic acts, without being present. If physically present (but not attending to the
empathizing person), the person being empathized with could be understood empathically
without realizing it, since empathic understanding refers to a process that is occurring in
the empathizing person (Barrett-Lennard, 1981). Therefore, as Barrett-Lennard (1976)
states, "empathic understanding or empathic knowing, is first and foremost an inner
experience" (p. 175, italics in original). Broadly stated, empathy is concerned with
responsively knowing the moment-to-moment experience of another.
Three main phases in a complete empathic process are distinguished by
Barrett-Lennard (1981, 1993): (a) reception and resonation by the listener, (b) expressive
communication of this responsive awareness by the empathizing person (listener), and
(c) received empathy (or the awareness of being understood). Although Barrett-Lennard
systematically illuminates interpersonal empathy as a multi-stage process occurring
within and between individuals, he stresses that it is a subtle, complex, and multifaceted
phenomenon. The phases he suggests are not a single, closed system and do not
necessarily occur in predictable steps. In fact, considerable discrepancy is possible


69
Along these same lines, though there is evidence that empathy is related to
therapeutic outcome (e.g., Orlinski, Grawe, & Parks, 1994; Truax & Carkhuff, 1967), the
empathy studied was viewed as a situation-specific affective or cognitive process (or
experiential) variable experienced by a therapist for the client. However, no research
currently exisfs regarding the relationship between experiential and dispositional empathy
(Duan & Hill, 1996). Future investigations might focus on how empathic processes
possibly relate to dispositional empathy and therapeutic outcome. Another interesting
avenue of study is expanding the research examining the empathy-altruism hypothesis to
assess whether alternative explanations, such as oneness, can explain findings.
It is not fully clear what processes take place when participants are told to engage
in empathic perspective-taking. Specifically, it is not known whether role-taking
instructions also trigger the operation of other empathy-related processes, such as ... the
use of elaborated cognitive networks (Davis, 1994, pp. 207-208). Careful assessment
and study of what participants actually do when told to engage in perspective-taking is a
potentially rich source of information that would help clarify this empathy process. In
addition, a deeper understanding of how personal and situational characteristics affect
empathic processes (or even act as mediating variables) is another rich source of
information for future study. For example, previous research has demonstrated that
perspective-taking (or role-taking) is a reliable and accurate measure of empathy;
however, little is known about how a persons disposition or how observer-target
similarity affect that individuals ability to take on the perspective of another, since
studies examining such characteristics have primarily focused on empathy outcomes.
Duan's (2000) conclusion that situation-specific empathic experiences may vary with


44
session and asked them to return the questionnaires by the following training class (the
next Thursday). Since two potential volunteers "dropped out" of training after the initial
Saturday training, a total of 38 trainees received questionnaire packets. The
questionnaire packets were the same as the packets handed out to the control group,
except that a letter written by the dissertation study researcher was attached to the front of
the packet. The letter briefly described the study, gave some background on the
researchers volunteer experiences with the Crisis Center, and asked trainees to
participate. Twenty-three questionnaire packets were collected by trainers at the
beginning of the next training class; trainers told the volunteers-in-training who had not
returned a packet that they could return their packet at the next training class (the next
week) and four more questionnaire packets were collected at that training class. Thus,
the return rate (27 out of 38) was 71.1%. All questionnaire packets returned by potential
volunteers were complete and used in the training group data set. Trainers gave all
questionnaire packets to the Training Director, who sent them directly to the researcher.
Volunteer Group
The volunteer group was divided into two groups for the purpose of disseminating
the questionnaire packets: active and inactive volunteers. It was decided, in consultation
with the Crisis Center Director, that active volunteers would receive questionnaire
packets in their mailboxes at the Crisis Center, w'hereas inactive volunteers (i.e.,
volunteers not actively or currently volunteering at the Crisis Center) would receive
questionnaires in the mail. All volunteer data was collected during Fall 2000 semester.
Questionnaire packets were sent to the Crisis Center Director for dissemination into
active volunteers mailboxes. A letter similar to the one attached to the trainees packets


6
a background variable and assuming all clinicians know how to establish a therapeutic
relationship" (Bohart & Greenberg, 1997, p. 3).
Recently however, interest in empathy has resurged, and numerous researchers
believe that empathy demands to become a major focus of psychological research (for
example, Barrett-Lennard, 1993; Bohart & Greenberg, 1997; Davis, 1994; Duan & Hill,
1996; Hart, 1999; Ickes, 1997; and Orlinski, Grawe, & Parks, 1994). The resurgence of
interest in empathy, the numerous arguments for a need to return to studying empathy,
and the diversity of ways empathy can be conceptualized all prompted this author to
examine empathy in the current study.
Motivations of Volunteers
People who volunteer to provide crisis intervention and suicide prevention
services should possess at least minimal levels of effective, therapeutic empathy. But do
all people with empathic skills volunteer their time in crisis intervention agencies? Of
course not. The question then is why do people volunteer to work in crisis/suicide
prevention settings? There is very little in the literature about what motivates individuals
to volunteer to work specifically in crisis intervention agencies. This is surprising given
the fact that so many crisis agencies rely on volunteers as the backbone of their existence
and services. Clary and Snyder (1991) suggest good reasons to study volunteers
motivations:
The questions that arise in thinking about volunteer work as ...
[voluntary], sustained and nonspontaneous help are fundamentally
motivational in nature. That is, they ask about the motives that are
involved when one decides whether to commit oneself to an ongoing
task and then must regularly decide whether or not to continue to
participate in it. (p. 123)


49
presented in Table 4-2. A nonequivalent control groups design suggests that statistically
significant differences between the groups may exist. It' analyses yield results indicating
that significant differences do exist, then an analysis of covariance would potentially
need to be performed in order to control for the initial differences.
Overall, 26 males and 122 females participated in the study. In the control group,
there were 12 males and 34 females. In the training group, there were four maies and 23
females. In the volunteer group, there were 10 maies and 65 females. Since there was a
greater number of women participating in the study, a chi square statistic was performed
in order to determine if there was a significant gender difference between the three
groups. There was no significant difference in the proportion of maies to females in any
of the three groups {'/ (2) = 3.4, p = 0.19). In addition, no significant differences in
racial composition existed between the groups (% (2) = [23, p = 0.14). Although
significant differences were found in marital status between the groups ix (2) = 29.4,
p < .01), t-tests revealed that marital status did not significantly affect empathy or
motivation.
The two most frequent participant responses for major were psychology (41 2%)
and not currently a student (22.3%). Counselor Education and Sociology were the next
most frequent responses, with 4.7% and 4.1% respectively. Eighty of the participants
responded that they had been enrolled in the Crisis Center training program, and 60
responded that they had not. All of the 75 participants in the volunteer group marked
yes to being enrolled in the training program, and five participants in the training group
marked yes. It appears that the majority' (n = 22) of the participants in the training
program marked no. since they were currently undergoing training when they


70
situations exemplify this discrepancy between antecedents and processes. Duan suggests
that any research on empathy or empathy-related behaviors should consider the
characteristics of the situation where participants empathic experiences are measured.
Finally, as noted in the Introduction of this study, the fact that young white
females are the most prevalent users of crisis intervention agencies suggests that research
should be focused on analyzing the factors that are responsible for the reduction of
suicide for this specific group when they use suicide prevention service agencies. It is
interesting to note however, that young white females have overall lower suicide rates
than other groups.
Conclusion
The Empathic Understanding subscale of the Relationship Inventory appears to be
a good measure for empathy in crisis center volunteers. The Perspective-Taking subscale
of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index may also prove to be an accurate measure of
volunteer empathy, provided adequate internal consistency is found. The ability to
demonstrate empathy has been shown to be a necessary component of crisis intervention
counseling. Data indicate significant differences between fully-trained crisis intervention
volunteers and either trainees or nontrained individuals on the examined measures of
empathy. In addition, results of this study indicate that a volunteers ability to provide
empathic understanding increases with crisis intervention experience. A volunteers
reasons for choosing to work in a suicide prevention/crisis intervention agency are both
altruistic and egoistic, and volunteers do not have higher levels of altruism compared to
nonvolunteers.


81
Chlopan, B. E., McCain, M. L., Carbonell, J. L., & Hagen, R. L. (1985). Empaihy:
Review of available measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 48.
635-653.
Clary, E. G., & Miller, J. (1986). Socialization and situational influences on sustained
altruism. Child Development. 57. 1358-1369.
Clary, E. G., & Orcnstein, L. (1991). The amount and effectiveness of help: The
relationship of motives and abilities to helping behavior. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin. 17. 58-64.
Clary, E. G & Snyder. M. (1991). A functional analysis of altruism and prosocial
behavior: The case of volunteerism. Review of Personality and Social Psychology,
12, 119-148.
Coonfield. T. J., Nida. R. A., & Gray, B. (1976). Research report: The assessment of
telephone crisis workers. Crisis intervention. 7, 2-9.
Daigle, M. S., & Mishara. B. L. (1995). Intervention styles with suicidal callers at two
suicide prevention centers. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior. 25, 261-275.
Davis, M. H. (1980). A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy.
JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology. 10. 85.
Davis, M. H. (1983a). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a
multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 44. 113-
126.
Davis, M. H. (1983b). The effects of dispositional empathy on emotional reactions and
helping: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality. 51. 167-184.
Davis, M. H. (1994). Empathy: A social psychological approach. Madison. WI:
Brown & Benchmark.
Delworth, U., Rudow, E. H.. & Taub, J. (1972). Crisis ccnter/hotline: A guidebook to
beginning and operating. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Duan, C. (2000). Being cmpathic: The role of motivation to empathize and the nature of
target emotions. Motivation and Emotion. 24, 29-49.
Duan, C, & Hill, C. E. (1996). The current state of empathy research. Journal of
Counseling Psychology. 43, 261-274.
Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities.
Psychological Bulletin. 94. 100-131.


their length of experience increased compared to less experienced volunteers. It was also
hypothesized that volunteers would display higher levels of altruistic motivation than
would a nontrained control group.
The first hypothesis, that trained volunteers would exhibit greater empathy than
the trainees or the control group, was supported. The second hypothesis, that an inverse
relationship would exist between crisis volunteers length of experience and amount of
empathy, was not supported. A significant positive correlation was found between length
of experience volunteering and levels of empathic understanding. The variable of
experience was windsorized in order to correct for extreme values (outliers) in the data
set. The third hypothesis, that crisis volunteers would exhibit higher levels of altruistic
motivation than the control group, was not supported. The volunteer group had the
lowest mean score for altruistic motivation of the three groups studied. Overall results
indicated that crisis intervention volunteers, especially those with more experience, have
effective empathic skills. Results lend support for the use of trained volunteers in suicide
prevention/crisis intervention agencies. The findings also suggest that attempts to retain
volunteers over longer periods would be beneficial to the agency. Reasons for
volunteering consisted of both altruistic and egoistic motivations, and results indicate that
volunteers can be effective regardless of their reasons for volunteering.
IX


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Michelle Lee Barz was bom January 30,1967 in Colorado. She graduated from
Pomona (CO) High School in 1985 and then attended Rice University, in Houston,
Texas, on a track scholarship. Michelle received her Bachelor of Arts degree from Rice
University in 1990 with a double major in Psychology and English. She graduated with a
Master of Science degree in Counseling Psychology from the University of Florida in
1994, the same time she was newly pregnant with her first child. Her thesis was entitled,
The Impact of Math Anxiety on the Behavior of Academically Talented Students.
Michelle is a part-time faculty member at Metropolitan State College of Denver,
She also teaches relationship and marriage classes, and does leadership training and
development. Michelle currently resides outside of Denver, Colorado with her husband
Stuart and their two children.
' 90


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Paul G. Schauble, Chair
Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Martin Heesacker
Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
-a-*
Of
Barbara Probert
Clinical Associate Professor Emeritus of
Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
M. David Miller
Professor of Education Psychology


51
question as including the training they were currently undergoing. Clearly, none of the
control group participants had been enrolled in the training. In response to the question
about additional training in counseling or crisis intervention, 45 participants marked
"yes" and 103 marked "no."
Since there were pre-existing differences in mean age for the three groups (see
Table 4-3), a univariate F-test was computed for the differences between group means.
The test revealed that the age differences were statistically significant, F ( os, 2, 145) =
14.7, p < .001. In addition, the mean age difference between each group was statistically
significant (see Table 4-4).
Table 4-3. Mean Ages in the Three Study Groups
Group
n
Mean Age (years)
SD
Control Group
46
20.8
3.9
Training Group
27
25.6
10.2
Volunteer Group
75
29.7
10.3
Table 4-4. Group Differences in Mean Age
Test
Mean Difference
Confidence interval
p value
Control vs. Training
-4.79
-9.0, -0.6
.026*
Control vs. Volunteer
-8.93
-12.2, -5.7
.000*
Training vs. Volunteer
-4.14
-8.05, -0.23
.038*
Note. = Difference is significant
Hypothesis 1
The first hypothesis of the study was that trained volunteers would exhibit greater
empathy, in the form of perspective-taking ability and empathic understanding, than
would trainees who have been accepted for volunteer training (but have not completed


63
With respect to the results regarding the second hypothesis, one cannot
completely surmise how well volunteers are actually able to offer empathy to clients,
since observ ational studies were not conducted in this research. However, based on
volunteers' repons of how well the statements of feelings/reactions in the study describe
them, it can be'surmised that their ability to empathically connect with clients is
positively associated with their length of experience.
The positive relationship between length of crisis volunteers' experience and
amount of empathy found in the study indicates that as the length of experience increases
for paraprofessionals trained to work in crisis intervention settings, their empathic skills,
specifically perspective-taking and empathic understanding, increase. This finding
suggests that crisis intervention and suicide prevention agencies might be well-served to
make more attempts to retain their volunteers over extended periods. Gidron (1978)
found that most volunteer "dropping out occurs during the first six months of volunteer
work. He attributed this to "the negative discrepancies found among short-term
volunteers' concern [with] rewards pertaining to interaction with professional staff
(p.23). Gidron asserted that short-term volunteers expect training, professional
supervision, consultation opportunities and praise from the staff. Meeting short-term
volunteers' expectations may well provide agencies with more long-term volunteers who,
ultimately, are more effective than those with less experience.
Although this study found a positive relationship between experience and
empathy, the two measures of perspective-taking and empathic understanding were
positively associated with each other, so a simultaneous multiple regression was
performed in order to assess the unique contribution of each empathy measure. Results


40
1997). Marangom. Garcia, Ickes, and Teng (1995) suggest that paper and pencil
measures of empathic ability are a viable alternative to the time-intensive performance
measure that Ickes and his colleagues developed.
Other tests considered for measuring empathy, but found to be lacking for the
current study, ihcluded the Human Empathic Listening Test (HELT; Coonfield, Nida, &
Gray, 1976), the Crisis Center Discrimination Index (CCDI; Delworth, Rudow, & Taub,
1972), and the Helpful Responses Questionnaire (HRQ; Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky,
1991). The HELT consists of 12 tape-recorded crisis vignettes and 60 questions
regarding the vignettes. It is designed to measure three aspects of empathic listening:
Understanding, Interest, and Response-Ability. Gray, Nida, and Coonfield (1976) found
mixed results regarding the HELT's reliability and validity: the instrument was valid
(discriminant validity), however the Understanding subscale had an internal consistency
of only .29, the Response-Ability scale, .40, and the Interest subscale was .88. The
reliability estimates of the first two subscales are quite low, suggesting that the HELT
may not be a reliable measure of empathic listening ability.
The CCDI is another measure developed for the selection and evaluation of
paraprofessionals. It is based on Carkhuff s (1969) research with the faciiitative and
action-oriented dimensions relevant in the helping process, which include empathy,
respect, and confrontation. The CCDI consists of 16 audiotaped excerpts of crisis center
calls, with topics such as suicidal ideation, pregnancy, school difficulties, and
relationship problems. Although scoring criteria are included with the instrument, no
reliability or validity data are given.


60
Hypothesis 1
The resuits support the assertion in the first hypothesis that trained volunteers
would exhibit greater empathy than pre-volunteers or nonvolunteers who have not
undergone training. The results suggest a pattern that is consistent with the assumption
that crisis intervention traming can significantly impact levels of empathy, with trained
individuals having the most empathy; however, a causal relationship cannot be drawn
from the current study. The resuits indicate that trained crisis volunteers are able to
effectively engage with clients in crisis, and suggest that the training and experience they
have undergone may increase their empatnic skills. This conclusion lends support for the
use of trained volunteers in crisis intervention agencies. Such a finding seems positive
for those concerned with, or involved in, crisis intervention, since funding, community
support, and other factors affecting a service agency might at least partially rely on the
ability of the agency to demonstrate effectiveness.
The fact that volunteers currently just beginning training were significantly
different from trained volunteers on the Relationship Inventory and marginally
significantly different on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index suggests that training does
have an impact on empathy, although pre-existing group differences could also account
for differences in empathic ability. However, the fact that there was no significant
difference found between volunteers-in-training and a similar control group suggests that
people who volunteer for a crisis intervention agency are not measurably different in
terms of their ability to empathize than those who do not volunteer (i.e., trainees are not a
self-selected group based on their empathic abilities), in addition, out of the original 38
people who began the Fall training, only 23 people completed the training and graduated


4
to be time-limited, here-and-now problems, it appears that the ability to convey warmth
and personal interest, as well as to provide some direction, may be more central to
successful crisis intervention than professional training (which often includes therapeutic
dogma and efforts to probe past experience and personality problems). Two questions
emerge, however, with respect to paraprofessionals providing crisis intervention: how
effective are these individuals (i.e., can they provide adequate empathy to establish a
therapeutic relationship with individuals in crisis) and what motivates individuals to
volunteer to be part of this third revolution?
Empathy
Empatheia, a term coined by the early Greeks, suggests affection and passion,
with a quality of suffering. The Latin equivalent, largely borrowed from the Greek word,
is pathos, which means feeling-perception. More modem usage of empathy, however,
came closer to the concept of knowing someone through entering his or her lived world
and feeling an awareness of his or her experience. This concept of knowing someone
was called Einfuhlung, a word initially used in German aesthetics (Davis, 1994). Alfred
Adler (1931), one of the pioneers of psychoanalysis, proposed this more modem view
and asserted that treatment can only be successful if the helper is genuinely interested in
the person being helped. He suggested that the primary method to convey this genuine
interest is through seeing, hearing, and experiencing the world through the other person.
This idea, however, does not distinguish empathy from sympathetic identification. Carl
Rogers (1957) brought this distinction into prominence with his classical paper on
conditions of therapeutic personality change and his well-known as if condition of
experience.


58
& Eisenbcrg, 1987; Manstead. 1992; Snodgrass, 1992), a comparison of gender
differences was performed on all three measures. An analysis of these differences was
not indicated by the primary hypotheses, but since it was readily available, a post-hoc
analysis was conducted as a potentially rich source of descriptive research for future
studies. A significant difference was found between males and females on both the
Relationship Inventory and Measure of Altruistic Motivation scales (see Table 4-8).
Table 4-8. Gender Differences on Measures of Empathy and Motivation
Gender
Relationship
Inventory
Interpersonal
Reactivity Index
Measure of Altruistic
Motivation
Mean SD
n
Mean
SD n
Mean SD
n
Males
13.3 11.4
25
19.3
3.7 26
3.6 3.1
26
Females
17.9 9.9
116
20.5
3.6 122
5.6 3.5
122
r-statistic
-2.1
-1.6
-2.7
p value
.04*
.07
.008*
Note. = difference is significant


41
Finally, the HRQ is a brief free-response questionnaire that measures participants'
ability to generate empathic responses. The instrument requires that each response be
rated on a "5-point ordinal scale of depth of reflection" (Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky,
1991, p. 445), with a score of 1 indicating no reflection and an interruption in the flow of
communication; and a score of 5 indicating that the reflection includes inferred meaning
and a reflection of feeling. The interrater reliability in the Miller et al. (1991) study is
high (.93), but test-retest reliability was only .45. The authors acknowledge that other
variables probably account for variance in empathic skills and suggest further study. No
validity data for the study is given nor are cutoff scores suggested for adequate or good
scores.
Motivation
In order to measure participants' altruistic motivation, an adaptation of Clary and
Orenstein's (1991) Measure of Altruistic Motivation was used. Altruistic motivation, as
opposed to egoistic motivation, is operationally defined as the extent to which a person
volunteers out of concern for others versus concern for self. The measure consists of 25
possible reasons for performing crisis counseling, of which five are identified as
representing altruistic reasons (75% agreement in a sample evaluating the reasons by
raters knowledgeable about motivational issues) and 20 as egoistic reasons. To assess
altruistic motivation, participants are asked to indicate their top five reasons for
volunteering. Ranks are then reverse-scored (i.e., the most important reason receives a
score of 5, the next most important reason receives a score of 4, and so on) and
participants' overall altruistic motivation score is computed from the reverse ranks of any


34
single/unmarried (123); and racial composition of the participants was as follows: 116
Caucasian, 12 Hispanic. 10 Asian/Pacific Islander, 6 African American, and 4 Other.
The age range of participants was 18-57, with an average age of 26.2 years (SD = 9.6).
Instruments
Empathy
Scales used
In order to assess participant's empathy, two instruments were used. The first
instrument is a subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980), a 28-item
instrument that measures four aspects of empathy. Carey, Fox, and Spraggins (1988)
designed a study to verify the multidimensional nature and item composition of the
Interpersonal Reactivity Index subscales through factor analysis. It is important to
replicate the factor structure of the instrument with varying samples to demonstrate that
the factors have a wider range of applicability as generalized constructs (to the extent that
invariance is found across changes in either variables or individuals). The Interpersonal
Reactivity Index subscales measure four discemibly different empathy dimensions and
the constructs measured by the Interpersonal Reactivity index have generalizability
outside the original samples used to develop the instrument (Carey et al., 1988). The
subscale most relevant to the current study is the perspective-taking (PT) scale, which is
related to the cognitive ability to judge other people accurately (Davis, 1983b). It
involves the "tendency to spontaneously adopt the psychological view of others" (Davis,
1983a, pp. 113-114), which is quite compatible with Rogerian empathic understanding.
Carey et al. (1988) suggest that the PT scale is a useful measure of empathic effectiveness


64
of the multiple regression indicated that only the measure of empathic understanding
significantly accounted for the variance in length of experience: that is. volunteers levels
of empathic understanding were a significant predictor of the number of months they
were likely to volunteer at the crisis center. It should be noted that the relatively low
internal consistency found on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Cronbach's alpha
measure) may have impacted the resuits and the fact that the Interpersonal Reactivity
Index did not significantly account for the variance in length of experience. When both
age and perspective-taking were controlled, empathic understanding still significantly
accounted for the variance in the length of volunteer experience.
Hypothesis 3
The third hypothesis, that crisis center volunteers would have higher levels of
altruistic motivation than the control group, was not supported. The literature regarding
whether or not people volunteer for altruistic reasons or egoistic reasons is sparse. A few
researchers have looked at motivations of volunteers in general (e.g., Clary & Snyder,
1991; Fitch, 1987; Henderson, 1980, 1981, 1985; Sergent & Sedlacek, 1990; Wiehe &
Isenhour, 1977), but fewer still have investigated the motivations of volunteers who work
specifically in crisis intervention settings (e.g., Black & DiNitto. 1994; Clary & Miller.
1986; Clary & Orenstein, 1991). Clary and Orenstein (1991) found a direct relationship
between altruistic motives for volunteering and the length of time spent as a volunteer.
Their finding was not examined in the current study; however, it is interesting to note that
the current study's results indicate that volunteers who work in a crisis intervention
agency do not have significantly higher levels of altruistic motivation. In fact the


3
Farberow, & Litman, 1961) who pioneered the use of nonprofessionals in suicide
prevention. They outlined the specific duties of crisis center workers: to build rapport
and secure communication; to evaluate potential danger to the caller, including suicide
lethality; and to formulate an action plan to mobilize the callers available resources
(Fowler & McGee, 1973). However, given the prevalence of suicide, as well as the
numerous suicide risk assessment instruments available (see recent reviews by Gutierrez,
Osman, Kopper, Barrios, & Bagge, 2000; Range & Knott, 1997), it is somewhat
surprising that empirical assessments of the effectiveness of paraprofessionals in suicide
intervention agencies have not kept pace (Frankish, 1994; Neimeyer & Pfeiffer, 1994).
McGee and Jennings (1973) cite experts in crisis intervention and suicide
prevention, such as Robert Litman, Edwin Shneidman, and Norman Farberow, to explain
why nonprofessionals, at times, may be better than professionals in providing crisis
services. They suggest that the lack of professional armor and sophisticated categorical
approaches to psychopathology would enable nonprofessionals to connect more
effectively with those in crisis. Their findings (and other studies) are explored in more
depth in the literature review section of this study. However, other than a few studies
(e.g., Homes & Howard, 1980; Knickerbocker & McGee, 1973; McGee & Jennings,
1973), very little research has focused specifically on the difference between
professionals and paraprofessionals in crisis/suicide intervention effectiveness.
The trend of incorporating volunteer and paraprofessional workers into the
treatment of diverse emotional problems has even been referred to as the "third revolution
in mental health" (Tapp & Spanier, 1973, p. 245), These paraprofessionals offer clients
advice, counseling, information, or simply empathic listening. Since crisis situations tend


APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT
Principal Investigator: Michelle L. Barz, M.S.
The purpose of this research project is to measure some personal variables, such
as empathy and motivation, related to peoples volunteer activities. The goal of this
study is to leam the effect of crisis intervention training and experience on these
variables. If you choose to participate, this study will take approximately 15-20 minutes
of your time and will involve filling out a packet containing three brief questionnaires.
Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary, and you do not have to answer any
question you do not wish to answer.
Alachua County Crisis Center trainees and volunteers, as well as students in a UF
psychology class, will receive a packet during the Fall 2000 semester. No compensation
will be awarded for participation in this study. The study is not designed to benefit you
directly, but it is hoped that it will provide valuable information for improving the
effectiveness of crisis intervention volunteers. This research does not involve any known
risks to you as a participant
All personal information collected as part of this study will be held strictly
confidential to the extent provided by law. Data collected will be coded so that no
identifying information appears on your questionnaire. This signed consent form
(required by the UF Institutional Review Board) will be placed in a sealed envelope and
will not be consulted as part of the study. Results from this study will only be reported in
general terms and will not identify any individuals.
If you have any questions regarding procedure, please contact my supervisor, Dr.
Paul G. Schauble, at the University of Florida Counseling Center, 301 Peabody Hall,
392-1575. If you have any concerns about your rights as a research participant in this
72


16
punishment (such as guilt), would simply be helping behavior. Helping acts carried out
solely for the purpose of benefiting or increasing the welfare of another would be deemed
altruistic. Although one might argue that the outcome (that is, the overt behavior of
helping another) is the same regardless of the underlying motivation, "more recent
theorizing and*research has increasingly focused on questions of motivation ... with the
result that more sophisticated theoretical accounts and empirical techniques have
evolved (Davis, 1994, p. 129) to clarify the distinction between altruism and
prosocial/helping behavior.
Relationship Between Altruism and Empathy
Many contemporary psychologists, including Martin Hoffman (1976,1981, 1982,
1987, 2000), Dennis Krebs (1975), Melvin Lemer (1982) and Norma Feshbach (1982),
proposed that empathy is the basis for altruistic motivation. Krebs clarified the
motivational distinction:
Psychologists have manipulated various antecedents of helping behavior and
studied their effects, and they have measured a number of correlated prosocial
events; however, ... it is the extent of self-sacrifice, the expectation of gain, and
the orientation to the needs of another that define acts as altruistic.... [We may]
cast some light on the phenomenon of altruism by investigating the idea that
empathic reactions mediate altruistic responses, (p. 1134)
Hoffman (1982) has studied altruistic motivation using a model that depends on
the interaction between affective and cognitive processes that change with age. He states
that the basic concept in the model is empathy, defined as a vicarious affective response,
that is,. . [a] response that is more appropriate to someone elses situation than to ones
own situation (p. 281). Davis (1994), in his summary of reviews of the literature on
empathy and altruism, found that reliable and significant positive associations exist


31
Perspective-Taking; the tendency or ability of the respondent to spontaneously
adopt the perspective of other people and see things from their point of view.
Success as a Volunteer: completion of crisis intervention training and continuing
to volunteer beyond the six-month time requirement.
Volunteer: someone who contributes services without financial gain to a
functional subcommunity or cause (Henderson, 1985, p.31).


37
Barrett-Lcnnard (1986) states that official norms for the Relationship Inventory
do not exist. Such norms would indicate that in a certain percent of cases, scores on a
given subscaie exceed or fall below a specified value. Fortunately, such norms are not
essential for most research. The task of calculating norms for the Relationship Inventory,
where there ar at least 10 principal variants of the 64-item version of the instrument, and
at least as many significant revisions and adaptations, seems particularly complex.
Relationship Inventory data have been collected in various contexts (e.g., diverse therapy
research studies, education-based studies, marital and family sphere studies, and
communication studies), through different viewpoints, and in a wide array of
relationships of varying duration and significance. These different variables suggest that
accumulating and organizing data into meaningful normative form would be a formidable
task.
For the purpose of the current study, the hypotheses state that differences between
groups will exist (e.g., volunteers will exhibit greater empathy than will trainees or
controls); since the Relationship Inventory scores are measured as a dependent variable,
norms or score cut-offs are not necessary to measure differences or compare groups. In
addition, it should not be taken for granted that "more [i.e., a higher score] means better
on all Relationship Inventory scales, in all cases (Barrett-Lennard, 1986, p.455).
The Empathic Understanding subscale of the Relationship Inventory consists of
16 statements designed to measure participants empathy. The items in each subscale are
rated on a 6-point scale (+3, +2, +1, -1, -2, -3), with +3 indicating yes. I strongly feel it is
true about me and -3 indicating no, l strongly feel it is not true about me. Half of the
items in each subscale are negatively worded and reverse-scored. Overall scaled scores


46
omitted on the empathy and motivation instruments. Protocols with omitted answers
were included only in analyses that did not pertain to the omissions. In other words, if a
participant did not list country of origin, but all the instruments were completed, then the
participants data regarding the instruments were used in the analyses; however, if a
participant did hot answer questions on the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, for example,
then the data were not used.
Statistical Analyses
With respect to the three hypotheses, the following statistical analyses were used;
Hypothesis 1; One-way, between participants MANOVA for unequal ajs, with
group (either trained, untrained, or college students) serving as the independent variable
and with perspective-taking ability and empathic understanding serving as the dependent
variables.
Hypothesis 2: Simultaneous multiple regression with the variables in the analysis
being number of months of post-training experience, perspective-taking and empathic
understanding.
Hypothesis 3: Independent /-tests, with group (volunteers vs. untrained college
students) serving as the independent variable and altruistic motivation serving as the
dependent variable.


76
The following is a list of possible reasons for volunteering at the Alachua County Crisis
Center. As honestly and accurately as possible, please indicate your top five reasons for
volunteering. If you are not a volunteer, indicate the top five reasons you most likely
would have for volunteering at the Alachua County Crisis Center. Place a 1 before the
item that represents your major reason for volunteering, a 2 before the next most
important reason, and so on until your fifth most important reason.
personal growth
to acquire new skills, experience
a chance to help others
to acquire information about career possibilities
to use special talents that I have
to express concern to people in need
to meet new people
to increase my self-confidence
to "repay previous use of volunteer services
to enhance my self-image
academic intemship/expenential learning
a chance to give of myself without expecting some sort of pay-off
to learn about some of the social services available in Alachua County
to increase my self-understanding
to provide a good experience for people in need
to help maintain a social service agency
to become more sensitive to others
to develop better human relations skills
to help those less fortunate than I
to become a better citizen
to gain skills which will be applicable to other situations
to have fun and do something constructive at the same time
to help build my rsum
other people (e.g., parents, spouse) want me to do volunteer work
my friend (or friends) is (are) volunteering


23
due to both individual and societal trends toward egocentrism and self-development.
Others argued that social and economic forces are increasingly making volunteensm a
luxury that can be undertaken only by the wealthy, and suggested that people are now
seeking growth and self-satisfaction from their volunteer experiences in addition to the
more traditionally hypothesized motivations of helping others (Henderson, 1985).
Characteristics of Volunteers
In their study on the personal characteristics of volunteer phone counselors, Tapp
and Spamer (1973) concluded that mental health volunteers are flexible, spontaneous,
and self-actualizing with the capacity for warmth, understanding, and openness to others.
The researchers stated that this description resembles the description of altruists, and they
suggested that the volunteer mental health counselor is "an altruistic individual whose
desire to make a contribution to his world mamfest[s] itself in his volunteerism" (p. 249).
However, Hobfoll (1980) found that undergraduate volunteer mental health workers
cannot be clearly distinguished from nonvolunteers in regard to personality
characteristics usually associated with the "helping personality" (Carkhuff, 1969), such as
empathy, self-acceptance, and tolerance. Volunteers were found to score higher with
respect to social responsibility, which Hobfoll suggested may partially explain their
motivation for volunteering.
Amato (1985), in his study of planned helping behavior (as opposed to
spontaneous helping behavior), found that people involved in formal, organizational
helping scored higher on adherence to the norm of social responsibility and had an
internal locus of control, compared to those involved in informal helping activities that
involved friends and/or family members. He also suggested that involvement in formal,


15
Motivations
Batson (1987, 1991), in his extensive reviews of prosocial motivation and
altruism, addressed the question of whether or not helping behavior is ever altruistic. He
asserts that the dominant view in Western thought for the past four centuries, as well as in
all major psychological views of motivation (including Freudian, behavioral, and even
humanistic or third force theories), is that all prosocial behavior is ultimately motivated
by some form of self-benefit. However, he also acknowledges an alternate view in
Western thought: humans are capable of acting from unselfish motives. This alternate
view suggests the existence of motivations directed toward the benefit of others as
opposed to benefit to oneself. Although an exclusively egoistic view of motivation has
been dominant in Western ideology, the term altruism has reappeared in contemporary
psychology.
Prosocial Behavior Versus Altruism
According to Jane Piliavin and her associates (Piliavin, Dovidio, Gaertner, &
Clark, 1981), prosocial behavior means behavior that is positively evaluated against
some normative standard applicable to interpersonal acts (p. 4). Prosocial behavior can
be distinguished from antisocial and nonsocial behavior, and its designation generally
depends on both the culture in which the behavior occurs and the person making the
judgment about the behavior. Davis (1994) calls prosocial behavior helping behavior.
His comprehensive review of the literature suggests that a distinction can be made
between helping behavior and altruism, based on the motivation(s) underlying the act.
Helping acts earned out in order to gam material rewards, social approval or internal
rewards (such as pride), or to avoid social sanctions for failing to help or internal


61
to volunteer status; this indicates that not everyone who is interested in becoming a
volunteer is able or willing to complete the training.
It should be noted that the range of participants' scores on the Relationship
Inventory (refer to Table 4-1) included some negative scores (recall that the overall score
range for the Empathic Understanding subscale is 48 to +48). Barrett-Lennard (1986)
points out that while it is true that the majority of scale scores generated from individual
respondents are usually positive, a (sometimes generous) sprinkling of negative scores
within a sample is not unusual, even in client therapist relationships. Barrett-Lennard
states that there is no absolute meaning to the zero point in the middle of the
theoretical range and significance has not been attributed a priori to any scoring values'
(p. 454). A negative score would most likely imply that a respondent answered no to
positive items and-or answered yes to negative items, which suggests, with respect to
the current study, that the respondents general relationships (e g., interpersonal
relationships that exist outside of the volunteer counseling situation) may be lacking in
empathic understanding.
With the standard scoring method, a scale score of 40 (or higher) would require a
mean response of at least 2.5 (i.e., perhaps by selecting an equal number of +3's and +2s
on positively-worded items and -3s and -2s on negatively-worded items). Barrett-
Lennard (1986) suggests that this score would seem about as high as could plausibly be
expected in terms of honest and discriminating perception. He states that in practice,
scores above 40 occur but are infrequent (p. 456). A score of 32 represents an average
item score of 2 (after converting answers on negative items); it implies clear affirmation
that the referent person was experienced as very substantially empathic (p.456, italics in


18
Evaluation of Effectiveness
Two levels of evaluation strategies for suicide prevention services have emerged:
macroanalvtic assessments of outcomes for entire programs on suicide rates in
communities, including client satisfaction; and microanaiyses of crisis counselors' skill
levels and/or their ability to provide effective help. This study is concerned with the
latter analyses, typically assessed by rating either actual calls, simulated calls or
roleplays, and by developing written tests of skills and knowledge. In one of the most
recent reviews of suicide intervention effectiveness, Neimeyer and Pfeiffer (1994)
examined both macro- and microevaluations. They pointed out that although a variety of
research methodologies were used in the studies evaluating suicide intervention
effectiveness, each methodology has both benefits and inherent limitations on the
information obtained.
Empathic Skills
At the microanalvtic level, several studies focused on the general Rogenan factors
of warmth, empathy, and genuineness (e.g., Carothers & Inslee. 1974; Knickerbocker &
McGee, 1973; Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky, 1991; Truax & Lister, 1971), assessing
whether volunteers are able to provide the factors, with mixed results. These researchers
generally used scales like Carkhuff s (1969). Such scales rate the ability of counselors to
provide facilitative conditions, especially the Rogerian factors mentioned above.
Carkhuff (1969) theorized that research results were partially confounded by the fact that
the people who were rating facilitative effectiveness might not have functioned at high
enough levels of the facilitative dimensions (especially empathy) themselves. Others
(Duan & Hill, 1996) suggest that the diverse nature of empathy, and the lack of


89
Wolber, G., & McGovern, T. V. (1977). A three component model for the evaluation of
telephone counselor effectiveness. Crisis Intervention. 8, 36-55.


LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 4-1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Measured 48
Table 4-2. Frequencies of the Measured Variables 50
Table 4-3. Mean Ages in the Three Study Groups 51
Table 4-4. Group Differences in Mean Age 51
Table 4-5. Group Means on the Empathy Measures 53
Table 4-6. Group Differences in Empathy 53
Table 4-7. Correlations Among Experience, Age and Empathy 55
Table 4-8. Gender Differences on Measures of Empathy and Motivation 58
vii


42
altruistic reasons included in their top five choices. Scores on the measure range from 0
(only egoistic reasons chosen) to 15 (only altruistic reasons chosen).
This measure is derived from ratings by an independent group of raters
knowledgeable about motivational issues and appears to be a reasonable instrument. In
addition, this scale can be presumed and treated as valid based on the conclusions of the
independent raters. Lastly, Clary and Orensteins (1991) measure is one of the only
published instruments that assess motivations for performing crisis hotline volunteer
work. However, it should be noted that internal consistency would not be expected from
this scale due to the nature of the measure. It would be expected that participants
reasons for volunteering would not necessarily be related to each other, and choosing one
altruistic reason for volunteering does not mean that other altruistic reasons are more
likely to be chosen. For example, one reason an individual might volunteer is because it
is a chance to help others (an altruistic reason) but this does not suggest that the person
is only volunteering for altruistic reasons. This same person may also choose additional
reasons to volunteer, such as to gain skills which will be applicable to other situations
and for personal growth (both egoistic reasons). Walsh and Betz (1990) state that
internal consistency often refers to homogeneity of items. Since the Measure of
Altruistic Motivation scale contains both altruistic and egoistic reasons for volunteering,
homogeneity of items would not be expected. Thus, estimates of internal consistency
would likely reflect that items are heterogeneous.


65
volunteer group had the lowest mean on the Measure of Altruistic Motivation of the three
groups examined.
The volunteer group had significantly higher levels of empathy than the training
or control groups. The literature suggests that there is a positive relationship between
empathy and altruism (e.g., Amato, 1985; Eisenberg et al.. 1989; Hoffman, 1976, 1981;
Krebs, i975; Rushton, 1980), but clearly, the relationship is complex, since the
volunteers in this study (who had relatively high levels of empathy) did not have higher
levels of altruistic motivation.
For all participants, the most frequently ranked reason they would (or do)
volunteer at the Crisis Center was an altruistic reason (a chance to help others")- The
next four most frequently ranked choices were egoistic reasons, and the fifth most
frequently ranked choice was a tie between an altruistic and an egoistic reason.
Obviously, people volunteer for a variety of reasons, and one can speculate that the
reasons chosen (whether altruistic or egoistic) do not seem to make a difference in the
effectiveness (or the ability to provide empathy) of the volunteer.
Consideration of Gender Differences
Post-hoc analyses regarding gender differences on empathy and motivation
suggested that there was a significant difference between males and females on the
Relationship Inventory and the Measure of Altruistic Motivation, with females displaying
higher levels of both empathic understanding and altruistic motivation. The widely held
stereotype that females are more empathic than males has led to numerous studies of
gender differences in empathy (Lennon & Eisenberg, 1987). Overall, the conclusions of


78
13. At the time I don't realize how touchy or sensitive others are about some of the
things we discuss.
14. I understand others.
15. I often respond to others rather automatically, without taking in what they are
experiencing.
16. When others are hurt or upset I can recognize just how they feel, without
getting upset myself.


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to voice my deepest appreciation of Dr. Paul
Schauble, my doctoral committee chair. His support, understanding, and guidance were
essential in the undertaking and completion of this dissertation. Paul exemplifies not
only a true scientist/practitioner, but also a person of the highest quality, integrity and
inner strength. He will always be a great source of inspiration for me. I would also like
to thank the members of my committee: Dr. Martin Heesacker, who provided helpful
research design, statistical guidance, and insightful comments; Dr. Marshall Knudson, for
all his support, encouragement, teaching and access to the best participants a researcher
could desire; Dr. David Miller, for being a first-rate statistics teacher and for asking
helpful questions to strengthen this study; Dr. Barbara Probert for her insightful
suggestions and warm encouragement; and Dr. Robert Ziller for his helpful input and
perspective on the beginnings of empathy. Kudos to Jim Probert, past fellow trainer, who
remembers what it is like to be a student. His encouragement, support and helpful
suggestions through the data collection and beyond are appreciated. I thank Wendy
Marsh for her assistance with data collection, Teraesa Vinson for her willingness to help
a stranger, and Jim McNulty for statistical assistance. I give heartfelt gratitude to my
dear friend Mary Pedersen for her time, friendship and support. To the Crisis Center
staff, whom I admire deeply, thank you. I am grateful to all of the Crisis Center staff,
volunteers and trainees, who give of themselves in countless ways to help others.


judgment, emotional involvement and creativity may produce a more satisfied volunteer,
which in turn may have effects on the volunteers length of service to the agency.
People volunteer at crisis and suicide prevention agencies for many reasons, not
all of them selfless. For example, psychology students may volunteer in order to acquire
clinical skills and experience that can be included in their curriculum vitas or to gain
information about career possibilities. Others may volunteer to increase their self
understanding in order to enhance personal growth. Still others may volunteer because
they have friends who are either volunteering or already have involvement with an
agency. However, the fact remains that crisis intervention and suicide prevention
agencies rely on the belief, however idealistic, that volunteers within a community will
come forward, with a willingness to invest their time and themselves, in order to achieve
meaningful human interactions (Probert & Fogel, 1997). With a better understanding of
why people volunteer to provide crisis intervention and suicide-prevention services,
perhaps crisis agencies could be even more effective in recruiting and retaining
volunteers.
Current Study
This study examines two important variables in crisis intervention and suicide-
prevention volunteers: their levels of empathy and their motivation for volunteering.
The question as to whether volunteers level of empathy increases or decreases with
experience is addressed, as is the question of whether volunteers are motivated to become
involved in crisis service agencies for altruistic or egoistic reasons.


3METHOD
32
Design
Participants
Instruments
Empathy
Scales used
Other scales considered
Motivation
Procedure
Control Group
Training Group
Volunteer Group
Statistical Analyses
4 RESULTS
Descriptive Statistics
Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 3
Additional Analyses
5 DISCUSSION
Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 3
Consideration of Gender Differences
Study Limitations
Implications for Future Research
Conclusion
APPENDICES
A INFORMED CONSENT
B INSTRUCTIONS
C INSTRUMENTS
LIST OF REFERENCES
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
32
33
34
34
34
38
41
43
43
43
44
46
.47
47
51
54
56
57
.59
60
62
64
65
67
68
70
.72
.74
.75
.79
.90
vi


54
Hypothesis 2
The hypothesized inverse relationship between a crisis volunteer's length of experience
and amount of empathy was not obtained. Volunteers length of experience was
measured by number of months working as a volunteer at the Crisis Center and amount
of empathy was measured using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and the Relationship
Inventory. In order to correct for extreme values (outliers) in a data set, statistical
methods can be employed to transform the entire data set or to substitute extreme values
with less extreme values. One of these methods is called windsorized statistics. In order
to help eliminate the influence of outlying data points in length of experience that might
skew the results, the variable was windsorized. Windsorizing is a process whereby
extreme data points (or outliers) are set to the highest value (data point) within the cluster
of data points; that is, extreme values in the data set are replaced by the value of a cut-off
criterion (Barnett & Lewis, 1978). Windsorizing comprises a compromise between
eliminating the strong influence of extreme values on the mean while still using all of the
information in the data set. A boxplot was used to determine the outliers in the data set
(see Agresti & Finlay, 1997). Boxplots are essentially charts that summarize the
distribution of a variable by displaying the median, quartiles and outliers. With respect to
the results of the boxplot. there were 19 cases that were determined to be outliers. The
outliers were (in months of experience): 242, 204, 180, 144, 132, 96, 72,60 (n = 4), 55,
54, 52, 50,48 (n = 3), and 47. The next highest value (or case) that was not an outlier
was 42 (months of experience), which became the cut-off criterion. Therefore, when the
19 outliers for the length of experience variable were windsorized, they were all set to 42.
Before windsorizing, the mean length of volunteers experience was 17.5 months
(SD = 36.7). Results of correlations using the non-windsorized length of experience data



PAGE 1

$66(66,1* 68,&,'( +27/,1( 92/817((56f (03$7+< $1' 027,9$7,216 %\ 0,&+(//( /(( %$5= $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( 6&+22/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

7R P\ SDUHQWV ZLWK ORYH DQG DSSUHFLDWLRQ

PAGE 3

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fVWUDQJHUf DQG -LP 0F1XOW\ IRU VWDWLVWLFDO DVVLVWDQFH JLYH KHDUWIHOW JUDWLWXGH WR P\ GHDU IULHQG 0DU\ 3HGHUVHQ IRU KHU WLPH IULHQGVKLS DQG VXSSRUW 7R WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU VWDII ZKRP DGPLUH GHHSO\ WKDQN \RX DP JUDWHIXO WR DOO RI WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU VWDII YROXQWHHUV DQG WUDLQHHV ZKR JLYH RI WKHPVHOYHV LQ FRXQWOHVV ZD\V WR KHOS RWKHUV

PAGE 4

)LQDOO\ WR P\ SDUHQWV DQG P\ KXVEDQG 6WXDUW JLYH YHU\ VSHFLDO WKDQNV IRU FRQWLQXDOO\ SURYLGLQJ PH ZLWK WKH WLPH ORYH IDLWK DQG HQFRXUDJHPHQW WR DFKLHYH P\ JRDOV ,9

PAGE 5

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

PAGE 6

0(7+2' 'HVLJQ 3DUWLFLSDQWV ,QVWUXPHQWV (PSDWK\ 6FDOHV XVHG 2WKHU VFDOHV FRQVLGHUHG 0RWLYDWLRQ 3URFHGXUH &RQWURO *URXS 7UDLQLQJ *URXS 9ROXQWHHU *URXS 6WDWLVWLFDO $QDO\VHV 5(68/76 'HVFULSWLYH 6WDWLVWLFV +\SRWKHVLV +\SRWKHVLV +\SRWKHVLV $GGLWLRQDO $QDO\VHV ',6&866,21 +\SRWKHVLV +\SRWKHVLV +\SRWKHVLV &RQVLGHUDWLRQ RI *HQGHU 'LIIHUHQFHV 6WXG\ /LPLWDWLRQV ,PSOLFDWLRQV IRU )XWXUH 5HVHDUFK &RQFOXVLRQ $33(1',&(6 $ ,1)250(' &216(17 % ,16758&7,216 & ,167580(176 /,67 2) 5()(5(1&(6 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ YL

PAGE 7

/,67 2) 7$%/(6 7DEOH 3DJH 7DEOH 0HDQV DQG 6WDQGDUG 'HYLDWLRQV RI 9DULDEOHV 0HDVXUHG 7DEOH )UHTXHQFLHV RI WKH 0HDVXUHG 9DULDEOHV 7DEOH 0HDQ $JHV LQ WKH 7KUHH 6WXG\ *URXSV 7DEOH *URXS 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ 0HDQ $JH 7DEOH *URXS 0HDQV RQ WKH (PSDWK\ 0HDVXUHV 7DEOH *URXS 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ (PSDWK\ 7DEOH &RUUHODWLRQV $PRQJ ([SHULHQFH $JH DQG (PSDWK\ 7DEOH *HQGHU 'LIIHUHQFHV RQ 0HDVXUHV RI (PSDWK\ DQG 0RWLYDWLRQ YLL

PAGE 8

$EVWUDFW RI 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 3UHVHQWHG WR WKH *UDGXDWH 6FKRRO RI WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ 3DUWLDO )XOILOOPHQW RI WKH r 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU WKH 'HJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ $66(66,1* 68,&,'( +27/,1( 92/817((56f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f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

PAGE 9

WKHLU OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH LQFUHDVHG FRPSDUHG WR OHVV H[SHULHQFHG YROXQWHHUV ,W ZDV DOVR K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW YROXQWHHUV ZRXOG GLVSOD\ KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ WKDQ ZRXOG D QRQWUDLQHG FRQWURO JURXS 7KH ILUVW K\SRWKHVLV WKDW WUDLQHG YROXQWHHUV ZRXOG H[KLELW JUHDWHU HPSDWK\ WKDQ WKH WUDLQHHV RU WKH FRQWURO JURXS ZDV VXSSRUWHG 7KH VHFRQG K\SRWKHVLV WKDW DQ LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS ZRXOG H[LVW EHWZHHQ FULVLV YROXQWHHUVf OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH DQG DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG $ VLJQLILFDQW SRVLWLYH FRUUHODWLRQ ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH YROXQWHHULQJ DQG OHYHOV RI HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ 7KH YDULDEOH RI H[SHULHQFH ZDV ZLQGVRUL]HG LQ RUGHU WR FRUUHFW IRU H[WUHPH YDOXHV RXWOLHUVf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

PAGE 10

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 :RUOGZLGH VXLFLGH UDWHV KDYH ULVHQ RYHU WKH ODVW ILYH GHFDGHV /HVWHU f ,Q WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV IHZ ZRXOG GLVDJUHH WKDW VXLFLGH FRQWLQXHV WR EH D PDMRU PHQWDO KHDOWK SUREOHP ,Q LQGXVWULDOL]HG QDWLRQV LW LV DPRQJ WKH WRS WHQ OHDGLQJ FDXVHV RI GHDWK IRU SHRSOH RI DOO DJHV &HQWHUV IRU 'LVHDVH &RQWURO f DQG LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV LW LV WKH WKLUG OHDGLQJ FDXVH RI GHDWK IRU LQGLYLGXDOV DJHG 86 %XUHDX RI WKH &HQVXV f 7KHVH VWDWLVWLFV DUH VXSSRUWHG E\ WKH
PAGE 11

&ULVLV DQG VXLFLGH LQWHUYHQWLRQ VHUYLFHV KDYH SUROLIHUDWHG UDSLGO\ LQ WKH ODVW VHYHUDO GHFDGHV 'DLJOH t 0LVKDUD f 7KLV SKHQRPHQRQ PD\ EH D UHVSRQVH WR WKH LQFUHDVLQJ QXPEHUV RI LQGLYLGXDOV FRQVLGHULQJ VXLFLGH DODUPLQJ GHDWK UDWHV DQG WKH IDFW WKDW VXLFLGH DWWHPSWHUV DUH PRUH OLNHO\ WKDQ QRQDWWHPSWHUV WR FRSH E\ UHO\LQJ RQ RWKHUV WR VROYH SUREOHPV UDWKHU WKDQ RQ WKHPVHOYHV 2UEDFK %DU-RVHSK t 'URU f 7KH PRGHP FULVLV FHQWHU PRYHPHQW GHYHORSHG RXW RI WKH FRPPXQLW\ PHQWDO KHDOWK SKLORVRSK\ RI WKH V DQG V DQG E\ WKH PLGV WKHUH ZHUH RYHU WHOHSKRQH FULVLV FHQWHUV LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 6WHLQ t /DPEHUW f &ULVLV ,QWHUYHQWLRQ 9ROXQWHHUV ,Q JHQHUDO KXPDQ VHUYLFH DJHQFLHV UHO\ RQ VLJQLILFDQW QXPEHUV RI YROXQWHHUV WR VHUYH WKHLU FOLHQW SRSXODWLRQV 0LOOHU 3RZHOO t 6HOW]HU f FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ FHQWHUV DUH QR GLIIHUHQW 7KH VKRUWDJH RI PHQWDO KHDOWK SURIHVVLRQDOV LQ PDQ\ SDUWV RI WKH FRXQWU\ KDV QHFHVVLWDWHG WKLV XVH RI YROXQWHHUV WKH PDMRULW\ RI ZKRP DUH QRQ RU SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV 5RVHQEDXP t &DOKRXQ f ,Q IDFW 6HHO\ f SRLQWV RXW WKDW FULVLV DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ DJHQFLHV RIWHQ KDYH SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV DV WKH EDFNERQH RI WKHLU VHUYLFHV 0LOOHU &RRPEV /HHSHU DQG %DUWRQ f IRXQG DQ DVVRFLDWLRQ EHWZHHQ VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ IDFLOLWLHV DQG D UHGXFWLRQ RI VXLFLGH LQ \RXQJ ZKLWH IHPDOHV WKH PRVW SUHYDOHQW XVHUV RI VXFK DJHQFLHVf 7KH DXWKRUV VXJJHVW WKDW UHVHDUFK VKRXOG IRFXV RQ DWWHPSWLQJ WR DQDO\]H IDFWRUV WKDW DUH UHVSRQVLEOH IRU WKLV UHGXFWLRQ 2QH IDFWRU LQ UHGXFLQJ VXLFLGHV LV FULVLV FRXQVHORU HIIHFWLYHQHVV ,Q IDFW WKH JURZLQJ FULVLV FHQWHU PRYHPHQW ZDV VXSSRUWHG E\ WKH EHOLHI WKDW YROXQWHHUV FRXOG EH HIIHFWLYH FULVLV FRXQVHORUV 7KLV EHOLHI JUHZ RXW RI WKH LQIOXHQWLDO ZRUN RI UHVHDUFKHUV LQ WKH V HJ /LWPDQ )DUEHURZ 6KQHLGPDQ +HOLJ t .UDPHU 6KQHLGPDQ

PAGE 12

)DUEHURZ t /LWPDQ f ZKR SLRQHHUHG WKH XVH RI QRQSURIHVVLRQDOV LQ VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ 7KH\ RXWOLQHG WKH VSHFLILF GXWLHV RI FULVLV FHQWHU ZRUNHUV WR EXLOG UDSSRUW DQG VHFXUH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WR HYDOXDWH SRWHQWLDO GDQJHU WR WKH FDOOHU LQFOXGLQJ VXLFLGH OHWKDOLW\ DQG WR IRUPXODWH DQ DFWLRQ SODQ WR PRELOL]H WKH FDOOHUfV DYDLODEOH UHVRXUFHV )RZOHU t 0F*HH f +RZHYHU JLYHQ WKH SUHYDOHQFH RI VXLFLGH DV ZHOO DV WKH QXPHURXV VXLFLGH ULVN DVVHVVPHQW LQVWUXPHQWV DYDLODEOH VHH UHFHQW UHYLHZV E\ *XWLHUUH] 2VPDQ .RSSHU %DUULRV t %DJJH 5DQJH t .QRWW f LW LV VRPHZKDW VXUSULVLQJ WKDW HPSLULFDO DVVHVVPHQWV RI WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV LQ VXLFLGH LQWHUYHQWLRQ DJHQFLHV KDYH QRW NHSW SDFH )UDQNLVK 1HLPH\HU t 3IHLIIHU f 0F*HH DQG -HQQLQJV f FLWH H[SHUWV LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ VXFK DV 5REHUW /LWPDQ (GZLQ 6KQHLGPDQ DQG 1RUPDQ )DUEHURZ WR H[SODLQ ZK\ QRQSURIHVVLRQDOV DW WLPHV PD\ EH EHWWHU WKDQ SURIHVVLRQDOV LQ SURYLGLQJ FULVLV VHUYLFHV 7KH\ VXJJHVW WKDW WKH ODFN RI SURIHVVLRQDO DUPRU DQG VRSKLVWLFDWHG FDWHJRULFDO DSSURDFKHV WR SV\FKRSDWKRORJ\ ZRXOG HQDEOH QRQSURIHVVLRQDOV WR FRQQHFW PRUH HIIHFWLYHO\ ZLWK WKRVH LQ FULVLV 7KHLU ILQGLQJV DQG RWKHU VWXGLHVf DUH H[SORUHG LQ PRUH GHSWK LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ VHFWLRQ RI WKLV VWXG\ +RZHYHU RWKHU WKDQ D IHZ VWXGLHV HJ +RPHV t +RZDUG .QLFNHUERFNHU t 0F*HH 0F*HH t -HQQLQJV f YHU\ OLWWOH UHVHDUFK KDV IRFXVHG VSHFLILFDOO\ RQ WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ SURIHVVLRQDOV DQG SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV LQ FULVLVVXLFLGH LQWHUYHQWLRQ HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KH WUHQG RI LQFRUSRUDWLQJ YROXQWHHU DQG SDUDSURIHVVLRQDO ZRUNHUV LQWR WKH WUHDWPHQW RI GLYHUVH HPRWLRQDO SUREOHPV KDV HYHQ EHHQ UHIHUUHG WR DV WKH WKLUG UHYROXWLRQ LQ PHQWDO KHDOWK 7DSS t 6SDQLHU S f 7KHVH SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV RIIHU FOLHQWV DGYLFH FRXQVHOLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ RU VLPSO\ HPSDWKLF OLVWHQLQJ 6LQFH FULVLV VLWXDWLRQV WHQG

PAGE 13

WR EH WLPHOLPLWHG KHUHDQGQRZ SUREOHPV LW DSSHDUV WKDW WKH DELOLW\ WR FRQYH\ ZDUPWK DQG SHUVRQDO LQWHUHVW DV ZHOO DV WR SURYLGH VRPH GLUHFWLRQ PD\ EH PRUH FHQWUDO WR VXFFHVVIXO FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ WKDQ SURIHVVLRQDO WUDLQLQJ ZKLFK RIWHQ LQFOXGHV WKHUDSHXWLF GRJPD DQG HIIRUWV WR SUREH SDVW H[SHULHQFH DQG SHUVRQDOLW\ SUREOHPVf 7ZR TXHVWLRQV HPHUJH KRZHYHU ZLWK UHVSHFW WR SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV SURYLGLQJ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ KRZ HIIHFWLYH DUH WKHVH LQGLYLGXDOV LH FDQ WKH\ SURYLGH DGHTXDWH HPSDWK\ WR HVWDEOLVK D WKHUDSHXWLF UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK LQGLYLGXDOV LQ FULVLVf DQG ZKDW PRWLYDWHV LQGLYLGXDOV WR YROXQWHHU WR EH SDUW RI WKLV fWKLUG UHYROXWLRQ"f (PSDWK\ (PSDWKHLD D WHUP FRLQHG E\ WKH HDUO\ *UHHNV VXJJHVWV DIIHFWLRQ DQG SDVVLRQ ZLWK D TXDOLW\ RI VXIIHULQJ 7KH /DWLQ HTXLYDOHQW ODUJHO\ ERUURZHG IURP WKH *UHHN ZRUG LV SDWKRV ZKLFK PHDQV IHHOLQJSHUFHSWLRQ 0RUH PRGHP XVDJH RI HPSDWK\ KRZHYHU FDPH FORVHU WR WKH FRQFHSW RI NQRZLQJ VRPHRQH WKURXJK HQWHULQJ KLV RU KHU OLYHG ZRUOG DQG IHHOLQJ DQ DZDUHQHVV RI KLV RU KHU H[SHULHQFH 7KLV FRQFHSW RI NQRZLQJ VRPHRQH ZDV FDOOHG (LQIXKOXQJ D ZRUG LQLWLDOO\ XVHG LQ *HUPDQ DHVWKHWLFV 'DYLV f $OIUHG $GOHU f RQH RI WKH SLRQHHUV RI SV\FKRDQDO\VLV SURSRVHG WKLV PRUH PRGHP YLHZ DQG DVVHUWHG WKDW WUHDWPHQW FDQ RQO\ EH VXFFHVVIXO LI WKH KHOSHU LV JHQXLQHO\ LQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH SHUVRQ EHLQJ KHOSHG +H VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH SULPDU\ PHWKRG WR FRQYH\ WKLV JHQXLQH LQWHUHVW LV WKURXJK VHHLQJ KHDULQJ DQG H[SHULHQFLQJ WKH ZRUOG WKURXJK WKH RWKHU SHUVRQ 7KLV LGHD KRZHYHU GRHV QRW GLVWLQJXLVK HPSDWK\ IURP V\PSDWKHWLF LGHQWLILFDWLRQ &DUO 5RJHUV f EURXJKW WKLV GLVWLQFWLRQ LQWR SURPLQHQFH ZLWK KLV FODVVLFDO SDSHU RQ FRQGLWLRQV RI WKHUDSHXWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ FKDQJH DQG KLV ZHOONQRZQ fDV LIf FRQGLWLRQ RI H[SHULHQFH

PAGE 14

5HVHDUFK RQ DQG LQWHUHVW LQ HPSDWK\ VXUJHG LQ WKH V DQG V ZKHQ &DUO 5RJHUV f SURSRVHG KLV fQHFHVVDU\ DQG VXIILFLHQW WKHUDSHXWLF FRQGLWLRQVf %\ WKHQ 7UXD[ DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV 7UXD[ t &DUNKXII 7UXD[ t 0LWFKHOO f DFFXPXODWHG HYLGHQFH WKDW VXJJHVWHG FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\ DQG WKHUDSHXWLF RXWFRPH ,Q IDFW PRUH UHVHDUFK DWWHQWLRQ KDV EHHQ IRFXVHG RQ WKH FRQVWUXFW RI HPSDWK\ WKDQ RQ DQ\ RWKHU YDULDEOH SRVLWHG DV UHOHYDQW WR WKH WKHUDSHXWLF SURFHVV 3DWWHUVRQ f ,QFRQVLVWHQFLHV LQ WKH UHVHDUFK KRZHYHU OHG PDQ\ UHVHDUFKHUV WR FRQFOXGH WKDW VXIILFLHQW HPSLULFDO VXSSRUW ZDV ODFNLQJ VHH UHYLHZ E\ 3DWWHUVRQ f 2Q RQH KDQG PDQ\ WKHUDSLVWV VDZ HPSDWK\ DV LPSRUWDQW LQ WHUPV RI EHLQJ ZDUP DQG VXSSRUWLYHf 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG WKH VWURQJHU FRQWHQWLRQ RI HPSDWK\ DV D FHQWUDO LQJUHGLHQW WR WKHUDSHXWLF FKDQJH ZDV JHQHUDOO\ QRW DFFHSWHG %RKDUW t *UHHQEHUJ f &RQVHTXHQWO\ UHVHDUFK RQ HPSDWK\ LQ WKH V GURSSHG GUDPDWLFDOO\ %RKDUW DQG *UHHQEHUJ SRLQW RXW WKDW ZH OLYH LQ D SDUDGR[LFDO DJH ZLWK UHVSHFW WR HPSDWK\ 2Q RQH VLGH HPSDWK\ KDV DJDLQ HPHUJHG DV DQ LPSRUWDQW WRSLF RI VWXG\ LQ DUHDV VXFK DV VRFLDO DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO SV\FKRORJ\ 1XPHURXV SRSXODU ERRNV DUJXH WKDW HPRWLRQDO LQWHOOLJHQFH ZKLFK LQFOXGHV HPSDWK\ PD\ EH HYHQ PRUH LPSRUWDQW WKDQ ,4 *ROHPDQ f ,Q DGGLWLRQ HPSDWK\ WUDLQLQJ LV QRZ EHLQJ XVHG LQ YDULRXV DUHDV LQFOXGLQJ VFKRROV EXVLQHVV DQG PHGLFLQH +RZHYHU GHVSLWH HYLGHQFH WKDW WKH WKHUDSHXWLF UHODWLRQVKLS LV WKH EHVW SUHGLFWRU RI VXFFHVV LQ WKHUDS\ DQG WKDW 5RJHUVn ZRUN RQ UHODWLRQDO FRQGLWLRQV VSHFLILHV WKDW HPSDWK\ LV RQH RI WKH NH\ LQJUHGLHQWV LQ FUHDWLQJ D WKHUDSHXWLF UHODWLRQVKLS RSLQLRQV LQ DFDGHPLF SV\FKRORJ\ DV ZHOO DV WKH LQIOXHQFH RI PDQDJHG FDUH RIWHQ PLQLPL]H WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS LQ WKHUDS\ WUHDWLQJ LW DV

PAGE 15

D EDFNJURXQG YDULDEOH DQG DVVXPLQJ DOO FOLQLFLDQV NQRZ KRZ WR HVWDEOLVK D WKHUDSHXWLF UHODWLRQVKLS %RKDUW t *UHHQEHUJ S f 5HFHQWO\ KRZHYHU LQWHUHVW LQ HPSDWK\ KDV UHVXUJHG DQG QXPHURXV UHVHDUFKHUV EHOLHYH WKDW HPSDWK\ GHPDQGV WR EHFRPH D PDMRU IRFXV RI SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK IRU H[DPSOH %DUUHWW/HQQDUG %RKDUW t *UHHQEHUJ 'DYLV 'XDQ t +LOO +DUW ,FNHV DQG 2UOLQVNL *UDZH t 3DUNV f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f VXJJHVW JRRG UHDVRQV WR VWXG\ YROXQWHHUVf PRWLYDWLRQV 7KH TXHVWLRQV WKDW DULVH LQ WKLQNLQJ DERXW YROXQWHHU ZRUN DV >YROXQWDU\@ VXVWDLQHG DQG QRQVSRQWDQHRXV KHOS DUH IXQGDPHQWDOO\ PRWLYDWLRQDO LQ QDWXUH 7KDW LV WKH\ DVN DERXW WKH PRWLYHV WKDW DUH LQYROYHG ZKHQ RQH GHFLGHV ZKHWKHU WR FRPPLW RQHVHOI WR DQ RQJRLQJ WDVN DQG WKHQ PXVW UHJXODUO\ GHFLGH ZKHWKHU RU QRW WR FRQWLQXH WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ LW S f

PAGE 16

%\ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKH PRWLYDWLRQV EHKLQG SHRSOHf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f DVVHUWV WKDW VRPH SHRSOH DUH PRUH LQKHUHQWO\ KHOSIXO WKDQ RWKHUV DQG RQH FDQ VXUPLVH WKDW LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR GLVSOD\ KLJK OHYHOV RI HPSDWK\ PD\ DOVR YROXQWHHU IRU PRUH DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV 6RPH GHYHORSPHQWDO UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH VWXGLHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\ DQG SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU VXFK DV DOWUXLVP (LVHQEHUJ t 0LOOHU D Ef RU KRZ HPSDWK\ FDQ OHDG WR WKH GHYHORSPHQW DQG SUDFWLFH RI DOWUXLVP +RIIPDQ f ,V WKH HPSDWK\ WKDW PLJKW PRWLYDWH LQGLYLGXDOV WR YROXQWHHU LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ VHWWLQJV VLPSOH DOWUXLVP RU DUH WKHUH PRUH HJRLVWLF IDFWRUV DW ZRUN" :LHKH DQG ,VHQKRXU f IRXQG WKDW SHUVRQDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZDV VHHQ DV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW PRWLYDWLRQ IRU SHRSOHfV LQWHUHVW LQ VHUYLQJ DV D YROXQWHHU 7KLV ILQGLQJ KDV REYLRXV LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU DJHQFLHV WKDW UHTXLUH YROXQWHHUV &ULVLV VHUYLFH DJHQFLHV W\SLFDOO\ UHTXLUH PRUH H[WHQVLYH WUDLQLQJ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDQ RWKHU YROXQWHHU DJHQFLHV +RZHYHU WKH SD\RII LQ WKH HQG PD\ EH JUHDWHU IRU ERWK WKH YROXQWHHU DQG WKH DJHQF\ 7DVNV UHTXLULQJ JUHDWHU HIIRUW VSHFLILF VNLOOV JRRG

PAGE 17

MXGJPHQW HPRWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW DQG FUHDWLYLW\ PD\ SURGXFH D PRUH VDWLVILHG YROXQWHHU ZKLFK LQ WXUQ PD\ KDYH HIIHFWV RQ WKH YROXQWHHUfV OHQJWK RI VHUYLFH WR WKH DJHQF\ 3HRSOH YROXQWHHU DW FULVLV DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ DJHQFLHV IRU PDQ\ UHDVRQV QRW DOO RI WKHP VHOIOHVV )RU H[DPSOH SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQWV PD\ YROXQWHHU LQ RUGHU WR DFTXLUH FOLQLFDO VNLOOV DQG H[SHULHQFH WKDW FDQ EH LQFOXGHG LQ WKHLU FXUULFXOXP YLWDV RU WR JDLQ LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW FDUHHU SRVVLELOLWLHV 2WKHUV PD\ YROXQWHHU WR LQFUHDVH WKHLU VHOIn XQGHUVWDQGLQJ LQ RUGHU WR HQKDQFH SHUVRQDO JURZWK 6WLOO RWKHUV PD\ YROXQWHHU EHFDXVH WKH\ KDYH IULHQGV ZKR DUH HLWKHU YROXQWHHULQJ RU DOUHDG\ KDYH LQYROYHPHQW ZLWK DQ DJHQF\ +RZHYHU WKH IDFW UHPDLQV WKDW FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ DJHQFLHV UHO\ RQ WKH EHOLHI KRZHYHU LGHDOLVWLF WKDW YROXQWHHUV ZLWKLQ D FRPPXQLW\ ZLOO FRPH IRUZDUG ZLWK D ZLOOLQJQHVV WR LQYHVW WKHLU WLPH DQG WKHPVHOYHV LQ RUGHU WR DFKLHYH PHDQLQJIXO KXPDQ LQWHUDFWLRQV 3UREHUW t )RJHO f :LWK D EHWWHU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI ZK\ SHRSOH YROXQWHHU WR SURYLGH FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGHSUHYHQWLRQ VHUYLFHV SHUKDSV FULVLV DJHQFLHV FRXOG EH HYHQ PRUH HIIHFWLYH LQ UHFUXLWLQJ DQG UHWDLQLQJ YROXQWHHUV &XUUHQW 6WXG\ 7KLV VWXG\ H[DPLQHV WZR LPSRUWDQW YDULDEOHV LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ YROXQWHHUV WKHLU OHYHOV RI HPSDWK\ DQG WKHLU PRWLYDWLRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ 7KH TXHVWLRQ DV WR ZKHWKHU YROXQWHHUVf OHYHO RI HPSDWK\ LQFUHDVHV RU GHFUHDVHV ZLWK H[SHULHQFH LV DGGUHVVHG DV LV WKH TXHVWLRQ RI ZKHWKHU YROXQWHHUV DUH PRWLYDWHG WR EHFRPH LQYROYHG LQ FULVLV VHUYLFH DJHQFLHV IRU DOWUXLVWLF RU HJRLVWLF UHDVRQV

PAGE 18

&+$37(5 5(9,(: 2) /,7(5$785( 7KLV FKDSWHU EHJLQV ZLWK DQ RYHUYLHZ RI HPSDWK\ DQG PRWLYDWLRQV IRU KHOSLQJ 1H[W D UHYLHZ RI FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ HIIHFWLYHQHVV LQ VHUYLFH SURYLGHUV LV SUHVHQWHG $ ORRN DW YROXQWHHUV WKHQ IROORZV LQFOXGLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOVf DELOLWLHV DQG WKHLU PRWLYDWLRQV IRU KHOSLQJ RWKHUV $W WKH HQG RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ WKH SXUSRVH RI WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ LV SUHVHQWHG 7KH FKDSWHU FRQFOXGHV ZLWK WKH VSHFLILF UHVHDUFK TXHVWLRQV WR EH VWXGLHG DV ZHOO DV NH\ GHILQLWLRQV &RQWHPSRUDU\ 3HUVSHFWLYHV RQ (PSDWK\ *RGIUH\ 7 %DUUHWW/HQQDUG RQH RI WKH SLRQHHUV RI HPSDWK\ UHVHDUFK VWXGLHG LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV IRU RYHU IRXU GHFDGHV HJ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f +H EHJDQ KLV ZRUN DV D VWXGHQW RI &DUO 5RJHUV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI &KLFDJR ZKHQ 5RJHUV f ILUVW FLUFXODWHG KLV FODVVLF IRUPXODWLRQ RI WKH fQHFHVVDU\ DQG VXIILFLHQW FRQGLWLRQV RI WKHUDS\f $W WKH WLPH QR PHDQV H[LVWHG IRU PHDVXULQJ HDFK RI WKH SRVLWHG UHODWLRQVKLS FRQGLWLRQV QRU ZDV LW FOHDU ZKDW NLQG RI GHVLJQ PLJKW EH ERWK IHDVLEOH DQG HIIHFWLYH ,W ZDV IURP WKLV FRQWH[W WKDW %DUUHWW/HQQDUG EHJDQ WR GHYHORS WKH XQGHUSLQQLQJV RI KLV RULJLQDO 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ IRU KLV GRFWRUDO GLVVHUWDWLRQ UHVHDUFK VHH %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f 7KH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ DQ LQVWUXPHQW XVHG WR PHDVXUH HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ FRQJUXHQFH OHYHO RI UHJDUG DQG XQFRQGLWLRQDOLW\ RI UHJDUG LV GLVFXVVHG LQ &KDSWHU RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KH 5HODWLRQVKLS

PAGE 19

,QYHQWRU\ LV EDVHG RQ WKH SURSRVLWLRQ WKDW WKHUDSHXWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ FKDQJHV RFFXU LQ SURSRUWLRQ WR WKH GHJUHH WKDW D FOLHQW H[SHULHQFHV FHUWDLQ TXDOLWLHV LQ WKH WKHUDSLVWfV UHVSRQVH WR WKH FOLHQW $OWKRXJK DOO WKHUDSHXWLF FRQGLWLRQV DUH LPSRUWDQW WKLV VWXG\ SULPDULO\ IRFXVHG RQ WKH FRQGLWLRQ RI HPSDWK\ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f VXJJHVWV WKDW IRU HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WR RFFXU LW LV QRW HVVHQWLDO IRU WKH SHUVRQ ZKR LV EHLQJ HPSDWKL]HG ZLWK WR EH OLWHUDOO\ SUHVHQW 6WDWHG DQRWKHU ZD\ D SHUVRQ PD\ EH HPSDWKL]HG ZLWK WKURXJK DQ DXGLR RU YLGHRWDSH UHFRUGLQJ RU SHUKDSV WKURXJK ZULWWHQ ZRUGV RU RWKHU H[SUHVVLYH RU DUWLVWLF DFWV ZLWKRXW EHLQJ SUHVHQW ,I SK\VLFDOO\ SUHVHQW EXW QRW DWWHQGLQJ WR WKH HPSDWKL]LQJ SHUVRQf WKH SHUVRQ EHLQJ HPSDWKL]HG ZLWK FRXOG EH XQGHUVWRRG HPSDWKLFDOO\ ZLWKRXW UHDOL]LQJ LW VLQFH HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ UHIHUV WR D SURFHVV WKDW LV RFFXUULQJ LQ WKH HPSDWKL]LQJ SHUVRQ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f 7KHUHIRUH DV %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f VWDWHV HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RU HPSDWKLF NQRZLQJ LV ILUVW DQG IRUHPRVW DQ LQQHU H[SHULHQFH S LWDOLFV LQ RULJLQDOf %URDGO\ VWDWHG HPSDWK\ LV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK UHVSRQVLYHO\ NQRZLQJ WKH PRPHQWWRPRPHQW H[SHULHQFH RI DQRWKHU 7KUHH PDLQ SKDVHV LQ D FRPSOHWH HPSDWKLF SURFHVV DUH GLVWLQJXLVKHG E\ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f Df UHFHSWLRQ DQG UHVRQDWLRQ E\ WKH OLVWHQHU Ef H[SUHVVLYH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ RI WKLV UHVSRQVLYH DZDUHQHVV E\ WKH HPSDWKL]LQJ SHUVRQ OLVWHQHUf DQG Ff UHFHLYHG HPSDWK\ RU WKH DZDUHQHVV RI EHLQJ XQGHUVWRRGf $OWKRXJK %DUUHWW/HQQDUG V\VWHPDWLFDOO\ LOOXPLQDWHV LQWHUSHUVRQDO HPSDWK\ DV D PXOWLVWDJH SURFHVV RFFXUULQJ ZLWKLQ DQG EHWZHHQ LQGLYLGXDOV KH VWUHVVHV WKDW LW LV D VXEWOH FRPSOH[ DQG PXOWLIDFHWHG SKHQRPHQRQ 7KH SKDVHV KH VXJJHVWV DUH QRW D VLQJOH FORVHG V\VWHP DQG GR QRW QHFHVVDULO\ RFFXU LQ SUHGLFWDEOH VWHSV ,Q IDFW FRQVLGHUDEOH GLVFUHSDQF\ LV SRVVLEOH

PAGE 20

DPRQJ WKH LQQHU UHVRQDWLRQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ H[SUHVVLRQf DQG UHFHSWLRQ SKDVHV DQG DW HDFK VWDJH FRQVLGHUDEOH ODWLWXGH H[LVWV IRU HPSDWK\ WR RFFXU 'DYLV f VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH QDWXUH RI HPSDWK\ FRQWLQXHV WR EH D PDWWHU RI VRPH GLVDJUHHPHQW 6SHFLILFDOO\ KH EHOLHYHG WKDW WKH WHUP HPSDWK\ DFWXDOO\ UHIHUV WR WZR GLVWLQFWO\ 6HSDUDWH SKHQRPHQD DIIHFWLYH UHDFWLYLW\ DQG FRJQLWLYH UROHWDNLQJ 7KLV LV VLPLODU WR +RIIPDQfV f WKHRUHWLFDO IUDPHZRUN RI HPSDWK\ ZKLFK LQFOXGHV FRJQLWLYH UROHWDNLQJ DQG DIIHFWLYH UHVSRQGLQJ WR RWKHUVf VLWXDWLRQV 7KH DIIHFWLYH UHVSRQVH GLPHQVLRQ FDQ EH GLVWLQJXLVKHG IXUWKHU LQWR IHHOLQJV RI V\PSDWK\ RU FRQFHUQ IRU RWKHUV DQG IHHOLQJV RI SHUVRQDO GLVWUHVV SURGXFHG E\ RWKHUVn GLVWUHVV 'DYLV SURSRVHG DQ RUJDQL]DWLRQDO PRGHO RI HPSDWK\UHODWHG FRQVWUXFWV WKDW PDNHV FOHDU WKH GLIIHUHQFHV DQG VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\fV YDULRXV FRQVWUXFWV EDVHG RQ DQ LQFOXVLYH GHILQLWLRQ RI HPSDWK\ 7KH FRQVWUXFWV LQFOXGH ERWK SURFHVVHV WDNLQJ SODFH LQ WKH SHUVRQ HPSDWKL]LQJ DQG WKH RXWFRPHV WKDW UHVXOW IURP WKHVH SURFHVVHV 6LPLODU WR %DUUHWW/HQQDUGfV f FRQFHSWLRQ RI D OLVWHQHU ZKR HPSDWKL]HVf DQG D UHFHLYHU 'DYLV f SURSRVHG WKDW WKH W\SLFDO HPSDWK\ fHSLVRGHf FRQVLVWV RI DQ REVHUYHU HJ WKH OLVWHQHUf EHLQJ H[SRVHG LQ VRPH ZD\ WR D WDUJHW HJ WKH UHFHLYHUf DQG WKHQ UHVSRQGLQJ HLWKHU FRJQLWLYHO\ DIIHFWLYHO\ RU EHKDYLRUDOO\f 'DYLVf PRGHO LV GLIIHUHQW IURP %DUUHWW/HQQDUGfV FRQFHSWLRQ KRZHYHU LQ WKDW 'DYLV H[SDQGV WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI WKH HPSDWKLF SURFHVV +H LGHQWLILHV IRXU UHODWHG FRQVWUXFWV ZLWKLQ WKLV W\SLFDO HSLVRGH DQWHFHGHQWV SHUVRQ RU VLWXDWLRQ FKDUDFWHULVWLFVf SURFHVVHV PHFKDQLVPV WKDW JHQHUDWH HPSDWKLF RXWFRPHVf LQWUDSHUVRQDO RXWFRPHV ERWK DIIHFWLYH DQG FRJQLWLYH UHVSRQVHV SURGXFHG LQ WKH REVHUYHU DV D UHVXOW RI H[SRVXUH WR WKH WDUJHWf DQG LQWHUSHUVRQDO RXWFRPHV RYHUW EHKDYLRUDO UHVSRQVHV WR WKH WDUJHWf 'DYLVf

