Linking collegiate service‐learning to future volunteerism: Implications for nonprofit organizations

One of the biggest challenges facing nonprofits is attracting and retaining volunteers to help deliver their programs. One way that colleges and universities are attempting to educate students on the importance of community issues and to graduate “good citizens” is through service‐learning (S‐L) programs. Although many scholars argue that collegiate S‐L programs will increase the extent to which students volunteer following graduation (for example, Astin, Sax, and Avalos, 1999; Misa, Anderson, and Yamamura, 2005), more empirical research has been called for to examine this relationship. This article proposes three predictors of future volunteerism for alumni of a collegiate S‐L experience: the amount of personal development experienced during the S‐L project, the perceived value of the S‐L project to the community organization, and the level of volunteerism prior to participation in an S‐L project. Results showed significant effects of all the proposed predictors on postgraduation volunteering. Our findings have implications for nonprofit managers charged with maintaining a sufficient level of volunteers to provide their community services as well as individuals who are responsible for organizing S‐L programs. These managerial implications and directions for future S‐L research are discussed.     

Hopelessness and suicidality in Turkish and American respondents

In samples of both Turkish and American students, the correlates of suicidal ideation were found to be similar, with depression, hopelessness, and attitudes toward the ownership of life predicting the level of suicidal ideation in both samples. Results using a Western measure of religiosity, however, were different in the two cultures, indicating the need for measures of religiosity specifically tailored for Turkish culture.     

Delayed Hospital Discharge and Mental Health: The Policy Implications of Recent Research

In 2003, the Community Care (Delayed Discharges etc.) Act introduced charges for social services departments unable to discharge patients from hospital within agreed timescales. As details of this reimbursement policy have begun to emerge, it has become apparent that the new system may also be extended to mental health services. In response, this narrative review of the literature on delayed hospital discharges and mental health reports findings from 12 studies, which raise important and timely concerns about the feasibility of reimbursement. Although a significant number of people experience delayed discharges from acute psychiatric services, the task of defining delayed discharges is complex and subjective, dependent on the professional background and seniority of the person making the judgement. Reasons behind delayed discharges are also multi‐factorial in nature and cannot be attributed to social services departments alone.     

The Relationship among Negative Affect,Distress Tolerance,and Length of Gambling Abstinence Attempt

The present study tested the theory that negative affect and one’s ability to tolerate distress is associated with failure to quit gambling during an abstinence attempt. Specifically, 16 current pathological gamblers who had at least one sustained period of gambling abstinence lasting a minimum of 3 months (i.e., delayed relapsers) and 16 current pathological gamblers who had never remained abstinent for a period longer than 2 weeks (i.e., immediate relapsers), were assessed for baseline levels of negative affect and stress reactivity, as well as faced with a psychological (mental arithmetic) and physical (breath holding) stressor. Compared to the delayed relapsers, the immediate relapsers displayed higher levels of negative affect and stress reactivity. Immediate relapsers also were less likely to persist on the psychological stressor, suggesting that one’s ability to tolerate the initial discomfort of an abstinence attempt may play an important role in gambling treatment outcome. The current project was completed in partial completion of the degree of Master of Arts in Psychology by the first author under the direction of the second author.     

Social Origins of Civil Society: Explaining the Nonprofit Sector Cross-Nationally

Recent research has usefully documented the contribution that nonprofit organizations make to social capital and to the economic and political development it seems to foster. Because of a gross lack of basic comparative data, however, the question of what it is that allows such organizations to develop remains far from settled. This article seeks to remedy this by testing five existing theories of the nonprofit sector against data assembled on eight countries as part of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project. The five theories are: (a) government failure/market failure theory; (b) supply-side theory; (c) trust theories; (d) welfare state theory; and (e) interdependence theory. The article finds none of these theories adequate to explain the variations among countries in either the size, the composition, or the financing of the nonprofit sector. On this basis it suggests a new theoretical approach to explaining patterns of nonprofit development among countries—the social origins approach—which focuses on broader social, political, and economic relationships. Using this theory, the article identifies four routes of third-sector development (the liberal, the social democratic, the corporatist, and the statist), each associated with a particular constellation of class relationships and pattern of state-society relations. The article then tests this theory against the eight-country data and finds that it helps make sense of anomalies left unexplained by the prevailing theories.     

Reflections on rational choice—The existence of systematic irrationality

The behavioral challenge to the rational choice paradigm is oriented toward individual decision-making. Behavioral irrationality does not mean chaos. Most irrational behavior involves the exercise of reasoning. In reality, decision makers do not behave with full knowledge and/or optimal computational power in pursuit of maximizing expected utility. Besides reviewing critiques to the rationality paradigm for judgments and preferences and exploring the impact of culture on people's economic behavior, this paper is the first to call the attention of researchers to the phenomenon of systemic irrationality. Irrationality may exist at the aggregate or societal level, a conclusion based on the observation that large segments of the population are incapable of making decisions in accord with traditional rationality—groups such as those who have a psychiatric disorder, those who are taking medications, those with limited intelligence, those from the lower social classes, children and adolescents, and the elderly. Even those who are not included in the aforementioned groups, but who take medications for medical conditions may have their decision-making impaired to some extent. Therefore, it is argued that rationality in economic decision-making may be the exception rather than the norm.     

What Do We Know About Making Risk Comparisons?

The risks of unfamiliar technologies are often evaluated by comparing them with the risks of more familiar ones. Such risk comparisons have been criticized for neglecting critical dimensions of risky decisions. In a guide written for the Chemical Manufacturers Association, Covello et al. (¹) have summarized these critiques and developed a taxonomy that characterizes possible risk comparisons in terms of their acceptability (or objectionableness). We asked four diverse groups of subjects to judge the acceptability of 14 statements produced by Covello et al. as examples of their categories. We found no correlation between the judgments of acceptability produced by our subjects and those predicted by Covello et al. .     

Specifying Risk Goals: Inherent Problems with Democratic Institutions

Many risks have the property that large numbers of people are exposed and have little or no individual control over the risks they face. Dams, nuclear power plants, and recombinant DNA research have proven controversial not simply because there is vast uncertainty about the true level of risk associated with each, but because a fundamental issue is that in each case social risks can be lessened by spending more on safety: dams can be designed to withstand larger earthquakes, nuclear plants can have additional safety equipment, and DNA research could be done in yet more carefully isolated laboratories. Since each person will have preferences regarding the proper trade-off between increased cost and increased safety, there is little possibility of consensus. More importantly, we show that a voting process for expressing individual preferences can be manipulated and is seriously flawed in the sense that it does not lead to an "efficient" outcome. In addition, we show that virtually all people are unhappy with the safety decision, in the sense that each would prefer either a safer or a cheaper outcome. Thus, making safety decisions that affect a large group of people who will not be able to control the outcome is even more difficult than has been appreciated. We suggest some ways of handling some of the difficulties.