Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Originalia

Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI): Konstruktvalidität und psychometrische Eigenschaften der deutschen Adaptation

Published Online:January 02, 2014https://doi.org/10.1026/0012-1924/a000098

Abstract

Das Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI; Clary et al., 1998) ist ein Inventar zur Erfassung der Motivation zu freiwilligem Engagement. Es misst sechs Funktionen von Freiwilligenarbeit: Erfahrungsfunktion, Karrierefunktion, Schutzfunktion, Selbstwertfunktion, soziale Anpassungsfunktion und Wertefunktion. Die vorliegende Studie stellt die deutsche Adaptation sowie eine bisher fehlende Konstruktvalidierung des VFI mit vergleichbaren motivationalen Konstrukten vor. An einer Stichprobe von N = 2 255 sozial-karitativ tätigen Freiwilligen wurden die psychometrischen Eigenschaften sowie die Konstruktvalidität überprüft. Die Sechs-Faktoren-Struktur bestätigte sich. Die internen Konsistenzen der Funktionen erwiesen sich als zufriedenstellend und nahe an den Werten der Originalstudie liegend. Zur ergänzenden Konstruktvalidierung des VFI wurden zwei motivationale Konstrukte aus der Selbstbestimmungstheorie herangezogen: die Handlungsregulationen (intrinsische und extrinsische Motivation) sowie die Kausalitätsorientierungen (Autonomie-Orientierung und Kontroll-Orientierung). Die Zusammenhänge dieser Konstrukte mit den VFI-Funktionen fielen gemäss den theoretischen Annahmen aus. Die deutsche Adaptation ist als erfolgreich zu bezeichnen.


Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI): Psychometric properties of the German adaptation and construct validation

The Volunteer Functions Inventory (VFI; Clary et al., 1998) is an inventory to assess the motivation underlying volunteerism. It measures six functions for volunteering: understanding, career, protective, enhancement, social, and values. This study presents the German adaptation and a so far missing construct validation of the VFI with comparable motivational constructs. Psychometric properties and construct validation were examined with N = 2,255 charitably engaged volunteers. The six-factor structure was confirmed. The functions’ internal consistencies were satisfying and close to the values of the original study. For the supplementary construct validation of the VFI, two motivational constructs from self-determination theory were used: behavioral regulations (intrinsic and extrinsic motivation) and causality orientations (autonomy-orientation and control-orientation). Correlations between these constructs and the VFI-functions were consistent with the theoretical assumptions. The German adaptation was successful.

Literatur

  • Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52, 317 – 332. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bagozzi, R. & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74 – 94. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Balderjahn, I. (1986). Das umweltbewusste Konsumentenverhalten: Eine empirische Studie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Batson, C. , Duncan, B. , Ackerman, P. , Buckley, T. & Birch, K. (1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 290 – 302. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bierhoff, H.-W. , Schülken, T. & Hoof, M. (2007). Skalen der Einstellungsstruktur ehrenamtlicher Helfer (SEEH). Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie, 6, 12 – 27. First citation in articleLink, Google Scholar

  • Burns, D. , Reid, J. , Toncar, M. , Anderson, C. & Wells, C. (2008). The effect of gender on the motivation of members of Generation Y college students to volunteer. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 19, 99 – 118. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Carstensen, L. , Isaacowitz, D. & Charles, S. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54, 165 – 181. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Clary, E. G. , Snyder, M. & Ridge, R. D. (1992). Volunteers’ motivations: A functional strategy for the recruitment, placement, and retention of volunteers. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 2, 333 – 350. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Clary, E. G. , Snyder, M. , Ridge, R. D. , Copeland, J. , Stukas, A. A. , Haugen, J. et al. (1998). Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1516 – 1530. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Clary, E. G. , Snyder, M. & Stukas, A. A. (1996). Volunteers’ motivations: Findings from a national survey. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25, 485 – 505. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cnaan, R. A. & Goldberg-Glen, R. S. (1991). Measuring motivation to volunteer in human services. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27, 269 – 284. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Dawes, J. (2008). Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Journal of Market Research, 50, 61 – 77. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109 – 134. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The „what” and „why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227 – 268. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Erez, A. , Mikulincer, M. , van Ijzendoorn, M. & Kroonenberg, P. (2008). Attachment, personality, and volunteering: Placing volunteerism in an attachment-theoretical framework. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 64 – 74. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Finkelstein, M. A. (2008). Predictors of volunteer time: The changing contributions of motive fulfillment and role identity. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 36, 1353 – 1363. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Finkelstein, M. A. (2009). Intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivational orientations and the volunteer process. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 653 – 658. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fletcher, T. & Major, D. (2004). Medical students’ motivations to volunteer: An examination of the nature of gender differences. Sex Roles, 51, 109 – 114. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39 – 50. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Gagné, M. , Forest, J. , Gilbert, M. H. , Aubé, C. , Morin, E. & Malorni, A. (2010). The motivation at work scale: Validation evidence in two languages. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 628 – 646. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Haefliger, U. & Hug, S. (2009, April). Mean well to do good? Volunteer motivation re-examined. Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Hu, L. & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1 – 55. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, 163 – 204. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kim, M. , Zhang, J. J. & Connaughton, D. (2010). Modification of the Volunteer Functions Inventory for application in youth sports. Sport Management Review, 13, 25 – 38. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Kwan, B. , Hooper, A. , Magnan, R. & Bryan, A. (2011). A longitudinal diary study of the effects of causality orientations on exercise-related affect. Self and Identity, 10, 363 – 374. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Okun, M. A. , Barr, A. & Herzog, A. (1998). Motivation to volunteer by older adults: A test of competing measurement models. Psychology and Aging, 13, 608 – 621. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Okun, M. A. & Schultz, A. (2003). Age and motives for volunteering: Testing hypotheses derived from socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 18, 231 – 239. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Podsakoff, P. M. , MacKenzie, S. B. , Lee, J.-Y. & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879 – 903. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Prentice, D. A. & Carlsmith, K. M. (2000). Opinions and personality: On the psychological functions of attitudes and other valued possessions. In G. R. Maio & J. M. Olson (Eds.), Why we evaluate. Functions of attitudes (pp. 223 – 248). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Scherhorn, G. , Hass, H. , Hellenthal, F. & Seibold, S. (2010). Kausalitätsorientierungen. In A. Glöckner-Rist (Hrsg.), Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen. ZIS Version 14.00. Bonn: GESIS. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Schermelleh-Engel, K. , Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research online, 8, 23 – 74. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Smith, M. , Bruner, J. & White, R. (1956). Opinions and personality. New York, NY: Wiley. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Study on Volunteering in the European Union (2010). Final report submitted by GHK. Zugriff am 10. 8. 2012. Verfügbar unter http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/pdf/doc1018_en.pdf First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Viswanathan, M. , Sudman, S. & Johnson, M. (2004). Maximum versus meaningful discrimination in scale response: Implications for validity of measurement of consumer perceptions about products. Journal of Business Research, 57, 108 – 124. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wakita, T. , Ueshima, N. & Noguchi, H. (2012). Psychological distance between categories in the Likert Scale comparing different numbers of options. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72, 533 – 546. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Weijters, B. , Cabooter, E. & Schillewaert, N. (2010). The effect of rating scale format on response styles: The number of response categories and response category labels. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27, 236 – 247. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Wu, J. , Wing Lo, T. & Liu, E. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Volunteer Functions Inventory with Chinese students. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 769 – 780. First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar