Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predictive Factors for Voluntary and/or Paid Work among Adults in their Sixties

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Population aging is a current challenge globally as the Baby Boomers are heading towards retirement. In Finland, a regional-council postulated that the rate of retirement in the region will leave more than half of the population retired in the near future. Hence, this study conducted logistic regressions for predictive factors for voluntary and paid work among adults in their 60s from the region by using the Aging and Well-being of North-Savo Survey. Chi Square tests were also implemented in order to examine the link between their current engagement and their well-being. The logistic regressions implemented showed relative covariates of education, income, health and socioeconomic delineation as predictive factors for current and future engagements in voluntary and paid work. Chi Square tests also revealed a link between the current engagement of the respondents and their well-being. However, further studies will be needed so as to determine the differences in the relativity of the predictive factors by gender. In addition, the study suggests the importance of continuing the discussion of older adult’s productive engagement and its value base in relation to income and outcomes, as well as spiritual empathy and sustainable future for the elderly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahn, S., Phillips, K. L., Smith, M. L., & Ory, M. G. (2011). Correlates of volunteering among aging Texans: The roles of health indicators, spirituality, and social engagement. Maturitas, 69(3), 257–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altschuler, J. (2004). Beyond money and survival: The meaning of paid work among older women. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 58(3), 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arber, S., & Ginn, J. (1995). Gender differences in the relationship between paid employment and informal care. Work, Employment & Society, 9(3), 445–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, J. N. (2005). Income and “outcomes” for elderly: Do the poor have a poorer life? Social Indicators Research, 70(3), 327–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L., Cahalin, L., Gerst, K., & Burr, J. (2005). Productive activities and subjective well-being among older adults: The influence of number of activities and time commitment. Social Indicators Research, 73(3), 431–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlow, J., & Hainsworth, J. (2001). Volunteerism among older people with arthritis. Ageing and Society, 21(02), 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bass, S. A., & Caro, F. G. (2001). Productive aging: A conceptual framework. In N. Morrow-Howell, J. Hinterlong, & M. Sherraden (Eds.), Productive aging: Concepts and challenges (pp. 37–80). Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, S. (2014). The promise of a long life? Cultural adaptation to productive aging, spiritual empathy, and a sustainable future. Journal of Religion, Spirituality & Aging, 26, 96–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borgonovi, F. (2008). Doing well by doing good. The relationship between formal volunteering and self-reported health and happiness. Social Science & Medicine, 66(11), 2321–2334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattan, M., Hogg, E., & Hardill, I. (2011). Improving quality of life in ageing populations: What can volunteering do? Maturitas, 70(4), 328–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cnaan, R. A., Handy, F., & Wadsworth, M. (1996). Defining who is a volunteer: Conceptual and empirical considerations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(3), 364–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croezen, S., Havenman-nies, A., Alvarado, V. J., Vantveer, P., & Degroot, C. P. G. M. (2009). Characterization of different groups of elderly according to social engagement activity patterns. The Journal of Nutrition and Aging, 13(9), 776–781.

    Google Scholar 

  • Futurage. (2011). A road map for European ageing research. www.futurage.group.shef.ac.uk.

  • Griffin, B., & Hesketh, B. (2008). Post-retirement work: The individual determinants of paid and volunteer work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81(1), 101–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoglund, M. W., Sadovsky, R., & Classie, J. (2009). Engagement in life activities promotes healthy aging in men. Journal of Men’s Health, 6(4), 354–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, S. I., & Morrow-Howell, N. (2010). Health outcomes of experience corps®: A high-commitment volunteer program. Social Science & Medicine, 71(2), 414–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jegermalm, M., & Jeppsson Grassman, E. (2009). Caregiving and volunteering among older people in Sweden—Prevalence and profiles. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 21(4), 352–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkinson, C., Dickens, A., Jones, K., Thompson-Coon, J., Taylor, R., Rogers, M., & Richards, S. (2013). Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalwij, A., & Vermeulen, F. (2005). Labour force participation of the elderly in Europe: The importance of being healthy. In IZA discussion paper series no 1887; Center discussion paper series no 2005–130.

  • Knapp, K., & Muller, C. (2000). Productive lives: Paid and unpaid activities of older Americans. (WP-2000-01). New York, USA: International Longevity Center.