PAGE 21

PRGHO K\SRWKHVL]HG DVVRFLDWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH FRQVWUXFWV DQG KH VXJJHVWHG WKDW VWURQJHU UHODWLRQVKLSV H[LVW EHWZHHQ FRQVWUXFWV WKDW DUH DGMDFHQW H J EHWZHHQ DQWHFHGHQWV DQG SURFHVVHVf WKDQ WKRVH WKDW DUH QRW DGMDFHQW HJ EHWZHHQ DQWHFHGHQWV DQG LQWHUSHUVRQDO RXWFRPHVf $OWKRXJK 'DYLVf f PRGHO ERUURZHG LWV IUDPHZRUN VRPHZKDW IURP +RIIPDQ f DQG 6WDXE f KH DUJXHG WKDW KLV PRGHO DOORZV IRU H[DPLQDWLRQ RI HPSDWK\ LQ D PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO IDVKLRQ WKDW DFFRXQWV IRU VLPLODU RXWFRPHV H J KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRUf WKURXJK D PXOWLWXGH RI SHUVRQ FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG SURFHVVHV HJ SHUFHSWLRQV DVVRFLDWLRQV DIIHFWLYH UHDFWLRQV DQG FRJQLWLRQVf &KDQJPLQJ 'XDQnV f ILQGLQJV VXSSRUWHG 'DYLVn FRQWHQWLRQ WKDW HPSDWK\ LV PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO 'XDQ IRXQG WKDW D GLVWLQFWLRQ FDQ EH PDGH EHWZHHQ LQWHOOHFWXDO HPSDWK\ WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK DQ REVHUYHU WDNHV WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI WKH WDUJHWf DQG HPSDWKLF HPRWLRQ WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK WKH REVHUYHU IHHOV WKH WDUJHWfV HPRWLRQVf DQG WKDW WKH WZR W\SHV RI HPSDWK\ PD\ FRUUHODWH LQ FHUWDLQ VLWXDWLRQV %RKDUW DQG *UHHQEHUJ f DUJXHG WKDW HPSDWK\fV PXOWLSOH GLPHQVLRQV LQFOXGH f D FRJQLWLYH RU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ GLPHQVLRQ DQ DIIHFWLYH RU H[SHULHQWLDO GLPHQVLRQ DFWLRQ >RU D@ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ >GLPHQVLRQ@ D ZD\ RI EHLQJ WRJHWKHU LQ UHODWLRQVKLSV >DQG@ LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQILUPDWLRQ RU YDOLGDWLRQf S LWDOLFV LQ RULJLQDOf 7KH DUJXPHQW WKDW HPSDWK\ UHVHDUFK LV EHVW VHUYHG E\ DGRSWLQJ D PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO DSSURDFK WR WKH RYHUDOO FRQVWUXFW LV FRQYLQFLQJ VHH 'DYLV Ef DQG KLV HPSDWK\ PHDVXUH WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ 'DYLV f UHIOHFWV WKLV PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDOLW\ 7KH HPSDWK\ PHDVXUH GLVFXVVHG LQ &KDSWHU RI WKLV VWXG\ LQFOXGHV PHDVXUHV RI SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ FRJQLWLYH UROHWDNLQJf IDQWDV\ LGHQWLILFDWLRQ ZLWK FKDUDFWHUV LQ PRYLHV QRYHOV SOD\V DQG RWKHU ILFWLRQDO VLWXDWLRQVf HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ

PAGE 22

IHHOLQJV RI ZDUPWK FRPSDVVLRQ DQG FRQFHUQ IRU RWKHUVf DQG SHUVRQDO GLVWUHVV IHHOLQJV RI GLVFRPIRUW DQG DQ[LHW\ UHVXOWLQJ IURP RWKHUVn GLVWUHVVf 7KHUH KDV EHHQ D FDOO LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH IRU PRUH FRPSUHKHQVLYH DSSURDFKHV WR VWXG\LQJ DQG PHDVXULQJ HPSDWK\ HJ &KORSDQ 0F&DLQ &DUERQHOO t +DJHQ 'XDQ t +LOO f HVSHFLDOO\ LQ WHUPV RI LWV PXOWLIDFHWHG QDWXUH HJ 6WUD\HU f DQG LQ WHUPV RI WKHUDS\ DQG KHOSLQJ %RKDUW t *UHHQEHUJ +DOO 'DYLV t &RQQHOO\ f 'DYLVf f PHDVXUH PD\ SDUWLDOO\ PHHW WKLV UHVHDUFK QHHG $QRWKHU SURPLQHQW HPSDWK\ UHVHDUFKHU :LOOLDP ,FNHV LV FRQFHUQHG SULPDULO\ ZLWK HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ +H DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV ,FNHV ,FNHV 6WLQVRQ %LVVRQQHWWH t *DUFLD f GHILQHG HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ DV fWKH DELOLW\ WR DFFXUDWHO\ LQIHU WKH VSHFLILF FRQWHQW RI RWKHU SHRSOHfV WKRXJKWV DQG IHHOLQJVff ,FNHV S f $OWKRXJK WKH VWXG\ RI HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LV VWLOO IDLUO\ QHZ LWV URRWV FDQ EH WUDFHG EDFN RYHU \HDUV WR WKH VWXG\ RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO SHUFHSWLRQ 0RVW RI ,FNHVf ZRUN GLIIHUV IURP WKDW RI %DUUHWW/HQQDUGfV RU 'DYLVf LQ WKDW KH LV OHVV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK WKH UHDFWLRQV RI D SHUFHLYHU WR HPRWLRQ H[SUHVVHG E\ D WDUJHW IRU H[DPSOH E\ H[KLELWLQJ RU UHSRUWLQJ WKH VDPH HPRWLRQ RU FRUUHFWO\ LGHQWLI\LQJ DQRWKHUfV HPRWLRQ WKURXJK FXHV SURYLGHGf WKDQ ZLWK KRZ ZHOO DQ LQGLYLGXDO LV DEOH WR fUHDGf RWKHU SHRSOHfV WKRXJKWV DQG IHHOLQJV (PSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ DSSHDUV WR SXW D JUHDWHU GHPDQG RQ SDUWLFLSDQWVf LQIHUHQWLDO DELOLWLHV *UDKDP t ,FNHV f ,Q WKHRU\ HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LV PRVW V\QRQ\PRXV ZLWK HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ KRZHYHU ZKHQ RSHUDWLRQDOO\ GHILQHG IRU HPSLULFDO VWXG\ HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ PXVW QHFHVVDULO\ LQFOXGH HPSDWKLF H[SUHVVLRQ DV ZHOO 0DUDQJRQL *DUFLD ,FNHV t 7HQJ f $Q LQQRYDWLYH PHWKRGRORJLFDO DSSURDFK GHYHORSHG E\ ,FNHV DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV ,FNHV %LVVRQQHWWH *DUFLD t 6WLQVRQ ,FNHV 6WLQVRQ HW DO

PAGE 23

,FNHV t 7RRNH f LQ RUGHU WR VWXG\ HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LV GHVFULEHG LQ &KDSWHU RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KH UHVHDUFK RQ HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ PRVW UHOHYDQW WR WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ LV WKH ZRUN E\ 0DUDQJRP HW DO f UHJDUGLQJ HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LQ FOLHQWWKHUDSLVW UHODWLRQVKLSV VHH DOVR ,FNHVn 0DUDQJRP t *DUFLD f 7KH\ IRXQG WKDW HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LPSURYHV ZLWK LQFUHDVHG H[SRVXUH WR D SHUVRQ IHHGEDFN DERXW D SHUVRQfV DFWXDO WKRXJKWV DQG IHHOLQJV DQG LQFUHDVLQJ WKH fUHDGDELOLW\f RI WKH WDUJHW SHUVRQ 7KH\ DOVR IRXQG UHODWLYHO\ VWDEOH LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH FRQVLVWHQF\ RI D SHUFHLYHUfV HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ DFURVV GLIIHUHQW SHRSOH ,FNHV f SRLQWHG RXW WKDW WKHVH ILQGLQJV KDYH FOHDU LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU WKH VHOHFWLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ RI LQGLYLGXDOV LQ DUHDV ZKHUH HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LV DQ HVVHQWLDO VNLOO DQG FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ LV FHUWDLQO\ QR H[FHSWLRQ ,Q DGGLWLRQ WR WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI EHLQJ DEOH WR XVH HPSDWK\ DFFXUDWHO\ +DOO 'DYLV DQG &RQQHOO\ f IRXQG D UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ GLVSRVLWLRQDO HPSDWK\ DQG WKHUDSHXWLF HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KLV LV RQH RI WKH ILUVW VWXGLHV WR DVVHVV D SHUVRQDOLW\ PHDVXUH RI HPSDWK\ VSHFLILFDOO\ HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ DQG SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DELOLW\f LQ SV\FKRORJLVWV DQG WKHLU VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKHUDS\ $OWKRXJK WKHUH LV GLVDJUHHPHQW DERXW KRZ EHVW WR GHILQH DQG RSHUDWLRQDOL]H HPSDWK\ %RKDQ t *UHHQEHUJ f WKH FRQVWUXFW RI HPSDWK\ KDV D ORQJ DQG GLVWLQJXLVKHG KLVWRU\ RI WKHRU\ DQG UHVHDUFK LQ KHOSLQJ DUHQDV 7KH FXUUHQW UHVXUJHQFH RI UHVHDUFK LQWR WKLV LQWHUHVWLQJ DQG LPSRUWDQW FRQVWUXFW DWWHVWV WR WKH IDFW WKDW WKH TXHVWLRQV UDLVHG DERXW HPSDWK\ ZLOO FDXVH LW WR UHPDLQ D FHQWUDO IRFXV IRU \HDUV WR FRPH

PAGE 24

0RWLYDWLRQV %DWVRQ f LQ KLV H[WHQVLYH UHYLHZV RI SURVRFLDO PRWLYDWLRQ DQG DOWUXLVP DGGUHVVHG WKH TXHVWLRQ RI ZKHWKHU RU QRW KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU LV HYHU DOWUXLVWLF +H DVVHUWV WKDW WKH GRPLQDQW YLHZ LQ :HVWHUQ WKRXJKW IRU WKH SDVW IRXU FHQWXULHV DV ZHOO DV LQ DOO PDMRU SV\FKRORJLFDO YLHZV RI PRWLYDWLRQ LQFOXGLQJ )UHXGLDQ EHKDYLRUDO DQG HYHQ KXPDQLVWLF RU fWKLUG IRUFHf WKHRULHVf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t &ODUN f SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU PHDQV fEHKDYLRU WKDW LV SRVLWLYHO\ HYDOXDWHG DJDLQVW VRPH QRUPDWLYH VWDQGDUG DSSOLFDEOH WR LQWHUSHUVRQDO DFWVf S f 3URVRFLDO EHKDYLRU FDQ EH GLVWLQJXLVKHG IURP DQWLVRFLDO DQG QRQVRFLDO EHKDYLRU DQG LWV GHVLJQDWLRQ JHQHUDOO\ GHSHQGV RQ ERWK WKH FXOWXUH LQ ZKLFK WKH EHKDYLRU RFFXUV DQG WKH SHUVRQ PDNLQJ WKH MXGJPHQW DERXW WKH EHKDYLRU 'DYLV f FDOOV SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU fKHOSLQJ EHKDYLRUf +LV FRPSUHKHQVLYH UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW D GLVWLQFWLRQ FDQ EH PDGH EHWZHHQ KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU DQG DOWUXLVP EDVHG RQ WKH PRWLYDWLRQVf XQGHUO\LQJ WKH DFW +HOSLQJ DFWV HDUQHG RXW LQ RUGHU WR JDP PDWHULDO UHZDUGV VRFLDO DSSURYDO RU LQWHUQDO UHZDUGV VXFK DV SULGHf RU WR DYRLG VRFLDO VDQFWLRQV IRU IDLOLQJ WR KHOS RU LQWHUQDO

PAGE 25

SXQLVKPHQW VXFK DV JXLOWf ZRXOG VLPSO\ EH KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU +HOSLQJ DFWV FDUULHG RXW VROHO\ IRU WKH SXUSRVH RI EHQHILWLQJ RU LQFUHDVLQJ WKH ZHOIDUH RI DQRWKHU ZRXOG EH GHHPHG DOWUXLVWLF $OWKRXJK RQH PLJKW DUJXH WKDW WKH RXWFRPH WKDW LV WKH RYHUW EHKDYLRU RI KHOSLQJ DQRWKHUf LV WKH VDPH UHJDUGOHVV RI WKH XQGHUO\LQJ PRWLYDWLRQ fPRUH UHFHQW WKHRUL]LQJ DQGrUHVHDUFK KDV LQFUHDVLQJO\ IRFXVHG RQ TXHVWLRQV RI PRWLYDWLRQ ZLWK WKH UHVXOW WKDW PRUH VRSKLVWLFDWHG WKHRUHWLFDO DFFRXQWV DQG HPSLULFDO WHFKQLTXHV KDYH HYROYHGf 'DYLV S f WR FODULI\ WKH GLVWLQFWLRQ EHWZHHQ DOWUXLVP DQG SURVRFLDOKHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU 5HODWLRQVKLS %HWZHHQ $OWUXLVP DQG (PSDWK\ 0DQ\ FRQWHPSRUDU\ SV\FKRORJLVWV LQFOXGLQJ 0DUWLQ +RIIPDQ f 'HQQLV .UHEV f 0HOYLQ /HPHU f DQG 1RUPD )HVKEDFK f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f +RIIPDQ f KDV VWXGLHG DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ XVLQJ D PRGHO WKDW GHSHQGV RQ WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ DIIHFWLYH DQG FRJQLWLYH SURFHVVHV WKDW FKDQJH ZLWK DJH +H VWDWHV WKDW fWKH EDVLF FRQFHSW LQ WKH PRGHO LV HPSDWK\ GHILQHG DV D YLFDULRXV DIIHFWLYH UHVSRQVH WKDW LV >D@ UHVSRQVH WKDW LV PRUH DSSURSULDWH WR VRPHRQH HOVHfV VLWXDWLRQ WKDQ WR RQHfV RZQ VLWXDWLRQf S f 'DYLV f LQ KLV VXPPDU\ RI UHYLHZV RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ HPSDWK\ DQG DOWUXLVP IRXQG WKDW UHOLDEOH DQG VLJQLILFDQW SRVLWLYH DVVRFLDWLRQV H[LVW

PAGE 26

EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\UHODWHG FRQVWUXFWV DQG DOWUXLVWLF EHKDYLRU ,QGHHG %DWVRQ f DUJXHG WKDW WKH VRXUFH RI KHOSLQJ WKDW LV LQWHQGHG VROHO\ WR EHQHILW DQRWKHU LH DOWUXLVPf LV WKH UHDFWLYH HPRWLRQDO UHVSRQVH RI HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ +H DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV FRQGXFWHG QXPHURXV H[SHULPHQWDO VWXGLHV GHPRQVWUDWLQJ D UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ DQG KHOSLQJ EGKDYLRU DQG WKH\ FDUHIXOO\ DQG FOHYHUO\ GHVLJQHG H[SHULPHQWV LQ ZKLFK D GLVWLQFWLRQ EHWZHHQ DOWUXLVWLF V\PSDWK\EDVHGf KHOSLQJ DQG HJRLVWLF JXLOWEDVHGf KHOSLQJ ZDV EXLOW LQWR WKH VWXG\ %DWVRQ HW DO f (VVHQWLDOO\ WKLV ZDV GRQH E\ PDNLQJ VRPH SDUWLFLSDQWV IHHO OLNH D GHFLVLRQ QRW WR KHOS ZDV MXVWLILHG WKHUHE\ HOLPLQDWLQJ JXLOW DV D PRWLYDWLQJ IRUFH WR KHOS +RZHYHU RQH FRXOG VWLOO DUJXH WKDW HYHQ WKRXJK LW LV fMXVWLILHGf QRW WR KHOS DQRWKHU D SHUVRQ PLJKW QRW IHHO WKDW LW LV PRUDOO\ DFFHSWDEOH 2YHUDOO WKRXJK WKH UHVHDUFK HYLGHQFH KDV JRQH IXUWKHU WR HVWDEOLVK D OLQN EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\ DQG DOWUXLVP LW LV QRW FOHDU ZK\ VXFK D UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWV &LDOGLQL %URZQ /HZLV /XFH DQG 1HXEHUJ f VXJJHVWHG WKDW DQ DOWHUQDWLYH WR WKH DOWUXLVPHJRLVP GHEDWH UHJDUGLQJ PRWLYDWLRQ WR KHOS RWKHUV LV WKH FRQVWUXFW RI fRQHQHVVf ZKLFK WKH\ GHILQHG DV fVKDUHG PHUJHG RU LQWHUFRQQHFWHG SHUVRQDO LGHQWLWLHVf Sf (VVHQWLDOO\ RQHQHVV VXJJHVWV WKDW SHRSOH KHOS RWKHUV EHFDXVH WKH\ IHHO PRUH fDW RQH ZLWKf WKRVH RWKHUV &LDOGLQL HW DO VWDWH WKDW SHUFHLYHG RQHQHVV RIIHUV D QRQDOWUXLVWLF WKRXJK QRW DQ HJRLVWLFf DOWHUQDWLYH WR SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK ILQGLQJV WKDW DWWULEXWHG KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU WR HPSDWKLFDOO\ GULYHQ DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ %DVHG RQ WKH H[SODQDWLRQV SUHVHQWHG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ WKH GHEDWH DERXW ZKDW PRWLYDWHV SHRSOH WR KHOS RWKHUV LV QRW \HW FOHDUO\ GHFLGHG WKRXJK WKRXJKWSURYRNLQJ VWXGLHV FRQWLQXH WR LQFUHDVH RXU NQRZOHGJH DERXW WKH HPSDWK\DOWUXLVP FRQQHFWLRQ

PAGE 27

(YDOXDWLRQ RI (IIHFWLYHQHVV 7ZR OHYHOV RI HYDOXDWLRQ VWUDWHJLHV IRU VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ VHUYLFHV KDYH HPHUJHG PDFURDQDOYWLF DVVHVVPHQWV RI RXWFRPHV IRU HQWLUH SURJUDPV RQ VXLFLGH UDWHV LQ FRPPXQLWLHV LQFOXGLQJ FOLHQW VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG PLFURDQDL\VHV RI FULVLV FRXQVHORUVn VNLOO OHYHOV DQGRU WKHLU DELOLW\ WR SURYLGH HIIHFWLYH KHOS 7KLV VWXG\ LV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK WKH ODWWHU DQDO\VHV W\SLFDOO\ DVVHVVHG E\ UDWLQJ HLWKHU DFWXDO FDOOV VLPXODWHG FDOOV RU UROHSOD\V DQG E\ GHYHORSLQJ ZULWWHQ WHVWV RI VNLOOV DQG NQRZOHGJH ,Q RQH RI WKH PRVW UHFHQW UHYLHZV RI VXLFLGH LQWHUYHQWLRQ HIIHFWLYHQHVV 1HLPH\HU DQG 3IHLIIHU f H[DPLQHG ERWK PDFUR DQG PLFURHYDOXDWLRQV 7KH\ SRLQWHG RXW WKDW DOWKRXJK D YDULHW\ RI UHVHDUFK PHWKRGRORJLHV ZHUH XVHG LQ WKH VWXGLHV HYDOXDWLQJ VXLFLGH LQWHUYHQWLRQ HIIHFWLYHQHVV HDFK PHWKRGRORJ\ KDV ERWK EHQHILWV DQG LQKHUHQW OLPLWDWLRQV RQ WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ REWDLQHG (PSDWKLF 6NLOOV $W WKH PLFURDQDOYWLF OHYHO VHYHUDO VWXGLHV IRFXVHG RQ WKH JHQHUDO 5RJHQDQ IDFWRUV RI ZDUPWK HPSDWK\ DQG JHQXLQHQHVV HJ &DURWKHUV t ,QVOHH .QLFNHUERFNHU t 0F*HH 0LOOHU +HGULFN t 2UORIVN\ 7UXD[ t /LVWHU f DVVHVVLQJ ZKHWKHU YROXQWHHUV DUH DEOH WR SURYLGH WKH IDFWRUV ZLWK PL[HG UHVXOWV 7KHVH UHVHDUFKHUV JHQHUDOO\ XVHG VFDOHV OLNH &DUNKXII V f 6XFK VFDOHV UDWH WKH DELOLW\ RI FRXQVHORUV WR SURYLGH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV HVSHFLDOO\ WKH 5RJHULDQ IDFWRUV PHQWLRQHG DERYH &DUNKXII f WKHRUL]HG WKDW UHVHDUFK UHVXOWV ZHUH SDUWLDOO\ FRQIRXQGHG E\ WKH IDFW WKDW WKH SHRSOH ZKR ZHUH UDWLQJ IDFLOLWDWLYH HIIHFWLYHQHVV PLJKW QRW KDYH IXQFWLRQHG DW KLJK HQRXJK OHYHOV RI WKH IDFLOLWDWLYH GLPHQVLRQV HVSHFLDOO\ HPSDWK\f WKHPVHOYHV 2WKHUV 'XDQ t +LOO f VXJJHVW WKDW WKH GLYHUVH QDWXUH RI HPSDWK\ DQG WKH ODFN RI

PAGE 28

GLVWLQFWLRQ EHWZHHQ GLIIHUHQW W\SHV RI HPSDWK\ PD\ DOVR KDYH FRQIRXQGHG LWV VWXG\ +RZHYHU GLIILFXOWLHV LQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RU VWXG\LQJ HPSDWK\ VKRXOG QRW SUHFOXGH LWV HPSLULFDO H[DPLQDWLRQ $IWHU DOO /LQHKDQ f VWUHVVHG WKDW FRQYH\LQJ HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ ZLWK VXLFLGDO LQGLYLGXDOV LV D FULWLFDO FRPSRQHQW RI WKHUDS\ 3URIHVVLRQDOV 9HUVXV 1RQSURIHVVLRQDOV 0F*HH DQG -HQQLQJV f GLVFRYHUHG WKDW PDQ\ YROXQWHHU FRXQVHORUV ZHUH HIIHFWLYH DW EHFRPLQJ JHQXLQHO\ HQJDJHG ZLWK FOLHQWV LQ FULVLV 7KH\ DVVHUWHG WKDW QRQSURIHVVLRQDLV VRPHWLPHV PLJKW EH HYHQ EHWWHU VXLWHG WKDQ SURIHVVLRQDOV IRU FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGHSUHYHQWLRQ ZRUN 1RQSURIHVVLRQDOV PD\ QDWXUDOO\ SURYLGH PRUH FRQQHFWHG QRQGHWDFKHG FRQWDFW ZLWK FOLHQWV LQ FULVLV ZKHUHDV SURIHVVLRQDOV PD\ KDYH D PRUH GHWDFKHG DQG FDWHJRULFDO DSSURDFK WR ZKDW PLJKW EH VHHQ DV SV\FKRSDWKRORJ\ ,Q DGGLWLRQ .QRWW DQG 5DQJH f IRXQG WKDW QRQSURIHVVLRQDLV RIWHQ KHDU IURP VRPHRQH ZLWK VXLFLGDO LQWHQWLRQV DUH DEOH WR UHFRJQL]H VLJQV RI VXLFLGDOLW\ DQG DUH ZLOOLQJ WR KHOS 7KLV VXJJHVWV WKDW WKH\ PLJKW EH PRUH DEOH WKDQ SURIHVVLRQDOV WR KHOS VXLFLGDO LQGLYLGXDOV LQ DQ LQIRUPDO VHWWLQJ WR H[SORUH DOWHUQDWLYHV RWKHU WKDQ VXLFLGH DQG WR IHHO KRSHIXO DERXW WKH IXWXUH .QLFNHUERFNHU DQG 0F*HH f FRPSDUHG OD\ YROXQWHHUV ZRUNLQJ DW D FULVLV FHQWHU ZKR KDG XQGHUJRQH D SKRQH FRXQVHORU WUDLQLQJ FRXUVHf ZLWK D JURXS RI SURIHVVLRQDOV DQG JUDGXDWH VWXGHQWV SUHSDULQJ IRU SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ FDUHHUV 8VLQJ PXOWLSOH PHDVXUHV WKH WKUHH JURXSV ZHUH UDWHG IRU HPSDWK\ ZDUPWK DQG JHQXLQHQHVV FRQVLGHUHG LQ PXFK RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH DV HVVHQWLDO IRU WKHUDSHXWLF FKDQJH $FURVV DOO WKUHH GLPHQVLRQV WKH QRQSURIHVVLRQDO JURXS VFRUHG DV KLJK DV RU KLJKHU WKDQ WKH WZR SURIHVVLRQDO JURXSV $OO JURXSV VFRUHG LQ WKH HIIHFWLYH UDQJH RQ WKH GLPHQVLRQV 7KH

PAGE 29

UHVXOWV KDYH RIWHQ EHHQ FLWHG DV MXVWLILFDWLRQ IRU XVLQJ WUDLQHG OD\ YROXQWHHUV LQ FULVLV FHQWHU VHWWLQJV +RPHV DQG +RZDUG f VSHFLILFDOO\ VWXGLHG ERWK SURIHVVLRQDO DQG SDUDSURIHVVLRQDO FULVLV ZRUNHUVn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f VFRUH ZHUH QRW VSHFLILHG WKH ILQGLQJV GR VXJJHVW WKDW PRUH WUDLQLQJ DQGRU H[SHULHQFH DUH UHODWHG WR JUHDWHU HIIHFWLYHQHVV 7KH UHVXOWV DOVR LQGLFDWH D QHHG IRU LPSURYHG WUDLQLQJ RQ VXLFLGH ULVN IDFWRUV IRU ERWK SURIHVVLRQDOV DQG SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV DOLNH LI WKH\ DUH ZRUNLQJ ZLWK VXLFLGDO FOLHQWV (IIHFWV RI 7UDLQLQJ DQG ([SHULHQFH 6RPH VWXGLHV LQYROYLQJ UROHSOD\V KDYH JHQHUDOO\ VKRZQ WKDW SKRQH FRXQVHORUV FDQ SURYLGH EHWWHU IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV ZLWK WUDLQLQJ DQG H[SHULHQFH )UDQFH +DUW t .LQJ 1HLPH\HU t 3IHLIIHU f ,Q WKHVH VWXGLHV WKH FRXQVHORUV DFWLYHO\ SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH UROHSODY VLWXDWLRQ +RZHYHU VWXGLHV LQYROYLQJ VLPXODWHG FDOOV PDGH WR FULVLV FHQWHUV LQ ZKLFK WKH SKRQH FRXQVHORUV ZHUH QRW DZDUH WKDW WKH FDOOV ZHUH VLPXODWHG

PAGE 30

KDYH OHG UHVHDUFKHUV WR FRQFOXGH WKDW FULVLV OLQH FRXQVHORUV RIWHQ GR QRW UHDFK PLQLPXP OHYHOV RI WKHUDSHXWLF HIIHFWLYHQHVV )UDQFH *HQWKHU 1HLPH\HU t 3IHLIIHU 6WHLQ t /DPEHUW f 7KH RXWFRPH RI WKHVH VWXGLHV VXJJHVWV WKDW ZKHQ FRXQVHORUV DUH QRW DZDUH WKDW WKH\ DUH EHLQJ DVVHVVHG RQ WKHLU DELOLW\ WR SURYLGH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV WKHLU HIIHFWLYHQHVV LV VXESDU (ONLQV DQG &RKHQ f XVLQJ LQGHSHQGHQWO\ GHYHORSHG VFDOHV VWXGLHG WKH HIIHFWV RI ERWK WUDLQLQJ DQG H[SHULHQFH RQ FRXQVHOLQJ VNLOOV NQRZOHGJH DQG GRJPDWLF DWWLWXGHV 7KH VFDOHV FRQWDLQHG ERWK ZULWWHQ TXHVWLRQV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH DWWLWXGHV DQG NQRZOHGJH DQG K\SRWKHWLFDO FDOOHUVf VWDWHPHQWV WKDW ZHUH XVHG WR HOLFLW ZULWWHQ UHVSRQVHV 7KH\ IRXQG WKDW YROXQWHHUVf FRXQVHOLQJ VNLOOV DQG NQRZOHGJH LPSURYHG ZLWK WUDLQLQJ EXW QRW ZLWK H[SHULHQFH DQG WKDW DWWLWXGHV ZHUH QRW DIIHFWHG E\ HLWKHU WUDLQLQJ RU H[SHULHQFH 7KH UHVHDUFK FLWHG DERYH LQGLFDWHV WKDW ZKLOH IXUWKHU WUDLQLQJ DQG H[SHULHQFH FDQ DIIHFW KRZ ZHOO FRXQVHORUV SURYLGH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV VXFK DV HPSDWK\ WKH UHVXOWV DUH FOHDUO\ PL[HG ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ VRPH VWXGLHV VXJJHVW WKDW D FRXQVHORUnV OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH LV LQYHUVHO\ UHODWHG WR HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ 7UXD[ DQG &DUNKXII f DUJXHG WKDW PRVW SV\FKRWKHUDS\ WUDLQLQJ SURJUDPV VWUHVV WKHRU\ DQG FOLHQW SV\FKRG\QDPLFV RYHU KRZ WR FUHDWH D IDFLOLWDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV HPSKDVL]HG WKDW WKH VNLOOV RI UHODWLRQVKLS EXLOGLQJ DUH RI SULPDU\ LPSRUWDQFH LQ WUDLQLQJ JRRG WKHUDSLVWV ,I VXFK VNLOOV DUH QRW FRQWLQXDOO\ HPSKDVL]HG WKHUDSHXWLF HPSDWK\ PD\ GLPLQLVK RYHU WLPH HYHQ ZLWK LQFUHDVHG WKHUDSHXWLF H[SHULHQFHf ,Q D VWXG\ RQ WKH HIIHFWV RI H[WHQGHG GLGDFWLF WUDLQLQJ RQ WKH WKHUDSHXWLF IXQFWLRQLQJ RI SURIHVVLRQDO SV\FKRORJ\ WUDLQHHV &DUNKXII .UDWRFKYLO DQG )ULHO f IRXQG WKDW RYHU WKH FRXUVH RI VHYHUDO \HDUV WUDLQLQJ WKHUDSLVWVf DELOLW\ WR

PAGE 31

GLVFULPLQDWH WKHUDSHXWLF FRQGLWLRQV LPSURYHG ZKLOH WKHLU DELOLW\ WR RIIHU WKHVH FRQGLWLRQV GHFOLQHG 3ROHQ] DQG 9HUGL f IRXQG WKDW SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOVn DELOLW\ WR GLVFULPLQDWH DQG FRPPXQLFDWH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ ZHUH QRW DIIHFWHG E\ OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH ,UO RWKHU ZRUGV SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV ZLWK PRUH H[SHULHQFH ZHUH QR EHWWHU IXQFWLRQLQJ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR UHDOL]LQJ DQG GLVSOD\LQJ HPSDWK\ LQ WKHUDS\ WKDQ SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV ZLWK OHVV H[SHULHQFH ,Q DQRWKHU VWXG\ QR GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ QHZO\ WUDLQHG DQG H[SHULHQFHG SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV RQ IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV DOWKRXJK ERWK ZHUH UDWHG KLJKHU WKDQ XQWUDLQHG FRQWUROV 2n'RQQHOO t *HRUJH f 7KHUHIRUH WKH TXHVWLRQ UHPDLQV DV WR ZKHWKHU FULVLV OLQH ZRUNHUV ZLWK PRUH H[SHULHQFH ZRXOG GLVSOD\ ORZHU OHYHOV RI HPSDWK\ WKDQ WKRVH ZLWK OHVV H[SHULHQFH ,QGHHG .DODIDW %RURWR DQG )UDQFH f VXJJHVWHG WKDW D FRPSOH[ UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWV EHWZHHQ SHUIRUPDQFH RI IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV YDOXHV DQG H[SHULHQFH $OWKRXJK WKHUH LV D UHVXUJHQFH LQ VWUHVVLQJ WKH VLJQLILFDQFH RI HPSDWK\ WR GDWH QR UHVHDUFK KDV LQYHVWLJDWHG KRZ HIIHFWLYHO\ SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV WUDLQHG WR ZRUN LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ VHWWLQJV XWLOL]H WKHLU VSHFLILF HPSDWKLF VNLOOV LH SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DELOLW\f RU ZKHWKHU WKHVH VNLOOV GHFUHDVH DV WKHLU H[SHULHQFH LQFUHDVHV 9ROXQWHHUV 9ROXQWHHQVP KDV H[LVWHG IRU FHQWXULHV EXW IRUPDOL]HG YROXQWHHU SURJUDPV KDYH DULVHQ RQO\ UHFHQWO\ (OOLV f 9ROXQWHHQVP HVSHFLDOO\ IRU FROOHJH VWXGHQWV EHFDPH SRSXODU LQ WKH V DQG V DV PRUH FRPPXQLW\ VHUYLFH ZDV HQFRXUDJHG WKURXJK FDPSXVEDVHG SURJUDPV (OOLV f +RZHYHU IURP WKH V WKHUH KDV EHHQ D GHFOLQH LQ YROXQWHHU LQYROYHPHQW 1HZPDQ f VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKLV GHFOLQH PD\ EH SDUWLDOO\

PAGE 32

GXH WR ERWK LQGLYLGXDO DQG VRFLHWDO WUHQGV WRZDUG HJRFHQWULVP DQG VHOIGHYHORSPHQW 2WKHUV DUJXHG WKDW VRFLDO DQG HFRQRPLF IRUFHV DUH LQFUHDVLQJO\ PDNLQJ YROXQWHHQVP D OX[XU\ WKDW FDQ EH XQGHUWDNHQ RQO\ E\ WKH ZHDOWK\ DQG VXJJHVWHG WKDW SHRSOH DUH QRZ VHHNLQJ JURZWK DQG VHOIVDWLVIDFWLRQ IURP WKHLU YROXQWHHU H[SHULHQFHV LQ DGGLWLRQ WR WKH PRUH WUDGLWLRQDOO\ K\SRWKHVL]HG PRWLYDWLRQV RI KHOSLQJ RWKHUV +HQGHUVRQ f &KDUDFWHULVWLFV RI 9ROXQWHHUV ,Q WKHLU VWXG\ RQ WKH SHUVRQDO FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI YROXQWHHU SKRQH FRXQVHORUV 7DSS DQG 6SDPHU f FRQFOXGHG WKDW PHQWDO KHDOWK YROXQWHHUV DUH IOH[LEOH VSRQWDQHRXV DQG VHOIDFWXDOL]LQJ ZLWK WKH FDSDFLW\ IRU ZDUPWK XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DQG RSHQQHVV WR RWKHUV 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV VWDWHG WKDW WKLV GHVFULSWLRQ UHVHPEOHV WKH GHVFULSWLRQ RI DOWUXLVWV DQG WKH\ VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH YROXQWHHU PHQWDO KHDOWK FRXQVHORU LV DQ DOWUXLVWLF LQGLYLGXDO ZKRVH GHVLUH WR PDNH D FRQWULEXWLRQ WR KLV ZRUOG PDPIHVW>V@ LWVHOI LQ KLV YROXQWHHULVP S f +RZHYHU +REIROO f IRXQG WKDW XQGHUJUDGXDWH YROXQWHHU PHQWDO KHDOWK ZRUNHUV FDQQRW EH FOHDUO\ GLVWLQJXLVKHG IURP QRQYROXQWHHUV LQ UHJDUG WR SHUVRQDOLW\ FKDUDFWHULVWLFV XVXDOO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH KHOSLQJ SHUVRQDOLW\ &DUNKXII f VXFK DV HPSDWK\ VHOIDFFHSWDQFH DQG WROHUDQFH 9ROXQWHHUV ZHUH IRXQG WR VFRUH KLJKHU ZLWK UHVSHFW WR VRFLDO UHVSRQVLELOLW\ ZKLFK +REIROO VXJJHVWHG PD\ SDUWLDOO\ H[SODLQ WKHLU PRWLYDWLRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ $PDWR f LQ KLV VWXG\ RI SODQQHG KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU DV RSSRVHG WR VSRQWDQHRXV KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRUf IRXQG WKDW SHRSOH LQYROYHG LQ IRUPDO RUJDQL]DWLRQDO KHOSLQJ VFRUHG KLJKHU RQ DGKHUHQFH WR WKH QRUP RI VRFLDO UHVSRQVLELOLW\ DQG KDG DQ LQWHUQDO ORFXV RI FRQWURO FRPSDUHG WR WKRVH LQYROYHG LQ LQIRUPDO KHOSLQJ DFWLYLWLHV WKDW LQYROYHG IULHQGV DQGRU IDPLO\ PHPEHUV +H DOVR VXJJHVWHG WKDW LQYROYHPHQW LQ IRUPDO

PAGE 33

SODQQHG KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU LV KLJK LI SHRSOH IHHO UHVSRQVLEOH IRU RWKHUVf ZHOIDUH IHHO WKHLU KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU FDQ KDYH DQ LPSDFW DQG KROG SRVLWLYH QRQSXQLWLYH YLHZV WRZDUGV RWKHUV ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ WKHVH DUH WUDLWV VLPLODU WR WKRVH VXJJHVWHG E\ 5XVKWRQ f DV EHLQJ FKDUDFWHULVWLF RI DQ fnDOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\f ,Q RUGHU WR DVVHVV ZKHWKHU RU QRW FRPPXQLW\ KHDOWK YROXQWHHUV DSSHDU WR SRVVHVV FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH DOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ $OOHQ DQG 5XVKWRQ f UHYLHZHG VWXGLHV DVVHVVLQJ YROXQWHHUVn SHUVRQDOLW\ FKDUDFWHULVWLFV 7KH\ IRXQG WKDW FRPPXQLW\ YROXQWHHUV WHQG WR EH PRUH HPSDWKLF KDYH KLJKHU LQWHUQDO PRUDO VWDQGDUGV SRVVHVV PRUH SRVLWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUGV WKHPVHOYHV KDYH JUHDWHU IHHOLQJV RI VHOIHIILFDF\ DQG DUH PRUH HPRWLRQDOO\ VWDEOH WKDQ QRQYROXQWHHUV 7KHVH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DUH DOVR LQ DFFRUG ZLWK 5XVKWRQfV FRQFHSWLRQ RI WKH DOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ &OHDUO\ WKH HYLGHQFH VXJJHVWV WKDW VRPH SHRSOH DUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR KHOS WKDQ RWKHUV EXW DUH VRPH SHRSOH WUXO\ VHHNLQJ WR KHOS RWKHUV DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQf RU DUH WKH\ XOWLPDWHO\ VHHNLQJ VHOIEHQHILW" %RWK 6WDXE f DQG 5XVKWRQ f VXJJHVWHG WKDW DOWUXLVP LV QRW DQ DOWHUQDWLYH WR HJRLVP EXW UDWKHU LW LV D VSHFLDO IRUP RI HJRLVP WKH UHZDUGV IRU DFWLQJ SURVRFLDOO\ DUH LQWHUQDO RU VHOI DGPLQLVWHUHG UDWKHU WKDQ H[WHUQDO RU VRFLDOO\ DGPLQLVWHUHG 7KHLU UHVHDUFK KRZHYHU GLG QRW DGGUHVV WKH TXHVWLRQ RI XQGHUO\LQJ PRWLYDWLRQ 9ROXQWHHU 0RWLYDWLRQV ,Q RUGHU WR DGGUHVV WKH TXHVWLRQ RI XQGHUO\LQJ PRWLYDWLRQ 'DQLHO %DWVRQ DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV XVHG D UHVHDUFK SDUDGLJP WKDW ZRXOG HQDEOH WKHP WR LQIHU SDUWLFLSDQWVf XOWLPDWH JRDO ZKHQ KHOSLQJ %DWVRQ %ROHQ &URVV t 1HXULQJHU%HQHILHO f )LUVW WKH\ H[DPLQHG IRXU SHUVRQDOLW\ YDULDEOHV LGHQWLILHG DV FRQWULEXWLQJ WR DQ DOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ VRFLDO UHVSRQVLELOLW\ VHOIHVWHHP DVFULSWLRQ RI UHVSRQVLELOLW\ DQG

PAGE 34

GLVSRVLWLRQDO HPSDWK\ 7KH\ WKHQ REVHUYHG KHOSLQJ XQGHU VSHFLILF V\VWHPDWLFDOO\ YDULHG FRQGLWLRQV ZKHUH HVFDSH IURP WKH QHJDWLYH FRQVHTXHQFHV IRU VHOI RI QRW KHOSLQJ DQRWKHU HJ VKDPH DQG JXLOWf ZDV HLWKHU HDV\ RU KDUG %DWVRQ HW DO IRXQG QR HYLGHQFH WKDW DQ\ RI WKH IRXU fDOWUXLVWLFf SHUVRQDOLW\ YDULDEOHV ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ DOWKRXJK WKUHH RI WKH YDULDEOHV VHOIHVWHHP DVFULSWLRQ RI UHVSRQVLELOLW\ DQG HPSDWKLH FRQFHUQ f ZHUH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK SURVRFLDO PRWLYDWLRQ LH KHOSLQJ RWKHUVf )URP WKHVH UHVXOWV VKRXOG LW EH FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH fDOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\f LV QRW UHDOO\ DOWUXLVWLF" 6XFK D FRQFOXVLRQ PD\ EH SUHPDWXUH EDVHG RQ WKH IDFW WKDW RWKHU SHUVRQDOLW\ YDULDEOHV WKDW FRQWULEXWH WR DQ DOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ HJ VHOIDFWXDOL]DWLRQ IOH[LELOLW\ DQG WROHUDQFHf ZHUH QRW PHDVXUHG DQG WKDW KHOSLQJ UHVSRQVHV ZHUH H[DPLQHG LQ RQO\ RQH QHHG VLWXDWLRQ 7UDGLWLRQDOO\ YROXQWHHU PRWLYDWLRQV ZHUH DVVXPHG WR EH DOWUXLVWLF 3HUKDSV RXU FRQFHSWLRQ RI YROXQWHHUV IDOOV LQWR D VSHFLDO VXEJURXS RI WKRVH ZKR SURYLGH SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU 1RQHWKHOHVV WKLV YLHZ RI YROXQWHHUV LQIOXHQFHG WKH ZD\ LQ ZKLFK YROXQWHHU SURJUDPV DUH GHVLJQHG RSHUDWHG DQG VWXGLHG &ODU\ DQG 6Q\GHU f DGGUHVVHG WKH TXHVWLRQ RI YROXQWHHU PRWLYDWLRQV LQ WHUPV RI D IXQFWLRQDO DQDO\VLV $FFRUGLQJ WR WKH UHVHDUFKHUV D IXQFWLRQDO DQDO\VLV LV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK WKH QHHGV PRWLYHV DQG VRFLDOSV\FKRORJLFDO IXQFWLRQV EHLQJ VHUYHG E\ YROXQWHHU DFWLYLWLHV 7KH\ DVVHUWHG WKDW YROXQWHHU DFWLYLW\ EDVHG RQ DOWUXLVWLF FRQFHUQ IRU RWKHUV LQ QHHG DQGRU D GHVLUH WR FRQWULEXWH WR VRFLHW\ VHUYHV D fYDOXHH[SUHVVLYH IXQFWLRQf 7KLV IXQFWLRQ LQFRUSRUDWHV WKH LGHD WKDW D SHUVRQfV YDOXHV DERXW RWKHUVf ZHOOEHLQJ LQIOXHQFHV KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU $GGLWLRQDOO\ UHVHDUFKHUV IRFXVHG RQ RWKHU PRWLYDWLRQV WKDW FDXVH SHRSOH WR YROXQWHHU ,Q KHU VWXG\ RI + YROXQWHHUV +HQGHUVRQ f IRXQG WKDW WKH SULPDU\

PAGE 35

PRWLYDWLRQ IRU DGXOW YROXQWHHUV ZDV DIILOLDWLRQ RU WKH GHVLUH WR LQWHUDFW ZLWK RWKHUV 7KLV UHDVRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ VHUYHV D nfVRFLDODGMXVWPHQW IXQFWLRQf &ODU\ t 6Q\GHU f ZKLFK UHIOHFWV QRUPDWLYH LQIOXHQFHV IURP RQHnV VRFLDO QHWZRUN )LWFK f LQ KLV VWXG\ RI WKH PRWLYDWLRQV RI FROOHJH VWXGHQWV YROXQWHHULQJ IRU FRPPXQLW\ VHUYLFH IRXQG WKDW PRWLYHV DUH ERWK HJRLVWLF DQG DOWUXLVWLF :LHKH DQG ,VHQKRXU f VWXG\LQJ FRPPXQLW\ DJHQF\ YROXQWHHUV IRXQG VLPLODU UHVXOWV *LGURQ f DVNHG YROXQWHHUV LQ KHDOWK DQG PHQWDO KHDOWK LQVWLWXWLRQV WR UHSRUW WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK WKH\ H[SHFWHG WR UHFHLYH H[WULQVLF UHZDUGV UHZDUGV FRQWUROOHG E\ WKH LQVWLWXWLRQf DQG LQWULQVLF UHZDUGV UHZDUGV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH VXEMHFWLYH PHDQLQJ RI WKH ZRUN IRU WKH YROXQWHHU f :KLOH WZRWKLUGV RI WKH VDPSOH H[SHFWHG VRPH H[WULQVLF UHZDUGV WKH YDVW PDMRULW\ H[SHFWHG SULPDULO\ LQWULQVLF UHZDUGV *LGURQfV ILQGLQJV GLG QRW H[SOLFLWO\ DGGUHVV ZKLFK UHZDUGV ZRXOG EH GHHPHG DOWUXLVWLF RU HJRLVWLF WKXV LW LV QRW FOHDU KRZ WKRVH WZR PRWLYDWLRQV LPSDFWHG YROXQWHHUVf UHDVRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ +HQGHUVRQ f VXJJHVWHG WKDW HDFK YROXQWHHU KDV XQLTXH PRWLYDWLRQV DQG H[SHFWDWLRQV RI KLV RU KHU H[SHULHQFH $VFHUWDLQLQJ WKHVH PRWLYDWLRQV FDQ FRQWULEXWH WR SURYLGLQJ YROXQWHHUV ZLWK D VDWLVIDFWRU\ H[SHULHQFH ZKLOH VLPXOWDQHRXVO\ VWDIILQJ FRPPXQLW\ DJHQFLHV ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW YROXQWHHUV LQ GLIIHUHQW RUJDQL]DWLRQV DUH YHU\ GLIIHUHQW W\SHV RI SHRSOH DQG KDYH XQLTXH PRWLYDWLRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ KDV LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU UHFUXLWPHQW DQG UHWHQWLRQ RI YROXQWHHUV 6HUJHQW t 6HGODFHN f +RZHYHU WKH TXHVWLRQ UHPDLQV DV WR ZKHWKHU FULVLVVXLFLGH SDUDSURIHVVLRQDLV KDYH GLIIHUHQW OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ WKDQ WKRVH LQGLYLGXDOV HQJDJLQJ P RWKHU IRUPV RI YROXQWHHU ZRUN RU LI FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ YROXQWHHUV DUH PRUH DOWUXLVWLF WKDQ WKRVH ZKR GR QRW YROXQWHHU DW DOO 5HVHDUFK VXJJHVWV WKDW WKRVH

PAGE 36

LQYROYHG LQ KHOSLQJ SURIHVVLRQV DQG SRVVLEO\ LQ VLPLODU YROXQWHHU DFWLYLWLHV DV ZHOOf GR WHQG WR KDYH PRUH RI DQ DOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\ WKDQ WKRVH LQ RWKHU DUHQDV $PDWR f 5HODWLRQVKLS %HWZHHQ 9ROXQWHHU 0RWLYDWLRQV DQG $ELOLWLHV 9HU\ IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH H[DPLQHG WKH ZD\ LQ ZKLFK SHRSOHfV PRWLYDWLRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ KDYH LPSDFWHG WKHLU DELOLW\ WR GLVSOD\ QHFHVVDU\ VNLOOV LQ SDUWLFXODU FRPPXQLW\ DJHQF\ VHWWLQJV \HW LW LV FHUWDLQO\ SODXVLEOH WKDW D SHUVRQfV PRWLYDWLRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ FRXOG GLUHFWO\ LPSDFW WKHLU ZLOOLQJQHVV WR WDNH ULVNV OHDUQ QHZ VNLOOV DQG SHUKDSV HYHQ DGRSW QHZ ZD\V RI WKLQNLQJ RU FRQFHSWXDOL]LQJ 6RPH UHVHDUFKHUV KDYH DUJXHG WKDW KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU LQYROYHV PRUH WKDQ MXVW ZLOOLQJQHVV WR KHOS DELOLWLHV DUH DQ LPSRUWDQW IHDWXUH RI HIIHFWLYH KHOSLQJ &ODU\ DQG 2UHQVWHLQ f VWXGLHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ FULVLV FRXQVHORUVf PRWLYHV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ DQG DELOLWLHV WR SURYLGH WKHUDSHXWLF UHVSRQVHV WR WKHLU DFWXDO KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU %ODFN DQG 'L1LWWR f H[DPLQHG WKH PRWLYDWLRQV DPRQJ RWKHU YDULDEOHV RI YROXQWHHUV ZKR ZRUN ZLWK VXUYLYRUV RI UDSH DQG EDWWHULQJ )URP WKHVH WZR VWXGLHV YROXQWHHUVn PRWLYDWLRQV ZHUH IRXQG WR LPSDFW D PXOWLWXGH RI DUHDV LQFOXGLQJ DPRXQW RI KHOS JLYHQ WR FOLHQWV OHQJWK RI YROXQWHHU VHUYLFH DQG YROXQWHHU VDWLVIDFWLRQ 5HVHDUFK KDV DOVR GHPRQVWUDWHG OLQNV EHWZHHQ DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ DQG VLWXDWLRQDO HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ %DWVRQ f DV ZHOO DV FRPPLWPHQW WR FULVLVFRXQVHOLQJ YROXQWHHU ZRUN &ODU\ t 0LOOHU f ,Q DGGLWLRQ &ODU\ DQG 2UHQVWHLQ f IRXQG D GLUHFW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYHV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ DQG WKH OHQJWK RI WLPH SHRSOH VSHQW DV D YROXQWHHU 7KH\ SUHGLFWHG WKDW HDUO\WHUPLQDWLQJ YROXQWHHUV LH YROXQWHHUV ZKR GHFLGH RI WKHLU RZQ YROLWLRQ WR WHUPLQDWH WKHLU PRQWK YROXQWHHU FRPPLWPHQW HDUO\f ZRXOG UHSRUW ORZHU OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ DW WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WUDLQLQJ WKDQ FRPSOHWHGVHUYLFH

PAGE 37

YROXQWHHUV ZKR VHUYHG DV YROXQWHHU FRXQVHORUV IRU RU PRUH PRQWKVf $OO WKH FRPSOHWHGVHUYLFH YROXQWHHUV LQ &ODU\ DQG 2UHQVWHLQnV VWXG\ KDG VHUYHG PRUH WKDQ PRQWKV $QDO\VHV VXSSRUWHG WKHLU SUHGLFWLRQ DQG ZHUH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW WR WKH S OHYHO 6XPPDU\ 5HVHDUFK WKHQ KDV GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW D KHOSHUfV FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DQG PRWLYHV FDQ DIIHFW KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU SDUWLFXODUO\ WKH DPRXQW RI KHOS LH GHFLGLQJ ZKHWKHU WR KHOS DQG KRZ PXFKf 6WLOO WR EH DQVZHUHG DUH TXHVWLRQV DERXW WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI KHOS LH GRHV WKH KHOSHU KDYH WKH DELOLW\ WR KHOS DQG LV WKH KHOS DFWXDOO\ KHOSIXOf $V SRLQWHG RXW E\ 1HLPH\HU DQG 3IHLIIHU f DQG RWKHUV HJ )UDQNLVK &ODU\ t 2UHQVWHLQ f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

PAGE 38

WKLV VWXG\ LQFOXGH KHOSLQJ WR SUHGLFW DQ LQGLYLGXDOn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f +RL 7KHUH ZLOO EH QR GLIIHUHQFH LQ DPRXQW RI HPSDWKLF SHUVSHFWLYHn WDNLQJ DELOLW\ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ EHWZHHQ WUDLQHG FULVLV FHQWHU YROXQWHHUV DQG XQWUDLQHG YROXQWHHUV RU SV\FKRORJ\ XQGHUJUDGXDWHV +\SRWKHVLV $V D FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ YROXQWHHUnV OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH LQFUHDVHV WKH DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ ZLOO GHFUHDVH +T 7KHUH ZLOO EH QR GLIIHUHQFH LQ WKH DPRXQW RI HPSDWKLF SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DELOLW\ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ EHWZHHQ WUDLQHG FULVLV FHQWHU YROXQWHHUV ZKR KDYH PRUH H[SHULHQFH DQG WKRVH ZKR KDYH OHVV H[SHULHQFH YROXQWHHULQJ DW WKH DJHQF\ +\SRWKHVLV :KHQ VXEMHFWV FRQVLGHU UHDVRQV ZK\ WKH\ ZRXOG YROXQWHHU VXLFLGHFULVLV KRWOLQH YROXQWHHUV ZLOO H[SUHVV KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ WKDQ

PAGE 39

QRQWUDPHG SV\FKRORJ\ XQGHUJUDGXDWHV +R 7KHUH ZLOO EH QR GLIIHUHQFH LQ DPRXQW RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ DV D UHDVRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ EHWZHHQ FULVLV FHQWHU YROXQWHHUV DQG XQGHUJUDGXDWH SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQWV .HY 'HILQLWLRQV $OWUXLVP KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU EDVHG RQ FRQFHUQ IRU WKH ZHOIDUH RI DQRWKHU UDWKHU WKDQ FRQFHUQ IRU WKH ZHOIDUH RI WKH VHOI LH HJRLVPf $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK D SHUVRQ YROXQWHHUV RXW RI FRQFHUQ IRU RWKHUV DV RSSRVHG WR FRQFHUQ IRU VHOI (PSDWKLF 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ fDQ DFWLYH SURFHVV RI GHVLULQJ WR NQRZ WKH IXOO SUHVHQW DQG FKDQJLQJ DZDUHQHVV RI DQRWKHU SHUVRQ RI UHDFKLQJ RXW WR UHFHLYH KLV FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG PHDQLQJ DQG RI WUDQVODWLQJ KLV ZRUGV DQG VLJQV LQWR H[SHULHQFHG PHDQLQJ WKDW PDWFKHV DVSHFWV RI KLV DZDUHQHVV WKDW DUH PRVW LPSRUWDQW WR KLP ,W LV DQ H[SHULHQFLQJ RI WKH FRQVFLRXVQHVV fEHKLQGf DQRWKHUfV RXWZDUG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EXW ZLWK WKH FRQWLQXRXV DZDUHQHVV WKDW WKLV FRQVFLRXVQHVV LV RULJLQDWLQJ DQG SURFHHGLQJ LQ WKH RWKHUf %DUUHWW/HQQDUG S f ,W LV QRW fHVVHQWLDO IRU WKH SHUVRQ ZLWK ZKRP RQH LV HPSDWKL]LQJ WR EH OLWHUDOO\ SUHVHQW >IRU LW LV@ DQ LQQHU H[SHULHQFHf %DUUHWW/HQQDUG S f (PSDWK\ WKH DELOLW\ WR DFFXUDWHO\ SHUFHLYH DQG XQGHUVWDQG WKH VSHFLILF FRQWHQW RI DQRWKHU SHUVRQnV WKRXJKWV DQG IHHOLQJV DQG WKH DELOLW\ WR LQIHU DQG FRPPXQLFDWH WKDW SHUVRQfV HPRWLRQDO VWDWHVf 3DUDSURIHVVLRQDO YROXQWHHUV VSHFLILFDOO\ WUDLQHG LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ LQFOXGLQJ WUDLQLQJ XVLQJ DFWLYH OLVWHQLQJ VNLOOVf LQ RUGHU WR DQVZHU WHOHSKRQH FDOOV IURP LQGLYLGXDOV LQ VXLFLGDO SHUVRQDO DQGRU HPRWLRQDO FULVLV

PAGE 40

3HUVSHFWLYH7DNLQJ WKH WHQGHQF\ RU DELOLW\ RI WKH UHVSRQGHQW WR VSRQWDQHRXVO\ DGRSW WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI RWKHU SHRSOH DQG VHH WKLQJV IURP WKHLU SRLQW RI YLHZ 6XFFHVV DV D 9ROXQWHHU FRPSOHWLRQ RI FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ WUDLQLQJ DQG FRQWLQXLQJ WR YROXQWHHU EH\RQG WKH VL[PRQWK WLPH UHTXLUHPHQW 9ROXQWHHU fVRPHRQH ZKR FRQWULEXWHV VHUYLFHV ZLWKRXW ILQDQFLDO JDLQ WR D IXQFWLRQDO VXEFRPPXQLW\ RU FDXVHf +HQGHUVRQ Sf

PAGE 41

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f DSSOLFDQWV DFFHSWHG IRU WUDLQLQJ

PAGE 42

DQG D FRQWURO JURXS VLPLODU LQ DJH EDFNJURXQG DQG HGXFDWLRQ 'DWD ZHUH JDWKHUHG WKURXJK WKH XVH RI SDSHU DQG SHQFLO WHVWV VHH LQVWUXPHQWV VHFWLRQf ZLWK DQ LQLWLDO JRDO RI KDYLQJ SHRSOH LQ HDFK JURXS 7KH DFWXDO QXPEHU RI SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ HDFK JURXS LV GLVFXVVHG XQGHU 3DUWLFLSDQWV 7KH RYHUDOO GHVLJQ ZDV D QRQHTXLYDOHQW FRQWURO JURXSV GHVLJQ 3DUWLFLSDQWV 7KH WKUHH SDUWLFLSDQW JURXSV ZHUH Df SDUDSURIHVVLRQDO YROXQWHHUV ZLWK YDU\LQJ DPRXQWV RI H[SHULHQFH DW WKH FULVLV DJHQF\ Ef LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR KDG EHHQ DFFHSWHG IRU YROXQWHHU WUDLQLQJ DW WKH FULVLV DJHQF\ EXW KDG QRW \HW FRPSOHWHG WUDLQLQJf DQG Ff XQGHUJUDGXDWH SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQWV HQUROOHG LQ 3HUVRQDOLW\ 7KHRU\ DW D ODUJH VRXWKHDVWHUQ XQLYHUVLW\ $OO SDUDSURIHVVLRQDO YROXQWHHUV ZHUH IURP D SURPLQHQW VRXWKHDVWHUQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DJHQF\ $Q\ FRQWURO JURXS SDUWLFLSDQWV ZKR KDG HLWKHU SUHYLRXVO\ SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ RU ZHUH FXUUHQWO\ HQUROOHG LQ WKH FULVLV FHQWHU WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP ZHUH QRW LQFOXGHG DV SDUW RI WKH FRQWURO JURXS LQ WKH DQDO\VHV $Q LQLWLDO JRDO RI SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ HDFK UHVHDUFK JURXS YROXQWHHUV DQG WUDLQHHVf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f RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH VWXGHQWV DQG ZHUH QRW PRVW RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH

PAGE 43

VLQJOHXQPDUULHG f DQG UDFLDO FRPSRVLWLRQ RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV ZDV DV IROORZV &DXFDVLDQ +LVSDQLF $VLDQ3DFLILF ,VODQGHU $IULFDQ $PHULFDQ DQG 2WKHU 7KH DJH UDQJH RI SDUWLFLSDQWV ZDV ZLWK DQ DYHUDJH DJH RI \HDUV 6' f ,QVWUXPHQWV (PSDWK\ 6FDOHV XVHG ,Q RUGHU WR DVVHVV SDUWLFLSDQWnV HPSDWK\ WZR LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH XVHG 7KH ILUVW LQVWUXPHQW LV D VXEVFDOH RI WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ 'DYLV f D LWHP LQVWUXPHQW WKDW PHDVXUHV IRXU DVSHFWV RI HPSDWK\ &DUH\ )R[ DQG 6SUDJJLQV f GHVLJQHG D VWXG\ WR YHULI\ WKH PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO QDWXUH DQG LWHP FRPSRVLWLRQ RI WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ VXEVFDOHV WKURXJK IDFWRU DQDO\VLV ,W LV LPSRUWDQW WR UHSOLFDWH WKH IDFWRU VWUXFWXUH RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZLWK YDU\LQJ VDPSOHV WR GHPRQVWUDWH WKDW WKH IDFWRUV KDYH D ZLGHU UDQJH RI DSSOLFDELOLW\ DV JHQHUDOL]HG FRQVWUXFWV WR WKH H[WHQW WKDW LQYDULDQFH LV IRXQG DFURVV FKDQJHV LQ HLWKHU YDULDEOHV RU LQGLYLGXDOVf 7KH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ VXEVFDOHV PHDVXUH IRXU GLVFHPLEO\ GLIIHUHQW HPSDWK\ GLPHQVLRQV DQG WKH FRQVWUXFWV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ LQGH[ KDYH JHQHUDOL]DELOLW\ RXWVLGH WKH RULJLQDO VDPSOHV XVHG WR GHYHORS WKH LQVWUXPHQW &DUH\ HW DO f 7KH VXEVFDOH PRVW UHOHYDQW WR WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ LV WKH SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ 37f VFDOH ZKLFK LV UHODWHG WR WKH FRJQLWLYH DELOLW\ WR MXGJH RWKHU SHRSOH DFFXUDWHO\ 'DYLV Ef ,W LQYROYHV WKH WHQGHQF\ WR VSRQWDQHRXVO\ DGRSW WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO YLHZ RI RWKHUV 'DYLV D SS f ZKLFK LV TXLWH FRPSDWLEOH ZLWK 5RJHULDQ HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ &DUH\ HW DO f VXJJHVW WKDW WKH 37 VFDOH LV D XVHIXO PHDVXUH RI HPSDWKLF HIIHFWLYHQHVV

PAGE 44

LQ FRXQVHOLQJ ,Q DGGLWLRQ &ODU\ DQG 2UFQVWHLQ f IRXQG WKDW SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ LV LQYROYHG LQ KHOSLQJ EXW LV PRUH UHOHYDQW IRU HIIHFWLYHQHVV WKDQ IRU DPRXQW RI KHOS S f ,W VHHPV WKDW SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ IRFXVHV RQ FROOHFWLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG LPSURYLQJ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ FOHDUO\ FRJQLWLYH SURFHVVHV UDWKHU WKDQ HQJDJLQJ LQ DOWUXLVWLF EHKDYLRU ZKLFK PD\ EH LQRUH HPRWLRQDO 'DYLV Ef 7KH FRHIILFLHQW DOSKD RI WKH 37 VFDOH LV 2NXQ 6KHSDUG DQG (LVHQEHUJ f XVHG WKH 37 VFDOH WR DVVHVV YROXQWHHUVLQ WUDLQLQJ DW WKH +XPDQH 6RFLHW\ DQG 3DUHQWV $QRQ\PRXV 7KH FRHIILFLHQW DOSKD IRU WKH VFDOH LQ WKHLU VWXG\ ZDV 7KH RWKHU WKUHH VXEVFDOHV RI WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ ZKLFK ZHUH QRW XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ DUH WKH IDQWDV\ VFDOH D WHQGHQF\ WR EHFRPH GHHSO\ LQYROYHG LQ ILFWLWLRXV VLWXDWLRQVf WKH SHUVRQDO GLVWUHVV VFDOH D WHQGHQF\ WR H[SHULHQFH HPRWLRQV UHODWHG WR GLVFRPIRUW DQG GLVWUHVV ZKHQ IDFHG ZLWK D QHHG\ RWKHUf DQG WKH HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ VFDOH D WHQGHQF\ WR H[SHULHQFH HPRWLRQV RI FRQFHUQ DQG V\PSDWK\ ZKHQ H[SRVHG WR D SHUVRQ LQ GLVWUHVVf 7KH IDQWDV\ DQG SHUVRQDO GLVWUHVV VXEVFDOHV ZHUH QRW XVHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW LQYHVWLJDWLRQ VLQFH QR VWXGLHV KDYH LQGLFDWHG WKHLU XVHIXOQHVV DV PHDVXUHV IRU HPSDWKLF HIIHFWLYHQHVV LQ FRXQVHOLQJ VLWXDWLRQV 7KH HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ VXEVFDOH ZDV QRW XVHG VLQFH LW KDV EHHQ VKRZQ WR KDYH QR UHODWLRQVKLS WR PHDVXUHV RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO IXQFWLRQLQJ 'DYLV Df ,Q DGGLWLRQ SHRSOH ZLWK KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ WKLV VXEVFDOH UHSRUWHG PRUH XQHDVH DQG DQ[LHW\ DURXQG RWKHUV WKDW LV 'DYLV IRXQG D JHQHUDOO\ SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VFRUHV RQ WKH HPSDWKLF FRQFHUQ VXEVFDOH DQG PHDVXUHV RI VK\QHVV VRFLDO DQ[LHW\ DQG DXGLHQFH DQ[LHW\ DV ZHOO DV VOLJKW WHQGHQFLHV WRZDUG FKURQLF IHDUIXOQHVV DQG YXOQHUDELOLW\ (DFK RI WKH IRXU VXEVFDOHV FRQVLVWV RI VHYHQ LWHPV UDWHG RQ D VFDOH RI GRHV QRW GHVFULEH PH ZHOOf WR GHVFULEHV PH YHU\ ZHOOf )RU HDFK VFDOH

PAGE 45

RYHUDOO VFRUHV FDQ UDQJH IURP WR ZLWK LQGLFDWLQJ D KLJK GHJUHH RI WKDW SDUWLFXODU DVSHFW RI HPSDWK\ 7KH RWKHU LQVWUXPHQW XVHG WR PHDVXUH SDUWLFLSDQWV HPSDWK\ ZDV %DUUHWW /HQQDUGnV 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f 7KLV LQVWUXPHQW fLV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH IRXU GLPHQVLRQV RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV DGDSWHG IURP 5RJHUVf f FRQFHSWLRQ RI WKH QHFHVVDU\ FRQGLWLRQV IRU WKHUDSHXWLF FKDQJH %DUUHWW/HQQDUG S f ,W PHDVXUHV HPSDWK\ FRQJUXHQFH OHYHO RI UHJDUG DQG XQFRQGLWLRQDOLW\ 7KHVH IRXU WKHRUHWLFDOO\ FULWLFDO YDULDEOHV RI WKHUDSLVWFRXQVHORUWRFOLHQW UHVSRQVHV FDQ EH DVVHVVHG IURP WKH SHUFHSWLRQV RI HLWKHU WKH FOLHQW RU WKH WKHUDSLVW )RU WKH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ WKH YDULDEOH RI LQWHUHVW LV HPSDWK\ IURP FULVLV YROXQWHHUnV FRXQVHORUnVf SHUVSHFWLYH +XQGUHGV RI VWXGLHV KDYH XVHG YDULRXV DGDSWDWLRQV DQG UHVHDUFK DSSOLFDWLRQV RI WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG %DUUHWW/HQQDUG t %HUJHUVRQ f 2QH XVHIXO DSSOLFDWLRQ RI WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ LV WKDW DQ RUGLQDU\ SHUVRQ FDQ UHVSRQG WR TXHVWLRQV LQ UHIHUHQFH WR DQ\ VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK DQRWKHU SHUVRQ ZKLFK LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH XVHIXOQHVV RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW LQ D FRXQVHOLQJ RU WKHUDS\ UHVHDUFK FRQWH[W 7KH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ LV D LWHP TXHVWLRQQDLUH LQ ZKLFK D SHUVRQ MXGJHV VWDWHPHQWV ZLWK UHVSHFW WR KRZ WUXH RU XQWUXH WKH\ DUH DERXW KLPKHU *XUPDQ f LQ KLV H[WHQVLYH UHYLHZ RI WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ UHSRUWV PHDQ VSOLWKDOI LQWHUQDOf UHOLDELOLW\A DQG WHVWUHWHVW FRHIILFLHQWV RI RU DERYH IRU HDFK RI WKH IRXU 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ VXEVFDOHV 5HOLDELOLW\ RU FRQVLVWHQF\ LV FHQWUDOO\ FRQFHUQHG ZLWK ZKHWKHU DQ LQVWUXPHQW \LHOGV WKH VDPH UHVXOW ZKHQHYHU LW LV DSSOLHG WR VRPHWKLQJ WKDW LW LV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH ZKLFK KDV UHPDLQHG FRQVWDQW IURP RQH RFFDVLRQ RI PHDVXUHPHQW WR DQRWKHU

PAGE 46

%DUUHWW/FQQDUG f VWDWHV WKDW RIILFLDO QRUPV IRU WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ GR QRW H[LVW 6XFK QRUPV ZRXOG LQGLFDWH WKDW LQ D FHUWDLQ SHUFHQW RI FDVHV VFRUHV RQ D JLYHQ VXEVFDLH H[FHHG RU IDOO EHORZ D VSHFLILHG YDOXH )RUWXQDWHO\ VXFK QRUPV DUH QRW HVVHQWLDO IRU PRVW UHVHDUFK 7KH WDVN RI FDOFXODWLQJ QRUPV IRU WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ZKHUH WKHUH DU DW OHDVW SULQFLSDO YDULDQWV RI WKH LWHP YHUVLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW DQG DW OHDVW DV PDQ\ VLJQLILFDQW UHYLVLRQV DQG DGDSWDWLRQV VHHPV SDUWLFXODUO\ FRPSOH[ 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ GDWD KDYH EHHQ FROOHFWHG LQ YDULRXV FRQWH[WV HJ GLYHUVH WKHUDS\ UHVHDUFK VWXGLHV HGXFDWLRQEDVHG VWXGLHV PDULWDO DQG IDPLO\ VSKHUH VWXGLHV DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VWXGLHVf WKURXJK GLIIHUHQW YLHZSRLQWV DQG LQ D ZLGH DUUD\ RI UHODWLRQVKLSV RI YDU\LQJ GXUDWLRQ DQG VLJQLILFDQFH 7KHVH GLIIHUHQW YDULDEOHV VXJJHVW WKDW DFFXPXODWLQJ DQG RUJDQL]LQJ GDWD LQWR PHDQLQJIXO QRUPDWLYH IRUP ZRXOG EH D IRUPLGDEOH WDVN )RU WKH SXUSRVH RI WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ WKH K\SRWKHVHV VWDWH WKDW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ JURXSV ZLOO H[LVW HJ YROXQWHHUV ZLOO H[KLELW JUHDWHU HPSDWK\ WKDQ ZLOO WUDLQHHV RU FRQWUROVf VLQFH WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ VFRUHV DUH PHDVXUHG DV D GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH QRUPV RU VFRUH FXWRIIV DUH QRW QHFHVVDU\ WR PHDVXUH GLIIHUHQFHV RU FRPSDUH JURXSV ,Q DGGLWLRQ LW VKRXOG QRW EH WDNHQ IRU JUDQWHG WKDW PRUH >LH D KLJKHU VFRUH@ PHDQV EHWWHU RQ DOO 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ VFDOHV LQ DOO FDVHVf %DUUHWW/HQQDUG Sf 7KH (PSDWKLF 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ VXEVFDOH RI WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ FRQVLVWV RI VWDWHPHQWV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH SDUWLFLSDQWVf HPSDWK\ 7KH LWHPV LQ HDFK VXEVFDOH DUH UDWHG RQ D SRLQW VFDOH f ZLWK LQGLFDWLQJ \HV VWURQJO\ IHHO LW LV WUXH DERXW PH DQG LQGLFDWLQJ QR O VWURQJO\ IHHO LW LV QRW WUXH DERXW PH +DOI RI WKH LWHPV LQ HDFK VXEVFDOH DUH QHJDWLYHO\ ZRUGHG DQG UHYHUVHVFRUHG 2YHUDOO VFDOHG VFRUHV

PAGE 47

FDQ UDQJH IURP WR ZLWK D SRVLWLYH LQGLFDWLQJ WKH KLJKHVW GHJUHH RI HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ *XUPDQ f UHYLHZHG D VXEVWDQWLDO UDQJH RI FRQWH[WV DQG LQYHVWLJDWLRQV XVLQJ WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ +H IRXQG D PHDQ FRHIILFLHQW DOSKD RI IRU WKH HPSDWK\ VXEVFDOH 7KH SRVLWLYH UHVXOWV RI D UDQJH RI LQGHSHQGHQW SUHGLFWLYH VWXGLHV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK WKH DVVRFLDWLRQ EHWZHHQ UHODWLRQVKLS FRQGLWLRQV PHDVXUHG E\ WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ DQG RXWFRPH LQ WKHUDS\ RU KHOSLQJ VLWXDWLRQV IRUP VWURQJ HYLGHQFH RI FRQVWUXFW SUHGLFWLYHf YDOLGLW\ XUPDQ FRQFOXGHV WKDW fWKHUH H[LVWV VXEVWDQWLDO LI QRW RYHUZKHOPLQJ HYLGHQFH LQ VXSSRUW RI WKH K\SRWKHVL]HG UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKHUDSHXWLF FRQGLWLRQV DQG RXWFRPH LQ LQGLYLGXDO WKHUDS\ DQG FRXQVHOOLQJf S f ,Q JHQHUDO WKH LVVXH RI YDOLGLW\ LV UDWKHU FRPSOH[ LQ SV\FKRVRFLDO PHDVXUHPHQW ,W GHSHQGV RQ WKH FODULW\ RI D FRQFHSW DQG RQ WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI ZKDW LV LQWHQGHG WR EH PHDVXUHG RQ WKH PHDQLQJWXOQHVV RI YLHZLQJ WKH FRQVWUXFW DV YDULDEO\ IDOOLQJ DORQJ D ORZ WR KLJK FRQWLQXXP RU VHTXHQFH DQG RQ WKH FRQJUXHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH FRQFHSWXDOL]HG GLPHQVLRQ DQG WKH DFWXDO YDULDEOH EHLQJ PHDVXUHG 'LIIHUHQW W\SHV RI YDOLGLW\ VXFK DV FRQWHQW SUHGLFWLYH fIDFWRULDOf DQG FRQVWUXFW DGGUHVV VRPH RI WKH DERYH LVVXHV %RWK WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ 'DYLV f DQG WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ %DUUHWW /HQQDUG f XQGHUVWRRG DQG DSSOLHG DSSURSULDWHO\ FDQ EH WUHDWHG DV YDOLG VFDOHV 2WKHU VFDOHV FRQVLGHUHG $OWKRXJK QRW HDVLO\ DGDSWDEOH WR WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ ,FNHV DQG YDULRXV FROOHDJXHV GHYHORSHG WKH XQVWUXFWXUHG G\DGLF LQWHUDFWLRQ SDUDGLJP WR PHDVXUH HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ XVHG LQ D QDWXUDOLVWLF VHWWLQJ HJ VHH ,FNHV ,FNHV %LVVRQQHWWH *DUFLD t 6WLQVRQ ,FNHV 6WLQVRQ %LVVRQQHWWH t *DUFLD LFNHV t 7RRNH f 0HPEHUV RI D

PAGE 48

G\DG DUH XQREWUXVLYHO\ DXGLR DQG YLGHRWDSHG ZKLOH LQWHUDFWLQJ LQ D fZDLWLQJ URRPf $W WKH HQG RI WKH REVHUYDWLRQ SHULRG SDUWLFLSDQWV DUH SDUWLDOO\ GHEULHIHG WKHQ HDFK PHPEHU RI WKH G\DG LV DVNHG WR VHSDUDWHO\ UHYLHZ WKH YLGHRWDSH DQG DVVHVV WKH WKRXJKWV DQG IHHOLQJV KH RU VKH KDG GXULQJ WKH fZDLWLQJ URRPf LQWHUDFWLRQ 3DUWLFLSDQWV DUH WKHQ GLUHFWHG WR YLHZ WKH WDSH D VHFRQG WLPH DQG DVNHG WR LQIHU WKH FRQWHQW RI WKHLU SDUWQHUfV WKRXJKWV DQG IHHOLQJV GXULQJ WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ )LQDOO\ ERWK SDUWLFLSDQWV DUH DVNHG WR FRPSOHWH D SRVWWHVW TXHVWLRQQDLUH DVVHVVLQJ WKHLU SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKHPVHOYHV DQG WKHLU SDUWQHU GXULQJ WKH LQWHUDFWLRQ $ JOREDO PHDVXUH RI HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LV WKHQ FRPSXWHG E\ WUDLQHG LQGHSHQGHQW UDWHUV PDNLQJ VLPLODULW\n MXGJPHQWV 7KH UHVXOWLQJ SHUFHQWDJH PHDVXUH RI HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ ZKLFK FRQWUROV IRU LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WRWDO QXPEHU RI LQIHUHQFHV PDGH DV ZHOO DV UHOLDELOLW\ RI VLPLODULW\ MXGJPHQWVf UDQJHV IURP WRWDO LQDFFXUDF\f WR SHUIHFW DFFXUDF\f 7KH HFOHFWLF DSSURDFK RI WKLV PHWKRG LV DSSHDOLQJ LQ WKDW LW FRPSHQVDWHV IRU ZHDNQHVVHV IRXQG LQ XVLQJ MXVW RQH DSSURDFK WR DVVHVV HPSDWK\ +RZHYHU WKLV PHWKRG ZRXOG EH H[WUHPHO\ GLIILFXOW WR XVH DV LQWHQGHG LQ D QDWXUDOLVWLF VHWWLQJf ZLWK FULVLV KRWOLQH YROXQWHHUV ZKRVH LQWHUDFWLRQV WUDQVSLUH RYHU WKH WHOHSKRQH ZLWK FDOOHUV ZKR W\SLFDOO\ KDYH FRPSOHWH DQRQ\PLW\ DQG WHQG WR EH LQ UHODWLYHO\ KLJK OHYHOV RI GLVWUHVV ,Q D UHYLHZ RI UHVHDUFK RQ WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI UDWHUV IRU VFDOHV EDVHG RQ WKH &DUNKXII DQG 7UXD[ IDFLOLWDWLYH GLPHQVLRQV H J HPSDWK\f :ROEHU DQG 0F*RYHUQ f IRXQG WKDW KLJKHU LQWHUUDWHU UHOLDELOLWLHV DUH PRUH OLNHO\ ZKHQ UDWHUV DUH H[WHQVLYHO\ WUDLQHG LQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VNLOOV ,Q DGGLWLRQ .XUW] DQG *UXPPRQ f IRXQG WKDW FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ REVHUYHU UDWLQJV RI HPSDWK\ ZLWK FOLHQW SHUFHSWLRQV KDYH JHQHUDOO\ EHHQ ORZ 7KLV GRHV OHDYH WKH FRQVWUXFW YDOLGLW\ RI UDWLQJV RSHQ WR TXHVWLRQ %RKDUW t *UHHQEHUJ

PAGE 49

f 0DUDQJRP *DUFLD ,FNHV DQG 7HQJ f VXJJHVW WKDW SDSHU DQG SHQFLO PHDVXUHV RI HPSDWKLF DELOLW\ DUH D YLDEOH DOWHUQDWLYH WR WKH WLPHLQWHQVLYH SHUIRUPDQFH PHDVXUH WKDW ,FNHV DQG KLV FROOHDJXHV GHYHORSHG 2WKHU WHVWV FRQVLGHUHG IRU PHDVXULQJ HPSDWK\ EXW IRXQG WR EH ODFNLQJ IRU WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ LKFOXGHG WKH +XPDQ (PSDWKLF /LVWHQLQJ 7HVW +(/7 &RRQILHOG 1LGD t *UD\ f WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU 'LVFULPLQDWLRQ ,QGH[ &&', 'HOZRUWK 5XGRZ t 7DXE f DQG WKH +HOSIXO 5HVSRQVHV 4XHVWLRQQDLUH +54 0LOOHU +HGULFN t 2UORIVN\ f 7KH +(/7 FRQVLVWV RI WDSHUHFRUGHG FULVLV YLJQHWWHV DQG TXHVWLRQV UHJDUGLQJ WKH YLJQHWWHV ,W LV GHVLJQHG WR PHDVXUH WKUHH DVSHFWV RI HPSDWKLF OLVWHQLQJ 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ ,QWHUHVW DQG 5HVSRQVH$ELOLW\ *UD\ 1LGD DQG &RRQILHOG f IRXQG PL[HG UHVXOWV UHJDUGLQJ WKH +(/7nV UHOLDELOLW\ DQG YDOLGLW\ WKH LQVWUXPHQW ZDV YDOLG GLVFULPLQDQW YDOLGLW\f KRZHYHU WKH 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ VXEVFDOH KDG DQ LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ RI RQO\ WKH 5HVSRQVH$ELOLW\ VFDOH DQG WKH ,QWHUHVW VXEVFDOH ZDV 7KH UHOLDELOLW\ HVWLPDWHV RI WKH ILUVW WZR VXEVFDOHV DUH TXLWH ORZ VXJJHVWLQJ WKDW WKH +(/7 PD\ QRW EH D UHOLDEOH PHDVXUH RI HPSDWKLF OLVWHQLQJ DELOLW\ 7KH &&', LV DQRWKHU PHDVXUH GHYHORSHG IRU WKH VHOHFWLRQ DQG HYDOXDWLRQ RI SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV ,W LV EDVHG RQ &DUNKXII V f UHVHDUFK ZLWK WKH IDFLLLWDWLYH DQG DFWLRQRULHQWHG GLPHQVLRQV UHOHYDQW LQ WKH KHOSLQJ SURFHVV ZKLFK LQFOXGH HPSDWK\ UHVSHFW DQG FRQIURQWDWLRQ 7KH &&', FRQVLVWV RI DXGLRWDSHG H[FHUSWV RI FULVLV FHQWHU FDOOV ZLWK WRSLFV VXFK DV VXLFLGDO LGHDWLRQ SUHJQDQF\ VFKRRO GLIILFXOWLHV DQG UHODWLRQVKLS SUREOHPV $OWKRXJK VFRULQJ FULWHULD DUH LQFOXGHG ZLWK WKH LQVWUXPHQW QR UHOLDELOLW\ RU YDOLGLW\ GDWD DUH JLYHQ

PAGE 50

)LQDOO\ WKH +54 LV D EULHI IUHHUHVSRQVH TXHVWLRQQDLUH WKDW PHDVXUHV SDUWLFLSDQWVn DELOLW\ WR JHQHUDWH HPSDWKLF UHVSRQVHV 7KH LQVWUXPHQW UHTXLUHV WKDW HDFK UHVSRQVH EH UDWHG RQ D SRLQW RUGLQDO VFDOH RI GHSWK RI UHIOHFWLRQ 0LOOHU +HGULFN t 2UORIVN\ S f ZLWK D VFRUH RI LQGLFDWLQJ QR UHIOHFWLRQ DQG DQ LQWHUUXSWLRQ LQ WKH IORZ RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG D VFRUH RI LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW WKH UHIOHFWLRQ LQFOXGHV LQIHUUHG PHDQLQJ DQG D UHIOHFWLRQ RI IHHOLQJ 7KH LQWHUUDWHU UHOLDELOLW\ LQ WKH 0LOOHU HW DO f VWXG\ LV KLJK f EXW WHVWUHWHVW UHOLDELOLW\ ZDV RQO\ 7KH DXWKRUV DFNQRZOHGJH WKDW RWKHU YDULDEOHV SUREDEO\ DFFRXQW IRU YDULDQFH LQ HPSDWKLF VNLOOV DQG VXJJHVW IXUWKHU VWXG\ 1R YDOLGLW\ GDWD IRU WKH VWXG\ LV JLYHQ QRU DUH FXWRII VFRUHV VXJJHVWHG IRU DGHTXDWH RU JRRG VFRUHV 0RWLYDWLRQ ,Q RUGHU WR PHDVXUH SDUWLFLSDQWVn DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ DQ DGDSWDWLRQ RI &ODU\ DQG 2UHQVWHLQnV f 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ ZDV XVHG $OWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ DV RSSRVHG WR HJRLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ LV RSHUDWLRQDOO\ GHILQHG DV WKH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK D SHUVRQ YROXQWHHUV RXW RI FRQFHUQ IRU RWKHUV YHUVXV FRQFHUQ IRU VHOI 7KH PHDVXUH FRQVLVWV RI SRVVLEOH UHDVRQV IRU SHUIRUPLQJ FULVLV FRXQVHOLQJ RI ZKLFK ILYH DUH LGHQWLILHG DV UHSUHVHQWLQJ DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV b DJUHHPHQW LQ D VDPSOH HYDOXDWLQJ WKH UHDVRQV E\ UDWHUV NQRZOHGJHDEOH DERXW PRWLYDWLRQDO LVVXHVf DQG DV HJRLVWLF UHDVRQV 7R DVVHVV DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ SDUWLFLSDQWV DUH DVNHG WR LQGLFDWH WKHLU WRS ILYH UHDVRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ 5DQNV DUH WKHQ UHYHUVHVFRUHG LH WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW UHDVRQ UHFHLYHV D VFRUH RI WKH QH[W PRVW LPSRUWDQW UHDVRQ UHFHLYHV D VFRUH RI DQG VR RQf DQG SDUWLFLSDQWVn RYHUDOO DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ VFRUH LV FRPSXWHG IURP WKH UHYHUVH UDQNV RI DQ\

PAGE 51

DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV LQFOXGHG LQ WKHLU WRS ILYH FKRLFHV 6FRUHV RQ WKH PHDVXUH UDQJH IURP RQO\ HJRLVWLF UHDVRQV FKRVHQf WR RQO\ DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV FKRVHQf 7KLV PHDVXUH LV GHULYHG IURP UDWLQJV E\ DQ LQGHSHQGHQW JURXS RI UDWHUV NQRZOHGJHDEOH DERXW PRWLYDWLRQDO LVVXHV DQG DSSHDUV WR EH D UHDVRQDEOH LQVWUXPHQW ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKLV VFDOH FDQ EH SUHVXPHG DQG WUHDWHG DV YDOLG EDVHG RQ WKH FRQFOXVLRQV RI WKH LQGHSHQGHQW UDWHUV /DVWO\ &ODU\ DQG 2UHQVWHLQfV f PHDVXUH LV RQH RI WKH RQO\ SXEOLVKHG LQVWUXPHQWV WKDW DVVHVV PRWLYDWLRQV IRU SHUIRUPLQJ FULVLV KRWOLQH YROXQWHHU ZRUN +RZHYHU LW VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ ZRXOG QRW EH H[SHFWHG IURP WKLV VFDOH GXH WR WKH QDWXUH RI WKH PHDVXUH ,W ZRXOG EH H[SHFWHG WKDW SDUWLFLSDQWVf UHDVRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ ZRXOG QRW QHFHVVDULO\ EH UHODWHG WR HDFK RWKHU DQG FKRRVLQJ RQH DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQ IRU YROXQWHHULQJ GRHV QRW PHDQ WKDW RWKHU DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV DUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR EH FKRVHQ )RU H[DPSOH RQH UHDVRQ DQ LQGLYLGXDO PLJKW YROXQWHHU LV EHFDXVH LW LV D fFKDQFH WR KHOS RWKHUVf DQ DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQf EXW WKLV GRHV QRW VXJJHVW WKDW WKH SHUVRQ LV RQO\ YROXQWHHULQJ IRU DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV 7KLV VDPH SHUVRQ PD\ DOVR FKRRVH DGGLWLRQDO UHDVRQV WR YROXQWHHU VXFK DV fWR JDLQ VNLOOV ZKLFK ZLOO EH DSSOLFDEOH WR RWKHU VLWXDWLRQVf DQG fIRU SHUVRQDO JURZWKf ERWK HJRLVWLF UHDVRQVf :DOVK DQG %HW] f VWDWH WKDW LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ RIWHQ UHIHUV WR KRPRJHQHLW\ RI LWHPV 6LQFH WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ VFDOH FRQWDLQV ERWK DOWUXLVWLF DQG HJRLVWLF UHDVRQV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ KRPRJHQHLW\ RI LWHPV ZRXOG QRW EH H[SHFWHG 7KXV HVWLPDWHV RI LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ ZRXOG OLNHO\ UHIOHFW WKDW LWHPV DUH KHWHURJHQHRXV

PAGE 52

3URFHGXUH &RQWURO *URXS )RU WKH FRQWURO JURXS D EULHI YHUEDO H[SODQDWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ ZDV JLYHQ DQG TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV ZHUH KDQGHG RXW WR VWXGHQWV LQ D 3HUVRQDOLW\ 7KHRU\ FODVV GXULQJ WKH )DOO VHPHVWHU 7KH ,QIRUPHG &RQVHQW IRUP DQG D EULHI LQVWUXFWLRQ VKHHW ZHUH DWWDFKHG WR WKH IURQW RI WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW ZKLFK LQFOXGHG D SHUVRQDO LQIRUPDWLRQ GHPRJUDSKLFf VKHHW DQG WKH WKUHH LQVWUXPHQWV WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ DQG 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQf LQ RQH RI VL[ DVVLJQHG RUGHUV WR DVFHUWDLQ IRU RUGHU HIIHFWVf $Q RSSRUWXQLW\ WR EH GHEULHIHG DIWHU WKH VWXG\ ZDV RIIHUHG WR DQ\ LQWHUHVWHG SDUWLFLSDQWV $OO VWXGHQWV LQ DWWHQGDQFH FRPSOHWHG D TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW DQG DQVZHUHG HYHU\ TXHVWLRQ 2I WKH SDFNHWV UHWXUQHG RQH ZDV QRW XVHG DV SDUW RI WKH FRQWURO JURXS GDWD LQ WKH VWXG\ VLQFH WKH SDUWLFLSDQW KDG DOUHDG\ ILOOHG RXW D TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW LQ &ULVLV &HQWHU WUDLQLQJ $OO SDUWLFLSDQWV LH DOO JURXSV LQ WKH UHVHDUFK VWXG\f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

PAGE 53

VHVVLRQ DQG DVNHG WKHP WR UHWXUQ WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUHV E\ WKH IROORZLQJ WUDLQLQJ FODVV WKH QH[W 7KXUVGD\f 6LQFH WZR SRWHQWLDO YROXQWHHUV GURSSHG RXW RI WUDLQLQJ DIWHU WKH LQLWLDO 6DWXUGD\ WUDLQLQJ D WRWDO RI WUDLQHHV UHFHLYHG TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV 7KH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV ZHUH WKH VDPH DV WKH SDFNHWV KDQGHG RXW WR WKH FRQWURO JURXS H[FHSW WKDW D OHWWHU ZULWWHQ E\ WKH GLVVHUWDWLRQ VWXG\ UHVHDUFKHU ZDV DWWDFKHG WR WKH IURQW RI WKH SDFNHW 7KH OHWWHU EULHIO\ GHVFULEHG WKH VWXG\ JDYH VRPH EDFNJURXQG RQ WKH UHVHDUFKHUfV YROXQWHHU H[SHULHQFHV ZLWK WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU DQG DVNHG WUDLQHHV WR SDUWLFLSDWH 7ZHQW\WKUHH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV ZHUH FROOHFWHG E\ WUDLQHUV DW WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH QH[W WUDLQLQJ FODVV WUDLQHUV WROG WKH YROXQWHHUVLQWUDLQLQJ ZKR KDG QRW UHWXUQHG D SDFNHW WKDW WKH\ FRXOG UHWXUQ WKHLU SDFNHW DW WKH QH[W WUDLQLQJ FODVV WKH QH[W ZHHNf DQG IRXU PRUH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV ZHUH FROOHFWHG DW WKDW WUDLQLQJ FODVV 7KXV WKH UHWXUQ UDWH RXW RI f ZDV b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nKHUHDV LQDFWLYH YROXQWHHUV LH YROXQWHHUV QRW DFWLYHO\ RU FXUUHQWO\ YROXQWHHULQJ DW WKH &ULVLV &HQWHUf ZRXOG UHFHLYH TXHVWLRQQDLUHV LQ WKH PDLO $OO YROXQWHHU GDWD ZDV FROOHFWHG GXULQJ )DOO VHPHVWHU 4XHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV ZHUH VHQW WR WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU 'LUHFWRU IRU GLVVHPLQDWLRQ LQWR DFWLYH YROXQWHHUVf PDLOER[HV $ OHWWHU VLPLODU WR WKH RQH DWWDFKHG WR WKH WUDLQHHVf SDFNHWV

PAGE 54

ZDV DWWDFKHG WR WKH IURQW RI HDFK TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHW ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU 'LUHFWRU LQFOXGHG D FRYHU OHWWHU ZLWK HDFK RI WKH DFWLYH YROXQWHHUVf SDFNHWV HQFRXUDJLQJ WKHLU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ WKH VWXG\ 4XHVWLRQQDLUHV ZHUH SODFHG LQ WKH DFWLYH YROXQWHHUVf PDLOER[HV 2I WKH DFWLYH YROXQWHHUV FKHFNHG WKHLU PDLOER[HV GXULQJ WKH UHVHDUFK SHULRG &RPSOHWHG TXHVWLRQQDLUHV ZHUH UHWXUQHG WR D 6WDII PDLOER[ 7KLV UHVHDUFKHU VHQW TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV WR LQDFWLYH YROXQWHHUV DORQJ ZLWK DQ LQWURGXFWLRQ OHWWHU VLPLODU WR WKH RQH IRU DFWLYH YROXQWHHUVf YLD WKH 86 3RVWDO 6HUYLFH 6WDPSHG UHWXUQ HQYHORSHV PDUNHG fVXUYH\Vf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f EHFDXVH WKHLU FDPSXV DGGUHVVHV ZHUH QRW FXUUHQW 7KHUHIRUH TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV ZHQW RXW WR SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH UHWXUQ UDWH JRDO ZDV DV VWDWHG HDUOLHU FRPSOHWHG TXHVWLRQQDLUH SDFNHWV IURP WKH HQWLUH YROXQWHHU JURXS 7KH JRDO ZDV H[FHHGHG SDFNHWV ZHUH UHWXUQHG IURP WKH LQDFWLYH YROXQWHHUV D b UHWXUQ UDWHf DQG IURP WKH DFWLYH YROXQWHHUV D b UHWXUQ UDWHf IRU D WRWDO RI SDFNHWV 7KH RYHUDOO UHWXUQ UDWH IRU WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS ZDV b UHWXUQV RXW RI TXHVWLRQQDLUHV GLVVHPLQDWHGf 7KH 'LUHFWRU PDLOHG DOO UHWXUQHG SDFNHWV WR WKH UHVHDUFKHU 2QO\ WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS KDG SURWRFROV ZLWK DQVZHUV

PAGE 55

RPLWWHG RQ WKH HPSDWK\ DQG PRWLYDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQWV 3URWRFROV ZLWK RPLWWHG DQVZHUV ZHUH LQFOXGHG RQO\ LQ DQDO\VHV WKDW GLG QRW SHUWDLQ WR WKH RPLVVLRQV ,Q RWKHU ZRUGV LI D SDUWLFLSDQW GLG QRW OLVW FRXQWU\ RI RULJLQ EXW DOO WKH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH FRPSOHWHG WKHQ WKH SDUWLFLSDQWfV GDWD UHJDUGLQJ WKH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH XVHG LQ WKH DQDO\VHV KRZHYHU LI D SDUWLFLSDQW GLG KRW DQVZHU TXHVWLRQV RQ WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ IRU H[DPSOH WKHQ WKH GDWD ZHUH QRW XVHG 6WDWLVWLFDO $QDO\VHV :LWK UHVSHFW WR WKH WKUHH K\SRWKHVHV WKH IROORZLQJ VWDWLVWLFDO DQDO\VHV ZHUH XVHG +\SRWKHVLV 2QHZD\ EHWZHHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV 0$129$ IRU XQHTXDO DMfV ZLWK JURXS HLWKHU WUDLQHG XQWUDLQHG RU FROOHJH VWXGHQWVf VHUYLQJ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG ZLWK SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DELOLW\ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ VHUYLQJ DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV +\SRWKHVLV 6LPXOWDQHRXV PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZLWK WKH YDULDEOHV LQ WKH DQDO\VLV EHLQJ QXPEHU RI PRQWKV RI SRVWWUDLQLQJ H[SHULHQFH SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ +\SRWKHVLV ,QGHSHQGHQW WHVWV ZLWK JURXS YROXQWHHUV YV XQWUDLQHG FROOHJH VWXGHQWVf VHUYLQJ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH

PAGE 56

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f UHVSRQGHQWV VFRUHG D PHDQ RI 6' f 2Q WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS LQYHQWRU\n HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ VXEVFDOH ZKHUH DQVZHUV FRXLG EH ZLWK QR VWURQJO\ IHHO LW LV QRW WUXH DERXW PH DQG \HV VWURQJO\ IHHO LW LV WUXH DERXW PH DQG WKH RYHUDOO VFRUH UDQJH IRU WKH TXHVWLRQV LV f§ WR f WKH PHDQ VFRUH ZDV 6' f 2Q WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ RQO\ WKH ILYH DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV DUH VFRUHG E\ UHYHUVHVFRULQJ WKH UDQNLQJV DQG WKHQ DGGLQJ WKH VFRUHV WRJHWKHU ZLWK RYHUDOO VFRUHV UDQJLQJ IURP WR WKH PHDQ RI WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ ZDV 6' f 7KH DYHUDJH DJH RI SDUWLFLSDQWV ZDV 6' f DQG WKH DYHUDJH DPRXQW RI WLPH LQ PRQWKV f WKDW YROXQWHHUV ZRUNHG DW WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU ZDV 6' f 0HDQV VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQV UDQJHV DQG PHDVXUHV RI LQWHUQDO

PAGE 57

FRQVLVWHQF\ DUH OLVWHG LQ 7DEOH 6HYHQ UHVSRQGHQWV GLG QRW DQVZHU RQH RU PRUH LWHPV RQ WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ PHDVXUH FRQVHTXHQWO\ WKH QXPEHU RI UHVSRQGHQWV RQ WKDW VFDOH LV 7DEOH 0HDQV DQG 6WDQGDUG 'HYLDWLRQV RI 9DULDEOHV 0HDVXUHG 9DULDEOH 1 0HDQ 6' 5DQJH D FRHIILFLHQW ,5,D E 5, $0 $JHF 7LPHG 1RWH 'DVKHV LQGLFDWH WKDW LQWHUQDO UHOLDELOLW\ ZDV QRW FDOFXODWHG IRU WKLV PHDVXUH VLQFH WKH QDWXUH RI WKH PHDVXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW LW ZRXOG QRW PDNH VHQVH WR WHVW IRU LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ ,I D UHVSRQGHQW FKRRVHV RQH DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQ VKH ZRXOG QRW EH H[SHFWHG WR QHFHVVDULO\ FKRRVH RWKHU DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV ,Q DGGLWLRQ DOWKRXJK WKH UDQJH RI VFRUHV ZDV WR RQO\ RQH SDUWLFLSDQW VFRUHG D )LYH UHVSRQGHQWV VFRUHG D DQG WKUHH UHVSRQGHQWV VFRUHG D QR RQH VFRUHG DQ RU D DQG DOO RWKHU UHVSRQGHQWVf VFRUHV IHOO EHORZ D ,5, LV WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ 5, LV WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ DQG $0 LV WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ E &URQEDFKnV DOSKD FRHIILFLHQW RI LV FRQVLGHUHG ERUGHUOLQH IRU LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ KRZHYHU SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ KDV D FRHIILFLHQW DOSKD RI / $JH RI SDUWLFLSDQWV LV LQ \HDUV G 7LPH YROXQWHHULQJ LV LQ PRQWKV 7KLV VWDWLVWLF RQO\ DSSOLHV WR DFWLYH DQG LQDFWLYH YROXQWHHUV 7KH PHDQ VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ DQG UDQJH UHSRUWHG ZHUH :LQGVRUL]HG VHH +\SRWKHVLV VHFWLRQ IRU D FRPSOHWH H[SODQDWLRQf %HIRUH :LQGVRUL]LQJ WKH PHDQ IRU OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH ZDV 6' f DQG WKH UDQJH ZnDV 2QH SDUWLFLSDQW LQ WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS GLG QRW LQGLFDWH WKH QXPEHU RI PRQWKV YROXQWHHULQJ WKXV Q )UHTXHQFLHV IRU GHPRJUDSKLF LQIRUPDWLRQ PDMRU HQUROOPHQW LQ WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU YROXQWHHU WUDLQLQJ DQG DGGLWLRQDORWKHU WUDLQLQJ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ RU FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DUH

PAGE 58

SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH $ QRQHTXLYDOHQW FRQWURO JURXSV GHVLJQ VXJJHVWV WKDW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV PD\ H[LVW ,Wn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n f S f ,Q DGGLWLRQ QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ UDFLDO FRPSRVLWLRQ H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV b f > S f $OWKRXJK VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG LQ PDULWDO VWDWXV EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV L[ f S f WWHVWV UHYHDOHG WKDW PDULWDO VWDWXV GLG QRW VLJQLILFDQWO\ DIIHFW HPSDWK\ RU PRWLYDWLRQ 7KH WZR PRVW IUHTXHQW SDUWLFLSDQW UHVSRQVHV IRU PDMRU ZHUH SV\FKRORJ\ bf DQG QRW FXUUHQWO\ D VWXGHQW bf &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ DQG 6RFLRORJ\ ZHUH WKH QH[W PRVW IUHTXHQW UHVSRQVHV ZLWK b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\ (LJKW\ RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV UHVSRQGHG WKDW WKH\ KDG EHHQ HQUROOHG LQ WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP DQG UHVSRQGHG WKDW WKH\ KDG QRW $OO RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS PDUNHG f\HVf WR EHLQJ HQUROOHG LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP DQG ILYH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ JURXS PDUNHG f\HVf ,W DSSHDUV WKDW WKH PDMRULW\n Q f RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP PDUNHG fQRf VLQFH WKH\ ZHUH FXUUHQWO\ XQGHUJRLQJ WUDLQLQJ ZKHQ WKH\

PAGE 59

UHVSRQGHG 7KH ILYH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ JURXS ZKR PDUNHG f\HV PD\ KDYH EHHQ HQUROOHG LQ EXW QRW FRPSOHWHGf D SUHYLRXV WUDLQLQJ FODVV RU WKH\ PD\ KDYH LQWHUSUHWHG WKH 7DEOH )UHTXHQFLHV RI WKH 0HDVXUHG 9DULDEOHV 9DULDEOH Q 3HUFHQW *HQGHU 0DOHV b )HPDOHV b 0DULWDO 6WDWXV 6LQJOH QHYHU PDUULHGf b 0DUULHG b 'LYRUFHG b 5HPDLQHG b 5DFH &DXFDVLDQ b +LVSDQLF b $VLDQ3DFLILF ,VODQGHU b $IULFDQ $PHULFDQ b 2WKHU b 0DMRU 1RW D VWXGHQW b 3V\FKRORJ\ b &RXQVHORU (GXFDWLRQ b 6RFLRORJ\ b 0HQWDO +HDOWK &RXQVHOLQJ b &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ b 5HKDE 6HUYLFHV b &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ r b &ULPLQRORJ\ b +LVWRU\ b =RRORJ\ b &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 6FLHQFHV b +DYH \RX HYHU EHHQ HQUROOHG LQ WKH YROXQWHHU WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP DW WKH $&&&"
PAGE 60

TXHVWLRQ DV LQFOXGLQJ WKH WUDLQLQJ WKH\ ZHUH FXUUHQWO\ XQGHUJRLQJ &OHDUO\ QRQH RI WKH FRQWURO JURXS SDUWLFLSDQWV KDG EHHQ HQUROOHG LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ ,Q UHVSRQVH WR WKH TXHVWLRQ DERXW DGGLWLRQDO WUDLQLQJ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ RU FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ SDUWLFLSDQWV PDUNHG \HV DQG PDUNHG QR 6LQFH WKHUH ZHUH SUHH[LVWLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ PHDQ DJH IRU WKH WKUHH JURXSV VHH 7DEOH f D XQLYDULDWH )WHVW ZDV FRPSXWHG IRU WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ JURXS PHDQV 7KH WHVW UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH DJH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW ) RV f S ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH PHDQ DJH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ HDFK JURXS ZDV VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW VHH 7DEOH f 7DEOH 0HDQ $JHV LQ WKH 7KUHH 6WXG\ *URXSV *URXS Q 0HDQ $JH \HDUVf 6' &RQWURO *URXS 7UDLQLQJ *URXS 9ROXQWHHU *URXS 7DEOH *URXS 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ 0HDQ $JH 7HVW 0HDQ 'LIIHUHQFH &RQILGHQFH LQWHUYDO S YDOXH &RQWURO YV 7UDLQLQJ r &RQWURO YV 9ROXQWHHU r 7UDLQLQJ YV 9ROXQWHHU r 1RWH r 'LIIHUHQFH LV VLJQLILFDQW +\SRWKHVLV 7KH ILUVW K\SRWKHVLV RI WKH VWXG\ ZDV WKDW WUDLQHG YROXQWHHUV ZRXOG H[KLELW JUHDWHU HPSDWK\ LQ WKH IRUP RI SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DELOLW\ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKDQ ZRXOG WUDLQHHV ZKR KDYH EHHQ DFFHSWHG IRU YROXQWHHU WUDLQLQJ EXW KDYH QRW FRPSOHWHG

PAGE 61

WUDLQLQJf RU XSSHUOHYHO SV\FKRORJ\ XQGHUJUDGXDWHV ZLWK QR WUDLQLQJ LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ 6LQFH PRUH WKDQ RQH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH ZDV HPSOR\HG LH ERWK WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ DQG WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ZHUH XVHG DV HPSDWKLF PHDVXUHVf D RQHn ZD\ EHWZHHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV PXOWLYDULDWH DQDO\VLV RI YDULDQFH 0$129$f IRU XQHTXDO QV ZDV LQLWLDOO\ SURSRVHG DV WKH VWDWLVWLFDO DQDO\VLV WR EH SHUIRUPHG +RZHYHU RQFH LW ZDV GHWHUPLQHG WKDW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW PHDQ DJH GLIIHUHQFHV H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH WKUHH JURXSV VHH 7DEOHV DQG f ZKLFK HVVHQWLDOO\ PHDQV WKDW D SRUWLRQ RI WKH WRWDO YDULDELOLW\ DPRQJ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHVf VFRUHV ZDV H[SODLQHG E\ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DJH DQG HPSDWK\ D PXOWLYDULDWH DQDO\VLV RI FRYDULDQFH 0$1&29$f ZDV SHUIRUPHG LQ RUGHU WR H[WUDFW WKH H[SODLQHG YDULDELOLW\ 7KLV VWDWLVWLFDO DGMXVWPHQW RI D FRQFRPLWDQW YDULDEOH DJH LQ WKLV FDVHf DOORZHG FRPSDULVRQ EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV WKDW FRXOG QRW EH HTXDWHG WKURXJK WKH XVH RI UDQGRP DVVLJQPHQW RI SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KLV VWDWLVWLFDO WHFKQLTXH DOVR UHGXFHV HUURU YDULDQFH WKHUHE\ JDPLQJ VWDWLVWLFDO SRZHU :LWK 0$1&29$ FRQWUROOLQJ IRU WKH DJH GLIIHUHQFHV DQ RPQLEXV )WHVW UHYHDOHG WKDW DJH KDG QR HIIHFW 3LOODLfV 7UDFH ) f S )RU HDFK VFDOH DJDLQ QR DJH GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG IRU WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ ) f S!$ DQG IRU WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ )RVf S! +RZHYHU DV K\SRWKHVL]HG VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV DJDLQ XVLQJ DQ RPQLEXV )VWDWLVWLFf LQ DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV ZKHQ FRQWUROOLQJ IRU DJH 3LOODLfV 7UDFH ) f S )RU WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ VFDOH ) f S IRU WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ) f A 6LQFH QR DJH HIIHFW ZDV IRXQG WKH 0$129$ UHVXOWV DUH UHSRUWHG IRU ERWK VFDOHV 7DEOH FRQWDLQV WKH JURXS PHDQV IRU HDFK VFDOH 2Q ERWK WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\

PAGE 62

,QGH[ DQG WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS PHDQ ZDV VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHUHQW IURP WKH FRQWURO JURXS PHDQ DQG WKH WUDLQLQJ JURXS PHDQ VHH 7DEOH f EXW RQ WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ YROXQWHHUV DQG WUDLQHHV ZDV PDUJLQDO 7DEOH *URXS 0HDQV RQ WKH (PSDWK\ 0HDVXUHV 6FDOH DQG *URXS 0HDQ 6' ) ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ r &RQWURO 7UDLQLQJ 9ROXQWHHU 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ &RQWURO r 7UDLQLQJ 9ROXQWHHU r )Rf 7DEOH *URXS 'LIIHUHQFHV LQ (PSDWK\ 6FDOH DQG 7HVW 0HDQ 'LIIHUHQFH &RQILGHQFH ,QWHUYDO S YDOXH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ &RQWURO YV 7UDLQLQJ &RQWURO YV 9ROXQWHHUr 7UDLQLQJ YV 9ROXQWHHU 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ &RQWURO YV 7UDLQLQJ &RQWURO YV 9ROXQWHHUr 7UDLQLQJ YV 9ROXQWHHUr 1RWH SUHGLFWHG GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKHVH JURXSV r GLIIHUHQFH LV VLJQLILFDQW D 'LIIHUHQFH LV PDUJLQDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 63

+\SRWKHVLV 7KH K\SRWKHVL]HG LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ D FULVLV YROXQWHHUnV OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH DQG DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ ZDV QRW REWDLQHG 9ROXQWHHUVf OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH ZDV PHDVXUHG E\ QXPEHU RI PRQWKV ZRUNLQJ DV D YROXQWHHU DW WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU DQG DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ ZDV PHDVXUHG XVLQJ WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ DQG WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ,Q RUGHU WR FRUUHFW IRU H[WUHPH YDOXHV RXWOLHUVf LQ D GDWD VHW VWDWLVWLFDO PHWKRGV FDQ EH HPSOR\HG WR WUDQVIRUP WKH HQWLUH GDWD VHW RU WR VXEVWLWXWH H[WUHPH YDOXHV ZLWK OHVV H[WUHPH YDOXHV 2QH RI WKHVH PHWKRGV LV FDOOHG ZLQGVRUL]HG VWDWLVWLFV ,Q RUGHU WR KHOS HOLPLQDWH WKH LQIOXHQFH RI RXWO\LQJ GDWD SRLQWV LQ OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH WKDW PLJKW VNHZ WKH UHVXOWV WKH YDULDEOH ZDV ZLQGVRUL]HG :LQGVRUL]LQJ LV D SURFHVV ZKHUHE\ H[WUHPH GDWD SRLQWV RU RXWOLHUVf DUH VHW WR WKH KLJKHVW YDOXH GDWD SRLQWf ZLWKLQ WKH FOXVWHU RI GDWD SRLQWV WKDW LV H[WUHPH YDOXHV LQ WKH GDWD VHW DUH UHSODFHG E\ WKH YDOXH RI D FXWRII FULWHULRQ %DUQHWW t /HZLV f :LQGVRUL]LQJ FRPSULVHV D FRPSURPLVH EHWZHHQ HOLPLQDWLQJ WKH VWURQJ LQIOXHQFH RI H[WUHPH YDOXHV RQ WKH PHDQ ZKLOH VWLOO XVLQJ DOO RI WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ LQ WKH GDWD VHW $ ER[SORW ZDV XVHG WR GHWHUPLQH WKH RXWOLHUV LQ WKH GDWD VHW VHH $JUHVWL t )LQOD\ f %R[SORWV DUH HVVHQWLDOO\ FKDUWV WKDW VXPPDUL]H WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI D YDULDEOH E\ GLVSOD\LQJ WKH PHGLDQ TXDUWLOHV DQG RXWOLHUV :LWK UHVSHFW WR WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH ER[SORW WKHUH ZHUH FDVHV WKDW ZHUH GHWHUPLQHG WR EH RXWOLHUV 7KH RXWOLHUV ZHUH LQ PRQWKV RI H[SHULHQFHf Q f Q f DQG 7KH QH[W KLJKHVW YDOXH RU FDVHf WKDW ZDV QRW DQ RXWOLHU ZDV PRQWKV RI H[SHULHQFHf ZKLFK EHFDPH WKH FXWRII FULWHULRQ 7KHUHIRUH ZKHQ WKH RXWOLHUV IRU WKH OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH YDULDEOH ZHUH ZLQGVRUL]HG WKH\ ZHUH DOO VHW WR %HIRUH ZLQGVRUL]LQJ WKH PHDQ OHQJWK RI YROXQWHHUVf H[SHULHQFH ZDV PRQWKV 6' f 5HVXOWV RI FRUUHODWLRQV XVLQJ WKH QRQZLQGVRUL]HG OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH GDWD

PAGE 64

VHW ZHUH QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW 7KLV PDNHV VHQVH LQ OLJKW RI WKH ODUJH VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQ $IWHU ZLQGVRQ]LQJ WKH PHDQ ZDV 6' f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r 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ rr rr $JH rr / /B r rr %RWK WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ DQG WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ZHUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ SRVLWLYHO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH EXW WKH\ ZHUH DOVR VLJQLILFDQWO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK HDFK RWKHU 7KHUHIRUH D PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV SHUIRUPHG HQWHULQJ WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ DQG 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ VLPXOWDQHRXVO\ 7KH WZR HPSDWK\ PHDVXUHV DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH YDULDELOLW\ LQ OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH 5 DGM )7 f DQG DW OHDVW RQH RI WKH VFDOHV ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH ) f S :KHQ HDFK VFDOH ZDV WHVWHG LQGLYLGXDOO\ FRQWUROOLQJ IRU WKH RWKHU VFDOH WKH IROORZLQJ UHVXOWV ZHUH IRXQG IRU WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ VFDOH W DQG IRU WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ VFDOH W

PAGE 65

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f 7KH WKUHH YDULDEOHV DFFRXQWHG IRU b RI WKH YDULDQFH LQ OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH 5 DGM ,I f DQG DW OHDVW RQH RI WKH YDULDEOHV ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH ) f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f ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG $Q LQGHSHQGHQW WHVW ZDV SHUIRUPHG ZLWK JURXS YROXQWHHUV YV FRQWUROVf VHUYLQJ DV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH DQG WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ VHUYLQJ DV WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH $ RQHZD\ $129$ ZDV FRQGXFWHG XVLQJ WKH HQWLUH VDPSOHfV VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQf DQG UHYHDOHG QR GLIIHUHQFHV LQ DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ DFURVV WKH WKUHH JURXSV ) f S 7KH PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF

PAGE 66

0RWLYDWLRQ IRU HDFK RI WKH WKUHH JURXSV ZHUH FRQWURO JURXS PHDQ 6' f WUDLQLQJ JURXS PHDQ 6' f DQG YROXQWHHU JURXS PHDQ 6' f $V VWDWHG HDUOLHU WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ YROXQWHHUV DQG FRQWUROV RQ WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ PHDVXUH ZDV QRW VWDWLVWLFDOO\ VLJQLILFDQW &RQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH DERYH ILQGLQJV D VSHFLILF FRPSDULVRQ EHWZHHQ WKH PHDQ IRU WKH FRQWURO JURXS DQG WKH PHDQ IRU WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH PHPEHUV RI WKHVH WZR JURXSV GLG QRW UHSRUW GLIIHUHQW OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ PHDQ GLIIHUHQFH f &O 7KH IUHTXHQFLHV IRU UHVSRQGHQWVf FKRLFHV RI WKH ILYH DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQV ZHUH fD FKDQFH WR KHOS RWKHUVf fWR H[SUHVV FRQFHUQ WR SHRSOH LQ QHHGf fWR SURYLGH D JRRG H[SHULHQFH IRU SHRSOH LQ QHHGf fWR KHOS WKRVH OHVV IRUWXQDWH WKDQ ,f DQG fD FKDQFH WR JLYH RI P\VHOI ZLWKRXW H[SHFWLQJ VRPH VRUW RI fSD\RIIf 7KH WRS HJRLVWLF UHDVRQV FKRVHQ ZHUH fSHUVRQDO JURZWKf fWR DFTXLUH QHZ VNLOOV H[SHULHQFHf fWR JDLQ VNLOOV ZKLFK ZLOO EH DSSOLFDEOH WR RWKHU VLWXDWLRQVf fWR GHYHORS EHWWHU KXPDQ UHODWLRQ VNLOOVf fWR KHOS EXLOG P\ UVXPf fWR LQFUHDVH P\ VHOIXQGHUVWDQGLQJ fDFDGHPLF LQWHUQVKLSH[SHULHQWLDO OHDUQLQJ fWR EHFRPH PRUH VHQVLWLYH WR RWKHUV DQG fWR XVH WKH VSHFLDO WDOHQWV WKDW KDYHf ,QWHUHVWLQJO\ WKH PRVW IUHTXHQWO\ FKRVHQ UHDVRQ ZKLFK ZRXOG KDYH EHHQ DPRQJ UHVSRQGHQWnV WRS ILYH UDQNLQJV RI UHDVRQV WR YROXQWHHUf ZDV DQ DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQ fD FKDQFH WR KHOS RWKHUVf $GGLWLRQDO $QDO\VHV $V SUHYLRXVO\ VWDWHG LQ WKH VHFWLRQ RQ GHVFULSWLYH VWDWLVWLFV QR JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV H[LVWHG DFURVV WKH WKUHH UHVHDUFK JURXSV 6LQFH WKHUH LV KRZHYHU D ERG\ RI OLWHUDWXUH WKDW GLVFXVVHV JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ HPSDWK\ DQG LQ DOWUXLVP HJ (LVHQEHUJ DQG KHU FROOHDJXHV )HVKEDFK *UDKDP t ,FNHV +RIIPDQ /HQQRQ

PAGE 67

t (LVHQEFUJ 0DQVWHDG 6QRGJUDVV f D FRPSDULVRQ RI JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV ZDV SHUIRUPHG RQ DOO WKUHH PHDVXUHV $Q DQDO\VLV RI WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV ZDV QRW LQGLFDWHG E\ WKH SULPDU\ K\SRWKHVHV EXW VLQFH LW ZDV UHDGLO\ DYDLODEOH D SRVWKRF DQDO\VLV ZDV FRQGXFWHG DV D SRWHQWLDOO\ ULFK VRXUFH RI GHVFULSWLYH UHVHDUFK IRU IXWXUH VWXGLHV $ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV RQ ERWK WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ DQG 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ VFDOHV VHH 7DEOH f 7DEOH *HQGHU 'LIIHUHQFHV RQ 0HDVXUHV RI (PSDWK\ DQG 0RWLYDWLRQ *HQGHU 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ 0HDQ 6' Q 0HDQ 6' Q 0HDQ 6' Q 0DOHV )HPDOHV UVWDWLVWLF S YDOXH r r 1RWH r GLIIHUHQFH LV VLJQLILFDQW

PAGE 68

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t 0F*HH 0F*HH t -HQQLQJV f IRXQG WKDW SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV DUH IXOO\ FDSDEOH RI EHFRPLQJ JHQXLQHO\ HQJDJHG ZLWK FOLHQWV LQ FULVLV DQG PD\ HYHQ GLVSOD\ KLJKHU OHYHOV RI HPSDWK\ ZDUPWK DQG JHQXLQHQHVV WRZDUGV WKHVH VDPH FOLHQWV WKDQ SURIHVVLRQDOV 7KH OLWHUDWXUH JHQHUDOO\ VXJJHVWV WKDW WUDLQLQJ DQG H[SHULHQFH DUH ERWK LPSRUWDQW FRPSRQHQWV RI YROXQWHHUV DELOLWLHV WR VXFFHVVIXOO\ FRQQHFW HPSDWKLFDOO\ ZLWK FOLHQWV LQ FULVLV HJ )UDQFH +DUW t .LQJ .DODIDW %RURWR t )UDQFH .QLFNHUERFNHU t 0F*HH 0LOOHU +HGULFN t 2UORIVN\ 1HLPH\HU t 3IHLIIHU  2n'RQQHOO t *HRUJH  7UXD[ t /LVWHU L f

PAGE 69

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f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f LQ DGGLWLRQ RXW RI WKH RULJLQDO SHRSOH ZKR EHJDQ WKH )DOO WUDLQLQJ RQO\ SHRSOH FRPSOHWHG WKH WUDLQLQJ DQG JUDGXDWHG

PAGE 70

WR YROXQWHHU VWDWXV WKLV LQGLFDWHV WKDW QRW HYHU\RQH ZKR LV LQWHUHVWHG LQ EHFRPLQJ D YROXQWHHU LV DEOH RU ZLOOLQJ WR FRPSOHWH WKH WUDLQLQJ ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKH UDQJH RI SDUWLFLSDQWVn VFRUHV RQ WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS ,QYHQWRU\ UHIHU WR 7DEOH f LQFOXGHG VRPH QHJDWLYH VFRUHV UHFDOO WKDW WKH RYHUDOO VFRUH UDQJH IRU WKH (PSDWKLF 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ VXEVFDOH LV f§ WR f %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f SRLQWV RXW WKDW ZKLOH LW LV WUXH WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI VFDOH VFRUHV JHQHUDWHG IURP LQGLYLGXDO UHVSRQGHQWV DUH XVXDOO\ SRVLWLYH D VRPHWLPHV JHQHURXVf VSULQNOLQJ RI QHJDWLYH VFRUHV ZLWKLQ D VDPSOH LV QRW XQXVXDO HYHQ LQ FOLHQW WKHUDSLVW UHODWLRQVKLSV %DUUHWW/HQQDUG VWDWHV WKDW fWKHUH LV QR DEVROXWH PHDQLQJ WR WKH ]HUR SRLQW LQ WKH PLGGOH RI WKH WKHRUHWLFDO UDQJH DQG VLJQLILFDQFH KDV QRW EHHQ DWWULEXWHG D SULRUL WR DQ\ VFRULQJ YDOXHVnf S f $ QHJDWLYH VFRUH ZRXOG PRVW OLNHO\ LPSO\ WKDW D UHVSRQGHQW DQVZHUHG fQRf WR SRVLWLYH LWHPV DQGRU DQVZHUHG f\HVf WR QHJDWLYH LWHPV ZKLFK VXJJHVWV ZLWK UHVSHFW WR WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ WKDW WKH UHVSRQGHQWfV JHQHUDO UHODWLRQVKLSV H J LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV WKDW H[LVW RXWVLGH RI WKH YROXQWHHU FRXQVHOLQJ VLWXDWLRQf PD\ EH ODFNLQJ LQ HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ :LWK WKH VWDQGDUG VFRULQJ PHWKRG D VFDOH VFRUH RI RU KLJKHUf ZRXOG UHTXLUH D PHDQ UHVSRQVH RI DW OHDVW LH SHUKDSV E\ VHOHFWLQJ DQ HTXDO QXPEHU RI nV DQG fV RQ SRVLWLYHO\ZRUGHG LWHPV DQG fV DQG fV RQ QHJDWLYHO\ZRUGHG LWHPVf %DUUHWW /HQQDUG f VXJJHVWV WKDW WKLV VFRUH ZRXOG VHHP DERXW DV KLJK DV FRXOG SODXVLEO\ EH H[SHFWHG LQ WHUPV RI KRQHVW DQG GLVFULPLQDWLQJ SHUFHSWLRQ +H VWDWHV WKDW fLQ SUDFWLFH VFRUHV DERYH RFFXU EXW DUH LQIUHTXHQWf S f $ VFRUH RI UHSUHVHQWV DQ DYHUDJH LWHP VFRUH RI DIWHU FRQYHUWLQJ DQVZHUV RQ QHJDWLYH LWHPVf LW LPSOLHV fFOHDU DIILUPDWLRQ WKDW WKH UHIHUHQW SHUVRQ ZDV H[SHULHQFHG DV YHU\ VXEVWDQWLDOO\ HPSDWKLFf S LWDOLFV LQ

PAGE 71

RULJLQDOf 6LPLODUO\ D VFDOH VFRUH RI DW WKH ERXQGDU\ RI WKH WKLUG DQG IRXUWK TXDUWLOHV RI WKH WKHRUHWLFDO UDQJHf VXJJHVWV WKDW WKLV OHYHO RI HPSDWK\ ZRXLG WHQG WR EH DGHTXDWH LQ KHOSLQJ UHODWLRQVKLSV ZKHUHDV D VFRUH RI ZRXOG EH H[SHFWHG WR UHSUHVHQW D OHVV WKDQ DGHTXDWH OHYHO RI WKHUDSHXWLF HPSDWK\ 5HFDOO WKH HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ PHDQ VFRUHV IRU HDFK RI WKH UHVHDUFK JURXSV IURP 7DEOH f YROXQWHHUV 6' f WUDLQHHV c 6' f DQG FRQWUROV 6' f %DVHG RQ WKH DERYH DVVXPSWLRQV QRQH RI WKH VWXG\ JURXSV ZDV VXEVWDQWLDOO\ HPSDWKLF 9ROXQWHHUV VFRUHG DW DQ DGHTXDWH OHYHO RI HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ ZKHUHDV WUDLQHHVf DQG FRQWUROVn HPSDWKLF OHYHOV ZHUH OHVV WKDQ DGHTXDWH +\SRWKHVLV 7KH GLUHFW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ D FULVLV YROXQWHHUfV OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH DQG DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ IRXQG LQ WKH VWXG\ GLG QRW VXSSRUW WKH VHFRQG K\SRWKHVLV ZKLFK SURMHFWHG WKDW DQ LQYHUVH UHODWLRQVKLS ZRXLG H[LVW 3UHYLRXV ILQGLQJV LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ KRZ H[SHULHQFH DIIHFWV HPSDWK\ DUH PL[HG 2Q WKH RQH KDQG )UDQFH f +DUW DQG .LQJ f 1HLPH\HU DQG 3IHLIIHU f 2f'RQQHOO DQG *HRUJH f DQG 3ROHQ] DQG 9HUGL f DOO IRXQG WKDW SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV FDQ SURYLGH EHWWHU IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV ZLWK H[SHULHQFH DQG WUDLQLQJ $V UHSRUWHG HDUOLHU UHVXOWV UHJDUGLQJ WKH ILUVW K\SRWKHVLV VKRZ D SDWWHUQ FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK WKH DVVHUWLRQ WKDW WUDLQLQJ HQKDQFHV FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ HIIHFWLYHQHVV WKRXJK D FDXVDO UHODWLRQVKLS FDQQRW EH GUDZQ IURP WKH FXUUHQW UHVHDUFK 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG &DUNKXII .UDWRFKYLO DQG )ULHO f DQG (ONLQV DQG &RKHQ f IRXQG WKDW FRXQVHOLQJ VNLOOV GLG QRW LPSURYH ZLWK H[SHULHQFH ZKLOH FRXQVHORUVf DELOLW\ WR GLVFULPLQDWH IDFLOLWDWLYH FRQGLWLRQV LPSURYHG ZLWK H[SHULHQFH WKHLU DFWXDO DELOLW\ WR RIIHU WKHVH FRQGLWLRQV GHFOLQHG

PAGE 72

:LWK UHVSHFW WR WKH UHVXOWV UHJDUGLQJ WKH VHFRQG K\SRWKHVLV RQH FDQQRW FRPSOHWHO\ VXUPLVH KRZ ZHOO YROXQWHHUV DUH DFWXDOO\ DEOH WR RIIHU HPSDWK\ WR FOLHQWV VLQFH REVHUY DWLRQDO VWXGLHV ZHUH QRW FRQGXFWHG LQ WKLV UHVHDUFK +RZHYHU EDVHG RQ YROXQWHHUVn UHSRQV RI KRZ ZHOO WKH VWDWHPHQWV RI IHHOLQJVUHDFWLRQV LQ WKH VWXG\ GHVFULEH WKHP LW FDQ EHnVXUPLVHG WKDW WKHLU DELOLW\ WR HPSDWKLFDOO\ FRQQHFW ZLWK FOLHQWV LV SRVLWLYHO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKHLU OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH 7KH SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ OHQJWK RI FULVLV YROXQWHHUVn H[SHULHQFH DQG DPRXQW RI HPSDWK\ IRXQG LQ WKH VWXG\ LQGLFDWHV WKDW DV WKH OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH LQFUHDVHV IRU SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV WUDLQHG WR ZRUN LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ VHWWLQJV WKHLU HPSDWKLF VNLOOV VSHFLILFDOO\ SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ LQFUHDVH 7KLV ILQGLQJ VXJJHVWV WKDW FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ DJHQFLHV PLJKW EH ZHOOVHUYHG WR PDNH PRUH DWWHPSWV WR UHWDLQ WKHLU YROXQWHHUV RYHU H[WHQGHG SHULRGV *LGURQ f IRXQG WKDW PRVW YROXQWHHU GURSSLQJ RXWf RFFXUV GXULQJ WKH ILUVW VL[ PRQWKV RI YROXQWHHU ZRUN +H DWWULEXWHG WKLV WR WKH QHJDWLYH GLVFUHSDQFLHV IRXQG DPRQJ VKRUWWHUP YROXQWHHUVn FRQFHUQ >ZLWK@ UHZDUGV SHUWDLQLQJ WR LQWHUDFWLRQ ZLWK SURIHVVLRQDO VWDII Sf *LGURQ DVVHUWHG WKDW VKRUWWHUP YROXQWHHUV H[SHFW WUDLQLQJ SURIHVVLRQDO VXSHUYLVLRQ FRQVXOWDWLRQ RSSRUWXQLWLHV DQG SUDLVH IURP WKH VWDII 0HHWLQJ VKRUWWHUP YROXQWHHUVn H[SHFWDWLRQV PD\ ZHOO SURYLGH DJHQFLHV ZLWK PRUH ORQJWHUP YROXQWHHUV ZKR XOWLPDWHO\ DUH PRUH HIIHFWLYH WKDQ WKRVH ZLWK OHVV H[SHULHQFH $OWKRXJK WKLV VWXG\ IRXQG D SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ H[SHULHQFH DQG HPSDWK\ WKH WZR PHDVXUHV RI SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ DQG HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ ZHUH SRVLWLYHO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK HDFK RWKHU VR D VLPXOWDQHRXV PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ ZDV SHUIRUPHG LQ RUGHU WR DVVHVV WKH XQLTXH FRQWULEXWLRQ RI HDFK HPSDWK\ PHDVXUH 5HVXOWV

PAGE 73

RI WKH PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ LQGLFDWHG WKDW RQO\ WKH PHDVXUH RI HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ DFFRXQWHG IRU WKH YDULDQFH LQ OHQJWK RI H[SHULHQFH WKDW LV YROXQWHHUVf OHYHOV RI HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ ZHUH D VLJQLILFDQW SUHGLFWRU RI WKH QXPEHU RI PRQWKV WKH\ ZHUH OLNHO\ WR YROXQWHHU DW WKH FULVLV FHQWHU ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKH UHODWLYHO\ ORZ LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ IRXQG RQ WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ &URQEDFKnV DOSKD PHDVXUHf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t 6Q\GHU )LWFK +HQGHUVRQ 6HUJHQW t 6HGODFHN :LHKH t ,VHQKRXU f EXW IHZHU VWLOO KDYH LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH PRWLYDWLRQV RI YROXQWHHUV ZKR ZRUN VSHFLILFDOO\ LQ FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ VHWWLQJV HJ %ODFN t 'L1LWWR &ODU\ t 0LOOHU &ODU\ t 2UHQVWHLQ f &ODU\ DQG 2UHQVWHLQ f IRXQG D GLUHFW UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYHV IRU YROXQWHHULQJ DQG WKH OHQJWK RI WLPH VSHQW DV D YROXQWHHU 7KHLU ILQGLQJ ZDV QRW H[DPLQHG LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\ KRZHYHU LW LV LQWHUHVWLQJ WR QRWH WKDW WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\nV UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW YROXQWHHUV ZKR ZRUN LQ D FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DJHQF\ GR QRW KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ ,Q IDFW WKH

PAGE 74

YROXQWHHU JURXS KDG WKH ORZHVW PHDQ RQ WKH 0HDVXUH RI $OWUXLVWLF 0RWLYDWLRQ RI WKH WKUHH JURXSV H[DPLQHG 7KH YROXQWHHU JURXS KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU OHYHOV RI HPSDWK\ WKDQ WKH WUDLQLQJ RU FRQWURO JURXSV 7KH OLWHUDWXUH VXJJHVWV WKDW WKHUH LV D SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\ DQG DOWUXLVP HJ $PDWR (LVHQEHUJ HW DO +RIIPDQ .UHEV L 5XVKWRQ f EXW FOHDUO\ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS LV FRPSOH[ VLQFH WKH YROXQWHHUV LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZKR KDG UHODWLYHO\ KLJK OHYHOV RI HPSDWK\f GLG QRW KDYH KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVWLF PRWLYDWLRQ )RU DOO SDUWLFLSDQWV WKH PRVW IUHTXHQWO\ UDQNHG UHDVRQ WKH\ ZRXOG RU GRf YROXQWHHU DW WKH &ULVLV &HQWHU ZDV DQ DOWUXLVWLF UHDVRQ fD FKDQFH WR KHOS RWKHUVf 7KH QH[W IRXU PRVW IUHTXHQWO\ UDQNHG FKRLFHV ZHUH HJRLVWLF UHDVRQV DQG WKH ILIWK PRVW IUHTXHQWO\ UDQNHG FKRLFH ZDV D WLH EHWZHHQ DQ DOWUXLVWLF DQG DQ HJRLVWLF UHDVRQ 2EYLRXVO\ SHRSOH YROXQWHHU IRU D YDULHW\ RI UHDVRQV DQG RQH FDQ VSHFXODWH WKDW WKH UHDVRQV FKRVHQ ZKHWKHU DOWUXLVWLF RU HJRLVWLFf GR QRW VHHP WR PDNH D GLIIHUHQFH LQ WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RU WKH DELOLW\ WR SURYLGH HPSDWK\f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t (LVHQEHUJ f 2YHUDOO WKH FRQFOXVLRQV RI

PAGE 75

UHYLHZV RQ JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ HPSDWK\ KDYH EHHQ LQFRQVLVWHQW SULPDULO\ GXH WR WKH IDFW WKDW HPSDWK\ KDV EHHQ RSHUDWLRQDOL]HG DQG PHDVXUHG LQ D YDULHW\ RI ZD\V (LVHQEHUJ DQG /HQQRQnV f PHWDDQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD IURP VWXGLHV IRXQG WKDW IHPDOHV VFRUHG KLJKHU WKDQ PDOHV RQ VHOIUHSRUW TXHVWLRQQDLUH PHDVXUHV RI HPRWLRQDO HPSDWK\ ZLWKrDQ HIIHFW VL]H RI +RZHYHU WKH\ DVVHUWHG WKDW WKH GHPDQG FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI VHOIUHSRUW TXHVWLRQQDLUHV UHQGHU WKHVH ILQGLQJV OHVV WKDQ FRQFOXVLYH HVSHFLDOO\ LQ OLJKW RI PXFK VPDOOHU GLIIHUHQFHV RU QR GLIIHUHQFHV IRXQG IRU RWKHU HPSDWK\ PHDVXUHV VXFK DV VHOIUHSRUW LQ VLPXODWHG HPRWLRQDO VLWXDWLRQV IDFLDOJHVWXUDO DQG SK\VLRORJLFDO LQGLFHVf %DVHG RQ WKH UHYLHZV RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHJDUGLQJ JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ HPSDWK\ D QHHG IRU JUHDWHU FRQFHSWXDO DQG PHWKRGRORJLFDO SUHFLVLRQ LQ IXWXUH UHVHDUFK LV HYLGHQW 7KHQ SHUKDSV WKH PHDQLQJ RI JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV IRXQG LQ SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK ZLOO EH FODULILHG /HQQRQ t (LVHQEHUJ f *UDKDP DQG OHNHV f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

PAGE 76

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fV DELOLW\ WR SDUDSKUDVH SRZHUIXO HPRWLRQV DFFXUDWHO\ DQG DW WKH DSSURSULDWH WLPH $OVR WKH ERUGHUOLQH LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ RI WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ LQ WKH FXUUHQW VWXG\f PD\ KDYH LPSDFWHG WKH UHVXOWV ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH VWXG\ XVHG SV\FKRORJ\ XQGHUJUDGXDWHV DV D FRQWURO JURXS ZKLFK FRQVWLWXWHG D QRQHTXLYDOHQW FRQWURO JURXSV GHVLJQ 7KLV VXJJHVWV WKDW SUHH[LVWLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ DWWLWXGHV VNLOOV DQG PRWLYDWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH UHVHDUFK JURXSV PD\ KDYH H[LVWHG +RZHYHU VLQFH PDQ\ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR YROXQWHHU IRU WKLV SDUWLFXODU FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ FHQWHU ZHUH XQGHUJUDGXDWH SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQWV RU RWKHUV ZLWK VLPLODU GHPRJUDSKLFVf WKH UHVXOWV DUH VWLOO VRPHZKDW JHQHUDOL]DEOH $OVR SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH VWXG\ ZHUH QRW UDQGRPO\ DVVLJQHG WR WKH WKUHH VWXG\ JURXSV WKHUHIRUH QR FRQFOXVLRQV UHJDUGLQJ FDXVDO UHODWLRQVKLSV DUH GUDZQ $QRWKHU OLPLWDWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ ZDV WKH UHODWLYHO\ VPDOO VDPSOH VL]H 7KHUH ZHUH RQO\ SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH WUDLQLQJ JURXS FRPSDUHG WR SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS DQG LQ WKH FRQWURO JURXS 3HUKDSV WKH VPDOO VDPSOH VL]H ZDV RQH UHDVRQ WKDW QR

PAGE 77

VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ WKH FRQWURO JURXS PHDQ DQG WKH WUDLQLQJ JURXS PHDQ RQ WKH 5HODWLRQVKLS LQYHQWRU\ HPSDWK\ PHDVXUH VHH 7DEOHV DQG f HYHQ WKRXJK V VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ WKH WUDLQLQJ JURXS PHDQ DQG WKH YROXQWHHU JURXS PHDQ ,Q RUGHU WR NHHS GDWD FROOHFWLRQ PDQDJHDEOH RQL\ SDUWLFLSDQWV IURP RQH FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ FHQWHU ZHUH WHVWHG 7KLV VWXG\ GLG QRW LQFOXGH RXWFRPH PHDVXUHV RI HIIHFWLYHQHVV HJ FDOOHU VDWLVIDFWLRQf EXW LW LV KRSHG WKDW UHVXOWV FDQ EH XVHG LQ FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK RWKHU RXWFRPH ILQGLQJV 1XPHURXV IDFWRUV JR LQWR FUHDWLQJ DQ HIIHFWLYH VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ YROXQWHHU WKLV VWXG\ RQO\ H[DPLQHG RQH RI WKRVH IDFWRUV HPSDWK\f DQG WKH PRWLYDWLRQV EHKLQG YROXQWHHULQJ LQ VXFK D FULWLFDO VHUYLFH DUHD ,PSOLFDWLRQV IRU )XWXUH 5HVHDUFK 7KH FRPSOH[ UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\ DQG PRWLYDWLRQ LQ YROXQWHHUV ZKR SURYLGH VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ VHUYLFHV FRXOG DOVR EH LQYHVWLJDWHG VSHFLILFDOO\ IXUWKHU VWXG\ LV ZDUUDQWHG WR LQYHVWLJDWH ZKHWKHU RU QRW DQ LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ HPSDWK\ DQG PRWLYDWLRQ H[LVWV LQ WKHVH YROXQWHHUV ,Q DGGLWLRQ %DUUHWW/HQQDUG f SRLQWHG RXW WKDW WKHUH LV fZLGH LQWUDPGLYLGXDO YDULDWLRQ LQ HPSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ IURP RQH LQVWDQFH WR DQRWKHU RFFXUULQJ HYHQ LQ YHU\n VLPLODU VLWXDWLRQVf S f 7KLV VXJJHVWV WKDW IXWXUH UHVHDUFK RQ HPSDWK\ DV D JHQHUDOL]HG WUDLW RU DELOLW\ ZRXOG EH D SRWHQWLDOO\ LPSRUWDQW DQG FRPSOH[f DUHD RI VWXG\ LQ LWV RZQ ULJKW ,QGHHG VRPH SHRSOH GR FRQVLVWHQWO\ DFW PRUH JHQHURXV KHOSLQJ DQG NLQG WKDQ RWKHUV 7KRPDV DQG )OHWFKHU f VXJJHVWHG WKDW DOWKRXJK VWXGLHV DUH VSDUVH WKHUH LV VRPH HYLGHQFH WKDW LPSOLHV WKH H[LVWHQFH RI VWDEOH LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH DELOLW\ WR PDNH DFFXUDWH HPSDWKLF MXGJPHQWV >DOWKRXJK@ WKH EDVLV DQG QDWXUH RI VXFK DELOLWLHV KDV \HW WR EH GHWHUPLQHGf S f

PAGE 78

$ORQJ WKHVH VDPH OLQHV WKRXJK WKHUH LV HYLGHQFH WKDW HPSDWK\ LV UHODWHG WR WKHUDSHXWLF RXWFRPH HJ 2UOLQVNL *UDZH t 3DUNV 7UXD[ t &DUNKXII f WKH HPSDWK\ VWXGLHG ZDV YLHZHG DV D VLWXDWLRQVSHFLILF DIIHFWLYH RU FRJQLWLYH SURFHVV RU H[SHULHQWLDOf YDULDEOH H[SHULHQFHG E\ D WKHUDSLVW IRU WKH FOLHQW +RZHYHU QR UHVHDUFK FXUUHQWO\ H[LVIV UHJDUGLQJ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ H[SHULHQWLDO DQG GLVSRVLWLRQDO HPSDWK\ 'XDQ t +LOO f )XWXUH LQYHVWLJDWLRQV PLJKW IRFXV RQ KRZ HPSDWKLF SURFHVVHV SRVVLEO\ UHODWH WR GLVSRVLWLRQDO HPSDWK\ DQG WKHUDSHXWLF RXWFRPH $QRWKHU LQWHUHVWLQJ DYHQXH RI VWXG\ LV H[SDQGLQJ WKH UHVHDUFK H[DPLQLQJ WKH HPSDWK\DOWUXLVP K\SRWKHVLV WR DVVHVV ZKHWKHU DOWHUQDWLYH H[SODQDWLRQV VXFK DV RQHQHVV FDQ H[SODLQ ILQGLQJV ,W LV QRW IXOO\ FOHDU ZKDW SURFHVVHV WDNH SODFH ZKHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV DUH WROG WR HQJDJH LQ HPSDWKLF SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ 6SHFLILFDOO\ fLW LV QRW NQRZQ ZKHWKHU UROHWDNLQJ LQVWUXFWLRQV DOVR WULJJHU WKH RSHUDWLRQ RI RWKHU HPSDWK\UHODWHG SURFHVVHV VXFK DV WKH XVH RI HODERUDWHG FRJQLWLYH QHWZRUNVf 'DYLV SS f &DUHIXO DVVHVVPHQW DQG VWXG\ RI ZKDW SDUWLFLSDQWV DFWXDOO\ GR ZKHQ WROG WR HQJDJH LQ SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ LV D SRWHQWLDOO\ ULFK VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ WKDW ZRXOG KHOS FODULI\ WKLV HPSDWK\ SURFHVV ,Q DGGLWLRQ D GHHSHU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI KRZ SHUVRQDO DQG VLWXDWLRQDO FKDUDFWHULVWLFV DIIHFW HPSDWKLF SURFHVVHV RU HYHQ DFW DV PHGLDWLQJ YDULDEOHVf LV DQRWKHU ULFK VRXUFH RI LQIRUPDWLRQ IRU IXWXUH VWXG\ )RU H[DPSOH SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK KDV GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW SHUVSHFWLYHWDNLQJ RU UROHWDNLQJf LV D UHOLDEOH DQG DFFXUDWH PHDVXUH RI HPSDWK\ KRZHYHU OLWWOH LV NQRZQ DERXW KRZ D SHUVRQfV GLVSRVLWLRQ RU KRZ REVHUYHUWDUJHW VLPLODULW\ DIIHFW WKDW LQGLYLGXDOfV DELOLW\ WR WDNH RQ WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI DQRWKHU VLQFH VWXGLHV H[DPLQLQJ VXFK FKDUDFWHULVWLFV KDYH SULPDULO\ IRFXVHG RQ HPSDWK\ RXWFRPHV 'XDQnV f FRQFOXVLRQ WKDW VLWXDWLRQVSHFLILF HPSDWKLF H[SHULHQFHV PD\ YDU\ ZLWK

PAGE 79

VLWXDWLRQV H[HPSOLI\ WKLV GLVFUHSDQF\ EHWZHHQ DQWHFHGHQWV DQG SURFHVVHV 'XDQ VXJJHVWV WKDW DQ\ UHVHDUFK RQ HPSDWK\ RU HPSDWK\UHODWHG EHKDYLRUV VKRXOG FRQVLGHU WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKH VLWXDWLRQ ZKHUH SDUWLFLSDQWVf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fV DELOLW\ WR SURYLGH HPSDWKLF XQGHUVWDQGLQJ LQFUHDVHV ZLWK FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ H[SHULHQFH $ YROXQWHHUfV UHDVRQV IRU FKRRVLQJ WR ZRUN LQ D VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQFULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ DJHQF\ DUH ERWK DOWUXLVWLF DQG HJRLVWLF DQG YROXQWHHUV GR QRW KDYH KLJKHU OHYHOV RI DOWUXLVP FRPSDUHG WR QRQYROXQWHHUV

PAGE 80

9ROXQWHHUV DQG SDUDSURIHVVLRQDOV DUF RIWHQ WKH EDFNERQH RI FULVLV DQG VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ DJHQFLHV 7KLV VWXG\ LV FRQVLVWHQW ZLWK D SDWWHUQ LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW WUDLQLQJ DV D YROXQWHHU DQG H[SHULHQFH DV D FULVLV FRXQVHORU FDQ LQFUHDVH YROXQWHHUVn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

PAGE 81

$33(1',; $ ,1)250(' &216(17 3ULQFLSDO ,QYHVWLJDWRU 0LFKHOOH / %DU] 06 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV UHVHDUFK SURMHFW LV WR PHDVXUH VRPH SHUVRQDO YDULDEOHV VXFK DV HPSDWK\ DQG PRWLYDWLRQ UHODWHG WR SHRSOHfV YROXQWHHU DFWLYLWLHV 7KH JRDO RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WR OHDP WKH HIIHFW RI FULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ WUDLQLQJ DQG H[SHULHQFH RQ WKHVH YDULDEOHV ,I \RX FKRRVH WR SDUWLFLSDWH WKLV VWXG\ ZLOO WDNH DSSUR[LPDWHO\ PLQXWHV RI \RXU WLPH DQG ZLOO LQYROYH ILOOLQJ RXW D SDFNHW FRQWDLQLQJ WKUHH EULHI TXHVWLRQQDLUHV
PAGE 82

VWXG\ SOHDVH FRQWDFW 8),5% 2IILFH %R[ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD *DLQHVYLOOH )/ SULQW QDPHf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

PAGE 83

$33(1',; % ,16758&7,216 $IWHU FRPSOHWLQJ WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ VKHHW EHORZ SOHDVH FDUHIXOO\ UHDG DQG IROORZ WKH GLUHFWLRQV SULQWHG DW WKH WRS RI HDFK RI WKH IROORZLQJ WKUHH EULHI TXHVWLRQQDLUHV
PAGE 84

$33(1',; & ,167580(176 ,Q WKH VSDFH EHIRUH HDFK TXHVWLRQ SOHDVH ZULWH WKH QXPEHU RU WR LQGLFDWH KRZ \RX IHHO XVLQJ WKH IROORZLQJ VFDOH GRHV QRW GHVFULEH PH ZHOOf WR GHVFULEHV PH YHU\ ZHOOf %HIRUH FULWLFL]LQJ VRPHERG\ WU\f WR LPDJLQH KRZ ZRXOG IHHO LI ZHUH LQ WKDW SHUVRQfV SODFH ,I ,fP VXUH ,fP ULJKW DERXW VRPHWKLQJ GRQfW ZDVWH PXFK WLPH OLVWHQLQJ WR RWKHU SHRSOHfV DUJXPHQWV VRPHWLPHV WU\ WR XQGHUVWDQG P\ IULHQGV EHWWHU E\ LPDJLQLQJ KRZ WKLQJV ORRN IURP WKHLU SHUVSHFWLYH EHOLHYH WKDW WKHUH DUH WZR VLGHV WR HYHU\ TXHVWLRQ DQG WU\ WR ORRN DW WKHP ERWK VRPHWLPHV ILQG LW GLIILFXOW WR VHH WKLQJV IURP WKH RWKHU SHUVRQfV SRLQW RI YLHZ WU\ WR ORRN DW HYHU\ERG\fV VLGH RI D GLVDJUHHPHQW EHIRUH PDNH D GHFLVLRQ :KHQ ,nP XSVHW DW VRPHRQH XVXDOO\ WU\ WR SXW PYVHLI LQ KLVKHU VKRHVf IRU D ZKLOH

PAGE 85

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fUHSD\ f SUHYLRXV XVH RI YROXQWHHU VHUYLFHV WR HQKDQFH P\ VHOILPDJH DFDGHPLF LQWHPVKLSH[SHQHQWLDO OHDUQLQJ D FKDQFH WR JLYH RI P\VHOI ZLWKRXW H[SHFWLQJ VRPH VRUW RI fSD\RIIf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f ZDQW PH WR GR YROXQWHHU ZRUN P\ IULHQG RU IULHQGVf LV DUHf YROXQWHHULQJ

PAGE 86

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
PAGE 87

$W WKH WLPH GRQnW UHDOL]H KRZ WRXFK\ RU VHQVLWLYH RWKHUV DUH DERXW VRPH RI WKH WKLQJV ZH GLVFXVV XQGHUVWDQG RWKHUV RIWHQ UHVSRQG WR RWKHUV UDWKHU DXWRPDWLFDOO\ ZLWKRXW WDNLQJ LQ ZKDW WKH\ DUH H[SHULHQFLQJ :KHQ RWKHUV DUH KXUW RU XSVHW FDQ UHFRJQL]H MXVW KRZ WKH\ IHHO ZLWKRXW JHWWLQJ XSVHW P\VHOI

PAGE 88

/,67 2) 5()(5(1&(6 $GOHU $ f :KDW OLIH VKRXOG PHDQ WR \RX 1HZ
PAGE 89

%DWVRQ & f 3URVRFLDO PRWLYDWLRQ ,V LW HYHU WUXOY DOWUXLVWLF" ,Q / %HUNRZLW] (Gf $GYDQFHV LQ H[SHULPHQWDO VRFLDO SVYFKRORWUY 9RO SS f 2UODQGR )/ $FDGHPLF 3UHVV %DWVRQ & f 7KH DOWUXLVP TXHVWLRQ 7RZDUG D VRFLDOSV\FKRORJLFDO DQVZHU +LOOVGDOH 1(UOEDXP %DWVRQ & %ROHQ 0 + &URVV $ t 1HXQQJHU%FQHILHO + ( f :KHUH LV WKH DOWUXLVP LQ WKH DOWUXLVWLF SHUVRQDOLW\" -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ %DWVRQ & 'f '\FN / %UDQGW 5 %DWVRQ *f 3RZHOO $ / 0F0DVWHU 0 5 t *ULIILWW & f )LYH VWXGLHV WHVWLQJ WZR QHZ HJRLVWLF DOWHUQDWLYHV WR WKH HPSDWKYDOWUXLVP K\SRWKHVLV -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\n DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ f %ODFN % t 'L1LWWR f 9ROXQWHHUV ZKR ZRUN ZLWK VXUYLYRUV RI UDSH DQG EDWWHULQJ 0RWLYDWLRQV DFFHSWDQFH VDWLVIDFWLRQ OHQJWK RI VHUYLFH DQG JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO 6HUYLFH 5HVHDUFK %RKDUW $ & t *UHHQEHUJ / 6 (GVf f (PSDWK\ UHFRQVLGHUHG 1HZ GLUHFWLRQV LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ :DVKLQJWRQ & $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLFDO $VVRFLDWLRQ &DUH\ & )R[ ( $ t 6SUDJJLQV ( ) f 5HSOLFDWLRQ RI VWUXFWXUH ILQGLQJV UHJDUGLQJ WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HDFWLYLW\ ,QGH[ 0HDVXUHPHQW DQG (YDOXDWLRQ LQ &RXQVHOLQJ DQG 'HYHORSPHQW &DUNKXII 5 5 f 'LIIHUHQWLDO IXQFWLRQLQJ RI OD\ DQG SURIHVVLRQDO KHOSHUV -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ &DUNKXII 5 5 f +HOSLQJ DQG KXPDQ UHODWLRQV 9ROV DQG ,, 1HZ
PAGE 90

&KORSDQ % ( 0F&DLQ 0 / &DUERQHOO / t +DJHQ 5 / f (PSDLK\ 5HYLHZ RI DYDLODEOH PHDVXUHV -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ &ODU\ ( t 0LOOHU f 6RFLDOL]DWLRQ DQG VLWXDWLRQDO LQIOXHQFHV RQ VXVWDLQHG DOWUXLVP &KLOG 'HYHORSPHQW &ODU\ ( t 2UFQVWHLQ / f 7KH DPRXQW DQG HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI KHOS 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS RI PRWLYHV DQG DELOLWLHV WR KHOSLQJ EHKDYLRU 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ %XOOHWLQ &ODU\ ( *f t 6Q\GHU 0 f $ IXQFWLRQDO DQDO\VLV RI DOWUXLVP DQG SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU 7KH FDVH RI YROXQWHHULVP 5HYLHZ RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ &RRQILHOG 7 1LGD 5 $ t *UD\ % f 5HVHDUFK UHSRUW 7KH DVVHVVPHQW RI WHOHSKRQH FULVLV ZRUNHUV &ULVLV LQWHUYHQWLRQ 'DLJOH 0 6 t 0LVKDUD % / f ,QWHUYHQWLRQ VW\OHV ZLWK VXLFLGDO FDOOHUV DW WZR VXLFLGH SUHYHQWLRQ FHQWHUV 6XLFLGH DQG /LIH 7KUHDWHQLQJ %HKDYLRU 'DYLV 0 + f $ PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO DSSURDFK WR LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ HPSDWK\ -6$6 &DWDORJ RI 6HOHFWHG 'RFXPHQWV LQ 3V\FKRORJ\ 'DYLV 0 + Df 0HDVXULQJ LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV LQ HPSDWK\ (YLGHQFH IRU D PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO DSSURDFK -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 'DYLV 0 + Ef 7KH HIIHFWV RI GLVSRVLWLRQDO HPSDWK\ RQ HPRWLRQDO UHDFWLRQV DQG KHOSLQJ $ PXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO DSSURDFK -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ 'DYLV 0 + f (PSDWK\ $ VRFLDO SV\FKRORJLFDO DSSURDFK 0DGLVRQ :, %URZQ t %HQFKPDUN 'HOZRUWK 8 5XGRZ ( + t 7DXE f &ULVLV FFQWHUKRWOLQH $ JXLGHERRN WR EHJLQQLQJ DQG RSHUDWLQJ 6SULQJILHOG ,/ &KDUOHV & 7KRPDV 'XDQ & f %HLQJ FPSDWKLF 7KH UROH RI PRWLYDWLRQ WR HPSDWKL]H DQG WKH QDWXUH RI WDUJHW HPRWLRQV 0RWLYDWLRQ DQG (PRWLRQ 'XDQ & t +LOO & ( f 7KH FXUUHQW VWDWH RI HPSDWK\ UHVHDUFK -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ (LVHQEHUJ 1 t /HQQRQ 5 f 6H[ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ HPSDWK\ DQG UHODWHG FDSDFLWLHV 3V\FKRORJLFDO %XOOHWLQ

PAGE 91

(LVHQEHUJ 1 t 0LOOHU 3 $ Df (PSDWK\ DQG SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU 3V\FKRORJLFDO %XOOHWLQ (LVHQEHUJ 1 t 0LOOHU 3 $ Ef (PSDWK\ V\PSDWK\ DQG DOWUXLVP (PSLULFDO DQG FRQFHSWXDO OLQNV ,Q 1 (LVHQEHUJ t 6WUDYHU (GVf (PSDWK\ DQG LWV GHYHORSPHQW SS f 1HZ
PAGE 92

*ROHPDQ f :RUNLQJ ZLWK HPRWLRQDO LQWHOOLJHQFH 1HZ
PAGE 93

+RIIPDQ 0 / f 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI HPSDWK\ ,Q 3 5XVKWRQ IH 5 0 6RUUHQWLQR (GVf $OWUXLVP DQG KHOSLQW] EHKDYLRU 6RFLDO SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG GHYHORSPHQWDO SHUVSHFWLYHV SS f +LOOVGDOH 1(UOEDXP +RIIPDQ 0 / f 'HYHORSPHQW RI SURVRFLDO PRWLYDWLRQ (PSDWK\ DQG JXLOW ,Q 1 (LVHQEHUJ (Gf 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI SURVRFLDO EHKDYLRU SS f 1HZ
PAGE 94

.DODIDW %RURWR 5 t )UDQFH f 5HODWLRQVKLSV DPRQJ H[SHULHQFH OHYHO DQG YDOXH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG WKH SHUIRUPDQFH RI SDUDSURIHVVLRQDO WHOHSKRQH FRXQVHORUV $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI &RPPXQLW\ 3V\FKRORJ\ .DQQ / .LQFKHQ 6 $ :LOOLDPV % 5RVV /RZU\ 5 +LOO & 9 *UXQEDXP $ %OXPVRQ 3 6 &ROOLQV / t .ROEH / $XJXVW f
PAGE 95

0DUDQJRQL & *DUFLD 6 ,FNHV : t 7HQJ f (PSDWKLF DFFXUDF\ LQ D FOLQLFDOO\ UHOHYDQW VHWWLQJ -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ DQG 6RFLDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 0DULV 5 : f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLS RI QRQIDWDO VXLFLGH DWWHPSWV WR FRPSOHWHG VXLFLGHV ,Q 5 : 0DULV $ / %HUPDQ 7 0DOWVEHUJHU t 5
PAGE 96

2UOLQVNL (f *UDZH t 3DUNV % f 3URFHVV DQG RXWFRPH LQ SV\FKRWKHUDS\ f§ QRFK HLQPDO ,Q $ ( %HUJLQ t 6 / *DUILHOG (GVf +DQGERRN RI SV\FKRWKHUDS\ DQG EHKDY LRU FKDQJH WK HGf 1HZ
PAGE 97

6WDXE ( f +HOSLQJ D GLVWUHVVHG SHUVRQ 6RFLDO SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG VWLPXOXV GHWHUPLQDQWV ,Q / %HUNRZLW] (Gf $GYDQFHV LQ H[SHULPHQWDO VRFLDO SV\FKRORJ\ 9RO SS f 1HZ
PAGE 98

:ROEHU t 0F*RYHUQ 7 9 f $ WKUHH FRPSRQHQW PRGHO IRU WKH HYDOXDWLRQ RI WHOHSKRQH FRXQVHORU HIIHFWLYHQHVV &ULVLV ,QWHUYHQWLRQ

PAGE 99

%,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ 0LFKHOOH /HH %DU] ZDV ERP -DQXDU\ LQ &RORUDGR 6KH JUDGXDWHG IURP 3RPRQD &2f +LJK 6FKRRO LQ DQG WKHQ DWWHQGHG 5LFH 8QLYHUVLW\ LQ +RXVWRQ 7H[DV RQ D WUDFN VFKRODUVKLS 0LFKHOOH UHFHLYHG KHU %DFKHORU RI $UWV GHJUHH IURP 5LFH 8QLYHUVLW\ LQ ZLWK D GRXEOH PDMRU LQ 3V\FKRORJ\ DQG (QJOLVK 6KH JUDGXDWHG ZLWK D 0DVWHU RI 6FLHQFH GHJUHH LQ &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ IURP WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD LQ WKH VDPH WLPH VKH ZDV QHZO\ SUHJQDQW ZLWK KHU ILUVW FKLOG +HU WKHVLV ZDV HQWLWOHG f7KH ,PSDFW RI 0DWK $Q[LHW\ RQ WKH %HKDYLRU RI $FDGHPLFDOO\ 7DOHQWHG 6WXGHQWVf 0LFKHOOH LV D SDUWWLPH IDFXOW\ PHPEHU DW 0HWURSROLWDQ 6WDWH &ROOHJH RI 'HQYHU 6KH DOVR WHDFKHV UHODWLRQVKLS DQG PDUULDJH FODVVHV DQG GRHV OHDGHUVKLS WUDLQLQJ DQG GHYHORSPHQW 0LFKHOOH FXUUHQWO\ UHVLGHV RXWVLGH RI 'HQYHU &RORUDGR ZLWK KHU KXVEDQG 6WXDUW DQG WKHLU WZR FKLOGUHQ n

PAGE 100

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f§Drf§ 2I %DUEDUD 3UREHUW &OLQLFDO $VVRFLDWH 3URIHVVRU (PHULWXV RI 3V\FKRORJ\ FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ 0 'DYLG 0LOOHU 3URIHVVRU RI (GXFDWLRQ 3V\FKRORJ\

PAGE 101

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

PAGE 102

/' e A 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$


57
Motivation for each of the three groups were: control group mean = 5.8 (SD = 4.0),
training group mean = 5.1 (SD = 3.3), and volunteer group mean = 5.0, (SD = 3.2). As
stated earlier, the difference between volunteers and controls on the Measure of Altruistic
Motivation measure was not statistically significant. Consistent with the above findings,
a specific comparison between the mean for the control group and the mean for the
volunteer group revealed that the members of these two groups did not report different
levels of altruistic motivation (mean difference = 0.78), Cl = -0.5,2.1,/? = .24. The
frequencies for respondents choices of the five altruistic reasons were: a chance to help
others, 108; to express concern to people in need. 38; to provide a good experience
for people in need, 28; to help those less fortunate than I, 20; and a chance to give of
myself without expecting some sort of pay-off, 19. The top egoistic reasons chosen
were: personal growth, 80; to acquire new skills, experience, 80; to gain skills
which will be applicable to other situations, 54; to develop better human relation
skills, 49; to help build my rsum, 38; to increase my self-understanding," 33;
academic internship/experiential learning," 30; to become more sensitive to others."
25; and to use the special talents that I have, 24. Interestingly, the most frequently
chosen reason (which would have been among respondent's top five rankings of reasons
to volunteer) was an altruistic reason: a chance to help others.
Additional Analyses
As previously stated in the section on descriptive statistics, no gender differences
existed across the three research groups. Since there is, however, a body of literature that
discusses gender differences in empathy and in altruism (e.g., Eisenberg and her
colleagues, 1983, 1989; Feshbach, 1982; Graham & Ickes, 1997; Hoffman, 1977; Lennon


62
original). Similarly, a scale score of 24 (at the boundary of the third and fourth quartiles
of the theoretical range) suggests that this level of empathy wouid tend to be adequate in
helping relationships, whereas a score of 16 would be expected to represent a less than
adequate level of therapeutic empathy.
Recall the empathic understanding mean scores for each of the research groups
(from Table 4-5): volunteers = 20.5 (SD = 10.1), trainees = ¡6.3 (SD = 9.8), and controls
= 12.5 (SD = 9.0). Based on the above assumptions, none of the study groups was
substantially empathic. Volunteers scored at an adequate level of empathic
understanding, whereas trainees and controls' empathic levels were less than adequate.
Hypothesis 2
The direct relationship between a crisis volunteers length of experience and
amount of empathy found in the study did not support the second hypothesis, which
projected that an inverse relationship wouid exist. Previous findings in the literature on
how experience affects empathy are mixed. On the one hand, France (1974), Hart and
King (1979), Neimeyer and Pfeiffer (1994), ODonnell and George (1977), and Polenz
and Verdi (1977) all found that paraprofessionals can provide better facilitative
conditions with experience and training. As reported earlier, results regarding the first
hypothesis show a pattern consistent with the assertion that training enhances crisis
intervention effectiveness, though a causal relationship cannot be drawn from the current
research. On the other hand, Carkhuff, Kratochvil, and Friel (1968) and Elkins and
Cohen (1982) found that counseling skills did not improve with experience; while
counselors ability to discriminate facilitative conditions improved with experience, their
actual ability to offer these conditions declined.


87
Orlinski. D. E Grawe. K., & Parks, B. K. (1994). Process and outcome in
psychotherapy noch einmal. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook
of psychotherapy and behav ior change (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.
Patterson. C. H. (1984). Empathy, warmth, and genuineness in psychotherapy: A
review of reviews. Psychotherapy. 21, 431 -438.
Piliavin. J. A., Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Clark, R. D., Ill (1981). Emergency
intervention New York: Academic Press.
Polcnz, D. D & Verdi. P. (1977). Differences in the therapeutic functioning of
paraprofessionals with varying lengths of experience. Journal of Clinical
Psychology. 33. 1115-1119.
Probert, J. S., & Fogel, J. (1997, April). More Tensions: Training Crisis Center
Volunteers. Workshop presented at the American Association of Suicidology
conference, Memphis, TN.
Range, L. M., & Knott, E. C. (1997). Twenty suicide assessment instruments:
Evaluation and recommendations. Death Studies. 21. 25-58.
Rogers, C. R. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality
change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21,95-103.
Rosenbaum, A., & Calhoun, J. F. (1977). The use of the telephone hotline in crisis
intervention: A review. Journal of Community Psychology. 5, 325-339.
Rudd, M. D. (1989). The prevalence of suicide ideation among college students.
Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 19. 173-183.
Rushton. J. P. (1980). Altruism, socialization and society. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
t
Seely, M. (1992). Hotlines our heritage and challenges. Crisis, 13, 14-15.
Sergent, M. T., & Sedlacek, W. E. (1990). Volunteer motivation across student
organizations: A test of person-environment fit theory. Journal of College Student
Development 31.255-261.
Shneidman, E. S., Farberow, N. L., & Litman, R. E. (1961). Introduction. In N. L.
Farberow & E. S. Shneidman (Eds.), The cry for help (pp. 6-18). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Snodgrass, S. (1992). Further effects of role versus gender on interpersonal sensitivity.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 154-158.


ASSESSING SUICIDE HOTLINE VOLUNTEERS
EMPATHY AND MOTIVATIONS
By
MICHELLE LEE BARZ
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2001


66
reviews on gender differences in empathy have been inconsistent, primarily due to the
fact that empathy has been operationalized and measured in a variety of ways.
Eisenberg and Lennon's (1983) meta-analysis of the data from 16 studies found
that females scored higher than males on self-report questionnaire measures of emotional
empathy, with*an effect size of .99! However, they asserted that the demand
characteristics of self-report questionnaires render these findings less than conclusive,
especially in light of much smaller differences or no differences found for other empathy
measures (such as self-report in simulated emotional situations, facial/gestural and
physiological indices). Based on the reviews of the literature regarding gender
differences in empathy, a need for greater conceptual and methodological precision in
future research is evident. Then, perhaps, the meaning of gender differences found in
previous research will be clarified (Lennon & Eisenberg, 1987).
Graham and lekes (1997) found no reliable gender differences in empathic
accuracy. They suggested that gender differences found in other studies on empathy
may, in fact, be more a matter of motivation than of ability. Males and females may not
differ in their ability to empathize, but their gender-role socialization may provide them
with more or less motivation to do so.
In the current study, the fact that both empathy and altruism were measured by
self-report questionnaires, suggests that, although gender differences were found, further
investigation needs to occur in order to more fully understand the nature of those
differences. Future research should consider both the demand characteristics of the
assessment or measurement device as well as the motivational set within the participants.


LIST OF REFERENCES
Adler. A, (1931). What life should mean to you. New York; Little. Brown,
Agresti. A., & Finlay, B. (1997). Statistical methods for the social sciences. Upper
Saddle River, NJ; Prentice Hall.
Allen, N. J., & Rushton, J. P. (1983). Personality characteristics of community mental
health volunteers: A review. Journal of Voluntary Action Research. 12. 36-49.
Amato. P. R. (1985). An investigation of planned helping behavior. Journal of Research
in Personality. 19, 232-252.
Barnett, V., & Lewis, T. (1978). Outliers in statistical data. New York: Wiley.
Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1959). Therapeutic personality change as a function of
perceived therapist response. American Psychologist. 14, 376.
Barrett-Lennard. G. T. (1962). Dimensions of therapist response as causal factors in
therapeutic change. Psychological Monographs. 76. No. 43, Whole no. 562.
Barrett-Lennard. G. T. (1976). Empathy in human relationships: Significance, nature
and measurement. Australian Psychologist, 11. 173-184.
Barrett-Lennard. G. T. (1978). The Relationship Inventory: Later development and
adaptations. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology. 8, 68.
Barrett-Lennard. G. T. (1981). The empathy cycle: Refinement of a nuclear concept.
Journal of Counseling Psychology. 28. 91-100.
Barrett-Lennard. G. T. (1986). The Relationship Inventory now: Issues and advances in
theory, method and use. In L. S. Greenberg & W. M. Pinsof (Eds.), The
psychotherapeutic process: A research handbook (pp. 439-476). New York:
Guilford Press.
Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1993). The phases and focus of empathy. British Journal of
Medical Psychology'. 66. 3-14.
Barrett-Lennard. G. T., & Bergerson, S. G. (1975). Resource bibliography of reported
studies using the Relationship Inventory', part C. mimeo. University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Canada.
79


39
dyad are unobtrusively audio- and videotaped while interacting in a waiting room. At
the end of the observation period, participants are partially debriefed, then each member
of the dyad is asked to separately review the videotape and assess the thoughts and
feelings he or she had during the waiting room interaction. Participants are then
directed to view the tape a second time and asked to infer the content of their partners
thoughts and feelings during the interaction. Finally, both participants are asked to
complete a posttest questionnaire assessing their perceptions of themselves and their
partner during the interaction. A global measure of empathic accuracy is then computed
by trained, independent raters making similarity' judgments. The resulting percentage
measure of empathic accuracy ( which controls for individual differences in total number
of inferences made as well as reliability of similarity judgments) ranges from .00 (total
inaccuracy) to 1.00 (perfect accuracy). The eclectic approach of this method is appealing
in that it compensates for weaknesses found in using just one approach to assess
empathy. However, this method would be extremely difficult to use as intended (in a
naturalistic setting) with crisis hotline volunteers, whose interactions transpire over the
telephone with callers who typically have complete anonymity and tend to be in
relatively high levels of distress.
In a review of research on the reliability of raters for scales based on the Carkhuff
and Truax facilitative dimensions (e g., empathy), Wolber and McGovern (1977) found
that higher interrater reliabilities are more likely when raters are extensively trained in
communication skills. In addition, Kurtz and Grummon (1972) found that correlations
between observer ratings of empathy with client perceptions have generally been low.
This does leave the construct validity of ratings open to question (Bohart & Greenberg,


84
Hoffman, M. L. (1981). The development of empathy. In J. P. Rushton Sorrentino (Eds.), Altruism and helpintz behavior: Social, personality, and
developmental perspectives (pp. 41-63). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hoffman, M. L. (1982). Development of prosocial motivation: Empathy and guilt. In
N. Eisenberg (Ed)., The development of prosocial behavior (pp. 281-313). New
York: Academic Press.
Hoffman, M. L. (1984). Interaction of affect and cognition in empathy. In C. E. Izard, J.
Kagan Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hoffman, M. L. (1987). The contribution of empathy to justice and moral development.
In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 47-80).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and
justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Homes, C. B., & Howard, M. E. (1980). Recognition of suicide lethality factors by
physicians, mental health professionals, ministers, and college students. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 48, 383-387.
Ickes, W. (Ed.). (1997). Empathic accuracy. New York: Guilford Press.
Ickes, W. (1993). Empathic accuracy. Journal of Personality, 61. 587-610.
Ickes, W., Bissonnette. V., Garcia S., dyadic interaction paradigm. In C. Hendrick & M. Clark (Eds.), Review of
personality' and social psychology: Research methods in personality and social
psychology (Vol. II, pp. 16-44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ickes, W., Marangoni, C, & Garcia, S. (1997). Studying empathic accuracy in a
clinically relevant context. In W. Ickes, (Ed.), Empathic accuracy (pp.282-310).
New York: Guilford Press.
Ickes, W., Stinson, L., Bissonnette, V., cognition: Empathic accuracy in mixed-sex dyads. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 59, 730-742.
Ickes, W., & Tooke, W. (1988). The observational method: Studying the interaction of
minds and bodies. In S. Duck, D. Hay, S. Hobfoll, W. Ickes fe B. Montgomery
(Eds.), The handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research, and interventions
(pp. 79-97). Chichester, England: Wiley.


25
dispositional empathy. They then observed helping under specific systematically varied
conditions, where escape from the negative consequences for self of not helping another
(e.g., shame and guilt) was either easy or hard. Batson et al. found no evidence that any
of the four altruistic personality variables was associated with altruistic motivation,
although three of the variables (self-esteem, ascription of responsibility and empathie
concern ) were associated with prosocial motivation (i.e., helping others). From these
results, should it be concluded that the altruistic personality is not really altruistic?
Such a conclusion may be premature based on the fact that other personality variables
that contribute to an altruistic personality (e.g., self-actualization, flexibility and
tolerance) were not measured and that helping responses were examined in only one need
situation.
Traditionally, volunteer motivations were assumed to be altruistic. Perhaps our
conception of volunteers falls into a special subgroup of those who provide prosocial
behavior. Nonetheless, this view of volunteers influenced the way in which volunteer
programs are designed, operated and studied. Clary and Snyder (1991) addressed the
question of volunteer motivations in terms of a functional analysis. According to the
researchers, a functional analysis is concerned with the needs, motives and
social/psychological functions being served by volunteer activities. They asserted that
volunteer activity based on altruistic concern for others in need and/or a desire to
contribute to society serves a value-expressive function. This function incorporates the
idea that a persons values about others well-being influences helping behavior.
Additionally, researchers focused on other motivations that cause people to
volunteer. In her study of 4-H volunteers, Henderson (1981) found that the primary


Finally, to my parents and my husband Stuart, I give very special thanks for continually
providing me with the time, love, faith and encouragement to achieve my goals.
IV


55
set were not statistically significant. This makes sense in light of the large standard
deviation. After windsonzing, the mean was 11.3 (SD = 15.6). Standard deviation was
more than halved, the mean dropped by 6.2 months of experience, and the correlational
results were significant Correlations between the windsorized length of experience
variable and the two empathy measures are presented in Table 4-7. Age was also
included in the correlational analyses since it was a possible confounding variable.
Table 4-7. Correlations Among Experience, Age and Empathy
Length of Interpersonal Relationship Age
Experience Reactivity Index Inventory
Length of
Experience 1.0
Interpersonal
Reactivity Index 0.20* 1.0
Relationship
Inventory 0.27** 0.52** 1.0
Age 0.61** 0.07 (L06 L0_
*=/?<.05. **=/?<.01.
Both the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and the Relationship Inventory were
significantly positively associated with length of experience, but they were also
significantly associated with each other. Therefore, a multiple regression was performed,
entering the Interpersonal Reactivity Index and Relationship Inventory simultaneously.
The two empathy measures accounted for 7% of the variability in length of experience
(R = 0.28, adj. FT = 0.07), and at least one of the scales was associated with length of
experience, F (2, 137) = 5.98, p < .01. When each scale was tested individually,
controlling for the other scale, the following results were found: for the Interpersonal
Reactivity Index scale, t= 1.1,/? = .273 and for the Relationship Inventory scale, t = 2.25,


67
Indeed, further clarification of this issue may be gained by investigating empathic
motivation rather than ability.
Study Limitations
Since the study gathered information through the use of paper and pencil tests,
one limitation of the study may have been the willingness and ability of individuals to
respond at all and/or respond in an accurate fashion. Participants were not required to
produce responses and instead chose responses already listed on their questionnaire.
Therefore, it is difficult to conclude with complete certainty that their responses during a
crisis call would be similar, indeed, a pencil and paper test cannot completely reflect a
counselors ability to paraphrase powerful emotions accurately and at the appropriate
time. Also, the borderline internal consistency of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (.64
in the current study) may have impacted the results.
In addition, the study used psychology undergraduates as a control group, which
constituted a nonequivalent control groups design. This suggests that pre-existing
differences in attitudes, skills and motivations between the research groups may have
existed. However, since many of the individuals who volunteer for this particular crisis
intervention center were undergraduate psychology students (or others with similar
demographics), the results are still somewhat generalizable. Also, participants in the
study were not randomly assigned to the three study groups; therefore, no conclusions
regarding causal relationships are drawn
Another limitation of the study was the relatively small sample size. There were
only 27 participants in the training group, compared to 75 participants in the volunteer
group and 46 in the control group. Perhaps the small sample size was one reason that no


To my parents -
with love and appreciation


71
Volunteers and paraprofessionals arc often the backbone of crisis and suicide
prevention agencies. This study is consistent with a pattern indicating that training as a
volunteer and experience as a crisis counselor can increase volunteers' abilities to work
with clients, thereby allowing crisis intervention and suicide prevention agencies the
ability to provide more effective services to their community. Since it appears from the
results of this study that volunteers are motivated to work in crisis intervention settings
for both egoistic and altruistic masons, agencies would be well-served to appeal to both
of these motivations in recruiting and retaining volunteers. In this era of high suicide
rates and increasing demands on crisis intervention/suicide prevention agencies, it seems
imperative that volunteers working in this area be highly trained and supported in ways
that encourage them to remain long-term; only then can we hope stop the trend of
increasing suicide rates.


80
Batson. C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever trulv altruistic? In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psvcholotrv (Vol. 20, pp. 65-122). Orlando,
FL: Academic Press.
Batson. C. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social-psychological answer.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Batson, C. D., Bolen, M. H.. Cross. J. A., & Neunnger-Bcnefiel, H. E. (1986). Where is
the altruism in the altruistic personality? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 50, 212-220.
Batson, C. D Dyck, J. L., Brandt J. R., Batson, J. G Powell, A. L., McMaster, M. R.,
& Griffitt, C. (1988). Five studies testing two new egoistic alternatives to the
empathv-altruism hypothesis. Journal of Personality' and Social Psychology. 55,
52-77.
Black, B., & DiNitto, D. (1994). Volunteers who work with survivors of rape and
battering: Motivations, acceptance, satisfaction, length of service, and gender
differences. Journal of Social Service Research. 20. 73-97.
Bohart. A. C., & Greenberg, L. S. (Eds.). (1997). Empathy reconsidered: New
directions in psychotherapy. Washington, D C.: American Psychological
Association.
Carey, J. C.. Fox, E. A., & Spraggins, E. F. (1988). Replication of structure findings
regarding the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Measurement and Evaluation in
Counseling and Development, 21, 102-105.
Carkhuff, R. R. (1968). Differential functioning of lay and professional helpers. Journal
of Counseling Psychology. 15, 117-126.
Carkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and human relations, Vols. I and II. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.
Carkhuff, R. R., Kratochvil, D., & Friel, T. (1968). The effects of professional training:
The communication and discrimination of facilitative conditions. Journal of
Counseling Psychology. 15. 68-74.
Carothers, J. E & Inslee, L. J. (1974). Level of empathic understanding offered by
volunteer telephone services. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 21_, 274-276.
Centers for Disease Control. (1985). Suicide surveillance, 1970-1980. Atlanta, GA:
Author.


20
results have often been cited as justification for using trained lay volunteers in crisis
center settings.
Homes and Howard (1980) specifically studied both professional and
paraprofessional crisis workers' ability to recognize suicide lethality factors. They
developed therLethality Scale, a 13-item scale that contains questions about suicide-
related factors such as age, gender, immediate stress, suicide plan and sleep disturbance.
The items, which are in multiple choice format, were completed by different groups of
professionals and paraprofessionals. Results indicated that general/family practice
physicians were more aware of lethality factors than were psychiatrists, followed by
psychologists, social workers, ministers and college students. A disturbing finding was
that doctoral-level psychologists only recognized correct responses to about half of the
items, masters-level social workers recognized fewer than half, and ministers recognized
no more than college students! Although definite criteria for a "good score were not
specified, the findings do suggest that more training and/or experience are related to
greater effectiveness. The results also indicate a need for improved training on suicide
risk factors for both professionals and paraprofessionals alike if they are working with
suicidal clients.
Effects of Training and Experience
Some studies involving roleplays have generally shown that phone counselors can
provide better facilitative conditions with training and experience (France, 1975; Hart &
King, 1979; Neimeyer & Pfeiffer, 1994). In these studies, the counselors actively
participated in the roleplav situation. However, studies involving simulated calls made to
crisis centers in which the phone counselors were not aware that the calls were simulated


7
By understanding the motivations behind peoples volunteer efforts, we can better
understand why they volunteer and what keeps them volunteering. In other words,
inquiring about motivations that dispose individuals to volunteer and to sustain their
volunteer involvement over time may help us better understand how crisis intervention
agencies can best attract and retain volunteers.
Volunteers provide necessary crisis intervention and suicide prevention services,
but how do agencies come by this invaluable resource? Why would people knowingly
commit their time and energy, not to mention undergo intense feelings and emotions
themselves, in order to help others deal with crises and/or a desire to die? Are these
individuals somehow more altruistic than those who do not volunteer? Stoffer (1968)
asserts that some people are more inherently helpful than others, and one can surmise that
individuals who display high levels of empathy may also volunteer for more altruistic
reasons. Some developmental researchers have studied the relationship between empathy
and prosocial behavior, such as altruism (Eisenberg & Miller, 1987a, 1987b), or how
empathy can lead to the development and practice of altruism (Hoffman, 1987). Is the
empathy that might motivate individuals to volunteer in crisis intervention settings simple
altruism or are there more egoistic factors at work? Wiehe and Isenhour (1977) found
that personal satisfaction was seen as the most important motivation for peoples interest
in serving as a volunteer. This finding has obvious implications for agencies that require
volunteers. Crisis service agencies typically require more extensive training and
supervision than other volunteer agencies. However, the payoff in the end may be greater
for both the volunteer and the agency. Tasks requiring greater effort, specific skills, good


21
have led researchers to conclude that crisis line counselors often do not reach minimum
levels of therapeutic effectiveness (France, 1975; Genther, 1974; Neimeyer & Pfeiffer,
1994; Stein & Lambert. 1984). The outcome of these studies suggests that when
counselors are not aware that they are being assessed on their ability to provide
facilitative conditions, their effectiveness is sub-par. Elkins and Cohen (1982), using
independently developed scales, studied the effects of both training and experience on
counseling skills, knowledge and dogmatic attitudes. The scales contained both written
questions designed to measure attitudes and knowledge and hypothetical callers
statements that were used to elicit written responses. They found that volunteers
counseling skills and knowledge improved with training, but not with experience, and
that attitudes were not affected by either training or experience. The research cited above
indicates that while further training and experience can affect how well counselors
provide facilitative conditions, such as empathy, the results are clearly mixed.
Interestingly, some studies suggest that a counselor's length of experience is
inversely related to empathic accuracy. Truax and Carkhuff (1967) argued that most
psychotherapy training programs stress theory and client psychodynamics over how to
create a facilitative relationship. The researchers emphasized that the skills of
relationship building are of primary importance in training good therapists. If such skills
are not continually emphasized, therapeutic empathy may diminish over time (even with
increased therapeutic experience). In a study on the effects of extended, didactic training
on the therapeutic functioning of professional psychology trainees, Carkhuff, Kratochvil,
and Friel (1968) found that over the course of several years training, therapists ability to


68
significant difference was found between the control group mean and the training group
mean on the Relationship inventory empathy measure (see Tables 4-5 and 4-6) even
though s significant difference was found between the training group mean and the
volunteer group mean.
In order to keep data collection manageable, oniy participants from one crisis
intervention center were tested. This study did not include outcome measures of
effectiveness (e.g., caller satisfaction), but it is hoped that results can be used in
conjunction with other outcome findings. Numerous factors go into creating an
"effective" suicide prevention volunteer: this study only examined one of those factors
(empathy) and the motivations behind volunteering in such a critical service area.
Implications for Future Research
The complex relationship between empathy and motivation in volunteers who
provide suicide prevention services could also be investigated; specifically, further study
is warranted to investigate whether or not an interaction between empathy and motivation
exists in these volunteers. In addition, Barrett-Lennard (1981) pointed out that there is
wide intramdividual variation in empathic accuracy from one instance to another,
occurring even in very' similar situations (p. 99). This suggests that future research on
empathy as a generalized trait or ability would be a potentially important (and complex)
area of study in its own right. Indeed, some people do consistently act more generous,
helping and kind than others. Thomas and Fletcher (1997) suggested that although
studies are sparse, there is some evidence that implies "the existence of stable individual
differences in the ability to make accurate empathic judgments, [although] the basis and
nature of such abilities has yet to be determined (p. 213).


CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
This chapter begins with a summary of the results supplied through descriptive
statistics and includes four tables. The chapter then expounds on the specific results for
the three hypotheses and explains the analyses used. It concludes with some post-hoc
analyses.
Descriptive Statistics
With respect to the perspective-taking subscale of the Interpersonal Reactivity
Index, which measures empathy through the tendency of a person to spontaneously adopt
the psychological view of others (answers range from 0 = does not describe me well to 4
= describes me very well, with an overall score range from 0 to 28 on the seven
questions), respondents scored a mean of 20.3 (SD = 1.06). On the Relationship
inventory' empathic understanding subscale (where answers couid be -3, -2, -1, +1, +2,
+3, with -3 = no, 1 strongly feel it is not true about me and +3 = yes, 1 strongly feel it is
true about me, and the overall score range for the 16 questions is 18 to +48), the mean
score was 17.1 (SD = 10.3). On the Measure of Altruistic Motivation, only the five
altruistic reasons are scored by reverse-scoring the rankings and then adding the scores
together, with overall scores ranging from 0 to 15; the mean of the Measure of Altruistic
Motivation was 5.3 (SD = 3.5). The average age of participants was 26.2 (SD = 9.6) and
the average amount of time (in months ) that volunteers worked at the Crisis Center was
11.3 (SD = 15.6). Means, standard deviations, ranges, and measures of internal
47


36
overall scores can range from 0 to 28. with 28 indicating a high degree of that particular
aspect of empathy.
The other instrument used to measure participants empathy was Barrett-
Lennard's Relationship Inventory (Barrett-Lennard, 1978). This instrument is designed
to measure four dimensions of interpersonal relationships adapted from Rogers (1957,
1959) conception of the necessary conditions for therapeutic... change" (Barrett-Lennard,
1978, p. 1). It measures empathy, congruence, level of regard, and unconditionality.
These four theoretically critical variables of therapist/counselor-to-client responses can
be assessed from the perceptions of either the client or the therapist. For the purpose of
this study, the variable of interest is empathy from crisis volunteer's (counselor's)
perspective. Hundreds of studies have used various adaptations and research applications
of the Relationship Inventory (Barrett-Lennard. 1986; Barrett-Lennard & Bergerson,
1975). One useful application of the Relationship Inventory is that an ordinary person
can respond to questions in reference to any significant relationship with another person,
which is consistent with the usefulness of the instrument in a counseling or therapy
research context.
The Relationship Inventory is a 64-item questionnaire, in which a person judges
statements with respect to how true or untrue they are about him/her. Gurman (1977), in
his extensive review of the Relationship Inventory, reports mean split-half (internal)
reliability^ and test-retest coefficients of .80 or above for each of the four Relationship
Inventory subscales. Reliability, or consistency, is centrally concerned with whether an
instrument yields the same result whenever it is applied to something that it is designed to
measure which has remained constant from one occasion of measurement to another.


82
Eisenberg, N., & Miller, P. A. (1987a). Empathy and prosocial behavior. Psychological
Bulletin. 101.91-119.
Eisenberg. N., & Miller. P. A. (1987b). Empathy, sympathy, and altruism: Empirical
and conceptual links. In N. Eisenberg & J. Straver (Eds.), Empathy and its
development (pp. 292-316). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Eisenberg, N., Miller, P. A., Shaller, M., Fabes, R. A., Fultz, J., Shell, R., & Shea, C. L.
(1989). The roie of sympathy and altruistic personality traits in helping: A
reexamination. Journal of Personality, 57, 41-67.
Elkins, R. I., & Cohen, C. R. (1982). A comparison of the effects of prejob training and
job experience on nonprofessional telephone crisis counselors. Suicide and Life-
Threatenmg Behavior. 12. 84-89.
Ellis, S. J. (1978). American traditions of volunteerism and service-learning: The
twentieth century. Synergist. Spring, 37-39.
Ellis, S. J. (1985). Research on volunteerism: What needs to be done. Journal of
Voluntary Action Research. M, 11-14.
Feshbach. N. D. (1982). Sex differences in empathy and social behavior in children. In
N. Eisenberg (Ed.), The development of prosocial behavior (pp. 315-338). New
York: Academic Press.
Fitch, R. T. (1987). Characteristics and motivations of college students volunteering for
community service. Journal of College Student Personnel. 28. 424-431.
Fowler, D. E., & McGee, R. K. (1973). Assessing the performance of telephone crisis
workers: The development of a technical effectiveness scale. In D. Lester & G.
Brockopp (Eds.), Crisis intervention and counseling by telephone. Springfield, 1L:
Charles C. Thomas.
France, K. (1975). Evaluation of lay volunteer crisis telephone workers. American
Journal of Community' Psychology. 3, 197-200.
Frankish. C. J. (1994). Crisis centers and their role in treatment: Suicide prevention
versus health promotion. Death Studies. F8, 327-339.
Genther, R. (1974). Evaluating the functioning of community-based hotlines.
Professional Psychology'. 5, 409-414.
Gidron, B. (1978). Volunteer work and its rewards. Volunteer Administration. 11.
18-32.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.


12
model hypothesized associations between the constructs, and he suggested that stronger
relationships exist between constructs that are adjacent (e g., between antecedents and
processes) than those that are not adjacent (e.g., between antecedents and interpersonal
outcomes). Although Davis (1994) model borrowed its framework somewhat from
Hoffman (1984) and Staub (1987), he argued that his model allows for examination of
empathy in a multidimensional fashion that accounts for similar outcomes (e g., helping
behavior) through a multitude of person characteristics and processes (e.g., perceptions,
associations, affective reactions and cognitions).
Changming Duan's (2000) findings supported Davis' contention that empathy is
multidimensional. Duan found that a distinction can be made between intellectual
empathy (the extent to which an observer takes the perspective of the target) and
empathic emotion (the extent to which the observer feels the targets emotions) and that
the two types of empathy may correlate in certain situations. Bohart and Greenberg
(1997) argued that empathys multiple dimensions include ... a cognitive or
understanding dimension,... an affective or experiential dimension,... action [or a]
communication [dimension],... a way of being together in relationships, ... [and]
interpersonal confirmation or validation (p. 419, italics in original).
The argument that empathy research is best served by adopting a
multidimensional approach to the overall construct is convincing (see Davis, 1983b) and
his empathy measure, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980) reflects this
multidimensionality. The empathy measure, discussed in Chapter 3 of this study,
includes measures of perspective-taking (cognitive role-taking), fantasy (identification
with characters in movies, novels, plays, and other fictional situations), empathic concern


APPENDIX C
INSTRUMENTS
In the space before each question, please write the number 0, 1,2, 3, or 4 to indicate how
you feel using the following scale: 0 (does not describe me well) to 4 (describes me very
well).
1. Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in that
persons place.
2. If Im sure Im right about something, 1 dont waste much time listening to
other peoples arguments.
3. I sometimes try to understand my friends better by imagining how things look
from their perspective.
4. I believe that there are two sides to every question and I try to look at them
both.
5. I sometimes find it difficult to see things from the other persons point of view.
6. I try to look at everybodys side of a disagreement before I make a decision.
7. When I'm upset at someone, I usually try to "put mvseif in his/her shoes for a
while.
75


26
motivation for adult volunteers was affiliation, or the desire to interact with others. This
reason for volunteering serves a 'social-adjustment function (Clary & Snyder, 1991),
which reflects normative influences from one's social network. Fitch (1987), in his study
of the motivations of college students volunteering for community service, found that
motives are both egoistic and altruistic; Wiehe and Isenhour (1977), studying community
agency volunteers, found similar results. Gidron (1978) asked volunteers in health and
mental health institutions to report the extent to which they expected to receive extrinsic
rewards (rewards controlled by the institution) and intrinsic rewards (rewards associated
with the subjective meaning of the work for the volunteer ). While two-thirds of the
sample expected some extrinsic rewards, the vast majority expected primarily intrinsic
rewards. Gidrons findings did not explicitly address which rewards would be deemed
altruistic or egoistic; thus, it is not clear how those two motivations impacted volunteers
reasons for volunteering.
Henderson (1980) suggested that each volunteer has unique motivations and
expectations of his or her experience. Ascertaining these motivations can contribute to
providing volunteers with a satisfactory experience while simultaneously staffing
community agencies. In addition, the possibility that volunteers in different
organizations are very different types of people, and have unique motivations for
volunteering, has implications for recruitment and retention of volunteers (Sergent &
Sedlacek, 1990). However, the question remains as to whether crisis/suicide
paraprofessionais have different levels of altruistic reasons for volunteering than those
individuals engaging m other forms of volunteer work; or if crisis intervention volunteers
are more altruistic than those who do not volunteer at all. Research suggests that those


85
Kalafat, J., Boroto, D. R., & France, K. (1979). Relationships among experience level
and value orientation and the performance of paraprofessional telephone
counselors. American Journal of Community Psychology 7, 167-180.
Kann, L., Kinchen. S. A., Williams, B. I., Ross. J. G., Lowry, R., Hill, C. V., Grunbaum,
J. A., Blumson, P. S., Collins, J. L., & Kolbe, L. J. (1998, August 14). Youth risk
behavior surveiilance-United States, 1997. Morbidity' and Mortality Weekly
Report: CPC Surveillance Summaries. 47, 1-89.
Knickerbocker, D., & McGee, R. (1973). Clinical effectiveness of nonprofessional and
professional telephone workers in a crisis intervention centre. In D. Lester & G.
Brockopp (Eds.), Crisis intervention and counseling bv telephone (pp.298-309).
Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Knott, E. C & Range, L. M. (1998). Content analysis of previously suicidal college
students experiences. Death Studies. 22. 171-180.
Krebs, D. L. (1975). Empathy and altruism. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. 32,1134-1146.
Kurtz, R. R., & Grummon, D. L. (1972). Different approaches to the measurement of
therapist empathy and their relationship to therapy outcomes. Journal of Consultimz
and Clinical Psychology. 39. 106-115.
Lennon, R., & Eisenberg, N. (1987). Gender and age differences in empathy and
sympathy. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp.
195-217). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lemer, M. J. (1982). The justice motive in human relations and the economic model of
man: A radical analysis of facts and fictions. In V. J. Derlega & J. Grzelak (Eds.),
Cooperation and helping behavior: Theories and research (pp. 249-278). New
York: Academic Press.
Lester, D. (1993). Challenge in preventing suicide. Crisis, 14, 187-1849.
Linehan, M. M. (1997). Validation and psychotherapy, in A. C. Bohart & L. S.
Greenberg (Eds.), Empathy reconsidered: New directions in psychotherapy.
Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.
Litman, R. E., Farberow, N. L., Shneidman, E. S., Helig, S. M., & Kramer, J. A. (1965).
Suicide-prevention telephone service. Journal of the American Medical
Association. 192. 107-111.
Manstead, A. (1992). Gender differences in emotion. In A. Gale & M. W. Eysenck
(Eds.), Handbook of individual differences: Biological perspectives. London:
Wiley.


35
in counseling. In addition. Clary and Orcnstein (1991) found that perspective-taking is
involved in helping, but "is more relevant for effectiveness than for amount of help" (p.
63). It seems that perspective-taking focuses on collecting information and improving
understanding, clearly cognitive processes, rather than engaging in altruistic behavior,
which may be inore emotional ( Davis, 1983b). The coefficient alpha of the PT scale is
.78. Okun, Shepard, and Eisenberg (2000) used the PT scale to assess volunteers-in-
training at the Humane Society and Parents Anonymous. The coefficient alpha for the
scale in their study was .81.
The other three subscales of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, which were not
used in this study, are the fantasy scale (a tendency to become deeply involved in
fictitious situations), the personal distress scale (a tendency to experience emotions
related to discomfort and distress when faced with a needy other), and the empathic
concern scale (a tendency to experience emotions of concern and sympathy when
exposed to a person in distress). The fantasy and personal distress subscales were not
used in the current investigation since no studies have indicated their usefulness as
measures for empathic effectiveness in counseling situations. The empathic concern
subscale was not used since it has been shown to have no relationship to measures of
interpersonal functioning (Davis, 1983a). In addition, people with higher scores on this
subscale reported more unease and anxiety around others; that is, Davis found a generally
positive relationship between scores on the empathic concern subscale and measures of
shyness, social anxiety and audience anxiety as well as slight tendencies toward chronic
fearfulness and vulnerability. Each of the four subscales consists of seven items rated on
a scale of 0 (does not describe me well) to 4 (describes me very well). For each scale,


45
was attached to the front of each questionnaire packet. In addition, the Crisis Center
Director included a cover letter with each of the active volunteers packets encouraging
their participation in the study. Questionnaires were placed in the 102 active volunteers
mailboxes. Of the 102 active volunteers, 90 checked their mailboxes during the research
period. Completed questionnaires were returned to a Staff mailbox.
This researcher sent 102 questionnaire packets to inactive volunteers (along with
an introduction letter similar to the one for active volunteers) via the U.S. Postal Service.
Stamped return envelopes, marked surveys were included in the mailed packets. After
consultation with the Director of the Crisis Center, it was decided that the return
envelopes would be addressed to the Director, rather than the researcher, with an
expectation that doing so would increase the return rate. However, no additional cover
letter from the Director was included with the mailed questionnaire packets. Of the
initial 102 questionnaire packets mailed, eight were returned by the Postal Service as
undeliverable or unable to forward due to non-current addresses. In addition, three
packets were not delivered to student participants (who were inactive volunteers) because
their campus addresses were not current. Therefore, 91 questionnaire packets went out to
participants.
The return rate goal was, as stated earlier, 30 completed questionnaire packets
from the entire volunteer group. The goal was exceeded: 40 packets were returned from
the inactive volunteers (a 44% return rate) and 35 from the active volunteers (a 39%
return rate) for a total of 75 packets. The overall return rate for the volunteer group was
41.4% (75 returns out of 181 questionnaires disseminated). The Director mailed all
returned packets to the researcher. Only the volunteer group had protocols with answers


17
between empathy-related constructs and altruistic behavior. Indeed, Batson (1987,1991)
argued that the source of helping that is intended solely to benefit another (i.e., altruism)
is the reactive emotional response of empathic concern. He and his colleagues conducted
numerous experimental studies demonstrating a relationship between empathic concern
and helping bdhavior, and they carefully and cleverly designed experiments in which a
distinction between altruistic (sympathy-based) helping and egoistic (guilt-based) helping
was built into the study (Batson et al., 1988). Essentially this was done by making some
participants feel like a decision not to help was justified, thereby eliminating guilt as a
motivating force to help. However, one could still argue that even though it is justified
not to help another, a person might not feel that it is morally acceptable. Overall, though
the research evidence has gone further to establish a link between empathy and altruism,
it is not clear why such a relationship exists.
Cialdini. Brown, Lewis, Luce, and Neuberg (1997) suggested that an alternative
to the altruism-egoism debate regarding motivation to help others is the construct of
oneness, which they defined as shared, merged or interconnected personal identities
(p.483). Essentially, oneness suggests that people help others because they feel more at
one with those others. Cialdini et al. state that perceived oneness offers a nonaltruistic
(though not an egoistic) alternative to previous research findings that attributed helping
behavior to empathically driven altruistic motivation. Based on the explanations
presented in the literature review, the debate about what motivates people to help others
is not yet clearly decided, though thought-provoking studies continue to increase our
knowledge about the empathy-altruism connection.


19
distinction between different types of empathy, may also have confounded its study.
However, difficulties in understanding or studying empathy should not preclude its
empirical examination. After all. Linehan (1997) stressed that conveying empathic
understanding with suicidal individuals is a critical component of therapy.
Professionals Versus Nonprofessionals
McGee and Jennings (1973) discovered that many volunteer counselors were
effective at becoming genuinely engaged with clients in crisis. They asserted that
nonprofessionais sometimes might be even better suited than professionals for crisis
intervention and suicide-prevention work. Nonprofessionals may naturally provide more
connected, non-detached contact with clients in crisis, whereas professionals may have a
more detached and categorical approach to what might be seen as psychopathology. In
addition, Knott and Range (1998) found that nonprofessionais often hear from someone
with suicidal intentions, are able to recognize signs of suicidality and are willing to help.
This suggests that they might be more able than professionals to help suicidal individuals,
in an informal setting, to explore alternatives other than suicide and to feel hopeful about
the future.
Knickerbocker and McGee (1973) compared "lay" volunteers working at a crisis
center (who had undergone a phone counselor training course) with a group of
professionals and graduate students preparing for professional psychology careers. Using
multiple measures, the three groups were rated for empathy, warmth, and genuineness,
considered in much of the literature as essential for therapeutic change. Across all three
dimensions, the nonprofessional group scored as high as, or higher than, the two
professional groups. All groups scored in the effective range on the dimensions. The


50
responded. The five participants in the training group who marked yes" may have been
enrolled in (but not completed) a previous training class, or they may have interpreted the
Table 4-2. Frequencies of the Measured Variables
Variable
n
Percent
Gender
Males
26
17.6%
Females
122
82.4%
Marital Status
Single (never married)
117
79.1%
Married
24
16.2%
Divorced
6
4.1%
Remained
1
0.7%
Race
Caucasian
116
78.4%
Hispanic
12
8.1%
Asian/Pacific Islander
10
6.7%
African American
6
4.1%
Other
4
2.7%
Major2
Not a student
33
22.3%
Psychology
61
41.2%
Counselor Education
7
4.7%
Sociology
6
4.1%
Mental Health Counseling
5
3.4%
Counseling Psychology
4
2.7%
Rehab Services
4
2.7%
Clinical Psychology
*5
2.0%
Criminology
J
2.0%
History
2
1.4%
Zoology
2
1.4%
Communication Sciences
2
1.4%
Have you ever been enrolled in the volunteer training program at the ACCC?
Yes
80
54.1%
No
68
45.9%
Have you had additional or other training in
counseling or crisis intervention?
Yes
45
30.4%
No
103
69.6%
Majors listed with a frequency of 1 (0.7%) were English, Pre-med., Entomology, Linguistics,
Telecom News, Public Relations, Political Science, Business, Finance, Nutrition, Religion, Rehab
Counseling, Graduate Sociology, Divinity/Theology, Law School and Social Work.


14
Ickes & Tooke, 1988) in order to study empathic accuracy is described in Chapter 3 of
this study.
The research on empathic accuracy most relevant to the current study is the work
by Marangom et al. (1995) regarding empathic accuracy in client-therapist relationships
(see also Ickes' Marangom, & Garcia, 1997). They found that empathic accuracy
improves with increased exposure to a person, feedback about a persons actual thoughts
and feelings, and increasing the readability of the target person. They also found
relatively stable individual differences in the consistency of a perceivers empathic
accuracy across different people. Ickes (1997) pointed out that these findings have clear
implications for the selection and training of individuals in areas where empathic
accuracy is an essential skill, and crisis intervention is certainly no exception. In addition
to the importance of being able to use empathy accurately, Hall, Davis, and Connelly
(2000) found a relationship between dispositional empathy and therapeutic effectiveness.
This is one of the first studies to assess a personality measure of empathy (specifically
empathic concern and perspective-taking ability) in psychologists and their satisfaction
with therapy.
Although there is disagreement about how best to define and operationalize
empathy (Bohan & Greenberg, 1997), the construct of empathy has a long and
distinguished history of theory and research in helping arenas. The current resurgence of
research into this interesting and important construct attests to the fact that the questions
raised about empathy will cause it to remain a central focus for years to come.


I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and quality,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Marshall Knudson
Courtesy Assistant Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it conforms to
acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully adequate, in scope and^uglity,
as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ^
Robert C. Ziller
Professor of Psychology
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Department of
Psychology in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and to the Graduate School and
was accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.
May 2001
Dean, Graduate School


APPENDIX B
INSTRUCTIONS
After completing the information sheet below, please carefully read and follow
the directions printed at the top of each of the following three brief questionnaires. Your
responses will be kept confidential and will be reported only in general terms with no
identifying information. Thank you for your participation in this study!
Name (print):
Last 4 Digits of Social Security Number:
Gender:
Marital Status (check one):
Single (never married)
Divorced
Separated
_____ Widowed
Remained
Age:
Race (check one):
African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Caucasian
_____ Hispanic
Native American
Other
Country of Origin:
If you are a student, what is your major?
Have you ever been enrolled in the volunteer training program at the Alachua County Crisis
Center? Yes No
If you are currently a volunteer, or have been one in the past, how long (to the nearest month)
have you volunteered for Alachua County Crisis Center?
Have you had additional or other training in counseling or crisis intervention? Yes No
If yes, please describe:
74


43
Procedure
Control Group
For the control group, a brief verbal explanation of the study was given and
questionnaire packets were handed out to students in a Personality Theory class during
the Fall 2000 semester. The Informed Consent form and a brief instruction sheet were
attached to the front of the questionnaire packet, which included a personal information
(demographic) sheet, and the three instruments (the Relationship Inventory, Interpersonal
Reactivity Index and Measure of Altruistic Motivation) in one of six assigned orders (to
ascertain for order effects). An opportunity to be debriefed after the study was offered to
any interested participants. All students in attendance completed a questionnaire packet
and answered every question. Of the 47 packets returned, one was not used as part of the
control group data in the study since the participant had already filled out a questionnaire
packet in Crisis Center training. All participants (i.e., all groups in the research study)
were given questionnaire packets that contained a consent form, an instruction page, and
the three instruments in one of six assigned orders.
Training Group
For the training group, the Crisis Center Training Director agreed to give
questionnaires to potential volunteers undergoing training during the Fall 2000 training
class; forty potential volunteers attended the initial Saturday training. The Training
Director gave questionnaire packets to one trainer for each group after the all-day
Saturday training. Volunteers-in-traimng are divided into several groups, each run by
two trainers, one of whom directs the training for a particular evening. The trainer
handed out questionnaires to the volunteers-in-training during their first Tuesday evening


22
discriminate therapeutic conditions improved, while their ability to offer these conditions
declined.
Polenz and Verdi (1977) found that paraprofessionals' ability to discriminate and
communicate facilitative conditions in psychotherapy were not affected by length of
experience. Irl other words, paraprofessionals with more experience were no better
functioning with respect to realizing and displaying empathy in therapy than
paraprofessionals with less experience. In another study, no difference was found
between newly trained and experienced paraprofessionals on facilitative conditions,
although both were rated higher than untrained controls (O'Donnell & George, 1977).
Therefore, the question remains as to whether crisis line workers with more experience
would display lower levels of empathy than those with less experience. Indeed, Kalafat,
Boroto, and France (1979) suggested that a complex relationship exists between
performance of facilitative conditions, values and experience. Although there is a
resurgence in stressing the significance of empathy, to date no research has investigated
how effectively paraprofessionals trained to work in crisis intervention settings utilize
their specific empathic skills (i.e., perspective-taking ability) or whether these skills
decrease as their experience increases.
Volunteers
Volunteensm has existed for centuries, but formalized volunteer programs have
arisen only recently (Ellis, 1985). Volunteensm, especially for college students, became
popular in the 1960s and 1970s as more community service was encouraged through
campus-based programs (Ellis, 1978). However, from the 1980s there has been a decline
in volunteer involvement. Newman (1985) suggested that this decline may be partially


56
p = .026. Therefore, controlling for the Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the Relationship
inventory significantly accounts for the variance in length of experience. However,
controlling for the Relationship Inventory, the Interpersonal Reactivity Index does not
account for the variance in length of experience.
Since age was also significantly positively associated with experience, another
simultaneous multiple regression was performed (with the interpersonal Reactivity Index,
Relationship Inventory and age as the predictor variables in order to control for shared
predictive variance). The three variables accounted for 41 % of the variance in length of
experience (R = 0.653, adj. If = 0.41), and at least one of the variables was associated
with length of experience, F (3, 136) = 33.76, p< .001. Controlling for age and the
Interpersonal Reactivity Index, the Relationship Inventory once again accounted for the
variance in length of experience, / 2.7, p = .008. In addition, age significantly predicted
length of experience, controlling for the two empathy measures, t = 9.l,p= .000. It is
not a surprise that the older a person is, the more experience that person typically has as a
crisis volunteer.
Hypothesis 3
The third hypothesis, that crisis volunteers would exhibit higher levels of altruistic
motivation than upper-level psychology undergraduates (with no crisis training) was not
supported. An independent /-test was performed, with group (volunteers vs. controls)
serving as the independent variable and the Measure of Altruistic Motivation serving as
the dependent variable. A one-way ANOVA was conducted (using the entire samples
standard deviation) and revealed no differences in altruistic motivation across the three
groups, F (05, 2, 145) = 0.756, p > 0.4. The mean scores on the Measure of Altruistic


48
consistency are listed in Table 4-1. Seven respondents did not answer one or more items
on the Relationship Inventory measure: consequently, the number of respondents on that
scale is 141.
Table 4-1. Means and Standard Deviations of Variables Measured
Variable
N
Mean
SD
Range
a coefficient
IRIa
148
20.3
3.6
8, 27
0.64b
RI
141
17.1
10.3
-12,46
0.78
AM
148
5.3
3.5
0, 14
Agec
148
26.2
9.6
18, 57
Timed
74
11.3
15.6
2,42
Note. Dashes indicate that internal reliability was not calculated for this measure since
the nature of the measure suggests that it would not make sense to test for internal
consistency. If a respondent chooses one altruistic reason, s/he would not be expected to
necessarily choose other altruistic reasons. In addition, although the range of scores was
to 14, only one participant scored a 14. Five respondents scored a 10 and three
respondents scored a 12; no one scored an 11 or a 13, and all other respondents scores
fell below 10.
a IRI is the Interpersonal Reactivity Index; RI is the Relationship Inventory; and AM is
the Measure of Altruistic Motivation.
b Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.64 is considered borderline for internal consistency,
however previous research indicates that the Interpersonal Reactivity Index has a
coefficient alpha of 0.78.
L Age of participants is in years.
d Time volunteering is in months. This statistic only applies to active and inactive
volunteers. The mean, standard deviation and range reported were Windsorized (see
Hypothesis 2 section for a complete explanation). Before Windsorizing, the mean for
length of experience was 17.5 (SD = 36.7) and the range w'as 2, 242. One participant in
the volunteer group did not indicate the number of months volunteering, thus n = 74.
Frequencies for demographic information, major, enrollment in the Crisis Center
volunteer training, and additional/other training in counseling or crisis intervention are


86
Marangoni, C, Garcia, S., Ickes, W., & Teng, G. (1995). Empathic accuracy in a
clinically relevant setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 854-
869.
Maris, R. W. (1992). The relationship of nonfatal suicide attempts to completed
suicides. In R. W. Maris, A. L. Berman, J. T. Maltsberger & R. I. Yufit (Eds.),
Assessment and prediction of suicide (pp. 362-3 80). New York: Guilford Press.
McGee. R., & Jennings, B. (1973). Ascending to "lower levels: The case for
nonprofessional crisis workers. In D. Lester & G. Brockopp (Eds.), Crisis
intervention and counseling by telephone (pp. 287-297). Springfield, IL: Charles
C. Thomas.
Miller, H. L., Coombs, D. W., Lceper, J. D., & Barton, S. N. (1984). An analysis of the
effects of suicide prevention facilities on suicide rates in the united states.
American Journal of Public Health, 74, 340-343.
Miller, W. R Hedrick, K. E & Orlofsky, D. R. (1991). The Helpful Responses
Questionnaire: A procedure for measuring therapeutic empathy. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 47, 444-448.
Miller, L., Powell, G., & Seltzer, J. (1990). Determinants of turnover among volunteers.
Human Relations. 43, 901-917.
Neimeyer, R. A., & Pfeiffer, A. M. (1994). Evaluation of suicide intervention
effectiveness. Death Studies. J_8, 131-166.
Newman, F. (1985). Higher education and the American resurgence. Princeton, NJ:
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
OCarroll, P. W., Berman, A. L., Maris, R. W., Moscicki, E. K., Tanney, B. L., &
Silverman, M. M. (1996). Beyond the Tower of Babel: A nomenclature for
suicidology. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 26.237-252.
O'Donnell, J. M., & George, K. (1977). The use of volunteers in a community mental
health center emergency and reception service: A comparative study of
professional and lay telephone counseling. Community Mental Health Journal, !,
3-12.
Okun, M. A., Shepard, S. A., & Eisenberg, N. (2000). The relations of emotionality and
regulation to dispositional empathy-related responding among volunteers-in-
training. Personality7 and Individual Differences. 28. 367-382.
Orbach, I., Bar-Joseph, H., & Dror, N. (1990). Styles of problem solving in suicidal
individuals. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 20, 56-64.


Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
* Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
ASSESSING SUICIDE HOTLINE VOLUNTEERS
EMPATHY AND MOTIVATIONS
By
Michelle Lee Barz
May 2001
Chairman: Paul G. Schauble
Major Department: Psychology
Suicide is a major mental health problem. Consequently, suicide prevention
agencies have become very important in helping communities deal with this crisis.
Volunteers are often the backbone of suicide prevention and crisis intervention agencies,
and their effectiveness is critical to the services that these agencies provide. This study
investigated general therapeutic empathy and motivations for engaging in helping
behavior among suicide hotline volunteers. The study consisted of three groups: trained
crisis center volunteers (with varying levels of experience), crisis center applicants
accepted for volunteer training, and a control group similar in age, background and
education, By using questionnaires, I measured differences in empathy and in motivation
for volunteering among the groups. I used a nonequivalent control groups design. It was
hypothesized that paraprofessionals volunteering at a suicide/crisis intervention agency
would exhibit more empathy in the form of perspective-taking and empathic
understanding than would untrained individuals, but they would display less empathy as
viii


CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter begins with an overview of empathy and motivations for helping.
Next, a review of crisis intervention and suicide prevention effectiveness in service
providers is presented. A look at volunteers then follows, including the relationship
between paraprofessionals abilities and their motivations for helping others. At the end
of the literature review, the purpose of the current study is presented. The chapter
concludes with the specific research questions to be studied as well as key definitions.
Contemporary Perspectives on Empathy
Godfrey T. Barrett-Lennard, one of the pioneers of empathy research, studied
interpersonal relationships for over four decades (e.g., Barrett-Lennard, 1959, 1963,
1976,1978, 1981, 1986, 1993). He began his work as a student of Carl Rogers at the
University of Chicago, when Rogers (1957) first circulated his classic formulation of the
necessary and sufficient conditions of therapy. At the time, no means existed for
measuring each of the posited relationship conditions, nor was it clear what kind of
design might be both feasible and effective. It was from this context that Barrett-Lennard
began to develop the underpinnings of his original Relationship Inventory for his doctoral
dissertation research (see Barrett-Lennard, 1962, 1993). The Relationship Inventory, an
instrument used to measure empathic understanding, congruence, level of regard, and
unconditionality of regard, is discussed in Chapter 3 of this study. The Relationship
9


5
Research on and interest in empathy surged in the 1960s and 1970s when Carl
Rogers (1957) proposed his necessary and sufficient therapeutic conditions. By then,
Truax and his colleagues (Truax & Carkhuff, 1967; Truax & Mitchell, 1971)
accumulated evidence that suggested correlations between empathy and therapeutic
outcome. In fact, more research attention has been focused on the construct of empathy
than on any other variable posited as relevant to the therapeutic process (Patterson, 1984).
Inconsistencies in the research, however, led many researchers to conclude that sufficient
empirical support was lacking (see review by Patterson, 1984). On one hand, many
therapists saw empathy as important (in terms of being warm and supportive). On the
other hand, the stronger contention of empathy as a central ingredient to therapeutic
change was generally not accepted (Bohart & Greenberg, 1997). Consequently, research
on empathy in the 1980s dropped dramatically.
Bohart and Greenberg point out that we live in a "paradoxical age" with respect to
empathy. On one side, empathy has again emerged as an important topic of study in
areas such as social and developmental psychology. Numerous popular books argue that
"emotional intelligence," which includes empathy, may be even more important than IQ
(Goleman, 1995,1998). In addition, empathy training is now being used in various areas,
including schools, business, and medicine. However, despite evidence that the
therapeutic relationship is the best predictor of success in therapy, and that Rogers' work
on relational conditions specifies that empathy is one of the key ingredients in creating a
therapeutic relationship, "opinions in academic psychology as well as the influence of
managed care often minimize the importance of the relationship in therapy, treating it as


53
Index and the Relationship Inventory, the volunteer group mean was significantly
different from the control group mean and the training group mean (see Table 4-6), but
on the Relationship Inventory, the difference between volunteers and trainees was
marginal.
Table 4-5. Group Means on the Empathy Measures
Scale and Group
Mean
SD
F
Interpersonal Reactivity Index
8.2*
Control
18.8
4.1
Training
19.8
3.6
Volunteer
21.5
3.1
Relationship Inventory
Control
12.5
9.0
9.7*
Training
16.3
9.8
Volunteer
20.5
10.1
*=/><.001
F(.o5,2,138)
Table 4-6. Group Differences in Empathy
Scale and Test Mean Difference
Confidence Interval
p value
Interpersonal Reactivity Index
Control vs. Training
-3.9
-8.5, 0.8
.10
"Control vs. Volunteer*
-8.1
-11.7,-44
.000
Training vs. Volunteer3
-4.2
-8.5, 0.2
.058
Relationship Inventory
Control vs. Training
-1.0
-2.7, 0.7
.25
Control vs. Volunteer*
-2.5
-4.0,-1.3
.000
Training vs. Volunteer*
-1.7
-3.2, -0.01
.038
Note. = predicted differences between these groups
* = difference is significant
a Difference is marginally significant


73
study, please contact UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
32611-2250.
I, (print name) freely volunteer to
participate in the research project described above, conducted by Michelle Barz, a
doctoral student in the Counseling Psychology Program, Department of Psychology, at
the University of Florida. I have been informed in advance what my tasks will be and
what procedures will be followed.
I have read the description above and I understand that 1 have the right to
withdraw consent and discontinue participation at any time. My signature below may be
taken as my agreement to participate in the study and I acknowledge that I have received
a copy of this description.
Signature Date
Last 4 digits of Social Security Number


28
volunteers (who served as volunteer counselors for 9 or more months). All the
completed-service volunteers in Clary and Orenstein's study had served more than 12
months. Analyses supported their prediction and were statistically significant to the
p < 005 level.
Summary
Research, then, has demonstrated that a helpers characteristics and motives can
affect helping behavior, particularly the amount of help (i.e., deciding whether to help
and how much). Still to be answered are questions about the effectiveness of help (i.e.,
does the helper have the ability to help and is the help actually helpful). As pointed out
by Neimeyer and Pfeiffer (1994) and others (e.g., Frankish, 1994; Clary & Orenstein,
1991), this aspect of help has been relatively ignored, and when it has been examined, the
focus has tended to remain on its impact on the amount of help. Thus, it is important to
separate intentions to help from ability to help, since these two components are not
synonymous.
Current Study
In response to the paucity of research evaluating the effectiveness of
paraprofessionals in suicide prevention, and to address some of the issues and questions
raised above, this study proposes to examine two major areas that are important in suicide
and crisis intervention. The purpose of this study is to investigate what differences exist
in general therapeutic empathy and motivations for engaging in helping behavior between
suicide hotline volunteers and untrained individuals. The benefits that may develop from


CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Worldwide suicide rates have risen over the last five decades (Lester, 1993). In
the United States, few would disagree that suicide continues to be a major mental health
problem. In industrialized nations, it is among the top ten leading causes of death for
people of all ages (Centers for Disease Control, 1985), and in the United States, it is the
third leading cause of death for individuals aged 15-24 (U.S. Bureau of the Census,
1996). These statistics are supported by the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance study
conducted by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) researchers, who found
that 13% of all deaths among young adults (ages 10-24) result from suicide (Kann et al.,
1998). Nationwide, these same researchers found that 21% of students in grades 9-12
had seriously considered suicide during the 12 months preceding the survey.
Even more alarming is that suicide is probably underreported and thus statistics
underestimate the true incidence of suicide. Although it is well accepted in the literature
on suicide that suicidal ideation is an important risk factor related to future suicide
attempts, Rudd (1989) provided evidence that the true magnitude of the incidence of
suicidal thoughts and behavior is not accurately estimated from national suicide figures.
Some researchers suggest that inaccurate estimates are also due to a lack of standard
nomenclature for referring to suicide-related behaviors (OCarroll et al., 1996). In
addition, it is estimated that 30% to 40% of individuals who completed suicide made at
least one prior suicide attempt (Maris, 1992).
1


TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ni
LIST OF TABLES vii
ABSTRACT viii
CHAPTERS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
Crisis Intervention Volunteers 2
Empathy 4
Motivations of Volunteers 6
Current Study 8
2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 9
Contemporary Perspectives on Empathy 9
Motivations 15
Prosocial Behavior Versus Altruism 15
Relationship Between Altruism and Empathy 16
Evaluation of Effectiveness 18
Empathic Skills 18
Professionals Versus Nonprofessionals 19
Effects of Training and Experience 20
Volunteers 22
Characteristics of Volunteers 23
Volunteer Motivations 24
Relationship Between Volunteer Motivations and Abilities 27
Summary 28
Current Study 28
Hypotheses 29
Key Definitions 30
v


38
can range from -48 to 48. with a positive 48 indicating the highest degree of empathic
understanding. Gurman < 1977) reviewed a substantial range of contexts and
investigations using the Relationship Inventory. He found a mean coefficient alpha of
.84 for the empathy subscale. The positive results of a range of independent predictive
studies concerned with the association between relationship conditions measured by the
Relationship Inventory and outcome in therapy or helping situations form strong
evidence of construct (predictive) validity. G urman concludes that there exists
substantial, if not overwhelming evidence in support of the hypothesized relationship
between . therapeutic conditions and outcome in individual therapy and counselling
(p. 523).
In general, the issue of validity is rather complex in psychosocial measurement. It
depends on the clarity of a concept and on the definition of what is intended to be
measured, on the meaningtulness of viewing the construct as variably falling along a low
to high continuum or sequence, and on the congruence between the conceptualized
dimension and the actual variable being measured. Different types of validity, such as
content, predictive, factorial, and construct, address some of the above issues. Both the
Interpersonal Reactivity Index (Davis, 1980) and the Relationship Inventory (Barrett-
Lennard, 1978), understood and applied appropriately, can be treated as valid scales.
Other scales considered
Although not easily adaptable to the current study, Ickes and various colleagues
developed the "unstructured dyadic interaction paradigm 7 to measure empathic accuracy
used in a naturalistic setting (e.g., see Ickes, 1993; Ickes, Bissonnette, Garcia, & Stinson,
1990; Ickes, Stinson, Bissonnette, & Garcia, 1990; ickes & Tooke, 1988). Members of a


LD
1780
20 £1
.62^
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 08555 3526


83
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam.
Graham, T., & lekes, W. (1997). When womens intuition isnt greater than mens. In
W. Ickes (Ed.), Empathic accuracy. New York: Guilford Press.
Gray, B Nida, R. A., & Coonfeld, T. J. (1976). Empathic Listening Test: An
instrument for the selection and training of telephone crisis workers. Journal of
Community Psychology, 4. 199-205.
Gurman, A. S. (1977). The patient's perception of the therapeutic relationship. In A. S.
Gurman and A. M. Razin (Eds.), Effective psychotherapy: A handbook of research
(pp. 503-543). New York: Pergamon.
Gutierrez, P. M., Osman, A., Kopper, B. A., Barrios, F. X., & Bagge, C. L. (2000).
Suicide risk assessment in a college student population. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 47, 403-413.
Hall, J. A., Davis, M. H., & Connelly, M. (2000). Dispositional empathy in scientist and
practitioner psychologists: Group differences and relationship to self-reported
professional effectiveness. Psychotherapy. 37, 45-56.
Hart, L. E., & King, G. D. (1979). Selection versus training in the development of
paraprofessionals. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 26,235-241.
Hart, T. (1999). The refinement of empathy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 39,
111-125.
Henderson, K. A. (1980). Programming volunteerism for happier volunteers. Parks and
Recreation. September. 61-64.
Henderson, K. A. (1981). Motivations and perceptions of volunteerism and a leisure
activity. Journal of Leisure Research. 13. 208-218.
Henderson, K. A. (1985). Issues and trends in volunteerism. Journal of Physical
Education. Recreation, and Dance. 56, 30-32.
Hobfoll, S. E. (1980). Personal characteristics of the college volunteer. American
Journal of Community Psychology. 8, 503-506.
Hoffman. M. L. (1976). Empathy, role-taking, guilt, and development of altruistic
motives. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research
and social issues (pp. 124-143). New York: Holt, Rinehart.
Hoffman, M. L. (1977). Sex differences in empathy and related behaviors.
Psychological Bulletin. 54. 712-722.


33
and a control group similar in age, background and education. Data were gathered
through the use of paper and pencil tests ( see instruments section), with an initial goal of
having 30 people in each group. The actual number of participants in each group is
discussed under Participants. The overall design was a nonequivalent control groups
design.
Participants
The three participant groups were (a) paraprofessional volunteers with varying
amounts of experience at the crisis agency, (b) individuals who had been accepted for
volunteer training at the crisis agency (but had not yet completed training), and (c)
undergraduate psychology students enrolled in Personality Theory at a large southeastern
university. All paraprofessional volunteers were from a prominent southeastern crisis
intervention agency. Any control group participants who had either previously
participated in, or were currently enrolled in. the crisis center training program were not
included as part of the control group in the analyses.
An initial goal of 30 participants in each research group (volunteers and trainees)
was approved by the dissertation committee, in actuality, there were 75 participants in
the volunteer group, 27 in the training group and 46 in the control group. The training
group was predicted to be the most difficult group from which to collect data due to the
relatively small number of people who participate in training classes. However, it was
determined, after seeking statistical consultation, that 27 participants in the training group
was an adequate number of respondents for the analyses.
Overall, 148 people participated in the study (26 men and 122 women); 115 of the
participants were students and 33 were not; most of the participants were


77
Please do not write your name on this form. It will be coded anonymously and
your answers used for research purposes only. Below are listed a variety of ways one
person could feel or behave in relation to other people. Please carefully consider each
statement with respect to whether you think it is true or not true about you. Mark each
statement in the space next to the number according to how strongly you feel it is true or
not true. Please mark every one. Write in +3, +2, +1, or -1. -2, -3 to stand for the
following answers:
+3: Y es, I strongly feel that it is true.
+2: Yes, I feel it is true.
+ 1: Yes, I feel that it is probably true, or more true than untrue.
-1: No, I feel that it is probably untrue, or more untrue than true.
-2: No, I feel it is not true.
-3: No, I strongly feel that it is not true.
1.1 want to understand how others see things.
2.1 understand other peoples words but do not know how they actually feel.
3.1 nearly always know exactly what others mean.
4.1 look at what others do from my own point of view.
5.1 usually sense or realize how others are feeling.
6. What others say or do sometimes arouses feelings in me that prevent me from
understanding them.
7. Sometimes I think that others feel a certain way because thats the way I feel
myself.
8. I can tell what others mean even when they have difficulty in saying it.
9. I usually understand the whole of what others mean.
10. I ignore some of other peoples feelings.
11. I appreciate just how others experiences feel to them.
12. At times I think that others feel strongly about something and then it turns out
that they dont.


CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
This chapter includes a discussion of the findings for each hypothesis, as well as
the additional findings regarding gender differences. Future research suggestions are also
included, as are limitations of this study. A summary of findings concludes the chapter.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not trained crisis center
volunteers would exhibit greater empathy and altruistic motivation than untrained
individuals. In addition, the correlation between crisis center experience and empathy
was also investigated. The literature on the empathic skills of professionals versus
paraprofessionals suggests that lay volunteers are an important and even necessary
component of crisis intervention and suicide prevention agencies. Some studies (e.g.,
Knickerbocker & McGee. 1973; McGee & Jennings, 1973) found that paraprofessionals
are fully capable of becoming genuinely engaged with clients in crisis, and may even
display higher levels of empathy, warmth and genuineness towards these same clients
than professionals. The literature generally suggests that training and experience are both
important components of volunteers abilities to successfully connect empathically with
clients in crisis (e.g., France, 1975; Hart & King, 1979; Kalafat, Boroto, & France, 1979;
Knickerbocker & McGee, 1973; Miller, Hedrick, & Orlofsky, 1991; Neimeyer &
Pfeiffer; 994; O'Donnell & George, 977; Truax & Lister, i 971).
59


24
planned helping behavior is high if people feel responsible for others welfare, feel their
helping behavior can have an impact, and hold positive, nonpunitive views towards
others. Interestingly, these are traits similar to those suggested by Rushton (1980) as
being characteristic of an 'altruistic personality. In order to assess whether or not
community health volunteers appear to possess characteristics associated with the
altruistic personality, Allen and Rushton (1983) reviewed 19 studies assessing
volunteers' personality characteristics. They found that community volunteers tend to be
more empathic, have higher internal moral standards, possess more positive attitudes
towards themselves, have greater feelings of self-efficacy and are more emotionally
stable than nonvolunteers. These characteristics are also in accord with Rushtons
conception of the altruistic personality. Clearly, the evidence suggests that some people
are more likely to help than others, but are some people truly seeking to help others
(altruistic motivation) or are they ultimately seeking self-benefit? Both Staub (1974) and
Rushton (1980) suggested that altruism is not an alternative to egoism, but rather, it is a
special form of egoism; the rewards for acting prosocially are internal or self-
administered rather than external or socially administered. Their research, however, did
not address the question of underlying motivation.
Volunteer Motivations
In order to address the question of underlying motivation, Daniel Batson and his
colleagues used a research paradigm that would enable them to infer participants
ultimate goal when helping (Batson, Bolen, Cross, & Neuringer-Benefiel, 1986). First,
they examined four personality variables identified as contributing to an altruistic
personality; social responsibility, self-esteem, ascription of responsibility and


13
(feelings of warmth, compassion and concern for others) and personal distress (feelings
of discomfort and anxiety resulting from others' distress). There has been a call in the
literature for more comprehensive approaches to studying and measuring empathy (e.g.,
Chlopan, McCain, Carbonell, & Hagen, 1985; Duan & Hill, 1996), especially in terms of
its multifaceted nature (e.g., Strayer, 1987) and in terms of therapy and helping (Bohart &
Greenberg, 1997; Hall, Davis, & Connelly, 2000). Davis (1980) measure may partially
meet this research need.
Another prominent empathy researcher, William Ickes, is concerned primarily
with empathic accuracy. He and his colleagues (Ickes, 1993; Ickes, Stinson, Bissonnette,
& Garcia, 1990) defined empathic accuracy as the ability to accurately infer the specific
content of other peoples thoughts and feelings (Ickes, 1997, p. 3). Although the study
of empathic accuracy is still fairly new, its roots can be traced back over 50 years to the
study of interpersonal perception. Most of Ickes work differs from that of
Barrett-Lennards or Davis in that he is less concerned with the reactions of a perceiver
to emotion expressed by a target (for example, by exhibiting or reporting the same
emotion or correctly identifying anothers emotion through cues provided) than with how
well an individual is able to read other peoples thoughts and feelings. Empathic
accuracy appears to put a greater demand on participants inferential abilities (Graham &
Ickes, 1997). In theory, empathic accuracy is most synonymous with empathic
understanding; however, when operationally defined for empirical study, empathic
accuracy must necessarily include empathic expression as well (Marangoni, Garcia,
Ickes, & Teng, 1995). An innovative methodological approach developed by Ickes and
his colleagues (Ickes, Bissonnette, Garcia, & Stinson, 1990; Ickes, Stinson et al., 1990;


2
Crisis and suicide intervention services have proliferated rapidly in the last
several decades (Daigle & Mishara, 1995). This phenomenon may be a response to the
increasing numbers of individuals considering suicide, alarming death rates, and the fact
that suicide attempters are more likely than nonattempters to cope by relying on others to
solve problems rather than on themselves (Orbach, Bar-Joseph, & Dror, 1990). The
modem crisis center movement developed out of the community mental health
philosophy of the 1960s and 1970s, and by the mid-70s, there were over 500 telephone
crisis centers in the United States (Stein & Lambert, 1984).
Crisis Intervention Volunteers
In general, human service agencies rely on significant numbers of volunteers to
serve their client populations (Miller, Powell, & Seltzer, 1990); crisis intervention and
suicide prevention centers are no different. The shortage of mental health professionals
in many parts of the country has necessitated this use of volunteers, the majority of whom
are non- or paraprofessionals (Rosenbaum & Calhoun, 1977). In fact, Seely (1992)
points out that crisis and suicide prevention agencies often have paraprofessionals as the
backbone of their services. Miller, Coombs, Leeper, and Barton (1984) found an
association between suicide prevention facilities and a reduction of suicide in young
white females (the most prevalent users of such agencies). The authors suggest that
research should focus on attempting to analyze factors that are responsible for this
reduction. One factor in reducing suicides is crisis counselor effectiveness. In fact, the
growing crisis center movement was supported by the belief that volunteers could be
effective crisis counselors. This belief grew out of the influential work of researchers in
the 1960s (e.g., Litman, Farberow, Shneidman, Helig, & Kramer, 1965; Shneidman,


11
among the inner resonation, communication (expression) and reception phases; and at
each stage, considerable latitude exists for empathy to occur.
Davis (1994) suggested that the nature of empathy continues to be a matter of
some disagreement. Specifically, he believed that the term empathy actually refers to
two distinctly Separate phenomena: affective reactivity and cognitive role-taking. This is
similar to Hoffmans (1984, 1987) theoretical framework of empathy which includes
cognitive role-taking and affective responding to others situations. The affective
response dimension can be distinguished further into feelings of sympathy or concern for
others and feelings of personal distress produced by others' distress.
Davis proposed an organizational model of empathy-related constructs that makes
clear the differences and similarities between empathys various constructs based on an
inclusive definition of empathy. The constructs include both processes taking place in
the person empathizing and the outcomes that result from these processes. Similar to
Barrett-Lennards (1981, 1993) conception of a listener (who empathizes) and a receiver,
Davis (1994) proposed that the typical empathy episode consists of an observer (e.g.,
the listener) being exposed in some way to a target (e.g., the receiver) and then
responding (either cognitively, affectively or behaviorally).
Davis model is different from Barrett-Lennards conception, however, in that
Davis expands the definition of the empathic process. He identifies four related
constructs within this typical episode: antecedents (person or situation characteristics),
processes (mechanisms that generate empathic outcomes), intrapersonal outcomes (both
affective and cognitive responses produced in the observer as a result of exposure to the
target), and interpersonal outcomes (overt behavioral responses to the target). Davis


88
Staub, E. (1974). Helping a distressed person: Social, personality, and stimulus
determinants. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
(Vol. 7, pp. 293-341). New York: Academic Press.
Staub, E. (1987). Commentary on Part I. In N. Eisenberg & J. Straver (Eds.), Empathy
and its development (pp. 103-115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stein, D. M &*Lambert, M. J. (1984). Telephone counseling and crisis intervention: A
critical review. American Journal of Community Psychology. 12,101-126.
Stoffer, D. L. (1968). An investigation of positive behavioral change as a function of
uenuineness. non-possessive warmth, and empathic understanding. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.
Straver, J. (1987). Affective and cognitive perspectives on empathy. In N. Eisenberg &
J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 218-244). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Tapp, J. T., & Spanier, D. (1973). Personal characteristics of volunteer phone
counselors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 41, 245-250.
Thomas, G., & Fletcher, G. J. O. (1997). Empathic accuracy in close relationships. In
W. Ickes (Ed.). Empathic accuracy (pp. 194-217). New York: Guilford Press.
Truax, C. B & Carkhuff, R. R. (1967). Toward effective counseling and psychotherapy:
Training and practice. Chicago: Aldine.
Truax, C. B., & Lister, J. L. (1971). Effects of short-term training upon accurate empathy
and non-persuasive warmth. Counselor Education and Supervision. Winter. 120-
125.
Truax, C. B., & Mitchell, K. M. (1971). Research on certain therapist interpersonal
skills in relation to process and outcome. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds.),
Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (1 st ed.). New York: Wiley.
U. S. Bureau of the Census. (1996). Statistical abstract of the united states: 1996,
Washington, D C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Walsh, W. B., & Betz, N. E. (1990). Tests and assessment (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prenttce-Hall,
Wiehe, V. R., & Isenhour, L. (1977). Motivation of volunteers. Journal of Social
Welfare. 4, 73-79.


29
this study include helping to predict an individual's likelihood of volunteering in a crisis
intervention agency as well as his or her success as a crisis intervention volunteer.
Hypotheses
Paraprofessionals who volunteer at a suicide/crisis intervention agency will
exhibit more empathy in the form of perspective-taking ability and empathic
understanding than untrained individuals, but display less empathy as length of
experience increases compared to less experienced volunteers, and express higher levels
of altruistic motivation for volunteering than a nontrained control group. The specific
hypotheses to be tested are;
Hypothesis 1: Individuals who are trained crisis/suicide intervention volunteers
will exhibit greater empathy, in the form of perspective-taking ability and empathic
understanding, than will volunteers who have not yet undergone training or
undergraduate psychology students untrained in crisis intervention (including active
listening skills). Hoi: There will be no difference in amount of empathic perspective
taking ability and empathic understanding between trained crisis center volunteers and
untrained volunteers or psychology undergraduates.
Hypothesis 2: As a crisis intervention volunteer's length of experience increases,
the amount of empathy will decrease. Hq2: There will be no difference in the amount of
empathic perspective-taking ability and empathic understanding between trained crisis
center volunteers who have more experience and those who have less experience
volunteering at the agency.
Hypothesis 3: When subjects consider reasons why they would volunteer,
suicide/crisis hotline volunteers will express higher levels of altruistic motivation than


30
nontramed psychology undergraduates. Ho3: There will be no difference in amount of
altruistic motivation as a reason for volunteering between crisis center volunteers and
undergraduate psychology students.
Kev Definitions
Altruism: helping behavior based on concern for the welfare of another rather
than concern for the welfare of the self (i.e., egoism).
Altruistic Motivation: the extent to which a person volunteers out of concern for
others as opposed to concern for self.
Empathic Understanding: an active process of desiring to know the full, present
and changing awareness of another person, of reaching out to receive his communication
and meaning, and of translating his words and signs into experienced meaning that
matches ... aspects of his awareness that are most important to him... .It is an
experiencing of the consciousness behind anothers outward communication, but with
the continuous awareness that this consciousness is originating and proceeding in the
other (Barrett-Lennard, 1962, p. 3). It is not essential for the person with whom one is
empathizing to be literally present... [for it is] an inner experience (Barrett-Lennard,
1976, p. 175).
Empathy: the ability to accurately perceive and understand the specific content of
another person's thoughts and feelings and the ability to infer and communicate that
persons emotional state(s).
Paraprofessional: volunteers specifically trained in crisis intervention and suicide
prevention (including training using active listening skills) in order to answer telephone
calls from individuals in suicidal, personal, and/or emotional crisis.