Λέξεις-Κλειδιά: εθελοντισµός, αλτρουισµός, ευτυχία, θρησκευτικότητα, οικογενειακό περιβάλλον, ανθρωπιστικές µη κυβερνητικές οργανώσεις.

ιεπιστηµονική Φροντίδα Υγείας(202) Τόµος 4,Τεύχος, 34-42 ISSN 79-9649 ιερεύνηση των χαρακτηριστικών της προσωπικότητας των εθελοντών στην παροχή πρωτοβάθµιων νοσηλευτικών υπηρεσιών σε ανθρωπιστικές µη κυβερνητικές οργανώσεις Κούλιου Φ., ραγκιώτη Ε., 2 Κοτρώτσιου Ε. 3 & Γκούβα Μ. 4 Νοσηλεύτρια, MSc, ΝΝΘΑ «Η Σωτηρία» Ψυχολόγος, MSc, ΝΝΘΑ «Η Σωτηρία» 3 Καθηγήτρια, Τµήµα Νοσηλευτικής Τ.Ε.Ι. Λάρισας 4 Επίκουρος Καθηγήτρια, Τµήµα Νοσηλευτικής Τ.Ε.Ι. Ηπείρου ΠΕΡΙΛΗΨΗ Εισαγωγή: Στο κέντρο του εθελοντισµού, όπως προκύπτει από την ανασκόπηση της βιβλιογραφίας, εντοπίζεται η προστασία της αξιοπρέπειας του ανθρώπου καθώς µέσα από τον εθελοντισµό φαίνεται να αντανακλάται η εικόνα του εαυτού µας. Λίγα µας είναι γνωστά µέχρι σήµερα για τα χαρακτηριστικά της προσωπικότητας των εθελοντών σε ποσοτικό επίπεδο. Οι περισσότερες έρευνες γύρω από τον εθελοντισµό εστιάζονται κυρίως σε µια πιο ποιοτική και θεωρητική προσέγγιση του εθελοντισµού. Σκοπός: Η παρούσα εργασία σχεδιάστηκε µε σκοπό να διερευνήσει ορισµένα ψυχολογικά χαρακτηριστικά της προσωπικότητας (αλτρουισµός, ευτυχία, ναρκισσισµός, θρησκευτικότητα και γενικότερο οικογενειακό περιβάλλον) που σχετίζονται µε τον εθελοντισµό στην παροχή πρωτοβάθµιων νοσηλευτικών υπηρεσιών. Πιο συγκεκριµένα, επιχειρήθηκε: α) η σύγκριση της οµάδας των εθελοντών και µη εθελοντών ως προς τα συγκεκριµένα χαρακτηριστικά, β) η συσχέτιση των επιµέρους υποκλιµάκων κάθε µεταβλητής τόσο για το σύνολο του δείγµατος όσο και για κάθε οµάδα ξεχωριστά. Yλικό και µέθοδος: Tο δείγµα της µελέτης καθορίστηκε να αποτελέσουν 2 άτοµα τα οποία προήλθαν από δύο κύριες δεξαµενές: α) εθελοντές στην νοσηλευτική της ΜΚΟ του Ελληνικού Ερυθρού Σταυρού και β) µη εθελοντές, µέλη υγιούς πληθυσµού του ευρύτερου χώρου της υγείας. Η οµάδα των εθελοντών αποτελούνταν από 63 άτοµα (ποσοστό 52,%), ενώ η οµάδα ελέγχου αποτελούνταν από 58 άτοµα (ποσοστό 47,9%) που ανέφεραν ότι δεν έχουν ασχοληθεί ποτέ µε τον εθελοντισµό. Η συγκέντρωση των δεδοµένων έγινε µε συµπλήρωση γραπτού ερωτηµατολογίου σε πλαίσιο και ώρα επιλογής των συµµετεχόντων.τα εργαλεία που χρησιµοποιήθηκαν ήταν: α) Ερωτηµατολόγιο κοινωνικο-δηµογραφικών χαρακτηριστικών, β) Η υπο-κλίµακα του Αλτρουισµού, γ) Η κλίµακα υποκειµενικής ευτυχίας, δ) Η κλίµακα της ναρκισσιστικής προσωπικότητας και ε) Η κλίµακα µέτρησης του οικογενειακού περιβάλλοντος. Αποτέλεσµατα: Από την στατιστική ανάλυση προέκυψε ότι οι δύο οµάδες διέφεραν πάρα πολύ σηµαντικά ως προς τον αλτρουισµό (P=0,000). Επίσης, διέφεραν σηµαντικά ως προς τον ναρκισσισµό (P=0,02) και ως προς την ηθική και θρησκευτική έµφαση του οικογενειακού περιβάλλοντος (P=0,027). Τέλος, ως προς την διάσταση της ευτυχίας δεν παρατηρήθηκε καµία στατιστικά σηµαντική διαφορά ανάµεσα στους εθελοντές και µη εθελοντές (P=0,57). Συµπεράσµατα: Από τα αποτελέσµατα της παρούσας µελέτης αναδεικνύεται η σχέση των συγκεκριµένων χαρακτηριστικών της προσωπικότητας µε τον εθελοντισµό. Θεωρούµε δε την προβληµατική γύρω από το ρόλο των ψυχοκοινωνικών χαρακτηριστικών των εθελοντών σαν έναν από τους πιο ενδιαφέροντες τοµείς, ιδιαίτερα για τις επιστήµες υγείας, του οποίου η µελέτη θα συµβάλλει ουσιαστικά στην ανάδειξη του ρόλου της του Εθελοντισµού στην Πρωτοβάθµια Φροντίδα Υγείας. Λέξεις-Κλειδιά: εθελοντισµός, αλτρουισµός, ευτυχία, θρησκευτικότητα, οικογενειακό περιβάλλον, ανθρωπιστικές µη κυβερνητικές οργανώσεις. 34 Υπεύθ. Αλ/φίας: Γκούβα M. Επ. Καθηγήτρια, Τµ Νοσηλευτικής, ΤΕΙ Ηπείρου,4o Klm Ε.Ο. Ιωαν.-Αθ., 45500, Ιωάννινα,. email: gouva@ioa.teiep.gr

Interscientific Health Care (202) Vol 4, Issue, 34-42 ISSN 79-9649 Α quantitative investigation of personality and psychological characteristics on volunteers in the humanitarian non government organizations Kouliou F., Dragioti E., 2 Kotrotsiou E. 3 and Gouva M. 4 Nurse, MSc Sotiria Hospital of Chest Diseases, Athens, Greece 2 Psychologist, MSc Sotiria Hospital of Chest Diseases, Athens, Greece 3 Professor, Nursing Department TEI of Larissa 4 Assistant Professor, Nursing Department TEI of Epirus ABSTRACT Background: In the heart of volunteerism, as derived from the literature review, the protection of human dignity is identified, since through volunteerism the image of the self is reflected. However, little is known today about the personality characteristics of volunteers at a quantitative level. Most studies around volunteerism focus mostly on a more qualitative and theoretical approach of volunteerism. Aim: The present study was designed to investigate specific psychological characteristics of the personality (altruism, happiness, narcissism, religiousness and the overall family environment) which are associated with volunteerism in primary nursing services. More specifically, it was attempted to: a) compare the volunteers and non volunteers groups as far as the specific characteristics are concerned, b) correlate the individual subscale of each variable both for the whole sample and for each group separately. Methods: The study sample was decided to consist of 2 people who came from two main sources: a) volunteers in the nursing section of the Humanitarian NGO of the Hellenic Red Cross and b) non- volunteers, members of the healthy population of the wider area of health. The volunteers group consisted of 63 people (52.