The Use Of The Rasch Irt Model In Constructing A Measure Of Predisposition To Help Among Filipino And Chinese-filipino Firefighters

Running Head: Predisposition to Help

The Use of the Rasch IRT Model in Constructing a Measure of Predisposition to Help among Filipino and Chinese-Filipino Firefighters

Carlo Magno De La Salle University

Further correspondence can be addressed to Mr. Carlo Magno at [email protected], Center for Learning Performance and Assessment, De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde.

Predisposition to Help

2

Abstract The study constructed a measure of predisposition to help for Filipino and ChineseFilipino firefighters. Initial subscales of the measure was proposed using Filipino psychology models and after conducting an initial exploratory factor analysis, five factors were extracted: pagkabayani (heroism), pakikiramdam (sensitivity), makapamilya (relational kinship), utang-na-loob (reciprocity), and pananagutan (social justice). Further exploratory factor analysis (EFA) maintained the content of the factors but four factors were only formed where pakikiramdam was not included. The test achieved a high reliability of .93 using cronbach’s alpha and for the factors, an alpha coefficient of .87, .93, .91, 84, and .72, respectively, were obtained. The test also showed convergent validity where the five factors are all significant and highly correlated with each other and their proximity using Joining Tree Clustering. Discriminant validity was also conducted where the subscale on pagkabayani was able to discriminate between Filipino and Chinese-Filipino firefighters. The Rasch model was used to calibrate the items on the extreme scores obtained. Based on the item mapping, 42 items resulted to be centered on the standard error. The items that were calibrated were consistent in the results of the varimax rotation of the EFA where high factor loadings were obtained.

Predisposition to Help

3

The Use of the Rasch IRT Model in the Constructing a Measure of Predisposition to Help among Filipino and Chinese Filipino Firefighters The most dangerous acts of helping people happen in the firefighting world. It is common that firemen who were trapped and died in situations to save people who needed help, or the local firefighters in communities doing everything they can to the point of endangering their own safety just to save others. Reasons for doing these acts are often very vague and are always assumed that they are just good people offering to lend a hand. The real causes leading to helping are almost always never questioned. Oftentimes, it is speculated that these acts are actually that of altruism or something else. One characteristic that interestingly manifesting among firefighters is their predisposition to help. Firefighters vary in their helping behavior based on individual differences. Such as in the survey of Go, So, and Uy (2004), they found a significant difference among Filipino and Chinese Filipino firefighter on few subscales of their measure of altruism. The measure in their study failed to discriminate certain critical characteristics of helping such as egoism, social justice kin selection, reciprocal helping, and social responsibility because their subscales reflect altruism in a very western point of view. Even the concept of altruism is very western since it is explained by models that do not reflect Filipino behavior of helping. Most commonly altruistic behavior is explained by foreign models such as the social exchange theory, relational theory and social norms theory (Aronson et al., 1999; Harrison, 1976; Brehm et al., 1999), which are typically western explanations of helping. For the Filipinos, the value of helping is close to the altruism behavior of the westerners. There is a need to contextualize predisposition to help among the Filipinos since they have a different way of manifesting this

Predisposition to Help

4

characteristic. One of the advancement that this study purports to contribute in the existing psychometric measures in the Philippines is a construction of a measure of predisposition to help that is appropriate for Filipino and Chinese-Filipino firefighters. The measure is composed of factors derived from studies on Filipino psychology. The items were analyzed applying the item response theory using the two-parameter Rasch Model. Content, convergent, and discriminant, validity as well as joining tree analysis and exploratory factor analyses are used to establish the factor structure of the proposed measure. Firefighting in the Philippines In the Philippines, there are government employed and volunteer Chinese-Filipino and Filipinos varieties of firefighters. This interesting combination had a long history, which started as life in the Philippines became urbanized. As the country is slowly developing, the need for basic government services became a necessity, aside from the policemen and the military, firefighters were also important to ensure public safety. Eventually, the Filipino government hired local Filipinos to serve as firefighters. During the 60’s and 70’s the frequent occurrence of unexpected fire events triggered the formation of volunteer fire brigades, originally created to help fellow Filipino-Chinese from fires and other disasters. From the 1960’s to the 1970’s, groups of civic-minded Filipino-Chinese established their own fire prevention associations, usually segregated only by geographic location. Since then, the volunteer brigades improved, its members started becoming more proficient in firefighting and rescue operations, upgrading their skills and capabilities through self-education, training and actual experience (Volunteer Brigades, n.d.). Eventually, Filipinos also started volunteering for these brigades, that

Predisposition to Help

5

presently, there is a good mixture of Filipino-Chinese and Filipinos in volunteer brigades around the country. Volunteer firefighters are ordinary people who are willing to give a portion of their time to the community. They are not getting paid for it and most of them are required to buy their own gears and gadgets. Their equipments are donated and they have to raise money or use their own in order to buy new ones (Brevern, 1988). Filipino Constructs of Helping Based on existing values present in Philippine society, a number of hypothetical factors can be arrived at and can be used as possible factors of predispositions to help between Filipino and Chinese-Filipino firefighters. Moreover, the study came up with specific behavioral manifestations of helping that can be used by firemen in measuring their predisposition to help. The several hypothetical predisposition factors of helping are also studied in line with the context of factors taken from social exchange, kin selection, and social norms theory that are western in nature and established. The factors derived in the present study is based on what is present in the culture and of Filipino psychology taking into consideration its western counterparts to establish a more solid basis for the study. Helping Helping is explained in a three-part process. First, the potential aide has to perceive the help seeker to be “trapped” in an emergency situation and could not possibly solve the whole situation. Next is for the aid to view himself as having the ability to provide assistance to the victim. Lastly, if the aide happens to have a lot of helping options to choose from, he or she has to make a decision on which one to use (Valentine & Ehrlichman, 1979).

Predisposition to Help

6

Helping is also manifested due to intrinsic reasons and neither because of rewards being offered nor of some threat imposed on the person if he or she did not do a certain task. This kind of intrinsic motivation could be due to avoidance of feeling some guilt for not doing something or for the sake of increasing one’s self-esteem. This was shown in an experiment done on chimpanzees, which illustrated that without the help of external rewards, the intrinsic behavior could be motivated, through sharing. On the other hand, experiments were also conducted on humans and the results showed that they are likely to become helpful when they are able to put themselves on the shoes of other people. Thus, they would also view themselves as being helped whenever they are put into that same problematic situation (Corsini, 1994). Another possible cause for a person to become helpful towards others is when he witnessed a person voluntarily helping another person. Thus, this would reinforce his or her likelihood to offer help to those who are in need. Aside from exhibiting one’s volunteerism to lend a hand due to imitation, helping would also be elicited if a person has already experienced the problem of the victim. Since he or she already has full knowledge of the problem at hand and thus, knows, more or less, how to surpass the problematic situation (Corsini, 1994). In the Philippine context, helping is known as “pagtulong.” The Filipino people were known for being helpful people because of their values. According to Andres & Ilada-Andres (1986), the Filipino people are naturally born to be tender and loving, companion oriented, sympathetic or kindhearted, “utang-na-loob” oriented, bayanioriented, hospitable, “makatao” and harmony-oriented. They are said to be tender and loving because they are overprotective to those people who are close to their heart. This

Predisposition to Help

7

is very evident with their family. Their children are always given curfews whenever they are going out with their friends. And as much as possible they would not want any of their close friends or relatives to get hurt either in accidents or calamities. They would worry a lot and eventually resort to finding ways on how they could help them. Filipinos are companion oriented. This portrays the Filipino people as social beings. They like to be around with people; they tend to feel less complete whenever they are alone. Thus, this gave rise to the concept of “kadamay” where if one of their friends has a problem, they would be there to keep them company and help them go through the hardship. Filipinos are sympathetic or kindhearted. This made them compassionate people and made them have the group-sharing kind of thinking where they become affected with the sad situation that their “kapwa-Pilipino” is feeling. Thus, they end up siding more with the people who are victimized in a certain situation rather than those who are not. This is the result of the “pakikisama” concept of the Filipino people. They tend to put themselves in the situation of others and therefore, will result to actions of helping these victims to the point that even if the victims did something wrong the Filipinos would still help the victims (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). Given all these personality traits and values that explains why Filipinos are “matulungin”, there are still other factors explained in studies conducted using western samples in explaining why an individual is willing to help others with or without motives. Based on what many researchers in social psychology have argued, most of the time, these aiding behaviors involves several factors that could affect them or that could cause them, which can also vary from person to person (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 1999).

Predisposition to Help

8

On the other hand, based on the Filipino context, helping behavior is also very evident. But this is usually associated with the kinship structure or relationship, which is a value that Filipino people give a lot of importance to (Aganon & David, 1985). In an article by Aganon and David (1985), it has been stated that the Filipino children learn to become helpful at an early age due to the reason that they have been brought up to give importance and to show their respects to their nuclear-family members by means of helping out in the farm work. In the early times agriculture is the means of livelihood of the Filipino people. Even if they are not being paid by their parents to do the farm works, they still help out willingly. Aside from the nuclear-family, this kinship relationship also extends to include the grandparents of the children, siblings of the children’s parents, the children’s own siblings, godparents at marriages and confirmations as well as neighbors. In the case of neighbors, for them to be included in the circle of kinsmen, the worth and strength of the social relationship has to be considered. Helping behaviors were always exhibited during the planting and harvesting periods of the year because they all voluntarily help out in these activities to be part of the kinship in the early times. And in return, the kinsmen who were offered assistance during these two seasons were also expected to reciprocate the favor in the future. Another reason for the kinship relation to be considered as responsible for the helping behavior of the Filipino people is because of the hopes of maintaining the interpersonal relationships of the people with one another (Aganon & David, 1985). This could be proven by the study made by Kaut (cited in Aganon & David, 1985) where he hypothesized that the Tagalog society’s criteria of maintaining social interaction is to be able to fulfill their needs, be it economic issues, political issues, or social issues. By social interaction, it means that helping one another

Predisposition to Help

9

and returning the favor depending on the needs of each person would definitely prolong the interpersonal relationships. This reciprocal helping behavior is the result of the value of pakikipag-kapwa, according to Enriquez (1969) cited in Aganon & David, (1985), pakikipag-kapwa is illustrated in the following statement: The value commitment that emerges from the interpersonal context of the kinship structure is that of kapwa. Pakikipag-kapwa incorporates these prescribed rules of reciprocal privileges and obligations between kindred members. Kapwa is the cognitive image of these relationships, and becomes generalized in experience to include all acceptable forms of social relationships. The “acceptable forms of social relationships” mentioned by Enriquez (1969) are based on two concepts which are principles of reciprocal obligation and hiya, which is considered as the emotional accompaniment of kapwa. The reciprocal obligation states that each person should be sensitive enough to maintain the fulfillment of the interests of each other (Aganon & David, 1985). On the other hand, if one’s reciprocal obligation is not accomplished, then the person will automatically feel hiya, which, according to Bulatao (cited in Aganon & David, 1985), is a “painful emotion” expressed in interpersonal situations perceived as “dangerous to one’s ego” resulting to the withdrawal behavior of the person experiencing it. This could be simply stated in a situation where person A is a good friend of person B. According to the concept of kapwa and kinship relation, they both have obligations towards each other. Here comes person B having a financial problem. It is the obligation of person A to help out because they are good friends. But because person A did not help person B solve his financial problem and did

Predisposition to Help

10

not even bother to sympathize with person B, person A felt hiya or ashamed of his or her wrongdoing. Volunteerism As illustrated, there are several manifestations of helping. One of the factors responsible for helping is the attitude of volunteerism. This is explained as the act of doing a favor for other people who are in need without expecting anything in return. This is usually associated to religion. People who are into church service are the ones who usually volunteer. But it is also common to people who are rich and are educated (Wilson & Janoski, 1995). Above all, self-interest is still the heart of volunteering. This is because through volunteering, a person gains full knowledge of what he or she wants and who he or she is; therefore, giving more meaning to ones’ life (Wilson & Janoski, 1995). According to Harold Kushner (n.d.), a number of people engage themselves in volunteer work because their working hours did not satisfy their interests. Frederick Herzberg (n. d.) further explains that in order for people to enjoy their job in the workplace, it should have the factors of: achievement, recognition, job fulfillment, responsibility, creativity and growth, economic benefits, companionship, supervision, and good working conditions. On the other hand, according to Burns (1974), the characteristics of a volunteer who does not ask for incentives are distinct from those who do volunteer and expects to have incentives, as well as, from those who do not volunteer. Individuals who volunteer without asking anything in return are those who are already independent in their lives. He or she views one’s self as not a perfect being; therefore, the person is more willing to accept flaws in their lives. As compared to the non-volunteers and those who volunteer

Predisposition to Help

11

for incentives, volunteers are an extravert type of people who are more out-going and confident. Volunteers also have different settings in rendering their help to those in need. They could either join an organization, such as Red Cross to give aid. This is known as “formal volunteer work” (Zweigenhaft, Armstrong & Quintis, 1996). On the other hand, there are also other volunteers who do volunteer work without joining organizations, such as people who donate goods for instance to an orphanage, or people who help the elderly cross the street. This simple act of volunteering is referred to as informal volunteer work (Zweigenhaft et al., 1996). It has been found out that the youth, religious, educated, rich, as well as, the elderly married couple are the ones who are more likely to volunteer (Wilson, & Janoski, 1995; Zweigenhaft et al., 1996; “Youthful voluntarism,” 2002). The underlying explanation for this behavior according to Gildron (1978) cited in Zweigenhaft et al. (1996) would then depend on the age. If the volunteer is of a younger age, belonging in the age bracket of 18-25, then, most likely the reason for him to volunteer is to acquire more exposure to the work setting. On the other hand, if the volunteer is in between the ages of 40’s and 50’s, then, he would most probably be doing charity work in order to build interpersonal relationships with other people (Zweigenhaft et al., 1996). In general, people do volunteer because they want to have a more meaningful life (Wilson & Janoski, 1995). In the Philippines, volunteerism could easily be seen in the different nongovernment organizations. An example is the volunteer firefighters’ associations that were organized by the Chinese-Filipino people a few years back.

