The authors applied functionalist theory to the question of the motivations underlying volunteerism, hypothesized 6 functions potentially served by volunteerism, and designed an instrument to assess these functions (Volunteer Functions Inventory; VFI). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses on diverse samples yielded factor solutions consistent with functionalist theorizing; each VFI motivation, loaded on a single factor, possessed substantial internal consistency and temporal stability and correlated only modestly with other VFI motivations (Studies 1, 2, and 3). Evidence for predictive validity is provided by a laboratory study in which VFI motivations predicted the persuasive appeal of messages better when message and motivation were matched than mismatched (Study 4), and by field studies in which the extent to which volunteers' experiences matched their motivations predicted satisfaction (Study 5) and future intentions (Study 6). Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

This study examined a functional strategy for investigating audience responses to motivationally‐based persuasive appeals. It was predicted that people exposed to advertisements informing them how they could satisfy personally relevant motivations through volunteering (i.e., functionally matched messages) would judge these ads to be more persuasive, more emotionally positive, and would report being more likely to volunteer than people exposed to advertisements unrelated to their personally relevant motivations (i.e., functionally mismatched messages). These predictions were confirmed in an experiment wherein participants whose attitudes toward volunteerism served a Social Adjustive, Value Expressive, Utilitarian, Knowledge, or Ego Defensive function viewed advertisements promoting volunteerism that either matched or mismatched their personally relevant motivations. Results confirmed predictions as participants responded more favorably to the functionally matched than mismatched messages. The implications of this research for understanding the mechanisms by which functionally matched messages exert persuasive influence and the ramifications of the research for the practice of volunteerism are discussed.

Two studies examined the effects of offender blameworthiness, consequence severity, and offender gender on written accounts provided after a hypothetical predicament. Participants imagined themselves as the offending party in a predicament and provided written accounts after their victims' reproach. Accounts were coded using Schonbach's (1980) account taxonomy. Study 1 results showed that although concessionary strategies were the most prevalent overall, they were more prevalent for more blameworthy offenses than less blameworthy offenses. Women's accounts were more complex than men's, especially for more blameworthy offenses. In Study 2, in which 3 levels of blameworthiness were used, offenders proffered significantly more concessions after negligent acts than after either accidental or intentional acts, producing a curvilinear pattern. Again, accounts of men and women differed, with men proffering fewer and less complex concessions and more lies than did women. Deviations from politeness theory predictions are explained by reference to face-saving tensions inherent in social predicaments, tensions absent in less problematic social encounters."For the wages of sin is death." (Romans 6:23) Portions of the research reported here were presented at the 1990 Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago. This research was supported by a Grant-in-Aid of Research from the Graduate School at the University of Minnesota to Marti Hope Gonzales.We are grateful to Connie Lawrence, Jay Sieler, and Jordan Moe for their assistance in data collection and to Connie Lawrence for her voluminous typewritten transcriptions of participants' written accounts. We are also indebted to three anonymous reviewers whose valuable comments and suggestions are reflected in this article.

No abstract