%), while the control group consisted of 58 people (47.9%) who reported that they had never been involved in volunteerism. The data collection was conducted through a written questionnaire filled at a place and time chosen by the participants. The tools used were: a) A questionnaire of sociodemographic characteristics, b) The Altruism subscale, c) The Subjective Happiness Scale, d) The Narcissistic Personality Scale and e) The Scale for measuring the Family Environment. Results: From the statistical analysis it was shown that the two groups differentiated quite significantly concerning altruism (P=0.000). Also, they were significantly differentiated concerning narcissism (P=0.02) and moral and religious emphasis of the family environment (P=0.027). Finally, concerning the happiness dimension no statistically significant differentiation between volunteers and non-volunteers was observed. Conclusions: From the results of the present study the association between specific personality characteristics and volunteerism was shown. We regard the difficulties around the role of the psychosocial characteristics of volunteers as one of the most intriguing fields, particularly for the health sciences, the study of which will essentially contribute to highlight its role in Volunteerism in Primary Health Care. Keywords: Volunteerism, Altruism, Happiness, Religiousness, Family environment, Humanitarian Non Government Organizations ΕΙΣΑΓΩΓΗ Volunteerism constitutes a social and economical capital offering significant benefits to the volunteers themselves, since they are given the opportunity of acquiring new skills and experiences in the work field (Ross, et al, 999). Many volunteers operate within the framework of Humanitarian Non Government Organizations (HNGOs). The main motives for volunteerism are the impulsivity, the challenge and the desire to experience the adventure of the hero (Hudson & Inson, 2006; Yeung, 2004). Furthermore, many are driven to the selfless labour by the need of personal transformation and by emotions of happiness (Dávila de León & Fuertes, 2007). Voluntary labour is about personal satisfaction/compensation, the labour for experience and the need to do something worthwhile (Peloza, Hudson & Hassay, 2009). In all cases, however, the volunteer is defined by agreeableness, consciousness, emotional stability (Dolnicar & Randle, 2007; Zappala, 35 Cor. Author: Gouva M., As. Prof. Dep. of Nursing, TEI of Epirus, 4th Klm Nat. Str. Ioan. Ath. 45500 - Ioannina, Greece. Email: gouva@ioa.teiep.g

2000; Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007), understanding, self-esteem and extroversion (Fritschie, 2009; Elshaug & Metzer, 200). The volunteers in the Humanitarian Non Government Organizations (HNGOs) are characterized by altruism (Einolf, 2009), charity and religiousness (Johnson, 2006; Lodi & Brent, 2007). Volunteers present a desire to publicly show their generosity and altruism driven by the social motive deriving by the codes of honour which prevail in each society. The aforementioned characteristics stem from the volunteers self-esteem as well as from the various degrees of altruism or greediness which characterize them, making these people want to show to the public the fact that they are generous, fair, brave, etc., a desire which is the result and an integral part of the person s quest for social self-esteem (Benabou & Tirole, 2004). However, there are also people who offer voluntary labour with the main aim to satisfy their own psychological and social needs (Clary, et al, 992). This, in itself, makes them experience situations which enhance their self-esteem and personal satisfaction (Gildron, 983), but also preserve their self-image which they want others to see, showing the selfish aspect of the volunteers personality (Benabou & Tirole, 2004). This is supplemented by the fact that voluntary work promotes personal satisfaction and gives the sense that the person does something worthwhile (Peloza, et al, 2009). Moreover, in the case of offering due to the