The Influences of Religious Attitudes on Volunteering

Original Paper

Abstract

Religiosity has long been known to promote volunteering in the US and elsewhere. Despite the growing body of research examining religious correlates of volunteering, however, few studies have focused on whether and how religious attitudes affect volunteering. With data from the Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS II), 2004–2006, we examine the influences of religious attitudes, namely, the religiously based feelings of exclusiveness and inclusiveness, and openness to other religious faiths, on volunteering. We find that while religious exclusiveness significantly promotes volunteering only in religious areas, religious inclusiveness promotes both religious and secular volunteering. Moreover, those who are open to other religious faiths are more likely to engage in both types of volunteer work. Implications of these findings are discussed for future research linking religious attitudes to volunteering.

Keywords

Volunteering Religious exclusiveness and inclusiveness Religious openness to other faiths 

Résumé

Aux États-Unis et ailleurs, la religiosité est depuis longtemps connue pour favoriser le bénévolat. Malgré le nombre croissant d’études portant sur les corrélats religieux du bénévolat, rares sont celles qui s’interrogent sur la façon dont les postures religieuses peuvent retentir sur le bénévolat. À partir de données provenant de la base Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS II, 2004–2006), nous examinons l’influence des postures religieuses, à savoir les sentiments d’exclusivité et d’inclusivité religieuse ainsi que l’ouverture aux autres convictions religieuses, sur le bénévolat. Nous démontrons qu’alors que l’exclusivité religieuse ne promeut le bénévolat de manière significative que dans les milieux religieux, l’inclusivité religieuse favorise à la fois le bénévolat religieux et le bénévolat laïque. De plus, les personnes ouvertes aux autres convictions religieuses sont davantage susceptibles de s’engager dans les deux types d’activités bénévoles. Nous envisageons enfin ce qu’impliquent ces conclusions, en vue de recherches futures sur le sujet des liens existant entre attitudes d’ordre religieux et bénévolat.

Zusammenfassung

In den USA und anderorts ist seit langem bekannt, dass Religiösität die Ausführung ehrenamtlicher Tätigkeiten fördert. Zwar nehmen die Forschungsarbeiten zu der Wechselbeziehung zwischen Religiösität und ehrenamtlichen Tätigkeiten zu, doch konzentrierten sich bislang nur wenige Studien darauf, ob und wie sich religiöse Einstellungen auf ehrenamtliche Tätigkeiten auswirken. Anhand der erhobenen Daten aus der in den USA von 2004 bis 2006 durchgeführten Befragung „Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS II)” untersuchen wir, inwieweit religiöse Einstellungen, insbesondere die religiös basierten Gefühle von Exklusivität und Inklusivität, und die Offenheit gegenüber anderen Glauben Einfluss auf ehrenamtliche Tätigkeiten nehmen. Wir stellen fest, dass religiöse Exklusivität ehrenamtliche Tätigkeiten ausschließlich in religiösen Bereichen besonders fördert, während religiöse Inklusivität sowohl religiöse als auch nicht religiöse ehrenamtliche Tätigkeiten fördert. Weiterhin sind Personen, die sich anderen religiösen Glauben gegenüber offen zeigen, eher dazu geneigt, in beiden Bereichen ehrenamtlich tätig zu sein. Die Schlussfolgerungen dieser Ergebnisse werden für zukünftige Forschungsarbeiten zu der Beziehung zwischen religiösen Einstellungen und ehrenamtlichen Tätigkeiten erörtert.

Resumen

Siempre se ha sabido que la religión contribuye a fomentar el voluntariado, tanto en EE.UU. como en cualquier otro país. Pese a la gran cantidad de estudios realizados para analizar la relación entre religión y voluntariado, pocos se han centrado en averiguar si la actitud religiosa afecta al voluntariado y cómo. Con datos de Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS II), 2004–2006, analizamos la influencia de la actitud religiosa, es decir, el sentimiento, con base religiosa, de inclusión y exclusión y de apertura a otras creencias sobre el voluntariado. Hemos descubierto que, aunque es cierto que la exclusividad religiosa sólo fomenta notablemente el voluntariado en lugares religiosos, la inclusión religiosa fomenta tanto el voluntariado secular como el religioso. Es más, aquellos que están abiertos a otras creencias religiosas presentan más propensión a comprometerse en ambos tipos de trabajo voluntario. Se debaten las implicaciones de estos hallazgos para futuras investigaciones sobre la relación entre la actitud religiosa y el voluntariado.

摘要

人们早就知道,笃信宗教能够促进美国和其他地方的志愿服务。尽管越来越多的研究机构探讨志愿服务与宗教的关联性,但是,很少有研究关注宗教观念是否以及如何影响志愿服务。利用美国中年发展调查(MIDUS II) 2004–2006年的数据,我们研究了宗教观念对志愿服务的影响,即排他性和包容性的宗教情感,以及对其他宗教信仰的开明程度。我们发现,虽然宗教的排他性显著推进了宗教领域的志愿服务,但宗教的包容性却能共同推进宗教领域和宗教以外的其他世俗领域的志愿服务。此外,接受其他宗教信仰的人们更有可能从事这两种类型的志愿工作。对这些研究结果的意义进行讨论,以便在以后研究宗教态度对志愿服务的影响。.

要約

長い間、宗教心が米国およびその他諸国のボランティア活動を促進してきたことは知られている。しかしながら、宗教に関する研究が増えているにもかかわらず、宗教態度がどのようにボランティア活動に影響するかについてはほとんど研究されていない。2004年から2006年の米国中高年能力開発研究(MIDUS II)の中間開発(Midlife Development)のデータに基づいて、宗教態度、独占的かつ包括的な宗教性に対する気持ち、ボランティア活動における宗教信仰への寛容さについて調査する。結果として、独占的な宗教は宗教領域のみのボランティア活動を促進するが、包括的な宗教は宗教的かつ宗教に関連しないボランティア活動を促進することがわかった。さらに、その他の宗教信仰を持つ者は、この2タイプのボランティア活動に携わる傾向があることがわかった。今後の調査のために、ボランティア活動への宗教態度と関連づけてこれらの調査結果について議論する。.

ملخص

التدين كان معروف لمدة طويلة بأنه ينهض بالعمل التطوعي في الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية و الأماكن الأخرى. بالرغم من أن المجموعة المتنامية من البحوث تربط الدراسة الدينية للعمل التطوعي، لكن، دراسات قليلة ركزت على ما إذا وكيف تؤثر المواقف الدينية على العمل التطوعي. مع البيانات من منتصف مرحلة التنمية في الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية (MIDUS II)، 2004-2006، نحن ندرس تأثيرات المواقف الدينية، خاصة، المشاعر على أساس ديني من التفرد و الشمول، و الإنفتاح على ديانات أخرى، في العمل التطوعي. إننا نجد إنه بينما التفرد الديني يشجع العمل التطوعي بدرجة كبيرة في الأماكن الدينية، الشمولية الدينية تعززعلى حد سواء العمل التطوعي الديني والدنيوي. علاوة على ذلك، المنفتحون على الديانات الأخرى هم أكثر ميلاً للانخراط في كلا النوعين من العمل التطوعي. تم مناقشة الآثار المترتبة على هذه النتائج للبحوث في المستقبل التي تربط المواقف الدينية بالعمل التطوعي.

References

  1. Argue, A., Johnson, D. R., & White, L. K. (1999). Age and religiosity: Evidence from a three-wave panel analysis. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 38(3), 423–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barro, R., Hwang, J., & McCleary, R. (2010). Religious conversion in 40 countries. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(1), 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., & Tsang, J. (2002). Four motives for community involvement. The Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 429–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batson, C. D., Denton, D. M., & Vollmecke, J. T. (2008). Quest religion, anti-fundamentalism, and limited versus universal compassion. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47(1), 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Batson, C. D., Lishner, D. A., Carpenter, A., Dulin, L., Harjusola-Webb, S., Stocks, E. L., et al. (2003). “As you would have them do unto you”: Does imagining yourself in the other’s place stimulate moral action? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(9), 1190–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Batson, C. D., Polycarpou, M. P., Harmon-Jones, E., Imhoff, H. J., Mitchener, E. C., Bednar, L. L., et al. (1997). Empathy and attitudes: can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feelings toward the group? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker, P. E., & Dhingra, P. H. (2001). Religious involvement and volunteering: Implications for civil society. Sociology of Religion, 62(3), 315–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beeghley, L., Velsor, E. V., & Bock, E. W. (1981). The correlates of religiosity among black and white Americans. Sociological Quarterly, 22(3), 403–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bekkers, R., & Schuyt, T. (2008). And who is your neighbor? Explaining denominational differences in charitable giving and volunteering in the Netherlands. Review of Religious Research, 50(1), 74–96.Google Scholar
  10. Berger, I. E. (2006). The influence of religion on philanthropy in Canada. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 17(2), 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2007). Volunteering in the United States, 2006. [News release USDL 07-0019]. Retrieved August 17, 2007, from www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/volun.pdf.
  12. Caputo, R. K. (1997). Women as volunteers and activists. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26(2), 156–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chaves, M. (1991). Family structure and Protestant church attendance: The sociological basis of cohort and age effects. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 39(4), 329–340.Google Scholar
  14. Driskell, R. L., Lyon, L., & Embry, E. (2008). Civic engagement and religious activities: Examining the influence of religious tradition and participation. Sociological Spectrum, 28(5), 578–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gallagher, S. (1994). Doing their share: Comparing patterns of help given by older and younger adults. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56(3), 567–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gunnoe, M., & Moore, K. (2002). Predictors of religiosity among youth aged 17–22: A longitudinal study of the national survey of children. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(4), 613–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hodgkinson, V. A., & Weitzman, M. S. (1990). Giving and volunteering in the United States: Findings from a national survey. Washington, DC: Independent Sector.Google Scholar
  18. Jackson, E., Bachmeier, M., Wood, J., & Craft, E. (1995). Volunteering and charitable giving: Do religious and associational ties promote helping behavior? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 24(1), 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Keaten, J. A., & Soukup, C. (2009). Dialogue and religious otherness: Toward a model of pluralistic interfaith dialogue. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 2(2), 168–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kwon, O. (2003). Buddhist and Protestant Korean immigrants: Religious beliefs and socioeconomic aspects of life. El Paso, TX: LFB Scholarly Publishing.Google Scholar
  21. Lam, P.-Y. (2002). As the flocks gather: How religion affects voluntary association participation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(3), 405–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lam, P.-Y. (2006). Religion and civic culture: A cross-national study of voluntary association membership. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 45(2), 177–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Loveland, M. T., Sikkink, D., Myers, D. J., & Radcliff, B. (2005). Private prayer and civic involvement. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 44(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Newport, F. (1979). The religious switcher in the United States. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 528–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Park, J. Z., & Smith, C. (2000). ‘To whom much has been given’: Religious capital and community voluntarism among churchgoing Protestants. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 39(3), 272–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pekkanen, R., & Tsujinaka, Y. (2008). Neighbourhood associations and the demographic challenge. In F. Coulmas, H. Conrad, A. Schad-Seifert, & G. Vogt (Eds.), The demographic challenge: A handbook about Japan (pp. 707–720). Leiden, The Netherlands: BRILL.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rabe-Hesketh, S., Skrondal, A., & Pickles, A. (2004). GLLAMM manual. U.C. Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series, Paper 160.Google Scholar
  29. Reitsma, J., Scheepers, P., & Grotenhuis, M. T. (2006). Dimensions of individual religiosity and charity: Cross-national effect difference in European countries? Review of Religious Research, 47(4), 347–362.Google Scholar
  30. Research Network on Successful Midlife Development. (1999). Technical report on the methodology of the MIDUS Survey. http://midmac.med.harvard.edu./tech.html (downloaded on June 8, 2009).
  31. Rossi, A. S. (2001). Domains and dimensions of social responsibility: A sociodemographic profile. In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), Caring and doing for others: Social responsibility in the domains of family, work, and community (pp. 97–134). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Ruiter, S., & De Graaf, N. D. (2006). National context, religiosity, and volunteering: Results from 53 Countries. American Sociological Review, 71(2), 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Salamon, L. M., & Sokolowski, W. (2001). Volunteering in cross-national perspective: Evidence from 24 countries. Working Paper of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project, 40. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies.Google Scholar
  34. Sherkat, D. E., & Wilson, J. (1995). Preferences, constraints, and choices in religious markets: An examination of religious switching and apostasy. Social Forces, 73(3), 993–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith, L. M. (1975). Women as volunteers: The double subsidy. Journal of Voluntary Action Research, 4(3), 119–136.Google Scholar
  36. Staub, E. (1995). How people learn to care. In P. G. Schervish, V. A. Hodgkinson, & M. Gates (Eds.), Care and community in modern society: Passing on the tradition of service to future generations (pp. 51–67). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
  38. Taniguchi, H. (2006). Men’s and women’s volunteering: Gender differences in the effects of employment and family characteristics. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(1), 83–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tajfel H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–48). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. (Reprinted from M. Hogg, & D. Abrams (Eds.). (2001), Intergroup relations (pp. 94–109). Ann Arbor, MI: Psychology Press).Google Scholar
  40. Uslaner, E. M. (2001). Volunteering and social capital: How trust and religion shape civic participation in the United States. In P. Dekker & E. Uslaner (Eds.), Social Capital and Participation in Everyday Life (pp. 104–117). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Uslaner, E. M. (2002). Religion and civic engagement in Canada and the United States. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(2), 239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Walter, T., & Davie, G. (1998). The religiosity of women in the modern West. British Journal of Sociology, 49(4), 640–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang, L., & Graddy, E. (2008). Social capital, volunteering, and charitable giving. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 19(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Welch, M. R., Sikkink, D., & Loveland, M. T. (2007). The radius of trust: Religion, social embeddedness and trust in strangers. Social Forces, 86(1), 23–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wilson, J. (2000). Volunteering. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 215–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilson, J., & Janoski, T. (1995). The contribution of religion to volunteer work. Sociology of Religion, 56(2), 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1997). Who cares? Toward an integrated theory of volunteer work. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 694–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson, J., & Musick, M. (1999). Attachment to volunteering. Sociological Forum, 14(2), 243–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wuthnow, R. (1988). The restructuring of American religion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Wuthnow, R. (1991). Acts of compassion. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wuthnow, R. (1994). God and mammon in America. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wuthnow, R. (1998a). Loose connections: Joining together in America’ fragmented communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Wuthnow, R. (1998b). After heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  55. Wuthnow, R. (1999). Mobilizing civic engagement: The changing impact of religious involvement. In T. Skocpol & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 331–363). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  56. Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), 129–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yeung, A. B. (2004). An intricate triangle—religiosity, volunteering, and social capital: The European perspective, the case of Finland. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(3), 401–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society for Third-Sector Research and The John's Hopkins University 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations