The Big Five and prosocial personality aspects

The Big Five and prosocial personality aspects Zdeněk Mlčák University of Ostrava, Czech Republic zdenek.mlcak@osu.cz Abstract: The paper resumes research findings of the five-factor model of personality, aspects of prosocial behavior and empathic tendencies in a sample of high school and university students (N = 1454) in contexts of gender, study orientation and volunteering experience. It has been found that female students show higher levels of neuroticism, agreeableness, altruism and empathy tendencies and lower level of public behavior than male students. Helping professions respondents demonstrate higher levels of openness to experience, anonymous behavior, altruism, behavior in crisis, empathic concern and perspective taking than respondents in technical and economic professions. Respondents with volunteering experience demonstrate higher levels of extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, anonymous behavior, emotional behavior, behavior in crisis, empathic concern, perspective taking, empathic fantasy and lower level of personal distress than respondents without this experience. It has been simultaneously found that the dimensions of five-factor model reflect prosocial and empathic tendencies latently and diffusionally. Keywords: five-factor model of personality, empathic tendencies, volunteering. I. PREFACE The aim of this paper is to present statistically significant variances in dimensions of the fivefactor personality model and prosocial behavior and empathic tendencies in contexts of gender, field of study and volunteering experience, obtained from a sample of high school and university respondents. At the same time it focuses on exploration of statistical proximity in relations between constituent dimensions of the five-factor personality model and prosocial and empathic tendencies in personality. II. THEORETICAL FOUNDATION This paper s theoretical and methodological basis consists of existing knowledge related to the psychological field of the five-factor personality model, prosocial tendencies and empathic tendencies in the phenomenon of volunteerism. A) Five-factor personality model (Costa, McCree, 1996) employs a dispositional viewpoint for structuring personality. Factors are understood as relatively stable, inborn and individually differentiated dispositions for varied ways of behavior. 1) Neuroticism (N) examines the level of adaptability or emotional instability. It distinguishes between individuals prone to psychic exhaustion and unrealistic ideals and individuals who are emotionally stable and resilient to psychic exhaustion. 2) Extraversion (E) reflects the quality and quantity of interpersonal interactions, need of stimulation and activation level. 3) Openness to experience (O) measures the tendency to seek new experiences and to uncover and tolerate the unknown. 4) Agreeableness (A) examines the quality of interpersonal orientation on a compassionhostility continuum manifested in thoughts, emotions and actions. 5) Conscientiousness (C) measures the level of motivation, endurance and organization of 11

goal-oriented behavior and distinguishes between reliable self-demanding individuals and those indifferent and negligent. B) Prosocial behavior can be defined as voluntary behavior oriented towards the benefit of others (Eisenberg, Fabes, Spinrad, 2006, p. 646). According to G. Carl and B. A. Randall (2002), this behavior sources from six prosocial tendencies. 1) Altruistic (AL) involves voluntary helping primarily motivated by concern for needs and benefit of another individual, often evoked by compassion and internalized moral norms or principles. 2) Compliant (CO) means helping others as a reaction to their verbal or nonverbal request. 3) Emotional (EM) is aimed towards helping others in emotionally intensive situational conditions (e.g. certain person s painful injury). 4) Public (PU) represents behavior in presence of an audience and is probably at least partially motivated by desire to gain other people s acceptance and respect. 5) Anonymous (AN) means that kind of helping in which the one being helped is unknown to the helping individual. 6) Dire (DI) means helping people caught in crisis or other type of emergent situation (e.g. in frustration or stress). C) M. H. Davis s (1980, 1983, 1996) multidimensional approach regards empathy as an individual s response to other person s observed experiencing and emerges from four empathic tendencies. 1) Empathic concern (EC) measures the tendency to experience warmth, compassion, sympathy and concern for other people who found themselves in unfavourable conditions; 2) Perspective taking (PT) diagnoses the tendency to accept someone else s viewpoint and is based on non-egocentric way of thinking and an effort to adjust one s psychological outlook on other individuals in everyday life; 3) Personal distress (PD) measures the tendency to experience feelings of anxiety, unease and discomfort orientated towards the individual when perceiving other people caught in acute and emergency situations. 4) Fantasy (FS) enables an evaluation of the tendency to shift oneself imaginatively into feelings and actions of fictional characters in books, games and movies, and realizing their situation. D) Volunteerism can be defined (see, e.g., Omoto, Snyder, 1995; Penner 2002) as long-term, voluntarily chosen and planned prosocial behavior orientated towards the benefit of other people, social groups or communities, or improving their well-being, performed from nonmaterial motives and within an organizational context. According a dispositional approach it is connected with the term of altruistic personality (see Rushton, 1981; Batson, 1991) which demonstrates a tendency to help others selflessly. Such a personality is characterized with a higher degree of moral value acceptation, social responsibility and a higher level of emotional and cognitive empathy. Altruism seems to be the most significant predictor of volunteerism (see, e.g., Penner, Finkelstein, 1998; Mowen, Sujan, 2005). Willingness to become a volunteer, duration of volunteering and amount of hours worked are connected to dispositions constituting a prosocial personality. According to L. A. Panner and his colleagues (Penner et al., 1995; 2005; Penner, 2002) they include other oriented empathy linked with cognitive and emotional aspects of personality and helpfulness reflecting rather its behavioral aspect. Volunteerism is connected with additional aspects of personality such as prosocial attitudes and social responsibility. 12

III. RESEARCH GOALS, METHODS AND SAMPLES OF RESPONDENTS Research goals were focused on gaining evidence proving the existence of statistically significant variances in personality dimensions, level of prosocial dispositions and emphatic tendencies in regard to gender, field of study and prosocial and empathic tendencies. Results gained by utilizing following four diagnostic method were used for reaching these goals. 1) NEO Five-factory inventory (NEO FFI) P.T. Costa, R. R.McCree (1989). 2) PTM Prosocial Tendencies Measure G. Carlo a B. A. Randall (2002). 5) IRI Interpersonal Index Reactivity M. H. Davis (1980, 1983, 1996). 4) MCSDS Marlow-Crown Social Desirability Scale D. P. Crown a D. Marlow (1960). The research sample consisted of 1454 high school and university students. Their age ranged from 15 to 22. It involved respondents from 5 high schools and from the first three grades of University of Ostrava and VŠB Technical University of Ostrava. Structure of the research sample is shown in Table 1. Tab. 1: Structure of the sample of respondents Variable Variable degree Absolute frequency Relative frequency Gender Male 402 27,6 Female 1052 72,4 Field of study Helping professions 718 49,5 Technical and economic fields 736 50,6 Volunteering experience No 887 61,0 Yes 567 39,0 Student High school 514 35,4 University 940 64,6 Total 1454 100,0 IV. RESEARCH GOALS, METHODS AND SAMPLES OF RESPONDENTS Attributive variables include gender, field of study and volunteering experience, dependent variables are represented by scores utilized by four diagnostic methods. In terms of statistical analysis, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was utilized and the most important data were extracted. Table 2 shows data concerning gender. Female students show statistically higher levels of neuroticism, agreeableness, altruistic behavior, empathic concern, perspective taking, personal distress and empathic fantasy compared to male students. Their level of public helping is lower. 13

Tab. 2: MANOVA for gender Female students N = 1052 Male students N = 402 Variable M SD M SD Neuroticism (N) 24,36 7,53 20,73 7,66 Agreeableness (A) 30,95 5,54 29,44 5,87 Public (PU) 6, 30 2,32 7,52 2,57 Altruistic (AL) 21,41 2,89 20,01 3,27 Empathic concern (EC) 17,41 3,44 15,47 3,58 Perspective taking (PT) 16,78 4,28 15,79 4,42 Personal distress (PD) 14,30 4,34 11,23 4,80 Fantasy (FS) 15,35 5,67 12,85 6,01 Variable SS DF MS F Sig. Neuroticism (N) 3127,02 1 3127,02 54,53 0,001 Agreeableness (A) 579,32 1 579,32 18,45 0,001 Public (PU) 189,928 1 189,928 34,709 0,000 Altruistic (AL) 225,101 1 225,101 24,647 0,000 Empathic concern (EC) 699,19 1 699,19 59,96 0,001 Perspective taking (PT) 124,77 1 124,77 7,03 0,008 Personal distres (PD) 2383,51 1 2383,51 119,72 0,001 Fantasy (FS) 1195,99 1 1195,99 36,40 0,001 Legend for Tab. 2 and subsequent tables: N = number of respondents, M = arithmetic mean, SD = standard deviation, SS = sum of squares, DF = degree of freedom, MS = mean square, F = proportion of variances between groups and in groups, Sig = level of statistical significance. Table 3 shows data concerning field of study. Respondents in helping fields show statistically higher levels of openness to experience, anonymous behavior, altruistic behavior, dire behavior, empathic concern and perspective taking compared to students in technical and economic fields. Tab. 3: MANOVA for field of study Helping professions N = 718 Control sample N = 736 Variable M SD M SD Oppeness to experience (O) 27,59 6,26 25,45 5,86 Anonymous (AN) 11,51 4,71 10,57 4,15 Altruistic AL) 21,42 2,91 20,43 3,20 Dire (DI) 9,48 2,56 8,50 2,70 Empathic concern (EC) 17,61 3,44 16,15 3,57 Perspective taking (PT) 17,34 4,24 15,69 4,28 14