Predisposition to Help

12

Filipino-Chinese Fire Brigades There is one story of an incident that happened a long time ago in the Binondo area wherein a fire broke out and not one of the local firefighters in the area wanted to take action unless they first get paid. The property of the person who bids the highest amount will be saved immediately and if you happened to have no money then you would have to pray that the fire stops before it reaches your house (Brevern, 1988). In the early 1900’s, it was common to hear about people bribing firemen in order to save their properties during fires. Despite these incidents, nobody did anything about it. In 1963, when a big fire almost destroyed the whole of Gandara Street in Manila, the community suddenly became aware of the importance of fire prevention. Since then, several volunteer fire brigades and associations were formed and have been in existence up to this day. Volunteer firefighters are those that are (1) retired and have the extra time, (2) have full-time job and only be able to respond at night or on weekends, (3) self-employed and have some flexibility in the time they commit, or (4) students, who can only respond when there are no classes. The reasons for wanting to be a volunteer fireman can vary from the thrill of it, a desire to give something back to the community, as a hobby, or as an assurance for their own home’s safety (Volunteer Brigades, n.d.). From being small fire prevention organizations, volunteer firefighters rose to become the best fire fighting groups in the Philippines (Brevern, 1988). These brigades are civic organizations that are mostly financed or sponsored by businessmen and several other organizations (Brevern, 1988). They are what is considered to be non-traditional, modern “Chinese” organizations because its membership is composed mainly of people

Predisposition to Help

13

with Chinese background, language and unifying principles that refer to the Chinese society because it is based upon models of modern organizations, where there is a democratic internal environment, and functions are more specific and limited. It also provides social service to non-members, and actively serves neighborhoods that include both Filipinos and Chinese (Wickberg, 1992). These brigades help increase the interaction with non-Chinese people and act as bridges from the traditional Chinese organizations, which may lead to the transcendence of the Chinese community (Wickberg, 1992). As a volunteer organization, volunteer firefighting is also an association of people organized to meet the needs of a section or of the whole of that community. It originates in the spontaneous, altruistic, humanitarian feelings of a few leaders in the community, who are concerned for the welfare of the disadvantaged among their fellow human beings (Pathak, 1979). Knowing that the volunteer brigades also help out the non-Chinese community, the members of these associations are also not exclusively of Chinese descents. There are also Filipino people who are members of these brigades. Chinese-Filipino The Chinese people are said to be the most ethnocentric, clannish and traditional people among others (See, 1997). They believe in sayings like “fallen leaves return to their roots,” “when drinking water remember its source” as well as disapproval of the saying “denying your roots and forgetting your ancestors” (See, 1997). All of these sayings explain why the Chinese people wanted to preserve the purity of their bloodlines as well as their customs and traditions. Thus, this made them strengthen their belief –

Predisposition to Help

14

“Once a Chinese, always a Chinese” (See, 1997). But due to several reasons, this group of people started to migrate to the Philippines and other parts of the world (See, 1997). Most of the common reason was to be able to find jobs abroad and earn more money through their hard work and perseverance (See, 1997). Eventually, due to the favorable environment that they have lived in, these Chinese people began to love the new country that has “taken good care” of them (See, 1997). According to Teresita Ang See (1997), these Chinese people began to “drink the water of their new countries and thought of their new sources” and eventually evolved into “new roots planted into new grounds.” Thus, the Chinese people living here in the Philippines gradually began to identify with the Filipinos but not intentionally (See, 1997). This was made possible by several reasons. One was because of the diplomatic recognition of the People’s Republic of China where it does not recognize the Chinese people as part of the country if they have dual citizenship (See, 1997). Second reason was because of the mass naturalization decree passed into law by former President Marcos allowing the Chinese living in the Philippines to acquire Filipino citizenship (See, 1997). Filipino Personality and Values Filipino as an individual is a lover of peace and order, courteous and kind. Admires the Christian values and is a God-fearing person. Filipino population is predominantly Catholic (Jose, 1999). Filipinos prefer their home to be humble and more or less open and exposed, which suggests frankness, trust, and friendship towards other people. They are naturally meek and humble, peace loving and hospitable (Osias, 1940). They tend to exclaim the philosophy of “bahala na” in moments of stress, anger or difficulty. It is like trusting God will help them do the last step or “God will take care” or

Predisposition to Help

15

“Let fate have its way” (Mercado, 2000). One of the greatest assets of the Philippines is the institution of the family. The Filipino’s concept of home is more of peace and neighborhood. Foreign writers and observers have always noted the Filipino’s hospitality (Osias, 1940). Among the Filipino people, monogamy marriage is the law and the rule. Some pagans and Mohammedans have practiced polygamy but it has become rare under the economic pressure. The state and the church have regulated permission for marriage for four centuries (Osias, 1940). The family life of Filipino is generally happy the Filipino woman is usually the household manager or the “ilaw” of household. She does the providing of food and clothing, receives all cash earned by any member of the family, and supervises expenditures. The Filipino man, on the other hand, serves as the breadwinner of the family and he is the one who goes out to work for the expenses (Osias, 1940). The spirit of the Filipinos as a group of people has come to maturity. In many crisis and emergencies, Filipinos respond to the needs of people who have become afflicted by the injury of disease, fire, earthquake, typhoon, or other great calamity (Osias, 1940). Despite of the so many years that Philippines was under mercilessness and harassment of a cruel regime, Filipinos have very well developed a strength of solidity, and has achieved it’s independence in the greatest of Philippine Revolution during 1896 (Osias, 1940). The idea of close family ties, friendship, fellowship, and neighborhood, warm and care has been Filipinos’ way of life (Osias, 1940). These traits or values do not only apply to the Filipino people exclusively. It is important to note that the Filipino and Chinese-Filipino groups will be compared in their predisposition to help in order to determine if the measure that was constructed can discriminate between these two groups. Although according to Ang-See (1997) the characteristics mentioned do also

Predisposition to Help

16

apply to the Chinese-Filipino population, which is a result of the integration of the Filipino and the Chinese cultures. The Filipino-Chinese people are also being thought of as Filipino people based on their citizenship. Pagka-bayani. One very well known value that Filipino people give a lot of importance to is the value of pagka-bayani (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). The term pagka-bayani is derived from the root word bayani, which means hero or refers to a person who freely contributes his or her labor or effort to another (Chua & Nazareno, 1992). From this root word comes the term bayanihan, which is defined as engaging oneself in services without asking any payments in return (Chua & Nazareno, 1992; Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1987). Based on these two terms, this study uses the concept pagka-bayani, which also signifies the essence of being a hero in terms of offering assistance to help seekers without asking anything in return either in material form or service form. This value became incorporated in the value system of the Filipinos because they give a lot of importance to establishing personal relationships (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1987). In pagka-bayani people ignores the social hierarchy, structures, leadership roles and authority relationships towards the elders (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1987). If the person felt that he or she has the right decision, he or she can act immediately even if it meant that his or her elders have to follow or agree with the decision also (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1987). This also made the Filipinos patient and tolerant people but still do not accept defeat (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). They are ready to defend the weak no matter what could be the consequence of it (Andres & IladaAndres, 1986). Thus, this shows the meaning of camaraderie and cooperation that Filipinos exhibit when they are set to do a certain task (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986).

Predisposition to Help

17

Pakikiramdam. One of the values that Filipinos give importance to is the value of pakikiramdam which refers to the high level of awareness and sensitivity of a person towards another’s feeling or situation. Mataragnon (1987) characterized it as “feeling for another”. It is also an act wherein great care is shown and reflection or thoughts were exhibited in hesitation to react, inattention to cues, and non-verbal behavior in mental role-playing if I were in the other’s situation, how would I feel (Mataragnon, 1987). Related to this would be paghaum, which is the Visayan term for the Tagalog term “alalay” that means “moving together with another person.” This refers to the ability of a person to empathize and guide another without owning the other person’s problem (Decenteceo, 1999). This showed the caring ability of the Filipino people to their fellow Filipinos whenever they have problems.

Predisposition to Help

18

Pagiging Makapamilya. Speaking of caring in pakikiramdam, the most important value of the Filipinos is their sense of pagiging maka-pamilya. Andres and Ilada-Andres (1986) stated that Filipinos are family or kamag-anak-oriented people. Each Filipino has a childlike connection to his or her parents even if he or she was already married, he or she will still visit his or her parents every now and then. Also, it has been said that the terms nanay, tatay, ama, itay, ina all have cultural connotations which actually made it possible to bind the children and parents together (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). It was also mentioned that kinship originated from the agricultural socioeconomic structure of their livelihood before the industrial revolution (Torres, 1985). The Filipinos live their lives through farming and the parents always require their children to help them out during harvest seasons. Aside from their own family working together, their extended family members also help out. Therefore, they were able to develop a sense of kindred relationship (Torres, 1985). This ensures psychological security among its members by means of giving love, showing affection and intimacy, and companionship. Thus, the family usually serves as the main source of emotional support. The sense of security given by the family comes from the mutual help and support it renders. Whenever there are crises and emergencies that arise, such as typhoons, fires and other disasters, other relatives would also run to and seek for help even before asking agencies, like red cross and the like (Medina, 1991). But as time had passed, outsiders were also included in the circle of kinship by the Filipinos. For example, their neighborhood that was once an acquaintance only with the family became close to its members. This is because he or she was able to develop a sense of deep social relationship with each member and their outlook in life – the way they do things, the way they judge certain situations and the like

Predisposition to Help

was the same (Torres, 1985). Even the ninongs and ninangs as well as kinakapatid were also considered as part of the family because of the spiritual relationship (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986).

19

Predisposition to Help

20

Pagtanaw ng Utang-Na-Loob. Pagtanaw ng Utang-na-loob is also a Filipino value. It is a term that is usually translated as debt of gratitude in many Western oriented studies. However, if taken in its Filipino context, the meaning is much deeper wherein there is no certain English word that could put into words its real meaning (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). It actually involves an emotional component when viewed together with the Filipino concept of loob. This concept also promotes an image of colonizer and benefactor, hence, it continues to be “perpetuated as an important aspect of the Filipino national self-image” (Enriquez, 1994). According to Dr. Tomas Quintin Andres and Ms. Pilar Ilada-Andres (1986), this is a behavior being exhibited by people whenever assistance was offered to them and they would always automatically have to return those favors. Also, since Filipinos do not want to be identified as walang utang-na-loob, this value becomes a relationship that may have no end. Upon returning these favors, they could actually show it in different ways. Some people would offer gifts or tokens, offer services, and many more in return for the helper’s good-heartedness. Aside from this casual every day life exchange of favors, the value of utang-na-loob also plays a role in the world of politics. If, for example, the person who offered a helping hand to a Filipino happened to be running for a position in the government office, this Filipino would definitely vote him or her for that certain position regardless of whether or not this person has good credentials. A lot of times, the reason for voting a person into office was because of payment for their gratitude. Thus, the Filipinos’ sense of utang-na-loob could actually result to a bad outcome if it defeats other factors that should be the ones important and that should be taken into consideration when certain decisions have to be made where the helper is involved. On the other hand, if utang-na-loob was taken into

Predisposition to Help

21

consideration in a more positive way, it could actually reveal the beauty of this Filipino value. Pagtugon sa Pananagutan. Pagtugon sa pananagutan was defined by Chua and Nazareno (1992) as a duty that a person has towards another and is considered as a Filipino value (Ang-See, 1997). It is said to be a duty in a sense that a person is simply obliged to do something for the good of the other. This is usually evident in the larger community setting (Ang-See, 1997). According to Ang-See (1997), the person views their obligations not only in the personal level or in the smaller society level but also in the larger scale like the whole Filipino society. Example, in the case of building bridges and houses by some wealthy Filipino-Chinese people, they are contributing it to the Philippine society and not just the small Chinese community (Ang-See, 1997). These people have come to realize that they are also part of the larger society and thus they have a responsibility to contribute something in terms of infrastructures or businesses for improving the society and economy. Western Conceptualizations of Helping Social Exchange Theory. The theory formulated by Thibaut and Kelley is called the social exchange theory. It shares the view that altruistic behavior is exhibited due to self-interest (Aronson, et al., 1999). The social exchange theory states that people weigh the costs and benefits that they will acquire whenever they decide to help other people who are in need (Aronson, et al., 1999). It also states that people will base their helping decision on the maximum benefit that they can possibly get from the situation (Brehm et al., 1999). In this theory, egoism and empathy altruism are the factors of altruism (Altruism…, 2001).

Predisposition to Help

22

Egoism was developed by other social psychologists to counter the empathyaltruism proposed by Batson (1997). It points out that there is no such thing as helping other people without even thinking about one’s own welfare or benefit from the situation. It also illustrates that when a person helps another who is in need and it made him or her feel good then, that feeling automatically becomes a gain (Brehm et al., 1999; Sober & Wilson, 1999). It can be noticed that egoism argues in the psychological level regarding why human beings help other people who are in need, thus other psychologists find it hard to disprove this sub-theory (Sober & Wilson, 1999). It refers to the helping attitude of people based on what they can get in return with that simple act of volunteerism (Guenther et al., 2002). Batson (1997) proposed the concept of empathy altruism. It was formulated to explain how altruism is elicited by empathy. This model states that empathy is made up of two components, which are the cognitive component and emotional component. It explains that the helper will first view himself or herself in the situation of the help seeker – cognitive perspective taking – then, he or she will feel the way the victim is feeling in that problematic situation – emotional perspective taking. As a result, the aide will voluntarily provide assistance to the victim (Brehm et al., 1999). Evolutionary Psychology. Another perspective is the evolutionary psychology that explains helping as relational altruism. It follows the principles of evolution proposed by Charles Darwin. This theory suggests that evolution favors those who are naturally selfish, in that this person will only help in order to ensure the survival of his own genes (Brehm, et al., 1999). Under this theory are kin selection or inclusive fitness and reciprocal helping (Brehm, 1999).

Predisposition to Help

23

Kin selection or inclusive fitness states that help is given more to genetic relatives so that even if one is to risk his life, his line will still continue through that of the genetic relative they saved (Aronson, et al., 1999). According to Brehm et al. (1999), this factor prefers people who share the same genes so that the genes will survive. It actually contributes to the reproductive success and that on the outside it might seem as selfsacrificing but in reality it is a way to spread the genes so it becomes immortal. Some researchers also suggest that the past and current conflicts between ethnic groups might have started out from this idea, that there might be a genetic basis for this because people only help those who can pass on their genes (Altruism: Helping others, 2001). Another concept under evolutionary psychology is reciprocal helping formulated by Trivers (1971). This explains that people expect each and every member of a society to return the favor of helping one another in times of crisis (Franzoi, 1996). This subfactor explains that people do something good like helping other people if they perceive themselves being helped in the near future (Harrison, 1976; Aronson et al., 1999; Brehm et al., 1999). Trivers (1971) states that in order for this reciprocal helping to occur, a certain situation should be present. This means that the advantage that the help seeker will acquire from the helper should be high and the cost that the helper will exert when he or she offers assistance will be low. This is in preparation for the future in case it is the helper who will need help (Franzoi, 1996). Social Norms. Social norms as proposed by Herbert Simon, states that the helping behavior of a person is exhibited because it is taught and expected by society (Aronson et al., 1999). Therefore, whenever a person perceives another person as having trouble, he or she will automatically offer assistance to that person (Aronson et al., 1999; Brehm et

Predisposition to Help

24

al., 1999). Under this theory are the social justice and social responsibility norm (Harrison, 1974; Altruism: Helping others, 2001). Social justice explains the expectation in a social norm. According to Lerner and Meindl (1981), social justice is the time that the helper will offer assistance to the victim if and only if the victim deserves it. Lerner (1980) also pointed out that in order for the help seeker to be worthy of help he or she should do good deeds to other people or possess good and favorable personalities (Franzoi, 1996). The individual helps within the norm because they have social responsibility. It is the rule stated by the society that each and every citizen should and is obligated to help other people who are in need of assistance (Harrison, 1974; Brehm et al., 1999). The results in the study of Taylor (1982) showed that once a person perceived that another individual is dependent and in need of assistance, he or she will be more determined to help out. The following are some studies conducted in the field of social psychology that contributes to the understanding of how people help and why do they help. Lamug (2002) tested a model of helping behavior using path analysis. She proposed in the model that the effects of ethnic similarity on helping are mediated by attribution of responsibility for dependency and perceived attraction of dependent persons. She found in her study that ethnic similarity had negative effects on attribution of responsibility. Attraction was affected negatively by attribution of responsibility and positively by ethnic. This means that people most likely help others that do not belong in their ethnic group. The more attracted a person is to another, the more likely he will

Predisposition to Help

25

render help. But if the situation calls for responsibility, the person does not manifest attraction to it. Oswald (1996) conducted a study where a number of participant’s were asked to view videotapes. The participants were 65 working adults, 55 women, and 10 men. The subjects were asked to observe the thoughts and emotions of the character in the videotape while the rest will observe other irrelevant details of the videotape aside from the character. Results showed that those subjects who observed the character in the videotape using their cognitive and affective perspective taking of analysis offered more help when compared to those participants who only observed the irrelevant details. Burnstien (1994) conducted an experiment based on evolutionary psychology theory. In this study he used both American and Japanese students and assessed whether the students would help people who were closer to them when there are emergencies and when it is a simple helping need. He found out that students in both cultures were most likely to help those who were closer to them rather than those who were not related to them and more help is given when it is a life-threatening situation. Another finding was that they helped more based on the reproductive capacity of the person to be helped. If the one who needs help is younger and more capable of reproducing then more help is given. Levine et al. (2001) conducted a study to find out the answers to three main issues on helping. The first main issue was that if helping people, especially strangers, vary from culture to culture. The second main issue was about whether or not helping is important across different cultures. The last issue was to find out what are the community characteristics that different cultures have that contribute to the social

Predisposition to Help

26

behavior of helping strangers. The results yielded from the sample of large cities in each of twenty-three countries that were elected, showed that the countries that have residents earning high income have lesser possibilities of helping strangers. The results also showed that those countries having friendly cultures tend to have citizens who are willing to help strangers. The traditional view that individualistic-cultured people are less helpful and collectivistic-cultured people are more willing to help was not fully supported by the results of the research conducted. Therefore, the researchers of the study concluded that there are some individualistic-cultured people who are more willing to help and there are also some collectivistic-cultured people who are less likely to help out. In relation to the research conducted by Levine & et. al., (2001) another study was conducted in Bern (1999), in Switzerland, to see if the results will be the same as those obtained from the suburbs of Los Angeles and lower Westchester country, New York. The researchers wanted to test if the participants in Bern would be more willing to offer some help to heterosexual males than homosexual males. They also wanted to see if the results that will be obtained in the first hypothesis would be affected by the gender or sexuality of the participants themselves. And they also wanted to find out if the help offered to female homosexuals would be different from those offered to male homosexuals. The researchers got a confederate who’s going to make the phone calls and record the responses of the participants to the request. The results obtained showed that whether or not the caller is a homosexual male or female who’s seeking help, the participants still helped him or her out. The explanation behind this could either be because of the social norms that all Berne’s are obliged to help other people who are in

Predisposition to Help

27

need or it is simply because of the attitude of Bernes’ to help people who are in need (Gabriel et. al., 2001). Several Filipino values were also described that are somewhat related to the Western concepts. The literature revealed that there are several factors that influence the helping behaviors that people exhibit in their daily lives. However, there are few studies where volunteer firefighters have been used as participants. There has also been little research done on proposed Filipino constructs as factors that contribute to the tendency of the helper assisting a victim. Method Test Design The test design used in the study is both the classical test theory and the item response theory. In the classical test theory, the measurement error of the test predisposition to help will be obtained through the difference of the true score and observed test score. The standard deviation of the distribution of random errors for each individual tells about the magnitude of measurement error. The standard deviation of the observed score and the reliability of the test are used to estimate the standard error of measurement. The accuracy of predisposition to help being measured is determined by the amount of the standard error of measurement. In applying the item response theory, an item’s characteristic is determined through its curve that described the probability of getting an extreme score in the test predisposition to help. The Rasch model is used to arrive at the logistic item characteristic curve, which is a function of possessing the characteristic helping. It forms the boundary between the probability areas of answering an item in high and low extremes.

Predisposition to Help

28

Search for Content Domain The conceptual definitions for helping was established and the factors that will compose it were reviewed in order to be guided for writing the items. A framework was formed through literature reviews and studies made. The factors were established from Filipino personality theories including the Filipino and Chinese-Filipino cultural values. An initial interview with ten volunteer firefighters was conducted. The responses from the interview were used as a guide in obtaining information regarding their background in helping and knowledge on their own ethnicity. The data gathered from the interview was used to write the items for the scale on predisposition to help. In the interview, the chain referral sampling technique was used in selecting the respondents. It was the appropriate sampling because it was difficult to ask the firefighters for interviews without referrals since their personal schedules as well as their contact numbers were not known. Through this technique, ten probable respondents were listed down. It was made up of five Chinese-Filipino volunteer firefighters and five Filipino volunteer firefighters. They were all selected from 5 brigades (a) one Chinese-Filipino and (b) one Filipino coming from each brigade. These groups of participants were contacted through phone calls and were asked if they are willing to be interviewed regarding the topic on helping, which was exhibited in line with the nature of their work. Contact numbers were given to the interviewees so that they could inform the researchers of their willingness to participate. The ones who agreed were briefed regarding the objectives of the study. Afterwards, a schedule for the interview was set depending on the convenient time of the firefighters. The Filipino language was used in the interview because it was found that some of the participants feel more comfortable and was able to express their thoughts more freely

Predisposition to Help

29

when they speak in the language that they are used to. Most of the respondents preferred to be interviewed in Filipino. In order to make the participants feel comfortable in answering the questions, the interviewers made use of the Filipino language. The interview questionnaire contained a category regarding the demographics of the firefighter, a category on firefighting as a profession, and the ways they help people who are in need (see Appendix A). Prior to the interview, conversations on light topics regarding events and people were made to establish rapport with the interviewees. They were then informed that there would be no right or wrong answers. Next, they were assured that their responses will be kept confidential and will only be used exclusively for the study. During the interview proper, demographics were asked such as name and age. After that, the participants were asked certain questions regarding their reasons for volunteering as firefighters as well as their various experiences in this line of work, based on the interview guide. However, follow-up questions not found in the interview guide were asked to clarify some vague points. A tape-recorder was used during the duration of the interview to record the responses that were given. After the interview, the firefighters were thanked for their time and for their participation. They were also given tokens of appreciation. Significant pieces of information were found regarding the tendency to help based on the interview conducted with the ten firefighters. These tendencies to help were on normal, daily life situations. These were all recorded, then, used as a guide in the construction of the items for the test on predisposition to help for the general population. Additional items were also constructed based on the review of related literature. This test

Predisposition to Help

30

questionnaire was then used to determine the predisposition to help of the firefighters for the purpose of the study (see Appendix B). Item Writing The items that were constructed making up the scale for predisposition to help. It was based on the review of related literature and from the responses of the actual interview that was conducted. From the related literature, several studies about helping behavior were gathered and reviewed, and some statements were phrased into situations showing helpful behaviors where the participants can place themselves into and assess how likely they would react. As for the interview conducted, certain statements mentioned by the participants such as, “It makes me feel good when I help,” were extracted from the transcriptions and were placed on certain factors made available and some possible emerging ones. The items were constructed as situations that happen in the life of any individual. In case the respondents do not directly experience it it becomes a hypothetical situation for them. Just like the interview that was conducted in Filipino, the items in the test questionnaire were also written in Filipino since a great number of the participants could understand questions that are stated in Filipino. The differences in the backgrounds of the participants, as well as the participants for the actual data gathering, also contributed to the use of Filipino because they were used in using it as a medium of communication. Most of them also expressed their preference for it over the English language. Selection of a Scaling Technique In this test, the responses of the participants coming from the general population were measured using a Likert scale. Their responses were based on their agreement and

Predisposition to Help

31

disagreement of the ideas or situations presented. This type of scale provides answers in the form of coded data that are comparable and can readily be manipulated. The scales include strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree. Points were assigned to each scale where strongly agree corresponds to five (4) points and strongly disagree is one (1) point for positive items and the points were reversed for negative items. The Filipino counter parts of the scales that were used are shown in table 1. Table 1 Scaling Technique for the Scale on Predisposition to Help English Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Filipino Lubos na Sumasang-Ayon Sumasang-ayong Di-Sumasang-Ayon Lubos na Di-Sumasang-Ayon

Points 4 3 2 1

The neutral scale was not included since the scores will be entered for the Rasch Model analysis that will use a dichotomous coding. Content Validation Three experts checked and reviewed the items that were constructed. These experts are professors from the De La Salle University–Manila and they all have backgrounds in teaching a course in psychometrics. After retrieving the questionnaires, the necessary corrections were made and the final draft of the test questionnaire was constructed. Each factor was made up of at least twenty (20) items each for the content validation. The items were then arranged in random order for the pretest and resulted in a varied number of items for each sub-factor after the content validation with a total of one hundred and eleven items in all. Table 2 shows the items for each factor in the pretest form.