presence of bystanders, people in order to absolve the discomforting sense they have offer their help, which elevates the altruistic behavior to a service of personal advisability (Piliavin & Callero, 99). A person s life stages which define their personality also define the existence of volunteerism (Okun & Schultz, 2003). The accumulation of experiences over time in combination with the changes of the perceived social conditions contributes to the expression of volunteerism (Funes, 999). However, little is known today about the personality characteristics of volunteers at a quantitative level. Most studies around volunteerism focus mostly on a more qualitative and theoretical approach of volunteerism. Therefore the present study was designed to investigate specific psychological characteristics of the personality (e.g altruism, happiness, narcissism, religiousness and the overall family environment) which are associated with volunteerism in primary nursing services. More specifically, it was attempted to: a) compare the volunteers and non volunteers groups as far as the specific characteristics are concerned, b) correlate the individual subscale of each variable both for the whole sample and for each group separately. MATERIALS and METHODS Sample and Procedure For this purpose the study sample was decided to consist of 2 individuals who came from two main sources: a) volunteers in the nursing section of the Humanitarian NGO of the Hellenic Red Cross and b) non- volunteers, members of the healthy population of the wider area of health. The mean age of the whole sample of participants was 45 years (SD=4) ranging 36 from 20 to 78 years. The volunteers group consisted of 63 people (52.%, x=52yrs ± SD=5), while the control group consisted of 58 people (47.9%, x=38yrs ± SD=7.5) who reported that they had never been involved in volunteerism. All the participants who fulfilled the study s requirements and accepted to participate in it were informed about the procedure of the study. The data collection was conducted through a written questionnaire filled at a place and time chosen by the participants. Participants responded to a demographic questionnaire (e.g. age, gender, family status, etc) and four self-report psychometric measures and sealed their responses in unmarked envelopes before returning them, so responses were both anonymous and confidential. Measures Participants completed four instruments. Altruism was measured by using the Altruism subscale of the Acceptance of welfare scale (ΑWS, Ahmed & Jackson, 979), that measures five factors of welfare like independence from government, morality of welfare, nurturance, work ethic and altruism. This subscale evaluate altruism using participants responses on a five-point Likert-scale (disagree strongly to agree strongly) to statements such as Most of the charities are dishonest (Ahmed & Jackson, 979; Papageorgiou, 2009). Papageorgiou (2009) have demonstrated reliability (a=.79) and validity for this measure in Greek population The Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS, Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 999) has only four seven-point Likert-scale items related to the participants perception of their own level of happiness. An example item asks participants to complete the statement, In general, I consider myself, where responses vary from not a very happy person to a very happy person. This instrument demonstrates adequate reliability (Cronbach s alpha =.86) and validity (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 999). The Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI; Raskin & Hall, 979) was using for evaluate non clinicalnarcissism (Emmons, 98; Raskin & Terry, 988; Coccosis, Vaslamatzis, Anagnostopoulos, Markidis, 998). For each paired statement, the one represents narcissistic traits and the other non-narcissistic ones. The scale used in the present study was the Greek adaptation of the NPI (Coccosis et al., 998). This version includes 30 forced-choice items pairs that compose a valid and promising measurement for the construction of narcissism (alpha coefficient:.85). High scores indicate strong narcissistic tendencies. A total score (range: 0-30) on the NPI is calculated by summing only the narcissistic choice (Coccosis et al., 998). The Family Environment was measured by using the Family Environment Scale (FES; Moos & Moos, 986; Moos, 990). FES is a parent-rated scale that consists of 0 nine-item subscales evaluating various aspects of family functioning in three general domains: (a) interpersonal relationships (cohesion, expressiveness, conflict), (b) personal growth orientations (independence, achievement, intellectual orientation, moral-religious emphasis), and (c) system

maintenance dimensions (organization, control) (Moos, 990; Holahan, Moos, Holahan & Brennan, 995; Holahan,Moos, Holahan, Brennan, 997). The Greek version of the instrument demonstrates satisfactory psychometric features (Matsa, 977). Data Analysis frequencies, means and standard deviations were applied for the description of sample s social, demographic and psychological characteristics. The parametric independent student T test was adopted to compare volunteers group and no volunteers scores on the quantitative variables, since their distribution was symmetric. The criteria for testing normality was: ± 2,00 for the Skewness and ± 5,00 for the Kyrtosis (Skordilis & Stavrou, 2005). Pearson x 2 (chi-square) tests was performed for the comparison of categorical variables (Ioannidis, 2000), while correlations coefficients were examine by Pearson r (Dafermos, 2005). The statistical analyses concerning the descriptive characteristics of the variables examined were performed by both Excel and SPSS4, while those concerning comparisons and correlations of quantitative and categorical variables were performed by the statistical parcel of SPSS4 (SPSS Inc., 2005) only. For all statistical analyses p<0.05 was considered as statistically significant. RESULTS Demographics Fullness means, standard deviations and distribution frequencies of demographic characteristics of the total sample and the two groups are represented in Table, as well as their comparisons. Table. Demographic characteristics and their differences between volunteers and non volunteers Voluntarism Non Volunteers Volunteers N=63 (00.0%) N=58 (00.0%) Total N=2 (00.0%) Differences p-value AGE* 5.83 ± 5.23 37.69 ± 7.50 45.05 ± 4.03 GENDER Men 2 (3.2) 7 (29.3) 9(5.7) Women 6 (96.8) 4 (70.7) 02 (84.3) FAMILY STATUS Single 7 (27.0) 35 (60.3) 52 (43.0) Marital 32 (50.8) 2(36.2) 53(43.8) Divorced 0 (5.9) 2 (3.4) 2 (9.9) Widowed 4 (6.3) 0 (0.0) 4 (3.3) EMPLOYMENT Unemployed/Student 2 (3.2) 0(0.0) 2 (.7) Housekeeping 0(5.9) 0(0.0) 0 (8.3) Self-Employed 8 (2.7) 2(3.4) 0 (8.3) Private Sectors 4 (22.2) 9(32.8) 33 (27.3) Public Sectors 9 (30.2) 37(63.8) 56 (46.3) Retired 0 (5.9) 0(0.0) 0 (8.3) EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND Primary Education 2(3.2) (.7) 3 (2.5) Secondary Education (3 Years) 2 (3.2) 0(0.0) 2 (.7) Secondary Education (6 Years) 29 (46.0) 5 (25.9) 44 (36.4) Higher Education (Graduate) 25 (39.7) 3 (53.4) 56 (46.3) Postgraduate (Μaster Degree) 4 (6.3) 5 (8.6) 9 (7.4) Postgraduate (P.h.D Degree) 0 (0.0) 2 (3.4) 2 (.7) Undergraduate Student (.6) 4 (6.9) 5 (4.) *AGE is expressed as Mean ± Standard deviation t =6.554 p=.000 X 2 p=5.584 p=.000 Fisher's Exact Test=7.304 p=.000 Fisher's Exact Test=33.684 p=.000 Fisher's Exact Test =0.356 p=.064 37

Comparisons between volunteers and no volunteers The next step to our analysis was to compare the two groups on the quantitative variables by Fisher Exact Test, Pearson s x 2 (Table 2) and means of t tests (Table 3). Altruism The results of the present study demonstrated significantly higher levels of altruism for volunteers, when compared to non volunteers. Significant differences were observed when applying Fisher Exact Test (p=.006) while Pearson s x 2 did not provide statistically significant differentiation between volunteers and non-volunteers (p=.594) (Table 2). Significant differences (p=.000) were also observed when the two groups were compared with the independent t- test (Table 3). Happiness The results did not indicate significantly higher levels of subjective happiness (p=.542) for those who not involved with voluntarism, when applying both Fisher Exact Test (p=.542) and Pearson s x 2 (p=.574) (Table 2). Moreover, as shown in table 3, independent t- test did not provide statistically significant differentiation for happiness among the two groups (p=.57). Table 2.Group Comparisons among Volunteers and Non Volunteers concerning Altruism and Happiness by both Fisher Exact Test and Pearson s x 2 Altruism (3 groups) Voluntarism Volunteers N=63 (00.0%) Non Volunteers N=58 (00.0%) >=-<=5 3 (4.7) 3 (5.) >=6-<=25 0(5.9) 23 (39.7) >=26-<=35 50 (79.4) 32 (55.2) Differences p-value Fisher's Exact Test =9.85 p=.006 Altruism (2groups) X 2 P=0.284, p=594 >=-<5 3(4.8) 3 (5.2) >=6-<=35 60 (95.2) 55 (94.8) Happiness (3 groups) >=4-<=2 3 (4.8) (.7) >=3-<=22 52(82.5) 52 (89.7) >=23-<=32 8 (2.7) 5 (8.6) Happiness (2 groups) >=4-<2 3(4.8) (.7) >=3-<=35 60 (95.2) 57(98.3) Fisher's Exact Test =2.35 p=.542 X 2 P=0.384, p=0.574 Narcissism Significant differences between the two groups were observed for narcissistic personality traits (p=.02) when compared using the independent t- test, as presented in table 3. Family environment The results of the present study did not provide dysfunctional family environment of volunteers in general. Significant differences between the two groups were observed only for Moral-Religious Emphasis (p=.027), when compared using the independent t- test (Table 3). 38

Table 3. Comparison of psychometric variables between volunteers and non volunteers. Voluntarism Non Volunteers Volunteers N=63 (00.0%) N=58 (00.0%) Total N=2 (00.0%) Differences* Scores of variables Mean (S.D.) Mean (S.D.) Mean (S.D.) p-value Altruism 29.02 ± 4.90 25.38 ± 5.80 27.26 ± 5.64 P =.000 SHS** 7.76 ± 3.80 8.7 ± 3.06 7.96 ± 3.46 P =.57 N.P.I*** 5.94 ± 4.32 8.38 ± 6.5 7. ± 5.39 P =.02 Cohesion 6.83 ± 2.2 6.6 ± 2.4 6.50 ± 2.28 P =.07 Expressiveness 5.6 ±.65 5.22 ± 2. 5.9 ±.88 P =.849 Conflict 2.33 ± 2.8 2.67 ± 2.26 2.50 ± 2.22 P =.404 Independence 5.73 ±.69 5.78 ± 2.5 5.75 ±.92 P =.897 Achievement Orientation 6.05 ±.57 6.03 ±.73 6.04 ±.64 P =.965 Intellectual - Cultural Orientation 6.08 ± 2.30 5.43 ± 2.28 5.77 ± 2.30 P =.23 Active-Recreational Orientation 5.08 ± 2.39 4.93 ± 2.38 5.0 ± 2.37 P =.733 Moral-Religious Emphasis 4.62 ± 2.2 3.74 ± 2.8 4.20 ± 2.9 P =.027 Organization 5.78 ±.93 5.22 ±.75 5.5 ±.86 P =.03 Control 4.65 ±.55 4.57 ±.69 4.6 ±.62 P =.783 Family Incongruence Score 52.30 ± 0.22 49.76 ± 9.99 5.08 ± 0.5 P =.70 *Means and standard deviations with t tests differences **SHS= Subjective Happiness Scale ***NPI = Narcissistic Personality Inventory Correlations with all variables tested for both groups Furthermore we examine zero order correlations for all variables for the two groups and the total sample. As shown in table 4 altruism was found to be significantly related to age (p<.05), while narcissism, moral religious emphasis and total FES were found to be significantly correlated with altruism (p<.05, p<.0, p 00), as tested by Pearson r for two groups (see table 4, 5). Table 4. Correlations among variables in volunteers group VARIABLES Variables Age Gender Altruism Age VOLUNTEERS (N=63) Happines s Narcissis m Moral Religious Emphasis Family Incongruenc e Score Gender.38 Altruism.283*.32 Happiness -.22 -.035.23 Narcissism -.273* -.29 -.367**.055 Moral Religious.68 -.6.40***.088 -.20 Emphasis Family Incongruence Score.246ms.059.468***.223ms -.23ms.639*** * p<0,05, **p<0,0,***p 0,00, MS (Mat.b.ginally significant)(0,05<p<0,0) 39

VARIABLES Table 5. Correlations among variables in non-volunteers group NON VOLUNTEERS (N=58) Variables Age Gender Altruism Happines s Narcissis m Moral Religious Emphasis Family Incongruenc e Score Age Gender.38 Altruism -.322*.48 Happiness -.069 -.250ms Narcissism -.26* -.295*.009 -.49.206 Moral Religious -448*** 68.289*. -.28 Emphasis Family Incongruence Score -.98 -.085.276*.340** -.077.44*** * p<0,05,**p<0,0, ***p 0,00, MS (Mat.b.ginally significant)(0,05<p<0,0) DISCUSSION The correlations of both altruism and narcissism with the variables of the other questionnaires presented strong associations (statistically significant and very significant) both for the whole sample and the two groups. In the volunteers group, altruism, narcissism, happiness and religiousness are correlated with demographic factors, without being dependant features of this group regarding age, sex, educational level and so on. The mean score of altruism (AS) for the volunteers and non volunteers group was respectively 29.02 ± 4.90 and 25.38 ± 5.80. These results support our initial hypothesis that volunteers would present high levels of altruism and in relation with the non volunteers, higher. Altruism is directly associated with voluntary behavior, since it is consistent with the evolutionary theory as well as with the tendency to help others, through the adaptive value, contributing to the survival of our genes, especially when it is likely that others will reciprocate the help in the future (Einolf, 2009; Sotiropoulos, 2004; Muller, 2000). The mean score of subjective happiness (SHS) for the group of individuals who engage in volunteerism and the individuals, who do not, was respectively 7.76 ± 3.80 and 8.7 ± 3.06. The mean normal score of subjective happiness in the Greek population is 7.85±4.98 (Lyrakos, Dragioti & Kostopanagiotou, 200). From the results of the present study the high levels of subjective happiness, as measured by the questionnaire of subjective happiness of Lyubomirksy & Leeper (999), are not highlighted. The above finding, consequently, is not in agreement with the results of previous quantitative studies, which regard that the value of a volunteer lies in the prerequisite of the individual s participation in citizenship (Voutsakis, 2004) and enjoy a psychological benefit, since they can acquire self-esteem, more energy, less 40 possibilities of being depressed and less resistance towards ageing, conditions which are consistent with a happy and fulfilled life (Starnes & Wymer 200; Gidron, 983; Cacioppo & Gardner 993). It seems that happiness is a phenomenon associated with many parameters, beyond the expression of the internal world and therefore being quite difficult to interpret. The mean score of narcissism (NPI) for the volunteers and non volunteers group was respectively 5.94 ± 4.32 and 8.38 ± 6.5. These results support our initial hypothesis that volunteers would present low levels of narcissism and less in relation with the non volunteers. The above finding is consistent with the results of previous studies, from which in narcissism the role of aggression expressed as underestimation towards others with the consequence of the disturbance of relationships has been recognized (Kernberg, 2008; Kernberg, 975). Besides, voluntary activities contain a lot of commitment and a significant personal cost (Omoto & Snyder, 995), which presupposes offering of our narcissistic self to the others (Benabou & Tirole, 2004). Finally, the mean of the total score of the Family Environment Scale for the individuals in the volunteers group was 52.30 ± 0.22, while for the non volunteers group the mean score was 49.76 ± 9.99. These results support our initial hypothesis that the volunteers would not differ by much in the total score of the Family Environment Scale from the non volunteers. From the results of the present study, the high levels of morality and religiousness emphasis in the family environment subscale are highlighted, while there are no significant differences in the other dimensions of the family system, as measured with the corresponding scale Form R-FES (by Moos, R. 987; Moos, R. 990) for the volunteers. The above finding is consistent with the ones of the study by Barnard and Corrales (979), in which the concept of the family boundaries is referred

to the procedures of together and separately which interact. It is also referred to which members participate in what and in which way this participation is realized. The boundaries enclose the spatial, temporal and emotional area of the relationships (Bernard & Corrales, 979), which through the religious emphasis, combined with volunteerism, promote the family, social cohesion and solidarity (Apostolidis & Papaspyropoulos, 2002).On the other hand, new research data show that religiousness is enhanced by certain genes and also through habits or prohibitions imposed by religions on certain members of families. Thus, by developing the religious dimension in its members, the family facilitates the internalization of the moral rules and values through the socialization mechanisms (Kokkinaki, 2006). Besides, volunteerism is communicated and cultivated to the members of a family through religious behaviors, which the family itself develops as a learning product (Johnson, 2006; Berger, 2006). CONCLUSIONS Regarding altruism, the levels in this group are high, while higher scores in the happiness dimension were not observed. Furthermore, for the volunteers we observed low levels of narcissism. As for religiousness, the individuals who engage in volunteerism present high levels, while in the other dimensions of family relationships they seem to function without any differences from the non volunteers. The results from the correlation of the variables per two of the present study come to enhance the results of other studies. In particular, the high correlations of the altruism subscale, as measured with the Providence Acceptance Scale (AS) by Ahmed & Jackson, and with the Narcissism Questionnaire (NPI) by Raskin & Hall, along with the religiousness emphasis subscale, as measured through the FES by Moos & Moss, seem to enhance the belief that the reasons why an individual engages in volunteerism may be purely altruistic, dative and deeply anthropocentric (Pearce, 983) and that the from the outset altruistic volunteers enjoy doing voluntary labour, for they receive the benefits of this experience (Starner & Wymer, 200). Finally, from the results of the present study, the relationship of the above personality traits with volunteerism are shown, a finding which enhances results, which have stressed that the sense of obligation towards a specific good cause, the feelings of social responsibility that the individual experiences or even the altruistic empathy towards the affected (Armato, 990) constitute the foundation of voluntary behavior. Moreover, several individuals engage in volunteerism so as to obtain social and psychological benefits (Bennett & Kottasz 2000; Bussell & Forbes 2002). Certainly, there are reasons which derive from egoistic motives that include the desire to acquire experience and education, the possibility for one to leave the family nest, to create new friendships along with having the ability to experience high self-esteem and a sense of belonging (Bennett & Kottasz, 2000). Since the above conclusions come from the results of the present research study and derive from a sample of volunteers in the provision of nursing services, it is understandable that there is a need to investigate the personality traits associated with volunteerism in other voluntary organizations of a different kind of social capital provision. The traits of altruism and religiousness constitute central issues in the frame of voluntary offer and thus, the need for the social bodies to wade more in impelling procedures for the moral and social rules through socialization emerges. By giving altruistic and religious motives to the future citizens, we create the so called civil society. We though regard the speculation for the volunteers psychosocial traits role as one of the most interesting fields, particularly for the health sciences, the study of which will essentially contribute to the emergence of the role of Volunteerism in the Primary Health Care. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the people who participated in this study, the Humanitarian NGO of the Hellenic Red Cross and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and insightful comments. REFERENCES. Ahmed, S. A. & Jackson D. N. (979). Psychographics for Social Policy Decisions: Welfare Assistance, Journal of Consumer research, 5:229-239. 2. Allen, N.S. & Rushton, S.P. (983). Personality characteristics of community Mental Health volunteers: A Review. Nonprofit and voluntary Sector Quarterly 2; 36. 3. Amato, P. (990). Personality and social network involvement as predictors of helping behaviour in everyday life. Social Psychology Quarterly 53(): 3 34. 4. Apostolidis, L., and S. Papaspyropoulos. (2002). The volunteering movement in Greece and the civil society. Athens: Greek Letters. 5. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2007). Voluntary Work, Australia (Catalogue no. 444.0) 6. Barnard, C.P. & Corrales, R.G. (979). The theory and techniques of family therapy. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. 7. Benabou, R. & Tirole, J. (2004). Incentives and Prosocial Behavior. Availiable in: ftp://ftp.iza.org/dps/dp695.pdf 8. Bennett, R., and Kottasz, R. (2000). Advertisement style and the recruitment of charity volunteers. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing 8(2):45 63. 9. Berger, I. E. (2006). The Influence of Relgion on Philanthorpy in Canada. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 7(2):5-32. 0. Bussell, H., and Forbes, D. (2002). Understanding the volunteer market: The what, where, who and why of volunteering. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing 7(3):244 257.. Cacioppo, J.T., & Gardner, W.L. (993). What underlies medical donor attitudes and behavior? Health Psychol. 2(4):269-7. 2. Cantensen, LL. (995). Evidence for a life-span theory of socioemotional selectivity. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 4, 5-56 3. Clary, E. G., Snyder, M., & Ridge, R. (992). Volunteers' Motivations: A Functional Strategy for the Recruitment, Placement, and Retention of Volunteers. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 2(4), 333-350. 4

4. Coccosis, M., Vaslamatzis. G., Anagnostopoulos, Ph. & Markidis, M. (998) The Narcissistic Personality Inventory: Psychometric properties of the Greek version. Psychiatriki, 9:9-33. 5. Dafermos, B. (2005) Social Statistics with SPSS. Thessaloniki: Ziti Publications. 6. Dávila de León, M.C. & Chacón Fuertes, F. (2007).Prediction of Longevity of Volunteer Service: A Basic Alternative Proposal. The Spanish Journal of Psychology,, 5-2. 7. Dolnicar, S. & Randle, M. (2007). What motivates which volunteers? Psychographic heterogeneity among volunteers in Australia. Voluntas, 8:35-55. 8. Einolf C. (2009). Does extensivity form part of the altruistic personality? An empirical test of Oliner and Oliner s theory. Social Science Research, 39:42 5. 9. Elshaug, C. & Metzer J. (200). Personality attributes of volunteers and paid workers engaged in similar occupational tasks. Journal of Social Psychology 4:752-763. 20. Emmons, R. A. (98) Relationship between narcissism and sensation seeking. Psychological Reports, 48:247 250. 2. Fritschie, R. (2009). Personality Traits and Motives for Volunteering of Volunteers vs Non-volunteers. Available in: http://www.dominican.edu/query/ncur/display_ncur.php? id=759 22. Funes, M.J. (999). Jovenes y accion voluntaria: la edad como factor condicionante en la acion participative. Est udios de jevuntud, 45(99):87-92 23. Gidron, B. (983). Sources of job satisfaction among service volunteers. Journal of Voluntary Action Research 2(): 20 35. 24. Holahan, C. J., Moos, R. H., Holahan, C. K. & Brennan, P. L. (997) Social context, coping strategies, and depressive symptoms: an expanded model with cardiac patients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72:98-928. 25. Holahan, C. J., Moos, R. H., Holahan, C. K. & Brennan, P. L.(995) Social support, coping, and depressive symptoms in a late-middle-aged sample of patients reporting cardiac illness. Health Psychology, 4:52-63. 26. Ioannidis, J. P. Α. (2000) Principles of Evidence-based medicine- Epidemiology-Public Health-Statistical Methods. Athens: Medical Publications Litsas. 27. Johnson, M.K. (2009). Religiosity and helping: do religious individuals volunteer more help to religious organizations than non-religious organizations? Baylor Electronically Accessible Research Documents 8(47):0Z. 28. Kernberg, O. (975) Borderline conditions and pathological narcissism. New York: Jason Aronson. 29. Kernberg, O. (2008) The destruction of time in pathological narcissism. The Ιinternational Journal of Psychoanalysis, 89:299-32. 30. Kokkinaki, F. (2006). Social Psychology. Dardanos: Athens. 3. Lyrakos, G.N. & Dragioti E & Kostopanagiotou P (200). Translation and validation of the subjective happiness scale in Greek population. Unpublished. 32. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. (999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation, Social Indicators Research, 46:37-55. 33. Matsa, K. (997) Comparative study of life events and psychological characteristics in family. Doctoral Thesis (submitted to the Medical School of University of Ioannina). 34. Moos, R. & Moos, B. (986) Family environment Scale Manual. Second Editions. Inc., CA: Consulting Psychologists press. 35. Moos, R. (990) Conceptual and empirical approaches to developing family - based assessment procedures: Resolving the case of the family environment scale. Family Process, 29:99-208. 36. Muller P. (2000). «L analyse cognitive des politiques, vers une sociologie politique de l action publique», Revue Française de Science Politique, 50: 20-23. 37. Omoto, A., and Snyder, M. (995). Sustained helping without obligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4):67 686. 38. Papageorgiou, D. (2009). Investigation of the attitudes of Greek Citizens against the Welfare State. Master Thesis (submitted to the Βiciness Administration of University of Macedonia). 39. Raskin, R. & Terry, H. (988) A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54:890-902. 40. Raskin, R. N. & Hall, C. S. (979) A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45:590. 4. Skordilis, E. K. & Stavrou, N. A. (2005) Sport orientation model for wheelchair basketball athletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 00:08-096. 42. Sotiropoulos D. (2004) Unknown Citizens Welfare State. Potamos: Athens. 43. SPSS Inc. (2005) SPSS Base 4.0 User s Guide. SPSS Inc.,: USA. http://www.spss.com 44. Starnes, B., and Wymer, W. (200). Demographics, personality traits, roles, motivations, and attrition rates of hospice volunteers. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing 7(2):6 76. 45. Voutsakis (2004). Volunteers and the State. In Sotiropoulos D. (2004). Unknown Citizens Welfare State. Potamos: Athens. 46. Lewig KA., Xantopoulou D., Bakker AB., Dollard MF., Metzer JC. (2007). Burnout and connectedness among Australian volunteers: A test of the Job Demands- Resources model. Journal Vocational Behaviour, 7:429-445. 47. Lodi-Smith J., & Roberts B.W. (2007). Social investment and personality: a meta-analysis of the relationship of personality traits to investment in work, family, religion and volunteerism. Pers Soc Psychol Rev ; 68-86. 48. Okun, M.A., & Schultz, A. (2003). Age and motives for volunteering: Testing hypotheses derived from socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 8(2):23-239. 49. Peloza, J., Hudson S., & Hassay D. (2009) The Marketing of Employee Volunteerism. Journal of Business Ethics, 85:37-386. 50. Piliavin, J.A. & Callero, P. (99). Giving blood: The development of an altruistic identity. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press. 5. Ross M W., Greenfield SA., Bennett L. (999). Predictors of dropout in AIDS volunteers. A longitudinal study. AIDS Care :723-732. 52. Zappala, G. (2000). How many people volunteer in Australia and why do they do it? The Smith Family Briefing Paper. 42