Variable SS DF MS F Sig. Oppeness to experience (O) 645,26 1 645,26 18,12 0,001 Anonymous (AN) 118,015 1 118,015 6,017 0,014 Altruistic AL) 59,151 1 59,151 6,477 0,011 Dire (DI) 102,014 1 102,014 15,002 0,000 Empathic concern (EC) 120,89 1 120,89 10,37 0,001 Perspective taking (PT) 201,78 1 201,78 11,37 0,001 Table 4 presents data concerning volunteering experience. Students with volunteering experience reach higher levels of extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, anonymous behavior, emotional behavior, dire behavior, empathic concern, perspective taking, empathic fantasy and social desirability compared to students without such experience. Student with volunteering experience show a lower level of personal distress compared to students without volunteering experience. Tab. 4: MANOVA for volunteering experience Volunteering experience - YES N = 567 Volunteering experience - NO N = 887 Variable M SD M SD Extraversion (E) 33,98 7,15 32,80 7,26 Opennes to experience (O) 28,12 6,29 25,48 5,84 Conscientiousness (C) 31,00 7,03 29,82 6,62 Anonymous (AN) 11,59 4,81 10,61 4,12 Emotional (EM) 12,06 3,78 10,89 3,62 Dire (DI) 9,50 2,67 8,56 2.60 Empathic concern (EC) 17,56 3,61 16,43 3,50 Perspective taking (PT) 17,49 4,35 15,87 4,21 Personal distress (PD) 13,11 4,72) 13,67 4,72 Fantasy (FS) 16,17 5,77 14,11 5,75 Social desirability (SD) 19,46 4,71 18,46 4,93 15

Variable SS DF MS F Sig. Extraversion (E) 374,46 1 374,46 7,23 0,007 Oppennes to experience (O) 1430,28 1 1430,28 40,16 0,001 Conscientiousness (C) 254,05 1 254,05 5,56 0,019 Anonymous (AN) 81,235 1 81,235 4,142 0,042 Emotional (EM) 123,698 1 123,698 9,255 0,002 Dire (DI) 86,424 1 86,424 12,709 0,000 Empathic concern (EC) 86,58 1 86,58 7,42 0,007 Perspective taking (PT) 360,46 1 360,46 20,32 0,001 Personal distress (PD) 194,29 1 194,29 9,76 0,002 Fantasy (FS) 249,83 1 249,83 7,60 0,006 Social desirability (SD) 208,93 1 208,93 8,88 0,003 Table 5 presents data concerning an interaction between two independent variables gender and field of study. Results indicate that male students in helping professions show higher levels of extraversion and perspective taking compared to female students in the same field of study. However, female students show a higher level of agreeableness than male students. Tab. 5: MANOVA for the interaction between gender and field of study Female students in helping fields N = 283 Male students in helping fields N = 119 Variable M SD M SD Extraversion (E) 31,93 7,78 33,79 7,68 Agreeableness (A) 29,64 5,85 28,95 5,91 Perspective taking (PT) 15,63 4,35 17,78 4,60 Variable SS DF MS F Sig. Extraversion (E) 338,77 1 338,77 6,54 0,011 Agreeableness (A) 203,78 1 203,78 6,49 0,011 Perspective taking (PT) 81,08 1 81,08 4,57 0,033 Results for an interaction between another two independent variables gender and volunteering experience do not show any statistically significant variances in observed dependent variables, therefore they are not included. Results of an interaction between the two remaining independent variables field of study and volunteering experience are reported in Table 6. Both male and female students of the control sample with volunteering experience show higher level of conscientiousness. 16

Tab. 6: MANOVA for the interaction between field of study and volunteering experience Respondents of the control sample with volunteering experience N = 369 Respondents of the control sample without volunteering experience N = 349 Variable M SD M SD Conscientiousness (C) 30,77 7,27 30,32 6,31 Variable SS DF MS F Sig. Conscientiousness (C) 258,28 1 258,28 5,65 0,018 Results of an interaction between all three independent variables gender, field of study and volunteering experience do not indicate any statistically significant variances and therefore they are not presented in the study. The last table Table 7 shows selected results of correlation analysis between dimensions of the five-factor model, prosocial tendencies and empathic tendencies for the whole research sample consisting of high school and university students. Tab. 7: Selected results of correlation analysis between dimensions of the five-factor model and prosocial and empathic tendencies (N = 1454) Variable N E O P S Neuroticism (N) 1-0,387++ 0,040-0,115++ -0,170++ Extraversion (E) -0,387++ 1 0,020 0,068++ 0,196++ Openess to experience (O) 0,040 0,020 1 0,031 0,027 Agreeableness (A) -0,115++ 0,068++ 0,031 1 0,166++ Conscientiousness (C) -0,170++ 0,196++ 0,027 0,166++ 1 Anonymous (AN) 0,011-0,083++ 0,192++ 0,062 0,118++ Public (PU) -0,041 0,128++ -0,101++ -0,165++ -0,038 Altruism (AL) -0,059++ -0,046 0,150++ 0,181++ 0,035 Compliant (CO) 0,022 0,228++ 0,078++ 0,228++ 0,233++ Emotional (EM) 0,105++ 0,203++ 0,207++ 0,047 0,096++ Dire (DI) 0,026 0,261++ 0,179++ 0,048 0,161++ Empathic concern (EC) 0,266++ 0,064 0,262++ 0,243++ 0,090++ Perspective taking (PT) -0,053 0,109++ 0,336++ 0,287++ 0,222++ Personal distress (PD 0,599++ -0,304++ -0,059 0,013-0,185++ Fantasy (ES) 0,210 0,007 0,378++ 0,035-0,044 Legend for Tab. 7: ++ correlation is significant at 0,01 level of statistical significance 17

V. DISCUSSION It has been found (see Tab. 2) that female students demonstrate statistically higher levels of neuroticism, agreeableness, altruistic behavior, empathic concern, perspective taking, personal distress and empathic fantasy and a lower level of public behavior compared to male students. Female and male students did not differ in social desirability. These results reflect general gender differences. In case of empathic tendencies, however, professional literature has not so far come to an explanation (see overview in Hoffman, 1977; Lennon, Eisenberg, 1987), as it is not clear whether it expresses existing differences between women and men, or artifacts sourcing from different perception of one s sex and gender stereotypes and expectations. These results may also be a consequence of preconceptions applied in the self-report method for instance, empathy measuring via nonverbal and vocal manifestations or even physiological measurements have not proven analogous differences between males and females (in detail, see Mlčák, 2009). The fact that female students regardless of their field of study and volunteering experience demonstrate a statistically lower level of public behavior and a higher level of altruistic behavior compared to male students also reflects gender roles of men and women. Higher level of altruism found in female students is possibly connected to the fact that the female role contains norms which activate rather more intimate, emotional and responsible forms of prosocial behavior (e.g. caring for close relatives) based both on a higher level of empathy and a higher readiness to sacrifice oneself. In contrast, a higher level of public behavior in male students may be linked to the heroic form of prosocial behavior, as males like to risk publicly in presence of audience (in details, see Eagly, Crowly, 1986). In terms of field of study it has been found (see Tab. 3) that regardless of their gender, students in helping professions reach higher levels of openness to experience, anonymous behavior, altruistic behavior, dire behavior, empathic concern and perspective taking compared to students in technical and economic professions. These results most likely reflect the fact of prosocially-oriented personality profiles of respondents in helping fields of study. The most interesting results have been reached in the subject of volunteering experience (see Tab. 4). Respondents with volunteering experience regardless of their gender or field of study show statistically higher levels of extraversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, anonymous behavior, emotional behavior, dire behavior, empathic concern, perspective taking, empathic fantasy and social desirability compared to respondents with no such experience. They also demonstrate a statistically lower level of personal distress. No difference has been found only in agreeableness, which is somewhat surprising. Concerning these results, volunteering experience seems to be a widely differencing factor in terms of the studied concepts. It is demonstrated that volunteering experience is even more differencing factor than field of study. Examination of the interaction between gender and field of study indicates (see Tab. 5) that male students in helping professions demonstrate higher levels of extraversion and perspective taking than female students. In contrast, female students in helping professions reach a higher level of agreeableness. Examination of the interaction between gender and volunteering experience did not show any statistically significant results. In terms of interaction between field of study and volunteering experience (see Tab. 6) it has been proven that both male and female students in the control sample with volunteering experience show a higher level of conscientiousness. Interactions between all the three attributive variables gender, field of study and volunteering experience were statistically insignificant. Selected results of correlation analysis between the five-factor model dimensions, prosocial tendencies and empathic tendencies show (see Tab. 7) that all dimensions of the five-factor model are thinly, yet in various degrees of significant statistical proximity intrinsically related 18

to prosocial and empathic tendencies. The first interpretatively interesting finding is a positive relation between the level of extraversion and tendencies to active behavior of individual in crisis and emotional situations. Another interesting finding is a positive relation between the level of openness and level of emotional and cognitive empathy (empathic concern and perspective taking). It seems that individuals with a higher level of openness to experience and also individuals with a higher level of conscientiousness can be characterized as more emotionally and cognitively empathizing into emergency situations of fellow humans than people with dispositions to personality introversion. Conscientiousness seems to be a dimension of the five-factor model of personality that is related to prosocial and empathic tendencies the least. Results allow us to propose that individual dimensions of the five-factor model reflect latently and difussionally prosocial and empathic personality tendencies. Presented results are generally consistent with some findings, yet contradicting some others. For instance, G. Carlo and his colleagues (Carlo, Okun, Knight, de Guzman, 2005) found in sample of over 800 high school students that volunteerism is related to all dimensions of the five-factor model of personality except neuroticism. The most significant relation was found between volunteerism and agreeableness, then extraversion, followed by conscientiousness and openness to experience. R.B. Kosek (1995) detected relation between volunteerism and agreeableness and openness to experience. G. Elshaug and J. Metzer (2001) found a significant relation between volunteerism and extraversion and agreeableness. Connection between volunteerism and agreeableness and extraversion has been consistently proven in number of additional studies. A. M. Omoto and M. Snyder (1995) even consider the combination of extraversion and agreeableness to be a general disposition to helping. G. Carlo and his colleagues assume (Carlo et al., 2005) thatthe influence of these personal dispositions on volunteering activity can be direct or mediated through other motives (attitudes, values, goals etc.). In contrast to mentioned authors, results of presented study have not proven any differences in dimension of agreeableness between respondents with volunteering experiences and without any. Other findings are analogous to the mentioned ones. This fact may be explained by a non-homogenous nature of the research sample of respondents. Not only the length of their volunteering experience differed, but also character of their volunteering activities did. For instance, respondents working with children or handicapped people were included in the same research sample as individuals helping in situations of floods or voluntary fire-department members. VI. CONCLUSION Results of the study point out the significance of volunteering experience which is closely related to personal differences between respondents having this experience and those with no such experience so far. Findings suggest that volunteering experience is rather minorly related to respondents gender and field of study. Simultaneously it has been found that the fivefactor model of personality latently and from the viewpoint of individual dimensions also somewhat difussionally reflect the most important prosocial and empathic personality tendencies. Results do not infer a direct circular causality between volunteering experience and dimensions of personality. There is a likely possibility particularly in long-term evolutionary-psychological view that prosocial behavior gradually creates a certain configuration of personality dimensions and reversely, that a certain configuration of personal attributes leads more often to prosocial behavior including volunteering activities. Results of the study support a growing belief of some prominent contemporary authors who assume that not only situational factors, but also personal dispositions play role in the 19

formation of specific forms of prosocial behavior. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper is an outcome of GA ČR project no. P407/11/0380 Prosocial behaviour and its personality aspects in the context of volunteering. REFERENCES [1] ALLEN, N.J., RUSHTON, J.P., 1983. Personality characteristics of community mental health volunteers: A review. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 12, pp. 36 49. [2] BATSON, C.D., 1991. The altruism question: Toward a socialpsychological answer. Hilsdale: NJ: Lawrence Erbaum Associates. [3] HOFFMAN, M.L., 1977. Personality and social development. Annual Review of Psychology, 28, pp. 295 321. [4] MCCRAE, R.R., COSTA, P.T. 1996. Toward a new generation of personality theories: Theoretical context for the five-factor model. In: J.S.Wiggins, ed. The five-factor model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York: Guilford Press, 1996, s. 51 87. [5] CARLO, G., RANDALL, B.A., 2002. The development of a measure of prosocial behaviors for late adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31, pp. 31 44. [6] CARLO, G., OKUN, M. A., KNIGHT, G.P., DE GUZMAN, M.R., 2005. The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion, and prosocial value motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, pp. 1293 1305. [7] CLARY, E. G. SNYDER, M., RIDGE, R. D. et al., 1998. Understanding and assesing the motivation of Volunteers: A functional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, pp. 1516 1530. [8] COSTA, P.T., MCCREE, R.R. 1989. The NEO-PI/NEO FFI manual supplement. Odessa: Psychological Assesment Resources. [9] DAVIS, M.H., 1983. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for multidimensional aproach. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 44, pp. 115 126. [10] DAVIS, M.H., 1996. Empathy: A social psychological approach. Boulder: Westview Press. [11] DAVIS, M.H., HULL, J., YOUNG, R., WAREN, G. 1987. Emotional reactions to dramatic film stimuli: The influence of cognitive and emotional empathy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, pp. 113 126. [12] EAGLY, A.H., CROWLY, M. 1986. Gender and helping behavior : A metaanalysis review of the social psychological literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100, pp. 282 208. [13] EISENBERG, N., FABES, R.A, SPINRAD, T.L. 2006. Prosocial development. In: W. Damon, R. Lerner, N. Eisenberg, eds. Handbook of Child Psychology. 6th. edition. Vol. 3. Social, Emotional and Personality Development. New York: J. Wiley, pp. 646 718. [14] ELSHAUG, C., METZER, J. 2001. Personality attributes of volunteers and paid workers engaged in similar occupational tasks.journal of Social Psychology, 141, pp. 752 763. [15] HŘEBÍČKOVÁ, M., URBÁNEK, T., 2001. NEO pětifaktorový osobnostní inventář (podle NEO Five- Factor Inventory P. T. Costy a R. R. McCraee). Praha: Testcentrum. [16] KOSEK, R.B., 1995. Measuring prosocial behaviors of college students. Psychological Reports, 1995, 77, pp. 739 742. [17] LENNON, R., EISENBERG, N., 1987.Gender and age differences in empathy and sympathy. In: N. Eisenberg, ed. Empathy and its development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195 217. [18] MLČÁK, Z., 2010. Prosociální chování v kontextu dispozičních aspektů osobnosti. Ostrava: Ostravská univerzita v Ostravě, Filozofická fakulta. [19] MOWEN, J.C., SUJAN, H., 2005.Volunteer behavior: A hierarchical model approach for invenstiganting its trait and functional motive antecedents. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, pp. 170 182. 20

[20] OMOTO, A. M., SNYDER, M., 1995. Sustained helping without oligation: Motivation, longevity of service, and perceived attitude change among AIDS volunteers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, pp. 671 686. [21] PENNER, L.A., 2002. Dispositional and organizational influences on sustained volunteerism: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 58, pp. 447 467. [22] PENNER, L.A., DOVIDIO, J.F., PILIAVIN, J.A., 2005. Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, pp. 365 292. [23] PENNER, L.A., FINKELSTEIN, M.A., 1998. Dispositional and structural determinants of volunteerism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, pp. 525 537. [24] RUSHTON, J.P., 1981. The altruistic personality. In: J.P. Rushton, P.M. Sorrentino, eds. Altruism and helping behavior : Social, personality, and developmental perspectives. Hillsdale: NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 251 266. [25] ZÁŠKODNÁ, H., MLČÁK, Z., 2009. Osobnostní aspekty prosociálního chování a empatie. Praha: TRITON, pp. 99 148. 21