Predisposition to Help

32

Table 2 Table of Specification for the Pre-Test Form

Factors Pagkabayani

No. of Items 26

Pakikiramdam

22

Pagtanaw ng Utang-na-Loob Pagiging Maka-pamilya

22 24

Pagtugon sa Pananagutan 21 Total

Item No. 1, 9, 18, 19, 26, 27, 35, 36, 48, 53, 54, 61, 62, 67, 71, 80, 81, 89, 95, 99, 106, 107, 110 2, 8, 20, 33, 44, 45, 47, 49, 55, 60, 64, 66, 70, 73, 77, 78, 82, 90, 96, 98, 111, 113 4, 6, 11, 12, 17, 21, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31, 38, 42, 72, 84, 86, 88, 91, 101, 102, 105, 109 3, 10, 15, 16, 32, 34, 39, 40, 46, 51, 56, 57, 68, 69, 75, 79, 83, 93, 97, 103, 104, 112, 114, 115 5, 7, 13, 14, 22, 25, 30, 37, 41, 43, 50, 52, 58, 59, 62, 65, 74, 76, 85, 87, 92, 94, 100, 708

115

Directions for Responding Aside from the instructions indicated, verbal instructions were given to the respondents upon administration. The respondents are instructed to take their time in answering each item and there are no right or wrong answers. There is no time limit in taking the test. The respondents are reminded to answer the test as honestly as possible based on how they would really respond when they are placed in the situation as presented for each item. The first part of the test questionnaire includes instructions that

Predisposition to Help

33

were provided for the respondents to read and follow. Participants were asked to encircle the corresponding number for their answer. Pre-try out Testing The test was administered first to ten respondents from the general population for pretesting to check if the items were comprehensible and easy to understand and follow. These ten respondents are composed of five Chinese-Filipino and five Filipinos. During the test, respondents were asked about their opinion regarding the construction of the test items whether or not they felt that it was difficult to answer the items or it was too easy. They were also asked to put comments and suggestions in the paper if necessary. Their feedback was taken into consideration. Pilot Test Form After gathering the various feedbacks from the participants during the pre try-out, the necessary corrections were made and the final instrument for pilot testing testing was completed. In the final form for pilot testing, there are 25 items for pagka-bayani, 21 items for pakikiramdam, 22 items for pagiging maka-pamilya, 22 items for pagtanaw ng utang-na-loob, and 21 items for pagtugon sa pananagutan. There was a total of 111 items. The scaling used was the lickert scale. The items of the predisposition to help were arranged in random order (see Appendix C). Table 3 shows the number of items for each hypothesized factors. Table 3 Table of Specification for the Pilot Test Form

Predisposition to Help

34

Pilot Testing Factors Pagkabayani

No. of Items 25

Pakikiramdam

21

Pagiging Maka-pamilya

22

Pagtanaw ng Utang-naloob Pagtugon sa Pananagutan

22

Total

111

21

Item No. 1, 9, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 35, 36, 48, 52, 53, 60, 61, 62, 66, 70, 79, 80, 88, 93, 94, 104, 105, 108 2, 8, 20, 33, 44, 45, 47, 49, 54, 59, 63, 65, 69, 72, 76, 77, 81, 89, 95, 97, 109 3 10 15 16 32 39 40 46 55 56 67 68 74 78 82 92 96 101 102 110 111 4, 6, 11, 12, 17, 21, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31, 38, 42, 71, 83, 85, 87, 90, 99, 100, 103, 107 5, 7, 13, 14, 22, 30, 37, 41, 43, 50, 51, 57, 58, 64, 73, 75, 84, 86, 91, 98, 106

Having made all the revisions necessary on the measure and having its content validated, a third group of participants, also coming from the general population, was obtained through convenient sampling and chain referral for pilot testing. The sample was composed of 150 respondents where 75 are Chinese-Filipino and the other half are composed of Filipinos. The participants were asked to choose a comfortable place to take the test. They were also given a five-minute briefing on what the test was all about. Then, the directions on how to go about in answering the questionnaires were provided. They were told that they would answer a test composed of 111 items. They were also told that they could answer the test in their own pacing and as much as possible answer the questions honestly so as to be able to obtain accurate results. Lastly, they were asked if they are able to understand the instructions given. Once there are no more questions and the participants are able to settle themselves, the questionnaires were distributed for them to answer.

Predisposition to Help

35

In the scoring for positive items, a response of strongly disagree corresponds to five (5) points while a response of strongly disagree corresponds to one (1) point. For negative items, responses of the scale are reversed. Data Analysis Coding of Data. The data for each item was coded based on the responses for each respondent. For the positive and negative items, the number corresponding to their answer on the scale is used. The scores for each item per respondent are then encoded in the statistica spreadsheet, a statistical computer software for further analysis. Reliability Analysis. The internal consistency of the items was determined using the cronbach’s alpha. The score of each item was also intercorrelated to determine its internal consistency and to see the items that are highly correlated. Construct Validity. To establish the factors of the test, the items have undergone factors analysis by reducing the number of subscales from the initial five factors hypothesized to new common factors where the items highly load on. The factorial composition of the test is established whether the items belonging in one cluster would measure the same characteristic. The factor loadings of each item were derived in order to determine the acceptance level of the said item. A value having .30 and above are the ones accepted in the pool of items for the final form of the test. The eigenvalues of each factor extracted were also determined. The eigenvalues are the sum of squared correlations between a factor variate and the p original variables. It reflects the overall relationship between that factor and the original variables. The scree test was used to assess the eigenvalues where the factors with eigenvalues of 1.0 and above are considered to be stable.

Predisposition to Help

36

The factors extracted were also rotated using varimax raw to show all strong and weak loadings. The varimax rotation was conducted to minimize the number of variables that load strongly on a factor and a low loading of other factors. In the process, the factors extracted tend to equalize the proportion of variances explained by each factor. Discriminant Validity. To establish the test’s discriminant validity, the scores on the predisposition to help among the Filipino and Chinese-Filipino firefighters were categorized and they were compared. The differences in their overall test score for each factor were tested for significance using the t-test for two independent samples. The alpha level of significance was set at .05. Factors that have significant differences between the set of sample means shows that the factor has the ability to discriminate. But when no significant difference is found it means that the factor converges across the groups. Rasch Model. To establish a uniform sample free scale of measurement for the predisposition to help that is applicable to individuals and groups of widely varying characteristics, the Rasch model is used. The method incorporates item performance in the standard-setting process by graphically presenting item difficulties in this case the extreme scores. The process involves item mapping where all the items ordered in columns, with each column in the graph representing a different item difficulty/extreme scores. The columns of items are ordered from easy to difficult (extreme low scores to extreme high scores in this study) on a histogram-type graph, with very easy items toward the left end of the graph, and very hard items toward the right end of the graph. Item difficulties in log odds unit are estimated through application of the Rasch IRT model (Wright & Stone, 1979). Logit difficulties are computed to obtain a characteristic curve for each item. The abscissa of the graph represents the rescaled item difficulty. Any

Predisposition to Help

37

one column has items within two points of each other. The goal of this item mapping procedure is to locate a column of items on the histogram where the researcher can reach consensus that the predisposition to help measure has a 50% chance answering the items correctly. Results Reliability Based on the item analysis done on the test instrument’s descriptive profile, the total item mean was 396.94, the sum of the scores was 59541, and the standard deviation was 32.56, while the variance obtained was 1059.88. The analysis also showed that the distribution of scores tends to be normal and symmetrical based on its skewness since the value obtained was 0.1907, which is a score close to 0. The value of kurtosis that was obtained was 0.171, which indicates that the distribution of the scores is normal since the value is close to 0. The minimum value of the scores was 317 and the maximum was 498. For the reliability analysis, the cronbach’s alpha obtained is 0.926 indicating high reliability and the standardized alpha value was 0.93. The average inter-item correlation resulted to a value of 0.32. The item total correlation and the mean and standard deviation for each item were also obtained. Factor Analysis To test the homogeneity of the items in the test questionnaire, the raw data was analyzed using the factor analysis. The principal components or eigenvalues, which indicate the amount of common variance accounted for by the respective number of factors, that were obtained are illustrated in Table 4.

Predisposition to Help

38

Table 4 Eigenvalues of Each Factor Eigenvalue 17.72 8.03 5.85 3.67 3.37

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5

Percentage total Variance 15.96 7.23 5.27 3.31 3.03

Cumulative Eigenvalue 17.72 25.75 31.60 35.27 38.63

Cumulative Percentage 15.96 23.19 28.47 31.77 34.81

As shown in table 4, five factors were extracted from the factor analysis with eigenvalues greater than 1. The first factor had the highest eigenvalue of 17.72, which means 18% of the time the items explain the variance in factor 1. As for factor 2, the eigenvalue showed that 8% of the time, items explains the variability of factor 2. For factor 3, 6% of the time is the variability accounted for. For factor 4, 4% of the time is the variability accounted for. Lastly, for factor 5, the variability of the test accounts for 3%. The varimax rotation was used to analyze the raw data in order to maximize the variances of the squared raw factor loadings across variables for each factor (see Appendix D). The communality or the proportion of variance that each item has in common with other items is illustrated in the table of communalities (see Appendix E). Lastly, the analysis of factor loadings for the whole test instrument, which illustrates the correlations between the respective variables and factors, showed the percentage explained for every item and proportion of total for each factor. Table 5 Extracted Eigenvalues for Each factor Explained Variance

Factor 1

Factor 2

Factor 3

Factor 4

Factor 5

12.60

8.84

4.92

5.36

6.92

Predisposition to Help

Prp.Totl 0.11 0.08 Note: Marked loadings are > .30

0.04

0.05

39

0.06

Table 5 shows that the variance explained are distributed across the five factors extracted as well as the number of items with acceptable loadings. Factor 1 has the highest number of items (see table 6) corresponding to 12.6% explained variance. The rest of the factors have explained variance of 8.8%, 4.9%, 5.4%, and 6.9%, respectively for factors 2 to 5. Final Form After the item analysis, certain items were not included from the original scale. The items that yield a loading lower than 0.3 were removed as well as those items that are accepted under several factors. For an item to be accepted under a specific factor it should have a value of more than 0.3 and it has to load only on one factor. Table 6 shows the new factors of each item. Table 6 Table of Specification for Final Form Factors Factor 1

Total no. of Items 29

Factor 2

13

Factor 3

12

Factor 4 Factor 5

6 12

Total

71

Item Numbers

New Factor Name

1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 31, 33, 35, 37, 42, 43, 45, 48, 49, 53, 56, 59, 61, 65, 66, 70, 71 3, 5, 16, 25, 41, 52, 54, 55, 57, 62, 64, 67, 69 14, 19, 23, 26, 34, 38, 39, 40, 47, 51, 58, 60 17, 29, 32, 44, 46, 50

Pagtugon sa Pananagutan

2, 9, 11, 12, 20, 22, 28, 30, 36, 63, 68

Pagkabayani Pagtanaw sa Utang-na-loob Pakikiramdam Pagiging Maka-pamilya

Because of the changes due to factor analysis of the data, similarities among the grouped items were analyzed and new labels for each factor were made. The final form

Predisposition to Help

40

after the pilot test and the analysis of data is illustrated in Appendix F. To determine the region of the scores where it approximates the true score that is free of error, the confidence interval for means was used. The mean was obtained where it is added and subtracted with one unit of standard deviation approximating 68% of the theoretical curve. The following values obtained are shown in Table 7.

Table 7 Mean and Standard Deviation for the Factors Predisposition to Help Factors Pagka-bayani Pakikiramdam Pagiging Maka-pamilya Pagtanaw ng utang-ng-loob Pagtugon sa pananagutan

M 44.60 23.93 41.4 39.93 109.64

SD 8.52 3.49 4.99 4.68 14.96

CI 36.08-53.12 20.44-33.42 36.41-46.43 34.65-44.01 94.68-124.28

Table 7 shows the range of scores within 68% of the normal curve. The actual data was taken from the actual test scores among 200 firefighters in Metro Manila area. The sample is composed of all males with Filipino and Chinese Filipino samples. The factors on pakikiramdam, pagiging maka-pamilya, and pagtanaw ng utang ng loob show more accurate means since constricted intervals were obtained. Discriminant Validity The data is obtained from 100 Chinese-Filipino Volunteer Firefighters and another set of 100 Filipino Volunteer Firefighters on their predisposition to help.

Predisposition to Help

41

Table 8 Comparing Filipino and Chinese Filipino Firefighters Source of Variation Pagkabayani Pakikiramdam Pagiging Makapamilya Pagtanaw ng utang-na-loob Pagtugon sa pananagutan * Significant at .05

t value 2.94 1.06 1.89 0.66 -0.22

df 198 198 198 198 198

p-value 0.004* 0.291 0.060 0.508 0.825

In comparing between Filipino and Chinese-Filipino firefighters in their pagkabayani, the p value obtained is 0.003, which is less than the alpha level of significance. The null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant difference between the Chinese-Filipino Volunteer Firefighters and Filipino Volunteer Firefighters in the pagkabayani factor in their predisposition to help. The Chinese-Filipino significantly obtained a higher mean score (M=46.34) than the Filipinos (M=42.86) in their pagkabayani in helping. This means that race can discriminate the factor on pagkabayani. The Chinese-Filipino Volunteer Firefighters were able to obtain a mean score of 24.26 and a standard deviation of 3.75 in pakikiramdam. The Filipino Volunteer Firefighters, on the other hand, got a mean score of 23.72 and a standard deviation score of 3.45. This comparison of means did not reach significance with a p value of .29. Race could not discriminate the factor on pakikiramdam. The Chinese-Filipino volunteer firefighters had a mean of 42.56 and a standard deviation of 7.54 on pagiging maka-pamilya. As for the Filipino Volunteer Firefighter, they got a mean score of 40.85 and a standard deviation of 4.98. Again, the statistical analysis showed that there is no significant difference in the scores of the two groups of volunteer firefighters in the factor of pagiging maka-pamilya.

Predisposition to Help

42

For pagtanaw ng utang ng loob, the Chinese-Filipino Volunteer Firefighters had a mean of 39.55 with a standard deviation of 4.84 while the Filipino Volunteer Firefighters had a mean of 39.11 with a standard deviation of 4.53. There is no significant difference between the two mean scores. The factor on pagtugon ng pananagutan also did not reach significance in comparing with the Chinese-Filipino and Filipino Volunteer Firefighters with means of 109.40 and 109.87 respectively and standard deviations of 14.02 and 15.90 respectively. Correlation Among the Factors The intercorrelations among the factors of pagkabayani, pakikiramdam, makapamilya, utang-na-loob, and pananagutan are established to determine whether they converge with each other. The results show that all the factors have significant relationship with each other. The magnitude of the relationship is positive providing evidence that the test have attained convergent validity. This means that as the score form one factors increases, the scores on other factors also increases. Table 10 Correlation Matrix For the Factors of Predisposition to Help

(1) pagkabayani (2) pakikiramdam (3) makapamilya (4) utang-na-loob (5) pananagutan * Significant at .05

1 1.00 0.61* 0.18* 0.18* 0.72*

2

3

4

5

1.00 0.33* 0.27* 0.73*

1.00 0.16* 0.39*

1.00 0.28*

1.00

The correlation coefficients obtained range from moderate to high. This shows that the factors are not multicollinear with each other. It further supports that the measure on predisposition to help is truly composed of the five factors.

Predisposition to Help

43

Tree Clustering of the Factors Cluster analysis using the Joining Tree Analysis was used to determine the distances of the five factors of predisposition to help. Figure 1 shows the tree diagram plotted on Euclidean distance estimates. Tree Diagram for Variables Single Linkage Euclidean distances

pagkabayani

makapamilya

utang-na-loob

pakikiramdam

pananagutan

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Linkage Distance

Figure 1. Clustering of the Five Factors on Predisposition to Help The joining tree analysis based on the Euclidean distance estimates show that pagkabayani, makapamilya and utang na loon are the factors that are closely related with each other because of the low Euclidean distance among them. The closeness of these three variables to pakikiramdam may be considered marginal. The factor on pananagutan is far in explaining its relationship with the rest of the factors (see Appendix G). In using an amalgamated distance the combination of utang na loob and makapamilya shows the closest cluster together with a Euclidean distance of 93.42 (see Appendix H).

Predisposition to Help

44

Exploratory Factor Analysis The scores of the 200 male firefighters, which is a second pilot test, are further analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. This procedure is conducted to determine whether the 71 items of the final form would still form the same five factors arrived from the preliminary factor analysis. Conducted further exploratory factor analysis would provide evidence on the factor structure of the measure for predisposition to help. In the factor extraction process, five factors were entered based on the previous five factors formed in the initial factor analysis. Table 12 Eigenvalues for the Five Factors

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5

Eigenvalue 17.35 4.93 3.81 2.83 2.43

% Total 24.44 6.95 5.36 3.99 3.42

Cumulative 17.35 22.29 26.09 28.93 31.36

Cumulative 24.44 31.39 36.75 40.74 44.17

Table 12 shows that high eigenvalues were obtained for each factor that are unrotated. In using a Scree test there are actually 19 factors that can be extracted with values greater than one but five factors were decided on since there are five points shown on the steep drop on the scree curve as illustrated in figure 2. The initial five factors in the preliminary factor analysis were also taken in to consideration.

Predisposition to Help

45

Value

Plot of Eigenvalues 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Number of Eigenvalues

Figure 2. Scree Curve for the Exploratory Factor Analysis The five factors were rotated using varimax raw in order to maximize the variance of the factor loadings. Table 13 Eigenvalues on Rotated Factors

Expl.Var Prp.Totl

Factor 1 10.87 0.15

Factor 2 4.09 0.058

Factor 3 9.56 0.13

Factor 4 3.85 0.05

Factor 5 2.99 0.04

As shown in Table 13, the percentage explained was distributed across the five factors. High percentage of explained variance was obtained for factor 1 (10.87%) and factor 3 (9.56%). The distribution of items in the second exploratory factor analysis is shown in Table 14.

Predisposition to Help

46

Table 14 Table of Specifications for the Exploratory Factor Analysis Factors Factor 1

No. of items 18

Factor 2 Factor 3

6 21

Factor 4 Factor 5 Total

5 3 43

Items No. 3, 5, 17, 18, 24, 25, 33, 41, 48, 52, 54, 55, 57, 59, 62, 66, 67, 69 9, 11, 12, 20, 47, 68 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 13, 21, 22, 29, 30, 31, 35, 42, 43, 44, 46, 50, 51, 53, 63 14, 19, 38, 39, 40 34, 58, 60

The items that were included are those with factor loadings of .40 and above. The items that do not meet these criteria and those that highly load on more than one factor are discarded (see Appendix I). Most of the items highly loaded on factor 1 (18 items) and factor 3 (21 items). Very few items are extracted for the rest of the factors. This time there are 43 items that highly loaded on the five-factor structure. In reviewing the content of the items for each factor, there is a pattern where the factor is dominated by items belonging in the factor from the initial factor analysis (see Appendix J). Factor 1 contains mostly of the items on pagkabayani, Factor 2 contains mostly the items on makapamilya, factor 3 contains mostly the items on pananagutan, both factors 4 and 5 contain items on pagtanaw ng utang ng loob and it was merged as one factor. The items on pakikiramdam were distributed on factors 1 and 3. These items were revised to fit the content of factors 1 and 3. There are four factors considered based on the new distribution of items in the exploratory factor analysis namely pagkabayani (heroism), makapamilya (kindred relationship), pananagutan (social responsibility), and utang na loob (reciprocity). The 43 items were maintained and the fourth factor contains 8 items since it was merged.

Predisposition to Help

47

Rasch Model In performing the Rasch Model, the scores of 30 respondents from the 71-item measure were selected randomly from the pool of 200 firefighters. These scores were included in the analysis for the Rasch model. The scores were coded into 1’s and 0’s where the responses that were answered agree and strongly agree were converted into 1 and those responses answered disagree and strongly disagree were coded as 0. There were 29 items that were omitted due to having extremely high responses. A total of 42 items were left for further analysis. Tables 15 and 16 show the grouped distribution of the 42 different item scores and their logits incorrect. Table 15 Group Distribution of the 11 different item scores of 27 cases Item score Group index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Item Proportion logit initial item item name score f Correct incorrect incorrect f X logit f X logit^2 calibration 24,27 26 2 0.96 0.04 -3.26 -6.52 42.46 -1.59 19,36,46,50, 59,61,63,65 25 8 0.93 0.07 -2.53 -20.21 408.28 -0.86 3,5,11,52,53, 70 24 6 0.89 0.11 -2.08 -12.48 155.67 -0.41 13,28,41,49,58, 62 23 6 0.85 0.15 -1.75 -10.50 110.15 -0.08 6,19,25,26,38,54 ,55,68 22 8 0.81 0.19 -1.48 -11.85 140.49 0.19 39,45 21 2 0.78 0.22 -1.25 -2.51 6.28 0.42 40,42,48,60 20 4 0.74 0.26 -1.05 -4.20 17.63 0.62 10,20,23 19 3 0.70 0.30 -0.86 -2.59 6.73 0.80 18 18 1 0.67 0.33 -0.69 -0.69 0.48 0.98 51 11 1 0.41 0.59 0.37 0.37 0.14 2.04 14 7 1 0.26 0.74 1.05 1.05 1.10 2.72

Predisposition to Help

48

Note: f=frequency Table 15 shows the initial calibration for the scores of the 27 cases. The 22 items are on the lower bound with negative item calibrations and 20 items were calibrated n the upper bound with positive values. The calibration has equalized distribution of extreme scores. Since the proportion of correct and incorrect responses are converted into logit. Table 16 Grouped Distribution of Observed Person Scores on 42 items Possible score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Nr 3 2 1 1 0 2 0 2

Proportion correct 0.02 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.17 0.19

logit correct -3.71 -3.00 -2.56 -2.25 -2.00 -1.79 -1.61 -1.45

F X logit -11.14 -5.99 -2.56 -2.25 0.00 -3.58 0.00 -2.89

F x logit^2 124.12 35.90 6.58 5.07 0.00 12.84 0.00 8.37

Table 17 shows the expansion factors for the initial estimates of item calibration and person measures in order to correct the item calibrations for sample spread and the person measures for the test width. Table 17 Final Estimates Extreme Item from 27 Cases Item score Group index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

item name 24,27 19,36,46,50,59, 61,63,65 3,5,11,52,53,70 13,28,41,49,58, 62 6,19,25,26,38,54, 55,68 39,45 40,42,48,60 10,20,23

corrected initial item sample spread item calibration expansion factor calibration Item score -1.59 0.08 -0.12 26

calibration SE 0.28

-0.86 -0.41

0.08 0.08

-0.06 -0.03

25 24

0.40 0.50

-0.08

0.08

-0.01

23

0.60

0.19 0.42 0.62 0.80

0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08

0.01 0.03 0.05 0.06

22 21 20 19

0.68 0.76 0.84 0.93

Predisposition to Help

9 10 11

18 51 14

0.98 2.04 2.72

0.08 0.08 0.08

0.07 0.15 0.21

18 11 7

49

1.01 1.72 2.41

Table 17 shows that the initial item calibrated were corrected and showed values that are more equalized. Table 18 shows the final corrected item calibrations and their standard error from the sample spread expansion factor in Table 13. Table 18 Final Estimates of Person Measures for all Possible scores on the 42 item test Possible Test Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Initial measure -3.71357 -2.99573 -2.56495 -2.25129 -2.00148 -1.79176 -1.60944 -1.44692

Test width expansion factor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

corrected measure -3.71357 -2.99573 -2.56495 -2.25129 -2.00148 -1.79176 -1.60944 -1.44692

Measure standard error 1.012122 0.724569 0.599145 0.525657 0.476474 0.440959 0.414039 0.392953

Discussion Factor Structure of Predisposition to Help In the initial factor analysis with 100 cases, the measure was able to yield five factors that include pagtugon sa pananagutan, pagkabayani, pagtanaw ng utang ng loob, pakikiramdam, and pagiging maka-pamilya. In the next exploratory factor analysis conducted with 200 cases, five factors were extracted but 4 were only considered because items on factor 4 are 5 are all the same. The content of the factors were maintained in the exploratory factor analysis except for pakikiramdam. In the correlation matrix using the first pilot testing (n=100), pakikiramdam was highly correlated with all the factors and in the joining tree clustering it mediates the closeness of the utang na loob, makapamilya, and pagkabayani with pananagutan. This explains that the items for this factor are

Predisposition to Help

50

immersed in all other factors especially with pagkabayani and pananagutan. In the concept of helping, one is able to help because he is sensitive to others needs. The predisposition to help in general requires the feeling of sensitivity or pakikiramdam in order to execute the process of helping (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). This means that sensitivity or pakikiramdam is not a factor of helping but it is part of completing the process of helping. Enriquez (1994) explains that pakikiramdam is an interpersonal pivotal value. The nature of pakikiramdam as a central behavior provides evidence that it runs through every value structure of the Filipinos especially in helping others. In another perspective, Mataragnon (1987) and Decenteceo (1999) explain that pakikiramdam is helping in itself since the Tagalog correspondence is captured in the concept of “alalay.” This entails the ability of the person to empathize and guide another without owing the other persons problem, which is typical of helping. Pananagutan as a factor is far from utang na loob, pagkabayani and makapamilya as shown in the tree clustering, although the items for this measure formed separately with the rest in the confirmatory factor analysis creating a factor which is consistent with the previous factor analysis conducted. Pananagutan does not capture the rest of the factors such as utang na loob, pagkabayani and makapamilya because it a conception of duty. Being heroic, reciprocal, and centering on kin relationship is not performed out of duty because they have a sense of gratitude (Chua & Nazareno, 1982). What differs pananagutan with the rest of the factors is in its scope. Utang na loob, pagkabayani and makapamilya are in the personal level while pananagutan is beyond personal because it contains and obligation to a macro level (Ang-See, 1997).

Predisposition to Help

51

Pagkabayani, utang ng loob and makapamilya are relational in their nature. These factors of helping are completed based on others. In pagkabayani, one executes an action even if it that the elders would disagree (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). In makapamilya, one is connected to his keen and ones orientation is build upon others. Utang ng loob is shown in order to maintain a smooth interpersonal relationship. The four factors that composed the predisposing to help captures the nature of helping in the Filipino way. Disciminant Validity The Chinese-Filipino and Filipinos are compared in the five factors and only pagkabayani discriminates the two races.

The Chinese-Filipino volunteer group

significantly tends to be more heroic than the Filipino volunteers.

This result

contradicted the belief that Filipino people are known for their pagka-bayani nature which was taken from the word bayanihan. According to Chua and Nazareno (1992), as well as to Andres and Ilada-Andres (1987), the term bayanihan denotes that Filipino people like to help each other out voluntarily without asking anything in return. Pagkabayani, on the other hand, was defined almost in the same way but the only difference is that it is in the light of a hero where assistance is offered to victims even though there will be a risk involved in the part of the helper. Although this has been incorporated in the Philippine setting and in the Filipino culture, there is no proof that only the Filipino people exhibit this type of value. The Chinese-Filipino people, having lived here in the Philippines for centuries, have also come to adopt the lifestyle and culture of the Filipinos. According to See (1997), there is an integration of the culture between the Filipino-Chinese and the Filipino people. The Filipino-Chinese people have also learned the value of pagka-bayani. Although there is integration of culture between the two

Predisposition to Help

52

groups, this somehow did not coincide completely when the test of significance was applied to the data obtained from the firefighters. It turned out that the Filipino-Chinese firefighters got a higher mean score in this factor, which explains that they exhibit a higher tendency in helping a victim in times of calamity having this factor as their predisposition. This significant result could be further supported by the fact that the volunteer fire brigades or stations were put up by the Filipino-Chinese people was because of their willingness to give something back to the community where they are living in. Even though they had a to choose other ways of helping their own community, they still decided to adopt this risk-taking “job” in order to show their support, which later became universal. Universal in a sense that not only was this “job” directed towards the Chinese-Filipino community, it was also directed towards the Filipino community. The sense of pagka-bayani of the Chinese-Filipino people especially the Chinese-Filipino volunteer firefighters is very evident. Item Calibration In using the Rasch Model, 42 items are calibrated to arrive with an ability free measure of predisposition to help. This is consistent with the exploratory factor analysis where 43 items were arrived. The items calibrated in the Rach Model are also consistent with the items with high factor loadings. Given the 42 items there is now a separate parameters for the items and the respondents. The calibrated values of persons and items arrived show that the dispersion of extremely high and low scores on helping equalizes with the helping characteristics of the respondents. The test width of the scale to measure helping is 1, which is low, and extreme scores were removed creating a sample free measure of predisposition to help. The values of the standard error computed are low

Predisposition to Help

53

which indicates that the characteristics of the respondents in helping is centered among the spread of the items creating a more precise measure of predisposition to help. The local independent of the measure and standard errors result in a measure of helping that improves accuracy and performs in a stable manner across settings and populations.

References Altruism on the far side. (1996). Retrieved July http://drs.yahoo.com/s=2766679/k=%22social+psychology Altruism: Helping others. (2001, August). Retrieved http://www.sage.edu/divisions/psych/courses/p301ch12.htm

2,

2005

July

2

From from

Andres, T. Q. D. & Ilada-Andres, P. C. B. (1986). Making Filipino values work for you. Makati: St. Paul Publications. Andres, T. Q. D. & Ilada-Andres, P. C. B. (1987). Understanding the Filipino. Quezon City: New daily Publishers. Ang-See, T. (1997). Chinese in the Philippines. Manila: Kaisa Para sa Kaunlaran, Inc. Aronson, E., Wilson, T. D., & Akert, R. M. (1999). Social psychology (3rd ed.). New York: Addosin Wesley Longman Inc. Baveria, A. S. P. & & See, T. A. (1992). China, across the seas: The Chinese as Filipinos. Q. C.: Philippine Association fo Chinese Studies. Bell, J. (1994). The impact of cost on student helping behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 49-56. Black, C. R., Weinstein, E. A., & Tanur, J. M. (1980). Development of expectations of altruism versus self-interest. Journal of Social Psychology, 111, 105-112. Brehm, S. S., Kassin, S. M., & Fein, S. (1999). Social psychology (4th ed.). USA: Houghton Miffin Company. Brevern, M. V. (1988). Once a Chinese, always a Chinese: The Chinese of Manilatradition and change. Intramuros, Manila: Lyceum Press. Burns, J. (1974). Some personality attributes of volunteers and nonvolunteers for psychological experimentation. Journal of Social Psychology, 92, 161-162.

Predisposition to Help

54

Chua, R. L. & Nazareno, R. L. (1992). Ang mahalaga sa buhay: A handbook of Filipino values. QC: New Day Publishers. Corsini, R. J. (1994). Encyclopedia of psychology (2nd ed.). Canada: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Deaux, K. (1974). Anonymous altruism: Extending the lost letter technique. Journal of Social Psychology, 92, 61-66. Enriquez, V. G. (1994). From colonial to liberation psychology: The Philippine experience (3rd ed.). Manila: De La Salle University Press. Feldman, R. S. (1999). Understanding psychology (3rd ed.). USA: McGraw Hill Companies. Felix, A. (1969). The Chinese in the Philippines. Philippines: R. P. Garcia Publishing Co. Ferrer, A. S. (2003). Diksyunaryo Filipino-English. Philippines: MECS Publishing House. Franzoi, S. L. (1996). Social psychology. USA: Times Mirror Higher Education Group, Inc. Gabriel, U., Beyeler, G., Daniker, N., Fey, W., Lienhart, M., & Gerber, B. L. (2001). Perceived sexual orientation and halping behavior: The wrong number technique, a Swiss replication. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 32, 743-749. Gildron, B. (1978). Volunteer work and its rewards. Volunteer Administration, 11, 18-32. Go, T., So, N., & Uy, G. (2004). The altruism of behavior of Filipino and Chinese Filipinos. An unpublished undergaduate thesis, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippies. Harrison, A. A. (1976). Individuals and groups: Understanding social behavior. California: Brooks/Cole Publishing. Iyer, N. & Kanekar, S. (1990). Predicted abnd recommended helping as a function of help-seeking context and cost helping. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 135138. Lamug, C. B. (2002). A path analysis to test a model of helping behavior. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 35, 363-382. Leibkind, K. (1999). Social psychology. In J. A. Fishman (Ed.), Handbook of language and ethnic identity (pp. 140-144). New York: Oxford Unwasty Press Inc.

Predisposition to Help

55

Levine, R. V., Norenzayan, A., & Philbrick, K. (2001). Cross cultural differences in helping strangers. Journal of Cross-cultural psychology, 32, 543-560. Myers, D. G. (1999). Social psychology (6th ed.). USA: McGRaw Hill Companies Inc. Nina, I., Aganon, A., & David, S. (1985). Sikolohiyang Pilipino: Isyu, pananaw at kaalaman. Philippines: National Bookstore. Newman, C. V. (1979). Relation between altruism and dishonest profiteering from another’s misfortune. The Journal of Social Psychology, 109, 43-48. Oswald, P. A. (1996). The effects of cognitive and affective perspective taking on empathic concern and altruistic helping. Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 613623. Pathak, S. (1979). Social welfare, health, and family planning in India. New Delhi: Marwah Publications. PJEE’s speech during the opening ceremonies of the 22nd biennial convenmtion of the federation of Filipino-Chinese chambers of commerce and Industry, Inc. (FFCCCII). (1999, March 12). Retrieved from http://www.opnet.ops.gov.ph/speech-1999mar05.htm Sober, E. & Wilson, D. (1999). Unto others: The evolution and psychology of unselfish behavior. London: Harvard University Press. Tan, A. S. (1994). The Chinese mestizos and the formation of the Filipino nationality. Philippines: Kaisa Para sa Kaunlaran, Inc. Valentine, M. E. & Ehrlichman, H. (1979). Interpersonal gaze and helping behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 107, 193-198. Wickerberg, E. (1992). The Chinese as Filipinos: Notes on some contemporary social organizations in Manila Chinese society. In A. S. P. Baveria & T. Ang-See (Ed.) China: across the seas (pp. 43-64). QC: MicroPublishing, Inc. Wilson, J. & Janoski, T. (1995). Sociology of religion: The contribution of religion to volunteer work. Journal of Social Psychology, 56, 137-140. Youthful volunteerism. (2002, December 2). Retreived http://www.pittsbughlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinions

July 2,

2005

from

Zweigenhaft, R. L., Armstrong, J., & Quintis, F. (1996). The motivations and effectiveness of hospital volunteers. Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 25-34.

Predisposition to Help

A

toolkit for volunteer leaders. http://4h.unl.edu/volunarelen/motivati.htm

Retrieved

June

16,

56

2005

The Chinese in the Philippines: Some basioc facts. Kaisa para sa Kaunlaran, Inc. Retrieved July 22, 2005 http://www.philonline.com.ph Volunteer brigades and associations in the Philippines. Retrieved July 6, 2005 http://www.youthvol.org/brigades.htm

Predisposition to Help

57

Appendix A Interview Guide Name: Age: Name of Fire Brigade/Association: Other Occupation: Position in Brigade: Ethnicity: □ Filipino-Chinese or □ Filipino A. Basic Information 1. Ilang taon ka nang isang Volunteer Fire Fighter? 2. Kailan ka unang sumali? 3. Tuwing kailan ka pumupunta sa inyong istasyon? 4. Anu-ano ang mga dahilan kung bakit ka sumali? 5. Ano ang naging reaksyon ng iyong mga mahal sa buhay tungkol dito? 6. Gaaano ka-importante ang pagiging isang bumbero para sa iyo? B. Helping 1. Sa iyong palagay, bakit ka tumutulong sa ibang tao? 2. Ano ang kahalagahan nito? (ng pagtulong) revise this it is incomplete? 3. Ano ang naidudulot nito sa iyo? 4. Magbigay ng mga halimbawa kung saan ipinakita mo ang pagtulong sa ibang tao maliban sa pagiging isang bumbero. C. Volunteerism 1. Bakit at paano mo naisipang maging isang volunteer (kahit na walang bayad)? 2. Ano ang kahalagahan ng pagiging isang boluntaryo? 3. Anu-ano ang mga katangian ng isang boluntaryong bumbero? 4. Magbigay ng mga halimbawa kung saan ikaw ay naging volunteer maliban sa pagiging isang bumbero. D. Predispositions to Help 1. Ang mga sumusunod ay mga konseptong Pilipinong makikita sa ating kultura. Sa iyong palagay, maaari ba silang maging mga dahilan kung bakit tayo tumutulong sa ibang tao? a. Pagkabayani / Heroism b. Pakikiramdam c. Katarungan d. Pananagutan e. Kindred Relationship f. Utang na Loob E. Ethnicity 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Sa iyong palagay ay may pagkakaiba ba ang isang boluntaryong bumbero na Fil-Chi at Filipino? Anu-ano ang mga ito? Kung pag-uusapan ang tungkol sa mga nabanggit na konsepto, may pinag-kaiba ba ang dalawa (Fil-Chi at Chi) sa mga ito? Sa Pagiging isang bumbero, importante ba ang pagiging isang Fil-Chi o Filipino? Bakit? Sa pangkalahatan, mayroon pa rin bang pagkakaiba ang mga Fil-Chi at Filipino pagdating sa pagtulong sa ibang tao? Mayroon bang pagkakaiba ang kultura ng Filipino sa mga Fil-Chi? Anu-ano ang mga ito?

Predisposition to Help

58

Appendix B Preliminary Items Constructed “Pagka-bayani” – It refers to the act of being tolerant to certain situations. Meaning the person is willing to fight for a good cause especially when it comes to defending the weak and oppressed ones (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986) or offering help to those who are in need without expecting anything in return (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1987). This factor was measured through ___ items that are indicated in the questionnaire for altruism. 1. Willing akong i-sacrifice ang aking buhay para sa isang tao para lang magampanan ang aking pagiging isang volunteer firefighter. 2. Sa aking palagay, kailangan na manggaling sa aking puso ang pagiging isang volunteer firefighter ko. (Pakikiramdam) 3. Kapag may nawawalang bata ay aking hinahatid mismo sa kanyang mga magulang. 4. Handa akong tulungan ang kahit sinong nangangailangan. 5. Kapag may naabutan akong naaksidente ay dali-dali kong dinadala sa ospital. 6. Susugod ako sa sunog hangga’t kaya ko. 7. Gumagaan ang aking loob kapag pinupuri ako ng mga tao matapos kong pigilin ang sunog. 8. Bali wala sa akin ang maaksidente sa sunog basta’t makatulong ako sa mga nasunugan. 9. Para sa akin, ako ay isang bayani kapag nakapagsaklolo ako ng buhay mula sa sunog. 10. Kapag may taong malalaglag mula sa nasusunog na gusali ay sasagipin ko siya hahit ano pa man ang mangyari. 11. Pakiramdam ko bayani ang dating ko kapag ako ay nakasakay sa itaas ng fire truck. (Pakikiramdam) 12. Buo pa rin ang aking loob na sumugod sa fire scene kahit na alam kong malaki ang chance na maaaksidenti ako. 13. Kapag may nakita akong taong nanakawan, kahit ano pa ang aking ginagawa sa oras na iyon ay iiwan ko at tutulungan ko siya. 14. Kaya ako sumali bilang isang volunteer dahil gusto ko lamang makatulong sa kapwa. (pananagutan) 15. Proud ako sa aking sarili bilang isang volunteer firefighter. 16. Bilang isang volunteer firefighter, ako ay may “will” at “courage” na saklolohin ang buhay mga tao. 17. Para sa akin, ang makatulong sa kapwa at makapagligtas ng buhay ay maituturing na pagkabayani. 18. Ok lang sa akin na sumugod sa sunog para sa mga taong nasusunugan. 19. Sumali ako bilang isang volunteer firefighter para makatulong sa mga nangangailangan. 20. Sumali ako bilang isang volunteer firefighter hindi para makatulong kundi para maging isang volunteer sa title. (negative item) – the one withunderline is not clear. 21. Gusto kong mapamahagi sa ibang tao ang pagiging matulungin kong tao. 22. Handa akong sapitin ang kahit anumang aksidente sa sunog basta makatulong lang ako sa mga nasusunugan. 23. Gagawin ko ang lahat ng aking makakaya para makapagligtas ng buhay at mga property. “Pakikiramdam” – It is taken from the root word “damdam,” which simply means being sensitive enough to understand and relate to the situation of another person. In short, it means putting one’s self in the situation of another person and from there would decide on what actions to take next (Enriquez, 1994). Another explanation would be feeling or sensing before taking action (Chua & Nazareno, 1992). This factor was measured through ___ items that are indicated in the questionnaire for altruism. 1. Ginagawa ko ang lahat ng aking makakakaya na pigilin agad ang sunog dahil nararamdaman kong kinakabahan ang mga taong nasa aking paligid. 2. Tuwing ako ay dumarating sa sunog, lagi kong inaalala kung ano na ang maaaring nangyari sa gusaling nasusunog at sa mga taong nakatira roon. 3. Alam kong nakakapagbigay saya sa ibang tao ang pagtulong kaya ako tumutulong sa mga nangangailangan. (Utang na loob)

Predisposition to Help

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

59

Alam kong sumasaya ang biktima kapag napapatay agad ang sunog kaya mas nagiging motivated akong tumulong.(utang na loob) Dahil sa alam ko ang pakiramdam ng masunugan ng bahay at mawalan ng mahal sa buhay ay mas lalo akong nagiging dedicated sa pagpatay ng sunog. Nararamdaman ko kung paano masunugan ng sariling bahay at mawalan ng ari-arian kaya ayaw kong maranasan ito ng ibang tao kaya ako lubusuang tumutulong. Nauunawaan ko ang pakiramdam ng na-su-suffocate kapag nakulong sa loob ng nasusunog na gusali kaya hangga’t maaari ay inilalabas ko agad sa maikling oras angmga taong nakukulong. Pagdating ako sa sunog, pinapakiramdaman ko muna kung ano na ang kalagayan ng gusaling nasusunog at ng mga taong nakulong sa loob ng gusaling nasusunog bago ako gumawa ng aksyon. Nauunawaan ko ang nararamdaman ng mga taong nasusunugan kaya mas namomotivate akong tumulong sa kanila tuwing may sunog. Hindi ko na iniintindi kung ano man ang maaaring nararamdaman ng mga taong nasusunugan, basta’t mapigil ko lang ang sunog. (negative item) Gumagaan ang aking loob pag nakatulong ako sa mga nabibiktima ng sunog dahil alam kong nasisiyahan sila kapag napigil namin ang sunog. Kung desperado na ang taong humihingi sa akin ng tulong ay handa akong tulungan siya dahil alam kong mahirap ang walang matakbuhan sa oras ng pangangailangan. Kung mayroon isang nakulong sa apoy, mag-volunteer akong tulungan siya dahil alam kong mahirap ang kalagayan niya. Hindi ako tutulong sa kapwa kahit na alam kong nahihirapan na sila sa kanilang kalagayan, maliban na lapitan nila ako at humingi ng tulong. (negative item) Dahil nauunawaan kong napakahirap ang pakiramdam ng hindi makalabas sa apoy, ako na mismo ang tuutulong. Kapag may nakita akong nasugatan dahil sa sunog, dinadala ko siya agad sa ospital. Kapag nakakita ako ng matandang bumababa ng hagdanan na nahihirapan sa nasusunog na gusali ay nangunguna akong lumapit para matulungan siya. Tinutulungan ko ang aking mga magulang na disiplinahin ang aking mga kapatid dahil alam kong gaano kahirap ang magpalaki ng anak na suwail.(Remove – not related) Nauunawaan ko ang kahalagahan ng pagtulong sa kapwa kaya kapag mayroon akong oras ay nagvo-volunteer akong turuan ang iban tao na maging isang epektibong bumbero. Kapag mayroon akong kaibigan na namatayan ay sinisigurado kong pupuntahan siya para tulungan siya at damayan dahil alam kong masakit ang mawalan ng minamahal sa buhay.(remove – not related)

“Katarungan” – It pertains to justice or righteousness (Chua & Nazareno, 1992) as well as “inner selfworth” meaning as long as he or she thinks that something is right, then, that is already justice (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). It may also be something concrete or visible for the Filipinos, in that it is seen or elicited by the ones who hold the power to maintain peace in one’s own land. It is said to be based on the value of harmony and is not individualistic but rather communitarian (Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1987). This factor was measured through the questionnaire for predisposition to help, wherein it was composed of ____ items. 1. Ang ibang kawani ng pamahalaan ang may karapatan para maghusga kung sino ang may kasalanan sa sunog. 2. Ang simpleng pagpatay lamang ng sunog ay makatarungang gawain bilang isang volunteer firefighter. 3. Tinutulungan ko ang kahit sino mang lumapit sa akin dahik ito ay nararapat. 4. Kung ang taong nagsimula ng sunog ay nasaktan ay tutulungan ko pa rin dahil iyon ang tingin komg tamang gawin. 5. Basta’t naaksidente ang isang tao, mabuti man siya o masama, ay tutulungan ko pa rin bilang isang volunteer. 6. Tinutulungan ko pa rin ang mga taong may pakana ng sunog dahil yan ang trabaho ng isang volunteer firefighter. 7. Tinitimbang ko lagi kung karapat-dapat bang tulungan ang isang tao tuwing mayroon siyang problema. (negative item)

Predisposition to Help

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

60

Kapag nakita kong nasunugan ang kaaway ko ay tutulungan ko pa rin siya kahit gaano pa ang galit ko. Kapag humingi ng tulong ang isang taong napinsalaan ay hindi ko na tinitimbang kung tama ba o mali ang tulungan siya. Kapag may lumapit sa akin at humingi ng tulong na siraan ang isang tao ay hindi ko iyon gagawin. (remove – not related) Hindi ako namimili kung sino ang dapat kong tulungan tuwing sunog, basta’t ang alam ko tama ang ginagawa kong pagtulong. Kapag may nakita akong magnanakaw at malapit na siyang maapektuhan ng sunog ay ililigtas ko pa rin siya dahil buhay pa rin miya ang nakasalalay. Kapag may sumisigaw at kailangang tulungan, agad akong tutulong ng walang atubili dahil ito ay nararapat. Kapag may lumapit sa akin na humihingi ng tulong financially dahil may sakit siya, tutulungan ko siya kapag alam kong hindi niya ako niloloko. (negative item) (remove – not related) Kung mayroon akong nakitang aksidente at nasugatan, hindi na ako magdadalawang isip na tulungan siya. Kapag may lumapit sa akin na isang taong masama at humingi ng tulong at sa tingin ko ay tama naman siyang tulungan ay tutulungan pa rin ako. Tutulungan ko lamang ang isang taong gumawa ng kasalanan kapag inamin na niya sa akin ang kanyang kamalian. (Negative item) Aalamin ko muna kung sino ang may kagagawan ng isang sunog na naganap bago ko pagdidisisyunan kung sino ang aking tutulungan. (negative item) Kapag alam kong mali na ang ginagawa ng isang tao ay hindi ko na talaga siya tutulungan. Kapag alam kong hindi tamang gawin ang isang pabor na hinihingi sa akin ng isang tao ay hindi ako tumutulong.

“Pananagutan” – It could be defined as obligation or liability of a person to someone else or to society (Chua & Nazareno, 1992). This factor was measured through a ___ item list that was indicated in the questionnaire for determining the factors that lead to predisposition to help 1. Ang isang volunteer firefighter ay hindi lamang pagvo-volunteer kundi may kasama rin itong malaking obligasyon. 2. Kapag ang isang tao ay naging isang volunteer firefighter ay kailangan niyang panagutan ang ilang mga requirements na kasama sa propesyong. 3. Ngayong naging isang volunteer na ako, kailangan kong panagutan ang kahit ano mang mangyari sa mg ataong nasasakupan ko. 4. Kapag nag-volunteer bilang isang bumbero ay kailangang magkaroon ng commitment. 5. Gagawin ko ang lahat para lang masaklolohan ang taong naaksidente. 6. Gagawin ko ang lahat ng aking makakaya bilang isang volunteer firefighter imbis na nakatambay lang ako sa station o headquarter at walang ginagawa. 7. Kapag ang taong inutusan kong sumugod sa sunog ay naaksidente, ako ang may sagot sa kanya. 8. Gagawin ko ang nararapat na tulong sa abot ng aking makakaya kapag may nakita akong taong nangangailangan ng tulong ko. 9. Kapag may alam lamang ako kung paano tulungan ang biktima ay gagawin ko ang lahat ng aking makakaya. 10. Kahit na alam kong kaya kong tulungan ang biktima ay pwede ko pa rin siyang hindi tulungan. (negative item) 11. Mabuti ang makatulong sa taong nangangailangan. 12. Kung may taong nanganganib ang buhay at alam ko naman magbigay ng first aid, gagawin ko ang aking makakaya. 13. Kapag may nakita akong taong nanganganib ang buhay, nagvo-volunteer ako agad na dalhin siya sa ospital. (Pagkabayani) 14. Tumatawag ako agad ng ambulansya kapag may nakita akong taong naaksidente. 15. Bilang isang volunteer firefighter na dumaan na sa maraming training, nagbibigay rin ako ng safety lectures sa mga magaaral ng mga eskwelahan upang makaiwas sa panganib ng sunog. 16. Bilang isang volunteer firefighter, kailangan kong pangalagaan ang kalagayan ng aming komunidad.

Predisposition to Help

61

17. Responsibilidad kong tulungan ang sino man sa aking mga kasamahan na maaksidente sa loob ng sunog. 18. Kailangan kong tulungan ang mga victims ng sunog hangga’t naroon ako sa fire scene. 19. Sa aking palagay ay hindi ko responsibilidad na tulungan ang mga fire victims dahil ako ay isang volunteer lamang. (negative item) 20. Bilang isang volunteer sa kahit anumang field, maging sa medics man o sa firefighting, ay kailangan maging “smart” kapag gagawa ng desisyon. 21. Dapat akong mag-alay ng tulong sa mga naaksidente kapag may alam ako kung paano sila tulungan. (same with item 12 – remove) 22. Kailangan kong maging “smart” pagdating sa paggawa ng decisions sa kahit anumang gawaing aking pinasukan dahil responsibilidad ko ang kahit anumang mangyari sa future. (same with item 20 – remove) 23. Para sa akin, kapag tinakbo ko ang isang taong naaksidente sa ospital ay sinisigurado ko na marakating siya sa ospital at mapasok agad sa ER. Kindred relationship – Kindred relationship suggests that help is offered to people who are considered as family members or relatives for the desire of defending one’s own gene as well as those who are close to the helper (Myers, 1999; Andres & Ilada-Andres, 1986). The fact that attachment to parents, siblings, as well as relatives and godparents, the helper is more inclined to help these groups of people (Andres & Ilada-Andres). This factor was measured through the ___ items that were indicated in the questionnaire for altruism. 1. Handa akong tulungan ang mga kamiyembro ko sa station o headquarter. 2. Tutulungan ko ang mga taong may relasyon o kakilala ng mga kapwa kong ka-station o kaheadquarter. 3. Kapay mayroon sa aking mga kapamilya na nangangailangan ng pera ay handa akong tulungan sila. (remove – not related) 4. Sasamahan ko kahit anong oras ang aking kaibigan sa ospital kapag siya ay may nasaktan. 5. Bukal sa aking loob na bayaran ang gamot na kakailanganin ng maysakit kong kaibigan na walang pera. 6. Uunahin kong tulungan ang aking kapamilya at kaibigan sa kahit ano mang sitwasyon. 7. Prina-prioritize ko ang aking pamilya lagi sa kahot anong sitwasyon. 8. Wala akong prina-prioritize na tulungan sa mga taong may problema kahit na isa pa sa kanila ang aking matalik na kaibigan, lahat sila ay pantay-pantay lang sa akin. (negative item) 9. Kapag may nasugatan o may nangyaring hindi kanais-nais sa kasamahan ko sa station ay tutulungan ko agad siya. 10. Gagamutin ko agad ang sugat na natamo ng aking kapwa volunteer firefighter. 11. Dumarating ako agad sa sunog kapag alam kong isa sa mga mahal ko sa buhay ang nalagay sa panganib. 12. Pare-pareho kong tutulungan ang sinomang maaksidente, kilala man o hindi. (negative item) 13. Kapag nagkaproblema ang isa sa kapwa kong volunteer firefighter ay handa akong tumulong sa kanya kahit gaano pa ito kahirap. 14. Isang tawag lang sa akin ng aking kaibigan at sabihing mayroon siyang problema ay handa na akong tumulong. 15. Hangga’t makakaya ko ay tutulungan ko ang aking kaibigan sa kahit anumang oras. 16. Isa sa kagandahan ng volunteer firefighting ay ang pagtutulungan ng bawat station kapag mayroong problema ang isa sa mga station. 17. Mas tutulungan ko ang kakilala ko sa loob ng nasusunog na gusali. 18. Kino-consider ko na pangalawang pamilya ang brigada kaya lagi akong handang tumulong kapag ang isa sa kanila ay nagkaproblema. 19. Hindi ko inuunang tulungan ang mga mahal ko sa buhay tuwing may sunog; pantay-pantay lang ang trato ko sa lahat ng mga biktima. (negative item) (same with item 8 – remove 8, this is better) 20. Kapag nagkaporblema ang isa kong kapamilya, mas uunahin ko siyang tulungan kaysa sa iba. 21. Hindi ako yung klase ng taong kapag kamag-anak ko lang ang nasusunugan bago ako reresponde sa sunog. (negative item) (remove – not clear)

Predisposition to Help

62

“Utang-na-loob” – It can be defined as debt of gratitude coming from the root word “utang” which means debt (Chua & Nazareno, 1992). This value refers to the act of returning the favor of the receiver of help to the helper; making sure that he or she is not indebted to the other party (Andres & IladaAndres, 1986). This factor was measured through a list of ___ items provided in the questionnaire for altruism that were administered to the respondents. 1. Tutulungan ko ang mga nangangailangan nang walang kapalit. (negative item) 2. Tumutulong ako sa ibang tao para balang araw ay matulungan din nila ako kapag ako naman ang nangailangan. 3. Para sa akin, kapag tinulungan ko ang isang tao sa kanyang problema alam kong balang araw, ibabalik niya ang pabor na ito. 4. Kapag ako ay napanganib sa gitna ng sunog, tama lang na tulungan ako ng taong natulungan ko na dati. 5. Tingin ko ay may utang-na-loob sa akin ang mga taong natulungan ko sa sunog. 6. Nagbibigay ako ng tulong na libre at walang kapalit. (negative item) 7. Kapag may tinulungan akong tao ngayon at balang araw ay tinulungan niya ako, hindi ko ito ituturing na bayad niya sa akin. (negative item) 8. Hindi ko iniisip na may utang-na-loob sa akin ang mga taong natutulungan ko sa sunog. (negative item) 9. Ang pag-abot sa akin ng isang basong tubig ng biktima matapos kong patayin ang sunog ay pagtanaw na rin ng utang-na-loob sa akin. 10. Sapat na makatulong ako sa kapwa at wala na akong iniisp na pwedeng kapalit na aking matatanggap. (negative item) 11. Kapag tumulong ako sa kapwa, nasa sa kanila na kung iisipin pa nila na mayroon silang utang-naloob sa akin. (negative item) 12. Kapag nasusunugan ang taong pinagkakautangan ko ng loob ay mas lalo akong mapipilitang saklolohin siya. 13. Masarap ang pakiramadam ko kapag tumutulong ako nang walang hinihinging kapalit. (negative item) 14. Para sa akin, hindi naman dahil sa may utang-na-loob ako sa isang tao kaya ko siya tinutulungan kapag siya ay may problema; tutulungan ko pa rin siya kahit wala akong utang-na-loob sa kanya. (negative item) 15. Tumutulong ako ngayon sa taong bayan para balang araw mayroon ding magmamagandang loob na tulungan ako. 16. Para sa akin, masarap ang tumulong bilang isang volunteer dahil walang perang kapalit. (negative item) 17. Kapag mayroong hihiram sa akin ng pera ay kusang loob kong binibigay na lamang at hindi ko na iniisip na balang araw ay maibabalik niya iyan bilang utang-na-loob sa akin. (negative item) (remove – not related) 18. Tinulungan ko ang kaibigan ko ngayon sa palago ng kanyang negosyo, pagdating ng panahon na kakailanganin ko ang tulong niya ay sana maibalik niya ang pabor na aking ginawa sa kanya. (remove – not related) 19. Kapag may dalawang taong lumapit sa akin at humingi ng tulong, mas inuuna kong tulungan ang taong pinagkakautangan ko ng loob. 20. Kapag kritikal na ang sitwasyon ng sunog, uunahin kong tulungan ang taong mayroon akong utang-na-loob.

Predisposition to Help

Appendix C Pilot Test Items (111 items)

63

Predisposition to Help

64

Predisposition to Help

65

Predisposition to Help

66

Predisposition to Help

67

Predisposition to Help

Appendix D Rotated Factor Loadings

68

Predisposition to Help

69

Predisposition to Help

70

Predisposition to Help

71

Predisposition to Help

Appendix E Communalities: Principal Factor Analysis

72

Predisposition to Help

73

Predisposition to Help

Appendix F Items for the Final Form (71 items)

74

Predisposition to Help

75

Predisposition to Help

76

Predisposition to Help

77

Predisposition to Help

78

Appendix G Euclidean Distance for the Tree Clustering pagkabayani Pakikiramdam makapamilya utang-na-loob pananagutan pagkabayani 0 308 136 146 932 pakikiramdam 308 0 257 229 1225 makapamilya 136 257 0 93 984 utang-na-loob 146 229 93 0 1015 pananagutan 932 1225 984 1015 0 Appemdix H Amalgamated Distances Eucledian Distance 93.41841 135.9743 229.0720 931.9694

Obj. No. makapamilya pagkabayani pagkabayani pagkabayani

Obj. No.

Obj. No.

Obj. No.

Obj. No.

utang-na-loob makapamilya utang-na-loob makapamilya utang-na-loob pakikiramdam makapamilya utang-na-loob pakikiramdam pananagutan

Predisposition to Help

Appendix I EFA Varimax Rotated Loadings ITEM1 ITEM2 ITEM3 ITEM4 ITEM5 ITEM6 ITEM7 ITEM8 ITEM9 ITEM10 ITEM11 ITEM12 ITEM13 ITEM14 ITEM15 ITEM16 ITEM17 ITEM18 ITEM19 ITEM20 ITEM21 ITEM22 ITEM23 ITEM24 ITEM25 ITEM26 ITEM27 ITEM28 ITEM29 ITEM30 ITEM31 ITEM32 ITEM33 ITEM34 ITEM35 ITEM36 ITEM37 ITEM38 ITEM39 ITEM40 ITEM41 ITEM42

Factor 0.26936 -0.11429 0.53735 0.24284 0.45971 0.12999 0.26240 0.28203 -0.13431 0.16474 0.05495 0.06562 0.25076 -0.07243 0.28575 0.28012 0.45682 0.50060 0.15424 -0.05839 0.32797 -0.23370 0.30276 0.58422 0.69410 -0.08513 0.43194 -0.14005 0.13781 0.15075 0.19136 0.40554 0.45387 -0.03587 0.32185 0.34217 0.47874 0.15708 -0.16239 0.13113 0.48826 0.39030

Factor 0.131475 0.344247 0.005381 0.098735 0.218681 0.271909 0.240875 0.082669 0.631903 0.236126 0.730947 0.580069 0.188356 0.260778 -0.022739 0.069613 0.022953 0.304030 -0.305999 0.664676 -0.139509 -0.066031 -0.040670 -0.106245 -0.084266 -0.228078 0.029024 0.005094 -0.196946 0.278555 -0.049837 -0.004923 0.307005 -0.083656 0.237299 0.114348 0.039786 0.034955 -0.019029 -0.089892 -0.125961 0.090723

Factor 0.489281 0.236115 0.348509 0.443119 0.146930 0.555313 0.458561 0.533346 -0.015588 0.432969 0.236042 0.079058 0.529229 -0.085647 0.371267 0.313661 0.322601 0.260858 0.284432 -0.202726 0.437507 0.476290 -0.051563 0.164543 0.046124 0.444747 0.534244 0.384487 0.476380 0.414915 0.582710 0.159409 0.183680 0.071760 0.461913 0.319334 0.498826 -0.158383 0.123986 0.287948 0.106387 0.439337

Factor -0.014678 -0.353720 -0.054892 -0.041925 0.137978 0.004330 -0.012085 0.137785 -0.162160 -0.115371 -0.048930 -0.201694 -0.144636 -0.465907 0.293935 -0.201155 0.111096 0.085778 0.556550 0.027314 0.158450 0.163036 0.194764 0.128667 0.175929 0.423655 0.213726 -0.282142 -0.103451 0.244560 0.001328 0.427115 0.042717 0.145402 -0.037695 0.109272 0.208843 0.740074 0.479717 0.748678 -0.116935 0.162372

Factor -0.108014 -0.031482 -0.310472 -0.196248 -0.219342 -0.325922 -0.254440 0.093543 -0.059014 0.108309 0.072883 0.036936 -0.091227 0.045016 0.082143 0.073366 0.099811 -0.056215 0.021608 0.083683 0.128545 0.093199 0.249239 0.205506 -0.077751 -0.012203 0.020847 0.235494 0.215764 0.187279 -0.075838 0.182414 0.290892 0.604864 0.096970 0.079002 0.116998 -0.040762 -0.033009 -0.076664 0.226695 0.096838

79

Predisposition to Help

ITEM43 ITEM44 ITEM45 ITEM46 ITEM47 ITEM48 ITEM49 ITEM50 ITEM51 ITEM52 ITEM53 ITEM54 ITEM55 ITEM56 ITEM57 ITEM58 ITEM59 ITEM60 ITEM61 ITEM62 ITEM63 ITEM64 ITEM65 ITEM66 ITEM67 ITEM68 ITEM69 ITEM70 ITEM71 Expl.Var Prp.Totl

0.13371 0.17023 0.32015 0.27114 0.05302 0.47301 0.49422 0.38008 -0.17603 0.66808 0.21293 0.78464 0.76434 0.45140 0.49832 0.27832 0.59271 -0.08186 0.41995 0.71912 0.09070 0.78281 0.51423 0.51777 0.67951 0.20251 0.66816 0.54126 0.32236 10.86779 0.15307

0.005347 -0.031153 0.011036 0.215172 0.532528 0.196954 -0.010727 -0.111038 0.146832 -0.171887 0.019893 -0.143735 -0.094728 0.120257 -0.079785 0.240581 0.161454 0.320888 -0.057481 0.130178 0.253642 0.176205 0.061853 0.097090 0.076610 0.630956 0.158579 0.167708 -0.142450 4.094403 0.057668

0.687386 0.663011 0.111827 0.575050 0.109914 0.385350 0.535820 0.433170 -0.435698 0.313546 0.681001 0.191007 0.149296 0.446356 0.241445 0.073898 0.171299 0.166788 0.567497 -0.100420 0.509576 0.033877 0.444938 0.308286 0.265246 0.035354 0.159668 0.433955 0.285736 9.555513 0.134585

-0.021845 0.126550 -0.377264 0.148774 -0.191422 0.055457 0.023047 -0.250521 0.104125 -0.032008 0.081768 0.036061 -0.037106 0.330045 0.131317 -0.030530 0.117747 -0.242482 0.184204 -0.076835 -0.083933 0.067968 0.078782 0.108713 -0.026140 0.088452 0.144212 0.041499 -0.382996 3.851388 0.054245

0.066721 0.111413 0.292493 0.224130 0.534057 0.202235 0.096583 0.276652 -0.218000 -0.076420 0.041967 -0.096117 -0.123130 0.116700 0.150193 0.618131 0.099760 0.611935 0.022954 0.085732 0.187107 0.118386 0.224257 0.122437 -0.011207 0.158570 0.130561 0.151075 0.229004 2.988465 0.042091

80

Predisposition to Help

81

Appendix J Accepted Items for the EFA Factor 1 Pagkabayani

Factor 2 Makapamily a Kindred relationship

• Kapag may nangyayaring landslide, kahit na alam kong delikado ang sitwasyon ay tutulungan ko pa rin ang mga natabunan. • Handa akong lumusob sa tubig kahit malalimat mapanganib para mailigtas ang taong nalulunod. • Kapag nakakita ako ng isang taong malapit nang masagasaan, ilalayo ko siya sa panganib dahil alam kong mahirap ang kalagayan kapag mnaaksidente. • Gusto kong tulungan ang mga taong nasa aming komunidad dahil alam kong sapat ang aking kakayahan. • Bilang tanda ng pagtutulungan ay dinadamayan ko ang suliranin ng ibang tao. • Hindi ako nagdadalawang isip na tumulong sa mga tao kahit na alam kong madadamay ako sa kapahamakan • Tutulungan ko ang aking kaibigan dahil ito ay responsibilidad ko. • Nararapat na tulungan ko ang sinumang nasalanta kahit na masangkot ako sa hirap • Kailangan na tulungan ko ang aking mga kapit bahay dahil iyon ang nararapat • Tutulungan ko ang aking kapwa hanggat makakaya ko at hindi ko iniisip kung malalagay man ang huhay ko sa panganib. • Tutulungan ko ang taong nasa panganib kahit buhay ko pa ang nakataya • Handa akong ibuwis ang kahit ano, maging buhay man basta makatulong ako sa mga taong nasa panganib • Ang mga epekto ng aking gagawing pagtulong ay hindi dahilan upang baliwalain ko ang aking kapwa • Ayokong makitang nasasaktan ang isang tao kaya tumutulong ako hanggat makakaya. • Pipigilan ko ang mga nag-aaway upang maayos agad ang gulo kahit na malagay pa sa panganib ang buhay ko • Handa akong tmulong sa anumang sitwasyon • Hindi ako magdadalawang isip na tulungan ang mga biktima ng kalamidad kahit na mapanganib pa ito • Importante para sa akin ang makatulong sa mga nangangailangan kahit na gaano pa ito kahirap • Kapag mayroong luymapit sa akon na dalawang tao at nagpapatulong sa isang gawain, uunahin kong tulungan ang kakilala ko. • Mas malaki ang tulong na aking ibinibigay sa mga taong malapit sa akin. • Inuuna kong tulungan ang mkga kaibigan at kamag-anak ko tuwing sila ay may problema • Kapag nasa panganib ang dalwang tao, una kong tutulungaan ang taong kakilala ko

• Madalas kong tinutulungan ang mga taong natulungan na ako. (revise) Madalas kong • Factor 3 Pananagutan

• • • • • •

tinutulungaang mga taong kakilala ko. Ang taong malapit sa aking puso ang una kong tutulungankapag mayroong pabor na hihingin sa akin. Tutulong ako sa aking mga kasama sa komunidad dahil mahalag ito para sa akin Sinisigurado ko na matulungan ko ang mga nagdurusa kong kapit bahay Tutulungan ko ang isang tao lalo na kung alam kong siya ay aking kababayan Tumutulong ako tuwing may kalamidad lalo na kung ito ay malapit sa aming tirahan Tutulungan ko ang mga taong nakikita kong nangangailangan bilang isang mabuting tao. Sa mga oras na gipit o walang pera ang isang tao sa aming lugar ay hindi ko

Predisposition to Help

Factor 4 Utang na loob

Factor 5 Utang na loob

82

maiiwasang tumulong • Isang obligasyon ang pagtulong sa aking kapwa • Kailangan kong tumulong sa mga proyekto sa aming komunidad dahil para rin ito sa ikabubuti ng aking kapaligiran • Malaki ang pagpapahalaga ko sa aking komunidad kaya lubos ang aking pagtulong dito • Kapag nakakita ako ng taong maraming dala-dala sa aming kalsada, inaalok ko ang aking tulong • Magaan sa loob ko na matulungan ang mga taong malapit sa king puso. • Kapag nangangailangan ng tulong aming aking kapit-bahay ay aalalayan ko siya hanggat sa aking makakaya. • Tungkulin kong tumulong sa mga taong nasalanta ng kalamidad. • Tayo ay may pananagutan na makatulong sa kapwa sa oras ng kanilang pangangailangan • Nagbibigay ako ng tulong dahil alam kong gawain ito ng isang mabuting mamamayan • Bukal sa aking loob ang tumulong sa mga taong nahihirapan dahil naiintindihan ko ang kanilang kalagayan. • Tumutulong ako sa mga tao dahil nararamdaman kong kailangn nila ang tulong ko. • Nararamdaman ko ang problema ng mga taong lumalapit sa akin at humuhingi ng tulong. • Pantay pantay lamang ang serbisyo ko sa pagtulong pati sa mga hindi pa nakapagbibigay ng tulong sa akin. • Malaking baagay ang makatulong lalo na kung sa iisang komunidad kami nakatira • Inuuna ko ang aking kapamilya sa anumang sitwasyon na dumarating sa akin. • Tinutungan ko lamang ang mga taong nakatulong na sa akin dati • Sa aking palagay ay hindi ko obligasyon ang tumulong sa mga tao lalo na kung pinabayaan nila ako dati. (-) • Hindi ako humihingi ng tulong mula sa ibang tao dahil alam kong umaasa silang may kapalit ito. (-) • Mahirap para sa kin an tumanaw ng utang na loobn kaya nag-aalanganin akong humingi ng utang ng loob. (-) • Hindi ko matutulungan ang mga taong binaliwala ako noong ako ay nangangailanagan. • Mahalaga sa akin ang pagtanaw ng utang na loob sa mga taong tumutulong sa akin. • Kailangan kong tulungan ang mga taong tumulong sa akin dati. • Tinutulungan ko agad ang mga taong pinagkakautangan ko ng pabor