Email this article Gender Differences of Olympic Volunteer Participation in Post-Game Volunteer Practices
- Authors: Sukharkova M.P.1
-
Affiliations:
- National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow
- Issue: No 4(849) (2022)
- Pages: 150-158
- Section: Социологические науки
- URL: https://journal-vniispk.ru/2500-347X/article/view/361527
- ID: 361527
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
We will look at the differences between women and men in terms of motivation to participate in Olympic volunteering and their volunteering experience after Games. Based on the research materials (online survey (N = 332)), we will show that the motivation for participation in the practices of Olympic volunteering for women differs from that for men. Thus, women were more likely to work as volunteers for altruistic motives, while men were more likely to choose professional and selfish motives. Women have been less likely to take part in volunteering practices over the past year, but more often want to keep in touch with other volunteers.
About the authors
Marina Petrovna Sukharkova
National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow
Author for correspondence.
Email: msukharkova@hse.ru
Analyst, Laboratory for Interdisciplinary Studies in Non-Commercial Sector, Centre for Studies of Civil Society and the Nonprofit Sector
Russian FederationReferences
- Holmes K. et al. Developing the dimensions of tourism volunteering / K. Holmes, K. Smith, L. Lockstone-Binney, T. Baum // Leisure Sciences. 2010. Vol. 32. № 3. P. 255–269.
- Einolf C., Chambré S. Who volunteers? Constructing a hybrid theory // International journal of nonprofit and voluntary sector marketing. 2011. Vol. 16. № 4. P. 298–310.
- Mesch D., Brown M., Moore, A. Hayat. Gender differences in charitable giving // International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing. 2011. Vol. 16. P. 342–355.
- Rosenthal S., Feiring C., Lewis M. Political volunteering from late adolescence to young adulthood: Patterns and predictions // Journal Social Issues. 1998. Vol. 54. P. 471–493.
- Wymer W. The implications of sex differences on volunteer preferences // Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations. 2011. Vol. 22. P. 831–851.
- Maslanka H. Women volunteers at GMHC // Women and AIDS: Psychological perspectives: Gender & psychology series / C. Squire (Ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1993. P. 110–125.
- Trudeau K., Devlin A. College students and community service: Who, with whom, and why? // Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1996. Vol. 26. P. 1867–1888.
- Schlozman K., Burns N., Verba S. Gender and the pathways to participation: The role of resources // The Journal of Politics. 1994. Vol. 56. P. 963–990.
- Moreno A., Moragas M., Paniagua R. The evolution of volunteers at the Olympic Games. Paper presented at the Symposium on Volunteers, Global society and the Olympic movement, Lausanne. 1999.
- Minnaert L. An Olympic legacy for all? The non-infrastructural outcomes of the Olympic Games for socially excluded groups (Atlanta 1996–Beijing 2008) // Tourism Management. 2012. Vol. 33. №2. P. 361–370.
- Nichols G., Ralston R. Social inclusion through volunteering: The legacy potential of the 2012 Olympic Games // Sociology. 2011. № 45. P. 900–914.
- Putnam R. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American Community. New York, NY: Simon Schuster. 2000.
- Woolcock M. Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework // Theory and Society. 1998. Vol. 27. №2 P. 151–208.
- Granovetter M. The strength of weak ties. A network theory revisited // Sociological Theory. 1983. Vol. 1. № 2. P. 201–233.
- Danes S. M. et al. Family capital of family firms. Bridging human, social, and financial capital / S. M. Danes, K. Stafford, G. Haynes, S. S. Amarapurkar // Family Business Review. 2009. Vol. 22. № 3. P. 199–215.
- Welty Peachey J. et al. Examining social capital development among volunteers of a multinational sportfor-development event / J. Welty Peachey, J. Bruening, A. Lyras, A. Cohen, G. B. Cunningham // Journal of Sport Management. 2015. Vol. 29. №1. P. 27–41.
- Welty Peachey J., Cohen A., Borland J., Lyras A. Building social capital: Examining the impact of street soccer USA on its volunteers // International Review for the Sociology of Sport. 2013. Vol. 48. № 1. P. 20–37.
- Stukas A., Daly M., Cowling M. Volunteerism and social capital: A functional approach //Australian Journal on Volunteering. 2005. Vol. 10. № 2. P. 35–44.
- Homans G. Social behavior as exchange // American Journal of Sociology. 1958. Vol. 63. № 6. P. 597–606.
- Newton K. Trust, social capital, civil society, and democracy // International Political Science Review. 2001. Vol. 22. № 2. P. 201–214.
- Khoo S., Engelhorn R. Volunteer motivations at a national Special Olympics events // Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly. 2011. Vol. 28. P. 27–39.
- Bates P., Davis F. A. Social capital, social inclusion and services for people with learning disabilities // Disability & Society. 2004. Vol. 19. № 3. P. 195–207.
Supplementary files
