Getting the measure of prosocial behaviours: A comparison of participation and volunteering data in the national child development study and the linked social participation and identify study

Jane Parry, Katherine Brookfield, Vicki Bolton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Measures of prosocial behavior can influence policy, legislation, investment, and inform assessments of the overall state of society. Evidence suggests that methods are important in determining these measures. To widen and deepen our understanding of the complex relationship between these items, we compared participation and volunteering data from a national birth cohort study (National Child Development Study [NCDS]) with data from a linked qualitative study, the Social Participation and Identity Study (SPIS). We evaluated the strengths and prosocial behavior content of each and explored possible links between their respective methodologies and participation and volunteering estimates. We found that prompts and probes were associated with higher estimates and narrow filter questions with lower estimates. The SPIS afforded detailed insights into lived experiences and personal narratives of volunteering and participating, whereas the NCDS supported analysis of these behaviors over time and from a lifecourse perspective. Implications for researchers and policy makers are considered.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-21
Number of pages21
JournalNonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly
Publication statusPublished - 23 Jul 2018

Fingerprint

social participation
participation
legislation
narrative
methodology
evidence
experience

Cite this

@article{ad3b7999674e47b4a9b56c999c9fc850,
title = "Getting the measure of prosocial behaviours: A comparison of participation and volunteering data in the national child development study and the linked social participation and identify study",
abstract = "Measures of prosocial behavior can influence policy, legislation, investment, and inform assessments of the overall state of society. Evidence suggests that methods are important in determining these measures. To widen and deepen our understanding of the complex relationship between these items, we compared participation and volunteering data from a national birth cohort study (National Child Development Study [NCDS]) with data from a linked qualitative study, the Social Participation and Identity Study (SPIS). We evaluated the strengths and prosocial behavior content of each and explored possible links between their respective methodologies and participation and volunteering estimates. We found that prompts and probes were associated with higher estimates and narrow filter questions with lower estimates. The SPIS afforded detailed insights into lived experiences and personal narratives of volunteering and participating, whereas the NCDS supported analysis of these behaviors over time and from a lifecourse perspective. Implications for researchers and policy makers are considered.",
author = "Jane Parry and Katherine Brookfield and Vicki Bolton",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "23",
language = "English",
pages = "1--21",
journal = "Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly",
issn = "0899-7640",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Getting the measure of prosocial behaviours

T2 - A comparison of participation and volunteering data in the national child development study and the linked social participation and identify study

AU - Parry, Jane

AU - Brookfield, Katherine

AU - Bolton, Vicki

PY - 2018/7/23

Y1 - 2018/7/23

N2 - Measures of prosocial behavior can influence policy, legislation, investment, and inform assessments of the overall state of society. Evidence suggests that methods are important in determining these measures. To widen and deepen our understanding of the complex relationship between these items, we compared participation and volunteering data from a national birth cohort study (National Child Development Study [NCDS]) with data from a linked qualitative study, the Social Participation and Identity Study (SPIS). We evaluated the strengths and prosocial behavior content of each and explored possible links between their respective methodologies and participation and volunteering estimates. We found that prompts and probes were associated with higher estimates and narrow filter questions with lower estimates. The SPIS afforded detailed insights into lived experiences and personal narratives of volunteering and participating, whereas the NCDS supported analysis of these behaviors over time and from a lifecourse perspective. Implications for researchers and policy makers are considered.

AB - Measures of prosocial behavior can influence policy, legislation, investment, and inform assessments of the overall state of society. Evidence suggests that methods are important in determining these measures. To widen and deepen our understanding of the complex relationship between these items, we compared participation and volunteering data from a national birth cohort study (National Child Development Study [NCDS]) with data from a linked qualitative study, the Social Participation and Identity Study (SPIS). We evaluated the strengths and prosocial behavior content of each and explored possible links between their respective methodologies and participation and volunteering estimates. We found that prompts and probes were associated with higher estimates and narrow filter questions with lower estimates. The SPIS afforded detailed insights into lived experiences and personal narratives of volunteering and participating, whereas the NCDS supported analysis of these behaviors over time and from a lifecourse perspective. Implications for researchers and policy makers are considered.

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 21

JO - Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

JF - Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

SN - 0899-7640

ER -