  • Kutner, G., & Love, J. (2003). Time and money: An in-depth look at 45+ volunteers and donors. Washington, DC: AARP Knowledge Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. Y., Jang, S., Lee, S., Cho, S., & Park, E. (2008). The relationship between social participation and self-rated health by sex and age: A cross-sectional survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(7), 1042–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuba, M. K., Hart, D., & Atkins, R. (2007). Psychological and social-structural influences on commitment to volunteering. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(4), 889–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musick, M. A., & Wilson, J. (2003). Volunteering and depression: The role of psychological and social resources in different age groups. Social Science & Medicine, 56(2), 259–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narushima, M. (2005). ‘Payback time’: Community volunteering among older adults as a transformative mechanism. Ageing and Society, 25(04), 567–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oudijk, D., Woittiez, I., & de Boer, A. (2011). More family responsibility, more informal care? The effect of motivation on the giving of informal care by people aged over 50 in the Netherlands compared to other European countries. Health Policy, 101(3), 228–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parboteeah, K. P., Cullen, J. B., & Lim, L. (2004). Formal volunteering: A cross-national test. Journal of World Business, 39(4), 431–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prouteau, L., & Wolff, F. (2008). On the relational motive for volunteer work. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(3), 314–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rios, D., Cubedo, M., & Rios, M. (2013). Graphical study of reasons for engagement in physical activity in European Union. Springerplus, 2, 488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rissanen, S., Hujala, A., & Helisten, M. (2010). The state and future of social service enterprises—a Finnish case. European Journal of Social Work, 13(3), 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozanova, J., Keating, N., & Eales, J. (2012). Unequal social engagement for older adults: Constraints on choice. Canadian Journal on Aging, 31(1), 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirven, N., & Debrand, T. (2008). Social participation and healthy ageing: An international comparison using SHARE data. Social Science & Medicine, 67(12), 2017–2026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolt, R., Blomqvist, P., & Winblad, U. (2011). Privatization of social services: Quality differences in Swedish elderly care. Social Science & Medicine, 72(4), 560–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taghian, M., D’Souza, C., & Polonsky, M. (2012). A study of older Australians’ volunteering and quality of life: Empirical evidence and policy implication. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 24(2), 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thanakwang, K., & Isaramalai, S. (2013). Productive engagement in older adults: A concept analysis. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(1), 124–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Regional Council of North-Savo. (2012). North-Savo well-being report. Finland: The Regional Council of North-Savo Publication A: 75.

  • Veerasamy, C., Sambasivan, M., & Kumar, N. (2014). Life satisfaction among healthcare volunteers in malaysia: Role of personality factors, volunteers motives and spiritual capital. International Society for Third-Sector Research and the John Hopkins University. doi:10.1007/s11266-014-9437-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ungerson, C. (1995). Gender, cash and informal care: European perspectives and dilemmas. Journal of Social Policy, 24(1), 31–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willigen, M. (2000). Differential benefits of volunteering across the life the course. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 55(5), 308–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zedlewski, S.Z., & Schaner, G.S. (2006). Perspective on productive aging: Older adults engaged as volunteers. 2100 M Street, NW Washington EDC 20037: The Urban Institute.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P. O. Box 1627, 70211, Kuopio, Finland

    Thomas Akintayo & Sari Rissanen

  2. Department of Health and Social Management, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio Campus, Finland

    Niina Häkälä, Katja Ropponen & Elsa Paronen

Authors
  1. Thomas Akintayo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Niina Häkälä
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katja Ropponen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elsa Paronen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sari Rissanen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Akintayo.

Appendix 1: The Fit of the Models

Appendix 1: The Fit of the Models

1.1 Model 1: Current Participation in Voluntary Work

The Omnibus Test of model 1 coefficients showed the Chi square (χ2) value of 42.707 (df = 15) with a high significant p value of <0.001, which indicated that the independent/explanatory variables selected in the model had a positive influence on the fit of the model when compared with the constant/baseline model. The fit of the model was also tested with the Hosmer and Lemenshow Test, which showed the p value of 0.730 and, based on the high p value, we can say that the model and the data have a good fit. On the contrary, the Nagelkerke Pseudo-R2 was 0.048 which is very poor for the model. Also, the classification of predicted values of observations was poor. It could not correctly classify those who participate in voluntary work at all. Of all the observations, the model was able to classify 78.2 %. The percentage did not increase from the null model at all.

1.2 Model 2: Current Participation in Paid Work

The Omnibus Test of model 2 coefficients was significantly better than the baseline model, and Chi Square (χ2) = 182.067, df = 15, p < 0.001. Also, the Hosmer and Lemenshow Test showed a good fit of the model with high p value (0.487), but the Nagelkerke Pseudo-R2 was only 0.170. The model correctly classified 57.5 % of those who did not participate in paid work, and 70.6 percent of those who did work. The overall percentage was 64.3 percent. The percentage increased from the null model (52.1 %) by over 12 percentage points.

1.3 Model 3: Future Participation in Voluntary Work

According to the Omnibus Test of model 3 coefficient, the Chi square was highly significant (χ2 = 214.749.509, df = 15, p < 0.001); this showed that the new model (with independent/explanatory variables included) was significantly better than the baseline model. The Nagelkerke Pseudo-R2 was 0.207, which is considered to be an adequate fit of the model. The Hosmer and Lemenshow Test showed a good fit of the model with a high p value (0. 301). However, when we evaluate the model based on the accuracy of the classification of predicted values of observations, the model was only moderate. It correctly classified only 34.3 % of those who were willing to participate in voluntary work in the future. Of those who were not willing to participate, the model correctly classified 91.2 %. Of all the observations, the model was able to classify 72.8 %. The percentage increased from the null model (67.8 %) by five percentage points.

1.4 Model 4: Future Participation in Paid Work

Also, the Omnibus Test of model 4 coefficient showed the positive influence of independent variables selected for the model when compared with the constant model (χ2 = 152.795, df = 16, p < 0.001). The Nagelkerke Pseudo-R2 was only 0.144, which indicates a relatively poor fit of the model. Instead, the Hosmer and Lemenshow Test indicated a better fit of the model with high p value (0.969). The model correctly classified 62.6 percent of those who were not willing to work in the future, and 67.0 percent of those who thought they would consider working. Altogether, the model correctly classified 64.7 percent of cases, which was a slight increase over the null model (52.7 %).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akintayo, T., Häkälä, N., Ropponen, K. et al. Predictive Factors for Voluntary and/or Paid Work among Adults in their Sixties. Soc Indic Res 128, 1387–1404 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1084-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1084-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation