See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261371481

The influence of volunteer motivation on satisfaction, attitudes, and support

for a mega-event

Article  in  International Journal of Hospitality Management · July 2014

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.003

CITATIONS READS

41 1,538

4 authors, including:

Myung Ja Kim
Kyung Hee University
47 PUBLICATIONS   1,065 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The influence of open innovation activities on the non-financial performance in the cultural tourism content industry View project

The effect of motivation and deterrent on perceived trust and risk for crowdfunding participation in tourism-related fields: Focusing on the moderating role of funders’
herding behavior View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Myung Ja Kim on 03 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman

The influence of volunteer motivation on satisfaction, attitudes,

and support for a mega-event
Choong-Ki Lee a,1 , Yvette Reisinger b,2 , Myung Ja Kim a,∗ , Seol-Min Yoon c,3
a
College of Hotel & Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University, 1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 130-701, Republic of Korea
b
College of Business Administration, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Block 5, Building 1, Mubarak Al-Abdullah Area, West Mishref, Kuwait
c
Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Woosong University, 17-2, Jayang-dong, Dong-gu, Daejeon 300-718, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Keywords: Although there are numerous studies on volunteering in tourism, little research has been done on vol-
Volunteer unteer support for mega-events. This study develops a theoretical model investigating the relationship
Volunteering between volunteer motivation and support for the Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea through mediating effects of
Mega-events
satisfaction and attitudes toward volunteering and the Expo venue. An onsite survey of 489 volunteers
Motivation
at the Yeosu Expo was conducted. The structural equation model reveals that patriotism and intrinsic
Attitude
Satisfaction motivations significantly influence volunteer satisfaction, which in turn exerts a significant effect on
attitudes toward volunteering and the Expo venue. Also, volunteer attitudes toward volunteering signif-
icantly influence volunteer attitudes toward the Expo venue, which in turn have a significant effect on
support for the Expo. The study suggests that patriotism and intrinsic motivations can leverage support
for mega-events through enhancing mediators of satisfaction and attitudes.

© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction for mega-events are motivated by the opportunity to socialize,

Mega-events have been studied in terms of their tourist attrac-
tiveness, image-making or developmental roles (Getz, 2008).
Relatively little research has been done on volunteering for mega-
events. Volunteers play an important role in hosting mega-events;
they represent staff, visitors, and consumers. Volunteers are also
supporters of mega-events who help to make these events suc-
cessful (Ralston et al., 2005). Identifying volunteer motivation for
participating and supporting mega-events is essential for organiz-
ing and hosting these events. Thus, it is vital to explore volunteer
motivations to participate in mega-events. Many studies have
been conducted on volunteer motivation in the area of sports
mega-events (e.g., Bang and Ross, 2009; MacLean and Hamm,
2007; Strigas and Jackson, 2003). It was found that volunteers
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 961 0549; fax: +82 2 961 0549.
E-mail addresses: cklee@khu.ac.kr (C.-K. Lee), yvette.reisinger@gmail.com
(Y. Reisinger), silver@khu.ac.kr, brightsaint@gmail.com (M.J. Kim),
sm9957@nate.com (S.-M. Yoon).
1
Tel.: +82 2 961 9430; fax: +82 2 964 2537.
2
Tel.: +965 2530 7000; fax: +965 2530 7030.
3
Tel.: +82 10 8964 0029.
obtain material rewards, enhance the local community status, con-
nect with personal hobbies and interests, and express altruism
(Carpenter and Myers, 2010; Elstad, 2003; Hoffman, 1981; Warner
et al., 2011).
Warner et al. (2011) argue that motivations alone are poor pre-
dictors of volunteer support for mega-events; one should explore
volunteer satisfaction with mega-events (Warner et al., 2011) that
affects attitudes toward volunteering and event venues (Pearce,
1983) and ultimately reflects support for the events. For example,
it was found that volunteer motivations highly influence satisfac-
tion with sports mega-events (e.g., Farrell et al., 1998; Reeser et al.,
2005). Volunteer satisfaction, on the other hand, affects attitudes in
organizations (Boezeman and Ellemers, 2009). Also, volunteer atti-
tudes toward volunteering and event venues significantly change
over time and affect support for events (Gallarza et al., 2013;
Ralston et al., 2005).
A theory of self-determination is utilized in this study. Self-
determination theory can explain volunteer intrinsic and extrinsic
motivational needs (Ryan and Deci, 2000a). Based on this theory,
this study identifies volunteer motivation in the context of the Expo
2012 Yeosu Korea (hereafter “Yeosu Expo”) – a cultural mega-event.
The study examines the relationships between volunteer motiva-
tion and attitudes toward volunteering and the Expo venue through

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.03.003
0278-4319/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
38 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
a mediating effect of satisfaction, and between satisfaction and
support for the Expo through mediating effects of attitudes.
The paper consists of several sections. The literature review
section describes the analyzed concepts, followed by the devel-
opment of the hypotheses to be tested. The methodology section
explains construct measurement and the data collection procedure.
The results section describes the findings of the confirmatory fac-
tor analysis and structural equation modeling in reference to the
hypotheses tested. The last section discusses theoretical and prac-
tical implications of the study results.
2. Literature review
2.1. Mega-events
A special event is “a one-time or infrequently occurring event
outside normal programs or activities of the sponsoring or orga-
nizing body” (Getz, 1997, p. 4). There are different types of special
events depending on their form, purpose, and program; some
are for public celebration (community festivals), while others are
planned for purposes of competition, fun, entertainment, busi-
ness, or socializing (e.g., sports, Expos) (Getz, 2005). Jago and Shaw
(1998) categorize special events according to their size and impact
on tourism (e.g., minor events, major events, hallmark events, fes-
tivals, mega-events). Mega-events are very large events that affect
entire economies and reverberate in the global media; they include
Olympic Games (e.g., mega-sports events) and international exhi-
bitions (e.g., world expos, international expos, specialized expos)
(Bureau International des Expositions, 2012; Lim and Lee, 2006).
Mega-events stimulate tourism and play a vital role in destination
marketing (Getz, 2008).
The term “Expo” refers to exposition and is also known as
a World Fair. There are various types of Expos, including trade,
computer, convention, or home shopping. Tourism developers at
international, national, and local levels show a great deal of interest
in cultural Expos (Lee et al., 2013). This study examines volun-
teer motivation for participating in the Yeosu Expo, which has
been recognized as an important international cultural mega-event
by the International Exhibitions Bureau (Bureau International des
Expositions, 2012). The Yeosu Expo focused on preservation and
sustainable development of the ocean and coast, new technology,
and creative marine activities.
2.2. Theoretical foundation of the study
The present study utilizes self-determination theory as a the-
oretical framework. This theory distinguishes between different
types of motivation based on the different goals that encourage
people to a specific behavior (Deci and Ryan, 1985, 2008; Ryan
and Deci, 2000b). The most basic distinction is between “intrinsic
motivation, which refers to doing something because it is inher-
ently interesting or enjoyable, and extrinsic motivation, which
refers to doing something because it leads to a separable out-
come” (Ryan and Deci, 2000a, p. 55). Intrinsic motivation provides
satisfaction of innate psychological needs (e.g., for competence,
autonomy, relatedness) (Hull, 1943), whereas extrinsic motivation
is not inherently interesting and must be externally stimulated (to
be valued by others, to feel connected, to belong, and to relate)
(Ryan and Deci, 2000a). Self-determination theory can explain
the importance of fulfilling volunteer motivational needs. Intrin-
sically motivated volunteers behave based on self-determination
and engage in volunteering because they find it interesting and
enjoyable (e.g., fun and challenging) and perceive volunteering as
being important (Oostlander et al., 2013). Externally motivated
volunteers behave based on external conditions (e.g., to avoid
punishment, guilt or shame, or to gain social recognition and pro-
tect self-worth) (Deci and Ryan, 2000; Oostlander et al., 2013).
Volunteers who are autonomously (self-) motivated, acting based
on interest and fun because of underlying personal values, usually
report higher satisfaction (Millette and Gagné, 2008) than indi-
viduals who are motivated and controlled by external conditions
and act based on external pressure to avoid guilt or punishment
(Oostlander et al., 2013). According to Bang and Ross (2009), indi-
viduals are likely to volunteer for events to the extent that they
experience psychological need satisfaction with the events. The
satisfaction with the volunteer experience can lead to positive
commitment to the organization (event) (Bang and Ross, 2009).
Self-determination theory offers the opportunity to gain a bet-
ter understanding of the quality of volunteer motivation and the
importance of self-determination and personal values as opposed
to the importance of external pressure. In addition, this theory
emphasizes the role of the external social environment in devel-
oping motivation.
2.3. Definitions of volunteering and volunteer
Volunteering is “any activity in which time is given freely to ben-
efit another person, group, or organization” (Wilson, 2000, p. 215).
Volunteering is a non-salaried service (Cnaan et al., 1996) requir-
ing a sense of obligation on the part of volunteers in terms of time,
effort, and skill development (Holmes et al., 2010). Volunteering is
“a skill- and knowledge-based activity in which people can have a
career in a special social world” (Stebbins, 1982, p. 264). This activ-
ity offers the opportunity for socializing, improving professional
competencies and interpersonal skills, and contributing to learn-
ing and personal development. Volunteering enhances individual
and community well-being (Stebbins, 1982). It can create feelings
of achievement and self-satisfaction and enhance self-esteem.
A volunteer devotes leisure time to public or client interests
(Stebbins, 1992) and performs an unpaid and planned activity,
within a formal structure (public, private, or non-profit), involving
some type of time commitment (Gallarza et al., 2013). A volunteer
engages in activities that are beneficial for the helper as well as
the helped (Wilson, 2000). Many doctors, teachers, or emergency
rescuers volunteer their services in various contexts and circum-
stances.
An intention to volunteer for an event is a function of the
perceived contribution of volunteering and the rewards an indi-
vidual expects to receive as a result of volunteer experience (Bang
et al., 2009b). Through a volunteering experience, an individual
evaluates own psychological needs, such as the desire to express
one’s values, enhance one’s career, and enjoy being involved in cer-
tain activities (Bang and Ross, 2009). Wearing (2001) insists that
in the context of volunteer tourism, volunteering provides bene-
fits to both participants and local communities. Smith and Holmes
(2012) assert that volunteers contribute to tourism as consumers
of tourism experiences as well as participants in tourism activities
such as events.
2.4. Definition of volunteer motivation
A wide variety of volunteer motivations have been identified
in the literature on volunteering (e.g., Clary et al., 1998; Khoo and
Engelhorn, 2011; Lai et al., 2013; Pearce, 1983; Warner et al., 2011).
Volunteer motivation can be defined as a drive of individuals to
seek out volunteer opportunities, to commit themselves to volun-
tary helping, and to sustain their involvement in volunteerism over
extended periods of time (Clary et al., 1998; Pearce, 1983). Khoo and
Engelhorn (2011) characterize volunteer motivation as a five-factor
model including solidarity, altruistic factors, commitments, exter-
nal traditions, and family traditions. Clary et al. (1998) and Lai et al.
 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
(2013) identify six motivations for volunteering: values (to express
values related to altruistic and humanitarian concerns for others);
understanding (to acquire new learning experiences and/or exer-
cise skills that might otherwise go unused); social (to strengthen
social relationships); career (to gain career related experience);
protection (to reduce negative feelings about oneself or address
personal problems); and self-enhancement (to grow and develop
psychologically).
Warner et al. (2011) suggest dimensions of volunteer motiva-
tion, such as contribution to society (e.g., altruism), contribution to
the nation (e.g., patriotism), tangible rewards (e.g., extrinsic moti-
vation), and challenging tasks (e.g., intrinsic motivation). Other
dimensions of motivations are also identified, including altruism
(e.g., Carpenter and Myers, 2010; Gallarza et al., 2013), patriotism
(e.g., Bang et al., 2009a; Mummendey et al., 2001; Yang et al., 2010),
intrinsic motivation (e.g., Degli Antoni, 2009; Gallarza et al., 2013),
and extrinsic motivation (e.g., Bang and Chelladurai, 2009; Degli
Antoni, 2009; Finkelstein, 2009). In this study, the altruism, patrio-
tism, intrinsic and extrinsic dimensions of motivation are identified
as the four major constructs that conceptualize volunteer moti-
vation for participating in mega-events (see Section 3.4). These
constructs are reviewed below.
2.4.1. Altruism
Altruism is defined as “behavior that promotes the welfare
of others without conscious regard for one’s own self-interests”
(Hoffman, 1981, p. 124). Altruism focuses on the needs of others,
which is distinct from the other volunteer motivations; volunteers
motivated by altruism trade off the same costs for the benefit
of someone else (Unger, 1991). Empirical research provides evi-
dence for altruistic motives across many types of voluntary activity
(Becker, 1974). A number of studies on volunteering cite altruistic
reasons among primary motivations to volunteer (e.g., Carpenter
and Myers, 2010; Khoo and Engelhorn, 2011; Unger, 1991; Warner
et al., 2011). Controlling for a variety of other explanations,
Carpenter and Myers (2010) find that the decision to volunteer
is positively correlated with altruism. Khoo and Engelhorn (2011)
suggest that altruism is crucial in volunteer motivation. Also, dur-
ing volunteer experiences the individual may discover the joy of
helping others, and altruism may then drive further volunteering
(Warner et al., 2011). As a result, this study considers altruism as an
important volunteer motivation for participating in mega-events.
2.4.2. Patriotism
Patriotism is defined as “critical awareness of and loyalty
towards the in-group” (Mummendey et al., 2001, p. 160). Patri-
otism is the sole motive for being a volunteer (Jackson, 1999).
Patriotism can be seen as an analogous concept to nationalism.
Individuals perceive their selves as part of the nation and the nation
as part of themselves; in other words, the individual self and the
nation are united into one psychological entity (Lai et al., 2013).
Individuals have a tendency to organize themselves into distinct
groupings based on an affinity of birth and/or belonging to a par-
ticular nation (Mummendey et al., 2001). Their sense of belonging
to one nation, a feeling they share with a group of people, regard-
less of one’s status is their national identity (Lai et al., 2013). While
temporal or standard intergroup comparisons with other nations
are associated with intergroup behavior that corresponds to patri-
otism, intergroup comparisons are linked with intergroup behavior
that corresponds to nationalism (Mummendey et al., 2001). Yang
et al. (2010) indicate that for those with a high permeability of
the self-boundary, their national focus and participation in the Bei-
jing Olympic Games becomes more positive as their patriotism
increases. According to Lai et al. (2013), a stronger national identity
(e.g., patriotism) is associated with greater volunteer motivation.
39
Therefore, this study considers patriotism as a significant volunteer
motivation for participating in mega-events.
2.4.3. Extrinsic motivation
Extrinsic motivation refers to behaviors or actions that make
possible an attainment of some outcomes aside from intrinsic
satisfaction with the action itself (Chantal et al., 1995; Deci and
Ryan, 2000). Extrinsic motivation can be seen as a tangible reward
(Warner et al., 2011), such as monetary reward or social recogni-
tion and networks. In tourism, many extrinsic benefits (e.g., family
involvement, free entrance, free food) can motivate volunteers
(Anderson and Shaw, 1999). Some volunteers may not be moti-
vated by monetary incentives, others may decide to join a voluntary
association to increase their social recognition and networks (Degli
Antoni, 2009). While sport volunteers feel that food and other
tangible rewards are attractive features of the volunteer experi-
ence, non-sport volunteers are indifferent to the provision of free
food, tangible rewards, and prestige and status (Warner et al.,
2011). According to Gallarza et al. (2013), extrinsic motivation (i.e.,
cognitive rather than affective) is represented by the utilitarian
value of the self-serving facet and includes broader social extrinsic
value, such as civic pride (e.g., satisfaction with one’s own or oth-
ers achievements) in sporting or cultural events. Thus, this study
considers extrinsic motivation as a main volunteer motivation for
participating in mega-events.
2.4.4. Intrinsic motivation
Intrinsic (internal) motivation refers to behavior that involves
engaging in an activity for the satisfaction or enjoyment inherent
in performing the activity (Finkelstein, 2009). Intrinsic motivation
deals with the hedonic dimension of acting as a volunteer (Gallarza
et al., 2013). Volunteering is associated with having fun, devel-
oping interests, and satisfying one’s expectations and curiosity
(Gallarza et al., 2013; Sin, 2009). Intrinsic motivation is positively
associated with a volunteer self-concept and pro-social person-
ality satisfied by the volunteer activity itself (Finkelstein, 2009).
Intrinsic motivation enables people to create relations character-
ized by a significant degree of familiarity (Degli Antoni, 2009).
Warner et al. (2011, p. 339) report that intrinsic motivations, such as
“tasks are challenging” and “experience is exciting” are significant
factors motivating different types of volunteers (sport continuous
and episodic; non-sport continuous and episodic). Event organizers
place much emphasis on the importance of intrinsically reward-
ing motives, such as the enjoyment of the activity of volunteering,
interacting socially with other volunteers and event participants,
and contributing to the larger social good (Cuskelly et al., 2004).
Anderson and Shaw (1999) find that intrinsic motivation is a very
significant volunteer motivation in tourism. Consequently, this
study considers intrinsic motivation to be a major volunteer moti-
vation for participating in mega-events.
Review of major studies on volunteer motivation is presented
in Table 1.
2.5. Volunteer satisfaction
Volunteer satisfaction is a popular and extensively studied topic
(e.g., Finkelstein, 2008; Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley, 2001; Jones and
Burns, 1973; Warner et al., 2011; Wong et al., 2011). Costa et al.
(2006) and Love et al. (2013) identify factors influencing volunteer
experiences at sports events, suggesting that experiences influence
volunteer satisfaction with sports events. However, previous stud-
ies suggest that volunteer satisfaction can be better predicted by
motivation (e.g., Clary et al., 1998; Farrell et al., 1998; Millette
and Gagné, 2008; Pearce, 1983; Reeser et al., 2005). It is also
argued that volunteer satisfaction is a predictor of time spent vol-
unteering, longevity of volunteer service, and intention to continue
40 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
Table 1
Review of major studies on volunteer motivation.
Researcher Major objectives
Anderson and Shaw (1999) Compare various techniques
applied to an open-ended
question regarding volunteer
motivation at a tourist
attraction
Bang et al. (2009a) Validate the revised volunteer
motivation scale for
international sporting events
and identify sub-group
differences in motivation for
volunteering
Bang and Chelladurai (2009) Develop and validate the
volunteer motivation scale for
international sporting events
Clary et al. (1998) Apply functionalist theory to
motivation for volunteering
Farrell et al. (1998) Investigate satisfaction with
and motivation for
volunteering
Khoo and Engelhorn (2011) Investigate motivational
differences in different
demographic and experiential
groups
Lai et al. (2013) Investigate factors motivating
Chinese adults to volunteer
and the role of national
identity in volunteering
Pearce (1983) Identify differences in
motivation and job attitudes
between volunteers and
employees
Reeser et al. (2005) Understand factors that
motivate and contribute to
satisfaction of polyclinic
volunteers
Warner et al. (2011) Identify satisfaction with and
motivation for improving the
volunteer system
volunteering (Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley, 2001). Thus, in this study,
volunteer satisfaction is considered as an outcome of volunteer
motivation as well as a predictor of future volunteering decisions, as
based on Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley (2001) and Finkelstein (2008).
Volunteer satisfaction plays an important role in sustaining vol-
unteer service and is a key component of the functional approach
to the volunteer process (Finkelstein, 2008). This study considers
volunteer satisfaction as a mediator between volunteer motivation
and attitudes toward volunteering and mega-event venues.
2.6. Attitude
Attitude is defined as “an affective or evaluative response to
beliefs” (Bagozzi, 1981, p. 325). The formation of an attitude pre-
cedes an assessment of beliefs and evaluations of consequences
of an act (Bagozzi, 1996). According to Batra and Ahtola (1991),
individual attitude is inherently bi-dimensional, based on both util-
itarian and hedonic values. Volunteer attitude can be defined as
a volunteer’s feeling toward potential volunteering and a tourism
destination, which is a key consideration in relation to mega-events
(Ralston et al., 2005). Different attitudes toward life affect attitudes
toward volunteering (Wilson, 2000). For example, Pearce (1978)
states that volunteers have positive attitudes toward volunteer-
ing because they want to do ‘good’. Volunteers have greater job
Delineated factors Event name and site
Community tourism, Sovereign
education, employment, family Hill, Victoria, Australia
involvement, leisure and
recreation, life enhancement,
material benefits, organization
goals, previous ties,
recruitment, social interaction
Expression of values, 2004 Athens Olympic Games,
patriotism, interpersonal Athens, Greece
contacts, career orientation,
personal growth, extrinsic
rewards, love of sports
Expression of values, 2002 FIFA World Cup, Seoul,
patriotism, interpersonal Korea
contacts, career orientation,
personal growth, extrinsic
rewards
Career, enhancement, Minneapolis, St. Paul, USA
protective, social,
understanding, values
Commitments, external 1996 Tournament of Hearts,
traditions, purposive, solidary Canada
Commitments, external The USA National Special
traditions, family traditions, Olympics, Ames, Iowa, USA
purposive, solidary
Career, enhancement, national Beijing and Macao, China
identity, protective, social,
understanding, values
Intrinsic motivation, social Private university,
motivation, service motivation northeastern
USA
To do something worthwhile, The International Olympic and
to help make the event a Paralympic Games
success, to make me feel part USA
of the event
Contribution to society, Sport and non-sport
contribution to the organizations, USA
organization, exciting
experience, free food, tangible
rewards, challenging tasks
satisfaction, less intention to leave, and greater praiseworthiness
than comparable employees (Pearce, 1983). Ralston et al. (2005)
indicate that volunteer attitudes toward volunteering strengthen
attitudes toward event venues.
Also, attitude toward a particular behavior is a function of
one’s salient beliefs that the action will lead to certain positive
or negative outcomes and an evaluation of how important these
outcomes could be (Cuskelly et al., 2004). Strong positive and neg-
ative attitudes toward major event volunteering predict higher
and lower levels of behavioral dependability, respectively (Cuskelly
et al., 2004). In the context of volunteer tourism, the effects of
event volunteering on residents’ attitudes were found to be both
positive and negative (e.g., Guttentag, 2009; Lyons et al., 2012).
Residents’ positive and negative attitudes were also found to play
a mediating role between antecedent variables (e.g., resident char-
acteristics, personal benefits) and outcome variables (e.g., support
for volunteerism, tourism planning) (e.g., McGehee and Andereck,
2009). Thus, this study defines volunteer attitude toward volun-
teering as a mediator between satisfaction and attitude toward the
mega-event venues as well as between satisfaction and support
for mega-events. This study also defines volunteer attitude toward
mega-event venues as a mediator between satisfaction and support
for mega-events as well as between attitude toward volunteering
and support for mega-events.
 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
2.7. Support for mega-events
Volunteering plays a critical role in community support for
events (Getz, 1991). Residents-volunteers are likely to support
mega-events as long as they believe the expected benefits exceed
the expected costs (Gursoy and Kendall, 2006). Ralston et al. (2005)
report a large number of volunteers who support sporting events
before the event (86.1%) and after the event (87.1%). If support for
mega-events remains relatively strong over time, this helps orga-
nizations to push for improved infrastructure in venues (Mihalik,
2000). In this study, support is defined as volunteer support for the
mega-event such as the Yeosu Expo.
2.8. Hypothesis development
2.8.1. Relationship between volunteer motivation and satisfaction
Volunteer satisfaction is integral to the success of the initial
and future events, which is highly influenced by volunteer moti-
vation (e.g., purposive, solidary, external traditions, commitments)
(Farrell et al., 1998). Volunteer satisfaction is closely related to
volunteer motivation and job characteristics (Millette and Gagné,
2008). Clary et al. (1998) provide support for the functionalist
proposition that life outcomes, such as satisfaction with volunteer
activity, depend on the match between an individual’s motivational
goals and the fulfillment of those goals. This implies that volunteer
satisfaction can be better predicted by motivation. Pearce (1983)
reports that the greater volunteer intrinsic, social, and service moti-
vation, the greater job satisfaction and less intent to leave. Reeser
et al. (2005) find a strong positive correlation between volunteer
motivation (e.g., altruism, value, extrinsic, intrinsic factors) and sat-
isfactions with the 2002 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Based on the literature, this study proposes the following hypothe-
ses:
H1 . Motivation has a positive effect on volunteer satisfaction.
H1a . Altruism has a positive effect on volunteer satisfaction.
H1b . Patriotism has a positive effect on volunteer satisfaction.
H1c . Extrinsic motivation has a positive effect on volunteer satisfac-
tion.
H1d . Intrinsic motivation has a positive effect on volunteer satisfac-
tion.
2.8.2. Relationship between satisfaction and attitudes
The argument that satisfaction and attitudes are related
has a long history (Ostroff, 1992). Ostroff (1992) asserts that
employee satisfaction affects employee attitudes toward commit-
ment, adjustment, and psychological stress. Carlson and O’Cass
(2010) find that satisfaction influences consumer attitudes and
behavioral intentions. In the context of volunteering, Boezeman
and Ellemers (2009) suggest that job attitudes of volunteers are pri-
marily predicted by their satisfaction, while this is not the case for
paid employees. According to self-determination theory (Deci and
Ryan, 2000; Ryan and Deci, 2000b), satisfaction of intrinsic needs
contributes to the job attitudes of volunteers. In addition, Hill et al.
(2007) indicate that tourists who are satisfied with their tourism
experiences have positive attitudes toward the visited destination.
Based on the literature, this study posits the following hypotheses:
H2 . Volunteer satisfaction has a positive effect on volunteer attitude
toward volunteering.
H3 . Volunteer satisfaction has a positive effect on volunteer attitude
toward the Expo venue.
41
2.8.3. Relationship between volunteer attitudes toward
volunteering and the Expo venue
Boezeman and Ellemers (2009) find that volunteer attitudes
toward volunteering are related to attitudes toward organizations.
When volunteers have positive attitudes toward their praisewor-
thy work, they are more likely to have positive attitudes toward
their organizations (Pearce, 1983). Ralston et al. (2005) imply
that positive attitudes toward tourism events strengthen volun-
teer attitudes toward the mega-event environments. Based on the
literature, this study proposes the following hypothesis:
H4 . Volunteer attitude toward volunteering has a positive effect on
volunteer attitude toward the Expo venue.
2.8.4. Relationship between attitudes and support for the Expo
It is argued that attitudes toward the perceived costs and bene-
fits influence support for mega-events (Gursoy and Kendall, 2006).
Roemer (2007) indicates that attitudes toward belongingness influ-
ence emotional support for historically and culturally significant
shrine-related festivals. Similarly, when tourists have an emo-
tionally fulfilling experience, they support tourism destination
development (Lee et al., 2012). Prayag et al. (2013) confirm that atti-
tudes toward the hosting place have a significant effect on support
for the Olympic Games. Based on the literature, this study proposes
the following hypotheses:
H5 . Volunteer attitude toward volunteering has a positive effect on
support for the Expo.
H6 . Volunteer attitude toward the Expo venue has a positive effect
on support for the Expo.
The initially proposed research model is presented in Fig. 1.
This model depicts the motivation construct as one latent variable
and shows the relationships among volunteer motivation, satis-
faction, attitudes, and support for the Expo. Satisfaction mediates
the relationships between motivation and attitudes, and attitudes
mediate the relationship between satisfaction and support for the
Expo. Fig. 2 presents the re-defined research model that explains
motivation with four latent constructs.
3. Method
3.1. Study site
The Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea was the first-ever world fair held
on water in the southern coastal town of Yeosu, approximately
455 km from Seoul, and was the second (after the Taejon Expo
1993) international fair hosted by Korea. The Expo remained open
for 93 days from May 12 until August 12, 2012. The theme of the
Expo was ‘The Living Ocean and Coast’. The Expo had 80 pavilions
that staged 8,000 events. The pavilions featured the coexistence of
the oceans and humankind, climate and environment, the marine
industry and technology, marine life, Korea’s maritime affairs, and
the potential harmony and coexistence of ocean-related issues
across nations. The event attracted more than 100 participating
countries and eight international organizations and was attended
by more than eight million domestic (95.1%) and 400,000 overseas
visitors (4.9%) (Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea, 2012). In order to identify,
recruit, and train individuals who could provide the best quality
services to Korean and foreign visitors, the Volunteer Work Center
was opened in November 2010. Out of 44,920 candidates for volun-
teering, 13,006 were selected (4,327 male and 8,679 female) (Yeosu
Korea Volunteer Work Center, 2012). The main responsibilities of
the selected volunteers were to guide and assist visitors, help with
the event interpretation, maintain order, take care of facilities, and
provide safe transportation.
42 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48

Attitude
towards H5
H2 Volunteering

Expo
H1 H4 Support
Motivation Satisfaction

H3
Attitude H6
towards
Expo Venue

Fig. 1. Proposed research model.

3.2. Measurement attitudes toward volunteering (e.g., “I like my volunteering at the

This research used multi-measurement items for each construct
analyzed to overcome measurement errors associated with single
items (Churchill, 1979). A list of measurement items was created
after extensive literature review on volunteer motivation, satis-
faction, attitudes, and support for special events (e.g., Gallarza
et al., 2013; Gursoy and Kendall, 2006; Prayag et al., 2013; Ralston
et al., 2005). Motivation was measured with 16 items. Altruism
was measured with four items (e.g., “I feel it is important to help
others”) adapted from studies by Carpenter and Myers (2010) and
Gallarza et al. (2013). Patriotism was measured with four items
(e.g., “I want to play the role of a good citizen”) drawn from Bang
et al. (2009a), Mummendey et al. (2001), and Yang et al. (2010).
Extrinsic motivation was measured with three items (e.g., “I want
to get event uniforms/licensed apparels”) adapted from Bang and
Chelladurai (2009), Degli Antoni (2009), and Finkelstein (2009).
Intrinsic motivation was measured with two items (e.g., “partic-
ipating in volunteering is fun”) adapted from Degli Antoni (2009)
and Gallarza et al. (2013). One item measuring extrinsic motivation
(i.e., “I want to win others’ respect through volunteering for the
Yeosu Expo”) and two items measuring intrinsic motivation (i.e.,
“volunteering satisfies my expectations from international events”
and “volunteering satisfies my curiosity about the Yeosu Expo”)
were identified from the open-ended question included in the sur-
vey.
Volunteer satisfaction was measured with four items (e.g., “I
am satisfied with my volunteering”) adapted from studies by
Finkelstein (2008) and Galindo-Kuhn and Guzley (2001). Volunteer
Yeosu Expo very much”) and toward the Expo venue (e.g., “I like
Yeosu through the volunteering”) were measured with eight items
drawn from Boezeman and Ellemers (2009), Pearce (1983), and
Prayag et al. (2013). Volunteer support for the Expo was measured
with four items (e.g., “the Yeosu Expo makes the future of the host
community promising”) adapted from Getz (1991) and Gursoy and
Kendall (2006).
The pre-validated multiple-item scales were adjusted to the
context of the Yeosu Expo. Four event practitioners from the Expo
staff and four academic experts in the area of festival and event
management evaluated the face validity of the measurement items.
A pre-test was conducted on a sample of 10 volunteers at the Expo
site. As a result of the pre-test, ambiguities were clarified. All items
were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly
disagree to 5 = strongly agree.
3.3. Data collection
An on-site survey of volunteers was conducted at the Yeosu
Expo site between June 14–28, 2012 using a convenience sampling
method. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to vol-
unteers at their work centers and rest areas. The purpose of the
study was outlined to volunteers by field researchers. The ques-
tionnaire was administered only to the volunteers who agreed to
participate in the survey. The Expo mascot toys (Yeony and Suny)
were given as a token of appreciation. A total of 500 questionnaires
were distributed and 489 questionnaires were collected back, rep-
resenting a response rate of 97.8%. During the data refinement

Altruism

H1a

Attitude
towards
H1b H5
Patriotism H2 Volunteering

Expo
H4 Support
Satisfaction
H1c H3
Extrinsic Attitude
H6
Motivation towards
Expo Venue
H1d

Intrinsic
Motivation

Fig. 2. Re-defined research model.

 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48 43

Table 2 Table 3
Results of the confirmatory factor analysis for motivation items. Demographic characteristics of volunteer respondents.

Factor Motivation items Factor loading Characteristics N (471) % (100)

Altruism I want to help out in any capacity. 0.794 Gender

I want to do something 0.798 Male 193 41.0
worthwhile. Female 276 58.6
I feel it is important to help others. 0.679 Missing 2 0.4
I want to help make the event a 0.516
Age
success.
Below 20 6 1.3
Patriotism I want to help my country gain 0.763 20–29 225 47.7
international prestige. 30–39 26 5.5
My love for my country makes me 0.865 40–49 47 10.0
help it run a great event. 50–59 63 13.4
I want to express my pride in my 0.830 60 and older 103 21.9
country. Missing 1 0.2
I want to play the role of a good 0.773
Education
citizen through volunteering for
Middle/high school 94 20.0
the Yeosu Expoa .
2-year college 85 18.0
Extrinsic I want to get event 0.856 Undergraduate university 256 54.3
uniforms/licensed apparel. Graduate school 29 6.2
I want to get tickets/free 0.858 Missing 7 1.5
admission.
Marital status
I want to get free food at the event. 0.894
Single 253 53.7
I want to win others’ respect 0.797
Married 206 43.7
through volunteering for the Yeosu
Other 6 1.3
Expo.
Missing 6 1.3
Intrinsic Participating in volunteering is fun. 0.863
Occupation
Volunteering develops my interest. 0.893
Professional 33 7.0
Volunteering satisfies my 0.822
Service 16 3.4
expectations from international
Student 215 45.7
events.
Civil servant 21 4.5
Volunteering satisfies my curiosity 0.812
Blue worker 11 2.3
about the Yeosu Expo.
Business person 26 5.5
a
The Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea. Homemaker 103 21.9
Other 43 9.1
Missing 3 0.6
process, 18 questionnaires were eliminated from the study and 471 Hometown (Yeosu/Jeonnam)
questionnaires were coded for the purpose of data analysis. Yes 226 48.0
No 243 51.6
Missing 2 0.4
3.4. Preliminary analysis
Volunteering frequency
Less than 5 times 245 52.0
An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was run for all motiva-
5–50 times 134 28.5
tion items. The EFA results delineated four factors, such as altruism, 50 times and more 68 14.4
patriotism, extrinsic motivation, and intrinsic motivation. All factor Missing 24 5.1
loadings were greater than the cut-off point of 0.4. A Confirmatory
Factor Analysis (CFA) was run to confirm the identified four factors
and their factor loadings. The CFA confirmed the same four factors
(see Table 2). Based on the EFA and CFA results, this study concep- 4. Results
tualizes volunteer motivation for participating in mega-events as
altruism, patriotism, intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic motivation. 4.1. Volunteer respondents’ profile

3.5. Analysis As shown in Table 3, female respondents (58.6%) outnumbered

The collected data were analyzed using AMOS 21 (Analysis
of Moment Structures 21) (Arbuckle, 2012). The structural equa-
tion modeling (SEM) was used to evaluate how well a proposed
model explains the collected data (Hair et al., 2010). The two-
step approach to data analysis was proposed, as per Anderson
and Gerbing (1992). In this study, the first step tested convergent
and discriminant validity of the measurement model, whereas the
second step tested the research hypotheses and structural model.
Specifically, the recommended fit indices are Chi-square (2 )/df ≤ 3
(Hayduck, 1987), goodness-of-fit index (GFI) ≥ 0.9 (Bagozzi and Yi,
1988), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI) ≥0.8 (Scott, 1994),
normed fit index (NFI) ≥ 0.9 (Bentler and Bonett, 1980), compar-
ative fit index (CFI) ≥ 0.9 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988), root mean square
error of approximation (RMSEA) ≤ 0.08 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988), and
standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) ∼≤ 0.08 (Hu and
Bentler, 1998).
male respondents (41.0%). Less than half of the sample (47.7%)
fell into the 20–29 years of age group and about one fifth (21.9%)
fell into the 60 and older age group. Respondents with university
degrees (or university students and graduate students) comprised
a majority (60.5%) of the sample. Single respondents accounted
for slightly more than half of the sample (53.7%), whereas mar-
ried respondents accounted for 43.7%. Students (45.7%) represented
the largest group of the sample, followed by homemakers (21.9%).
Almost half of the sample (48.0%) came from the vicinity of the Expo
site (Yeosu city, Jeonnam province). More than half of the sample
(52.0%) participated in volunteering less than five times and 28.5%
participated more than five but less than 50 times.
4.2. Confirmatory factor analysis
CFA was performed. CFA involves revision of the measurement
model by dropping items that share a high degree of residual
44 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48

Table 4
Measurement model resulting from confirmatory factor analysis.

Construct Items Factor loading Meana Standard deviation

Altruism I want to help out in any capacity. 0.728 4.456 0.792

I want to do something worthwhile. 0.741 4.643 0.656
I feel it is important to help others. 0.730 4.355 0.822
I want to help make the event a success.b – – –

Patriotism I want to help my country gain – – –

international prestige.b
My love for my country makes me help it 0.863 4.115 0.941
run a great event.
I want to express my pride in my country. 0.863 4.200 0.912
I want to play the role of a good citizen 0.759 4.231 0.908
through volunteering for the Yeosu Expoc .

Extrinsic motivation I want to get event uniforms/licensed 0.808 1.860 1.096

apparel.
I want to get tickets/free admission. 0.829 2.028 1.184
I want to get free food at the event. 0.866 1.702 1.013
I want to win others’ respect through – – –
volunteering for the Yeosu Expo.b

Intrinsic motivation Participating in volunteering is fun. 0.891 3.847 1.096

Volunteering develops my interest. 0.940 3.896 1.097
Volunteering satisfies my expectations 0.740 3.949 1.057
from international events.
Volunteering satisfies my curiosity about – – –
the Yeosu Expo.b

Satisfaction I am satisfied with my participation in – – –

voluntary activities.b
I am satisfied with my decision to 0.844 4.311 0.869
participate in voluntary activities.
I am satisfied with my volunteering 0.782 3.840 1.162
compared to my expectations.
I believe my decision to participate in 0.834 4.379 0.834
voluntary activities is right.

Attitude toward I like my volunteering for the Yeosu Expo – – –

volunteering very much.b
My evaluation of voluntary activities at the 0.807 3.974 0.967
Yeosu Expo is positive.
I feel that volunteering for the Yeosu Expo 0.890 4.092 0.921
is excellent.
I like all voluntary activities at the Yeosu 0.925 4.023 0.957
Expo.

Attitude toward Expo I like Yeosu through volunteering. 0.936 3.940 0.985
venue My evaluation of Yeosu is positive through 0.925 3.972 0.979
volunteering.
I feel that Yeosu is a very important place – – –
because of volunteering.b
I like Yeosu because of all the activities 0.885 3.904 1.040
related to volunteering.

Expo support The Yeosu Expo is important for the host – – –

place.b
The Yeosu Expo offers benefits to Yeosu 0.800 3.853 1.081
residents
The Yeosu Expo makes the host 0.944 3.857 1.061
community a better place to live.
The Yeosu Expo makes the future of the 0.883 3.994 1.034
host community promising.
a
5-Point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.
b
The item was deleted after confirmatory factor analysis.
c
The Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea.

Table 5
Fit indices for the measurement and structural model.

Fit statistics Measurement model Structural model Recommended value

2 /df 354.539/224 (1.583) 484.602/237 (2.045) ≤3.0 (Hayduck, 1987)

GFI 0.941 0.920 ≥0.9 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988)
AGFI 0.921 0.899 ≥0.8 (Scott, 1994)
NFI 0.956 0.940 ≥0.9 (Bentler and Bonett, 1980)
CFI 0.983 0.968 ≥0.9 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988)
RMSEA 0.035 0.047 ≤0.08 (Bagozzi and Yi, 1988)
SRMR 0.036 0.081 ∼≤0.08 (Hu and Bentler, 1998)

Note: GFI, goodness-of-fit index, AGFI, adjusted goodness-of-fit index, NFI, normed fit index, CFI, comparative fit index, RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation,
SRMR, standardized root mean square residual.
 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48 45

Table 6
Convergent and discriminant validities.

Construct CR AVE ␣ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Mean S.D.

1. Altruism 0.858 0.668 0.770 0.817 4.485 0.757

2. Patriotism 0.887 0.724 0.866 0.686 0.851 4.182 0.920
3. Extrinsic motivation 0.850 0.653 0.870 −0.133 −0.056 0.808 1.863 1.098
4. Intrinsic motivation 0.881 0.714 0.889 0.378 0.380 0.189 0.845 3.897 1.083
5. Satisfaction 0.864 0.680 0.844 0.425 0.463 0.050 0.513 0.825 4.176 0.955
6. Attitude toward volunteering 0.916 0.784 0.906 0.309 0.336 0.036 0.373 0.727 0.885 4.030 0.949
7 Attitude toward Expo venue 0.939 0.836 0.939 0.230 0.251 0.027 0.278 0.542 0.633 0.914 3.939 1.002
8.Support for Expo 0.899 0.748 0.906 0.153 0.167 0.018 0.185 0.360 0.439 0.580 0.865 3.901 1.059

Note: The diagonal elements in boldface in the “correlation of constructs” matrix are the square root of the average variance extracted (AVE). CR: composite reliability, and
˛: Cronbach’s ˛.

variance with other items. As per Babin and Boles (1998), eight
items were dropped (see Table 4). Since most of the maximum
likelihood-based fit indices outperform those obtained from gen-
eralized least squares and asymptotic distribution-free they are
preferable for evaluating model fit (Hu and Bentler, 1998). Thus, this
study estimated the maximum likelihood-based fit indices. All fits
for the measurement model were good, specifically, 2 = 354.539,
df = 224, p < 0.001; GFI = 0.941; AGF = 0.921; NFI = 0.956; CFI = 0.983;
RMSEA = 0.035, and SRMR = 0.036 at the 90% confidence interval,
which is the most sensitive index to models with mis-specified
factor covariance (Hu and Bentler, 1998) (see Table 5). As shown
in Tables 4 and 5, each index exceeded recommended values, indi-
cating adequate fits of the model to the collected data.
Four criteria were used to assess the convergent validity of
the constructs. First, the standardized path loading of each item
must be statistically significant and greater than 0.7 (Gefen et al.,
2000). Second, the composite reliability (CR) must be larger than 0.7
(Nunnally, 1967). Third, the average variance extracted (AVE) for
each construct must exceed 0.5 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Fourth,
Cronbach’s alpha (˛) for each construct must be larger than 0.6
(Nunnally, 1967). The standardized factor loadings were all signifi-
cant and greater than 0.7 (Table 4). As shown in Table 6, the CR for all
constructs exceeded 0.7 and the AVE for each construct was greater
than 0.5 and Cronbach’s alpha (˛) for all constructs exceeded 0.6.
As a result, the convergent validity of the constructs was supported
(Bagozzi and Yi, 1988).
The discriminant validity of the measurement model was eval-
uated by comparing the square root of the AVE of each construct
with the correlation between the construct and all other constructs.
If the square root of the AVE of each construct is greater than the
correlation of the specific construct with any of the other constructs
discriminant validity is confirmed (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). As
shown in Table 6, the square root of the AVE of each construct
exceeded the correlation between the specific construct and any
of the other constructs. As a result, the discriminant validity of the
measurement model was confirmed.
4.3. Structural model
Table 7 shows the estimates of the structural modeling. The
model-fit indices for the structural model provided evidence of a
good model fit as shown in Table 5 (2 = 484.602, df = 237, p < 0.001;
GFI = 0.920; AGFI = 0.899; NFI = 0.940; CFI = 0.968; RMSEA = 0.047;
SRMR = 0.081). Fig. 3 shows the standardized path coefficient, path
significance, and variance explained (R2 ) for each path.
Hypotheses 1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d postulated the positive relation-
ships between volunteer motivation (altruism, patriotism, extrinsic
motivation, and intrinsic motivation) and satisfaction. The results
of hypothesis testing indicate that satisfaction was positively
influenced by patriotism (ˇ = 0.238, p < 0.001) and intrinsic moti-
vation (ˇ = 0.376, p < 0.001). Thus, hypotheses 1b and 1d were
supported. Hypotheses 2 and 3 posited the structural relationships
between satisfaction and volunteer attitude toward volunteering
and attitude toward the Expo venue. Satisfaction was found to
have a positive effect on volunteer attitude toward volunteering
(ˇ = 0.727, p < 0.001) and volunteer attitude toward the Expo venue
(ˇ = 0.173, p < 0.01), thus supporting hypotheses 2 and 3. Volun-
teer attitude toward volunteering had a positive and significant
effect on volunteer attitude toward the Expo venue (ˇ = 0.507,
p < 0.001), supporting hypothesis 4. Lastly, hypotheses 5 and 6
posited that volunteer attitude toward volunteering and volunteer
attitude toward the Expo venue were associated with support for
the Expo. Results indicate that volunteer attitude toward volun-
teering (ˇ = 0.120, p < 0.05) and toward the Expo venue (ˇ = 0.504,
p < 0.001) were positively associated with support for the Expo,
supporting hypotheses 5 and 6. However, the paths from altruism
(ˇ = 0.121, n.s.) and extrinsic motivation to satisfaction (ˇ = 0.008,
n.s.) were not significant, rejecting hypotheses 1a and 1c.

Table 7
Standardized structural estimates and tests of the main hypotheses.

Hypothesis Path ˇ coefficient t-Values Test results

H1a Altruism → satisfaction 0.121 1.563 Not supported

H1b Patriotism → satisfaction 0.238*** 3.301 Supported
H1c Extrinsic motivation → satisfaction 0.008 0.171 Not supported
H1d Intrinsic motivation → satisfaction 0.376*** 7.151 Supported
H2 Satisfaction → attitude toward volunteering 0.727*** 13.919 Supported
H3 Satisfaction → attitude toward the Expo venue 0.173** 2.579 Supported
H4 Attitude toward volunteering → attitude toward the Expo venue 0.507*** 7.520 Supported
H5 Volunteer attitude → support for the Expo 0.120* 2.135 Supported
H6 Attitude toward the Expo venue → support for the Expo 0.504*** 8.564 Supported
R2
Satisfaction 0.355
Volunteer attitude toward volunteering 0.528
Volunteer attitude toward the Expo venue 0.415
Support for the Expo 0.345

Note: R2 = coefficient of determination (variance explained).

*
p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
46 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
Altruism
0.121
0.238***
Patriotism
Satisfaction
0.008
R2 =0.355
Extrinsic
Motivation
0.376***
Intrinsic
Motivation
Fig. 3. Path analysis results. Note: figures indicate standardized beta coefficients. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
By the direct effects of altruism, patriotism, extrinsic motivation,
and intrinsic motivation 35.5% of the total variance in satisfaction
was explained. More than half of the variance (R2 = 0.528) in vol-
unteer attitude toward volunteering was explained by the direct
effect of satisfaction, and 41.5% of the variance in volunteer atti-
tude toward the Expo venue was explained by the direct effect of
satisfaction and volunteer attitude toward volunteering. In addi-
tion, more than one third of the variance (R2 = 0.345) in support for
the Expo was explained by the direct effects of volunteer attitude
toward volunteering and attitude toward the Expo venue.
5. Discussion
This study found that the major dimensions of motivation to vol-
unteer in mega-events were patriotism, altruism, and intrinsic and
extrinsic factors. Patriotism significantly influenced volunteer sat-
isfaction, which supports Lai et al.’s (2013) findings. Since the Yeosu
Expo had been actively promoted by the Korean government as a
national mega-event, volunteers may have perceived volunteer-
ing in the Expo as an important civic responsibility. Also, this study
found that intrinsic motivation had a significant effect on volunteer
satisfaction, which supports previous studies (e.g., Boezeman and
Ellemers, 2009; Farrell et al., 1998; Pearce, 1983). It seems that vol-
unteering in the Yeosu Expo allowed volunteers to develop interest
in the Expo, have fun, fulfill desires, and satisfy curiosity. Surpris-
ingly, the relationship between altruism and satisfaction was not
significant; this result differs from previous research (e.g., Anderson
and Shaw, 1999; Reeser et al., 2005). It appears that volunteering at
the Yeosu Expo was motivated more by patriotism (helping a coun-
try) than altruism (helping others). Also, the relationship between
extrinsic motivation and satisfaction was not significant, in con-
trast to Warner et al.’s (2011) findings on sports events. This study
implies that volunteers were not motivated by extrinsic rewards,
such as tangible and material benefits. Rather volunteers partici-
pated in the Yeosu Expo because they took pride in their country.
In addition, by showing that volunteer satisfaction greatly influ-
enced volunteer attitude toward volunteering in the Yeosu Expo,
the study extended the findings of Boezeman and Ellemers (2009)
and Ryan and Deci (2000a,b). Satisfied volunteers were likely to
have positive attitudes toward volunteering in the Expo. Further,
the study indicates that volunteer satisfaction affected volunteer
attitude toward the Expo venue, implying that satisfied volunteers
had positive attitudes toward the Expo venue. Moreover, volun-
teer attitude toward volunteering substantially affected volunteer
Att itude
towards 0.120*
Volunteering
0.727***
R2 =0.528
0.507*** Expo
Support
0.173** 0.504*** R2 =0.345
Att itude
towards
Expo Venue
R2 =0.415
attitude toward the Expo venue. In other words, volunteers who
had positive attitudes toward volunteering in the Expo had more
favorable attitudes toward the Expo venue. The results suggest that
event managers need to pay more attention to enhancing posi-
tive volunteer attitude toward volunteering. This can be done by
enhancing volunteer satisfaction and favorable attitudes toward
the act of volunteering.
Next, the results indicate that volunteer attitude toward vol-
unteering in the Yeosu Expo had significant impact on volunteer
support for the Expo, which was partially consistent with Gursoy
and Kendall’s (2006) research on mega-events. That is, volunteers
who had positive attitude toward volunteering in the Expo were
likely to be more supportive of the Expo. Additionally, volunteer
attitude toward the Expo venue had significant effect on volun-
teer support for the Expo. The more positive attitude of volunteers
toward the Expo venue, the more support for the Expo was likely to
be attained. Therefore, mega-event organizers should acknowledge
that volunteers who have a favorable attitude toward volunteering
and toward a mega-event venue are more likely to support hosting
the mega-event. Consequently, such volunteers can be invaluable
supporters of the event.
6. Conclusion and implications
The findings of this study have theoretical and practical impli-
cations for academics and event practitioners. First, this study
utilized self-determination theory as a framework for understand-
ing volunteers’ motivations (Bang et al., 2009b; Ryan and Deci,
2000a; Thibaut and Kelley, 1959). Based on the above theory, the
study identified important volunteer motivations and examined
which motivations most influenced satisfaction in the context of
the Yeosu Expo, one of the world’s cultural Expos. The results of
the study revealed that two motivations (patriotism and intrinsic)
out of four affected satisfaction. Second, since motivations alone
are poor predictors of support for mega-events (Warner et al.,
2011), the study developed a theoretical model investigating the
relationship between volunteer motivation and support for the
Yeous mega-event through mediating effects of satisfaction and
attitudes toward volunteering and the event venue. The two-step
approach (see Anderson and Gerbing, 1992) used in the study con-
firmed the validity of the theoretical model showing the positive
effect of volunteer motivation on the support for the mega-event
through mediating effects of satisfaction and attitudes. The findings
suggested that patriotism and intrinsic motivations could leverage
 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
volunteer support for a mega-event through enhancing mediators
of volunteer satisfaction and attitudes. The findings contributed to
the development of follow-up studies in the area of mega-events.
The research findings suggest several practical implications
for mega-event managers. First, in terms of the relationships
between patriotism and intrinsic motivation and satisfaction, man-
agers of mega-events would do well to focus on patriotism and
intrinsic motivations to increase volunteer satisfaction. Second, in
terms of the relationships among satisfaction and volunteer atti-
tudes toward volunteering and toward mega-event venues as well
as between attitude toward volunteering and toward the event
venues, organizers of mega-events should enhance positive volun-
teer attitudes toward volunteering through satisfaction. Third, they
should enhance volunteer positive attitudes toward event venues
through volunteer satisfaction and attitude toward volunteering.
Fourth, since volunteer attitude toward volunteering and the event
venue had significant effect on volunteer support for the event,
event organizers should concentrate on building volunteer support
for mega-events through volunteer attitudes toward volunteering
and event venues. Organizers of mega-events could strategically
gain the support of volunteers by making them feel good about the
act of volunteering and event venues, which in turn could influence
volunteer support for the events.
Since the questionnaire was administered to Korean volun-
teers only, the results of this study cannot be generalized. Also,
the study was conducted at one mega-event only. Future studies
should be conducted at other mega-events to verify the findings. In
this study patriotism and intrinsic motivations significantly influ-
enced volunteer satisfaction. Future research should examine other
motivations that influence volunteer satisfaction, such as work
career, social relationships, or personal growth (see Clary et al.,
1998; Pearce, 1983; Warner et al., 2011). Since volunteer expe-
riences have significant effect on satisfaction with sports events
(Costa et al., 2006; Love et al., 2013), future study is recommended
to investigate the relationship between volunteer experiences and
satisfaction with mega-events.
References
Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1992. Assumptions and comparative strengths of the
two-step approach: comment on Fornell and Yi. Sociol. Methods Res. 20 (1),
321–333.
Anderson, M.J., Shaw, R.N., 1999. A comparative evaluation of qualitative data
analytic techniques in identifying volunteer motivation in tourism. Tourism
Manage. 20 (1), 99–106.
Arbuckle, J.L., 2012. IBM® SPSS® AmosTM 21 User’s Guide. IBM, Chicago, IL.
Babin, B.J., Boles, J.S., 1998. Employee behavior in a service environment: a model
and test of potential differences between men and women. J. Mark. 62 (2),
77–91.
Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad.
Mark. Sci. 16 (1), 74–94.
Bagozzi, R.P., 1981. An examination of the validity of two models of attitude. Multi-
variate Behav. Res. 16 (3), 323–359.
Bagozzi, R.P., 1996. The role of arousal in the creation and control of the halo effect
in attitude models. Psychol. Mark. 13 (3), 235–264.
Bang, H., Alexandris, K., Ross, S.D., 2009a. Validation of the revised volunteer moti-
vations scale for international sporting events (VMS-ISE) at the Athens 2004
Olympic games. Event Manage. 12 (3/4), 119–131.
Bang, H., Chelladurai, P., 2009. Development and validation of the volunteer moti-
vations scale for international sporting events (VMS-ISE). Int. J. Sport Manage.
Mark. 6 (4), 332–350.
Bang, H., Ross, S.D., 2009. Volunteer motivation and satisfaction. J. Venue Event
Manage. 1 (2), 61–77.
Bang, H., Won, D., Kim, Y., 2009b. Motivations, commitment, and intentions to con-
tinue volunteering for sporting events. Event Manage. 13 (2), 69–81.
Batra, R., Ahtola, O.T., 1991. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of con-
sumer attitudes. Mark. Lett. 2 (2), 159–170.
Becker, G.S., 1974. A theory of social interactions. J. Pol. Econ. 82 (6), 1063–1093.
Bentler, P.M., Bonett, D.G., 1980. Significant tests and goodness of fit in the analysis
of covariance structures. Psychol. Bull. 88 (3), 588–606.
Boezeman, E.J., Ellemers, N., 2009. Intrinsic need satisfaction and the job attitudes
of volunteers versus employees working in a charitable volunteer organization.
J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 82 (4), 897–914.
47
Bureau International des Expositions, 2012. EXPO Yeosu 2012 news pick, Retrieved
from: http://www.bie-paris.org/site/articles/expo-yeosu-2012.html (12.03.13).
Carlson, J., O’Cass, A., 2010. Exploring the relationships between e-service quality,
satisfaction, attitudes and behaviours in content-driven e-service web sites. J.
Serv. Mark. 24 (2), 112–127.
Carpenter, J., Myers, C.K., 2010. Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism,
image, and incentives. J. Public Econ. 94 (11/12), 911–920.
Chantal, Y., Vallerand, R.J., Valliéres, E.F., 1995. Motivation and gambling involve-
ment. J. Soc. Psychol. 135 (6), 755–763.
Churchill Jr., G.A., 1979. A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing
constructs. J. Mark. Res. 16 (1), 64–73.
Clary, E.G., Ridge, R.D., Stukas, A.A., Snyder, M., Copeland, J., Haugen, J., Miene, P.,
1998. Understanding and assessing the motivations of volunteers: a functional
approach. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74 (6), 1516–1530.
Cnaan, R., Handy, A., Wadsworth, M., 1996. Defining who is a volunteer: conceptual
and empirical considerations. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Q. 25 (3), 364–383.
Costa, C.A., Chalip, L., Christine Green, B., Simes, C., 2006. Reconsidering the role of
training in event volunteers’ satisfaction. Sport Manage. Rev. 9 (2), 165–182.
Cuskelly, G., Auld, C., Harrington, M., Coleman, D., 2004. Predicting the behavioural
dependability of sport event volunteers. Event Manage. 9 (1/2), 73–89.
Deci, E., Ryan, R., 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behav-
ior. Plenum, New York.
Deci, E., Ryan, R., 2008. Self-determination theory: a macro-theory of human moti-
vation, development, and health. Can. Psychol. 49, 182–185.
Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., 2000. The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: human needs and
the self-determination of behaviour. Psychol. Inq. 11 (4), 227–268.
Degli Antoni, G., 2009. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivations to volunteer and social
capital formation. Kyklos 62 (3), 359–370.
Elstad, B., 2003. Continuance commitment and reasons to quit: a study of volunteers
at a jazz festival. Event Manage. 8 (2), 99–108.
Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea, 2012a. Overview: anticipated results, Retrieved from:
http://eng.expo2012.kr/main.html?mobile at=Y (11.03.13).
Expo 2012 Yeosu Korea Volunteer Work Center, 2012b. Volunteer infor-
mation: vision and Goal, Retrieved from: http://eng.expo2012.kr/is/vt/
vol/web/volMainS.html (10.03.13).
Farrell, J.M., Johnston, M.E., Twynam, G.D., 1998. Volunteer motivation, satisfac-
tion, and management at an elite sporting competition. J. Sport Manage. 12 (4),
288–300.
Finkelstein, M.A., 2008. Volunteer satisfaction and volunteer action: a functional
approach. Soc. Behav. Pers. 36 (1), 9–18.
Finkelstein, M.A., 2009. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivational orientations and the vol-
unteer process. Pers. Individ. Differ. 46 (5/6), 653–658.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobser-
vable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18 (1), 39–50.
Galindo-Kuhn, R., Guzley, R.M., 2001. The volunteer satisfaction index: construct
definition, measurement, development, and validation. J. Soc. Serv. Res. 28 (1),
45–68.
Gallarza, M.G., Arteaga, F., Gil-Saura, I., 2013. The value of volunteering in special
events: a longitudinal study. Ann. Tourism Res. 40 (1), 105–131.
Gefen, D., Straub, D.W., Boudreau, M., 2000. Structural equation modeling and
regression: guidelines for research practice. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 4 (7),
2–76.
Getz, D., 1991. Festivals, Special Events, and Tourism. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New
York.
Getz, D., 1997. Event Management and Event Tourism. Cognizant Communication
Corporation, New York.
Getz, D., 2005. Event Management and Event Tourism, 2nd ed. Cognizant, New York.
Getz, D., 2008. Event tourism: definition, evolution, and research. Tourism Manage.
29 (3), 403–428.
Gursoy, D., Kendall, K.W., 2006. Hosting mega-events: modeling locals’ support. Ann.
Tourism Res. 33 (3), 603–623.
Guttentag, D.A., 2009. The possible negative impacts of volunteer tourism. Int. J.
Tourism Res. 11 (6), 537–551.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis,
7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
Hayduck, L.A., 1987. Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL. Johns Hopkins Uni-
versity Press, Baltimore, MD.
Hill, J., Woodland, W., Gough, G., 2007. Can visitor satisfaction and knowledge about
tropical rainforests be enhanced through biodiversity interpretation, and does
this promote a positive attitude towards ecosystem conservation? J. Ecotourism
6 (1), 75–85.
Hoffman, M.L., 1981. Is altruism part of human nature? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 40 (1),
121–137.
Holmes, K., Smith, K.A., Lockstone-Binney, L., Baum, T., 2010. Developing the dimen-
sions of tourism volunteering. Leis. Sci. 32 (3), 255–269.
Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M., 1998. Fit Indices in covariance structure modeling: sensi-
tivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 3 (4),
424–453.
Hull, C., 1943. Principles of Behavior. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.
Jackson, L., 1999. Patriotism or pleasure? The nineteenth century volunteer force as
a vehicle for rural working-class male sport. Sports Hist. 19 (1), 125–139.
Jago, L., Shaw, R., 1998. Special events: a conceptual and definitional framework.
Festival Manage. Event Tourism 5 (1/2), 21–32.
Jones, R.R., Burns, W.J., 1973. Volunteer satisfaction with in-country training for
the Peace Corps: reanalyses and extended findings. J. Appl. Psychol. 57 (1),
92–94.
48 C.-K. Lee et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 40 (2014) 37–48
Khoo, S., Engelhorn, R., 2011. Volunteer motivations at a national special Olympics
event. Adapt. Phys. Act. Q. 28 (1), 27–39.
Lai, M.H.C., Ren, M.Y.W., Wu, A.M.S., Hung, E.P.W., 2013. Motivation as Media-
tor between National Identity and Intention to Volunteer. J. Comm. Appl. Soc.
Psychol. 23 (2), 128–142.
Lee, C.K., Bendle, L.J., Yoon, Y.S., Kim, M.J., 2012. Thanatourism or peace tourism:
perceived value at a North Korean resort from an indigenous perspective. Int. J.
Tourism Res. 14 (1), 71–90.
Lee, C.K., Kang, S.K., Lee, Y.K., 2013. Segmentation of mega-event motivation: the
case of Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Asia Pacific J. Tourism Res. 18 (6), 637–660.
Lim, S.T., Lee, J.S., 2006. Host population perceptions of the impact of mega-events.
Asia Pacific J. Tourism Res. 11 (4), 407–421.
Love, A., Morse, A., Ruihley, B., 2013. Understanding sporting event volunteers’ expe-
riences: a critical incident approach. J. Contemp. Athle. 7 (2), 69–85.
Lyons, K., Hanley, J., Wearing, S., Neil, J., 2012. Gap year volunteer tourism, Myths of
global citizenship? Ann. Tourism Res. 39 (1), 361–378.
MacLean, J., Hamm, S., 2007. Motivation, commitment, and intentions of volunteers
at a large Canadian sporting event, Leisure/Loisir. J. Can. Assoc. Leis. Stud. 31 (2),
523–556.
McGehee, N.G., Andereck, K., 2009. Volunteer tourism and the voluntoured: the case
of Tijuana, Mexico. J. Sustain. Tourism 17 (1), 39–51.
Mihalik, B., 2000. Host population perception of the 1996 Atlanta Olympics: support,
benefits, and liabilities. Tourism Anal. 5 (1), 49–53.
Millette, V., Gagné, M., 2008. Designing volunteers’ tasks to maximize motivation,
satisfaction and performance: the impact of job characteristics on volunteer
engagement. Motiv. Emotion 32 (1), 11–22.
Mummendey, A., Klink, A., Brown, R., 2001. Nationalism and patriotism: national
identification and out-group rejection. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 40 (2), 159–172.
Nunnally, J.C., 1967. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Oostlander, J., Guntert, S., van Schie, S., Wehner, T., 2013. Leadership and volunteer
motivation: a study using Self-Determination Theory. Nonprofit Volunt. Sect. Q.,
1–21.
Ostroff, C., 1992. The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and performance:
an organizational level analysis. J. Appl. Psychol. 77 (6), 963–974.
Pearce, J.L., (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) 1978. Something for nothing: an
empirical examination of the structures and norms of volunteer organizations.
Yale University.
Pearce, J.L., 1983. Job attitude and motivation differences between volunteers and
employees from comparable organizations. J. Appl. Psychol. 68 (4), 646–652.
Prayag, G., Hosany, S., Nunkoo, R., Alders, T., 2013. London residents’ support for the
2012 Olympic Games: the mediating effect of overall attitude. Tourism Manage.
36 (June), 629–640.
View publication stats
Ralston, R., Lumsdon, L., Downward, P., 2005. The third force in events tourism:
volunteers at the XVII Commonwealth Games. J. Sustain. Tourism 13 (5),
504–519.
Reeser, J.C., Berg, R.L., Rhea, D., Willick, S., 2005. Motivation and satisfaction among
polyclinic volunteers at the 2002 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games. Br. J.
Sports Med. 39 (4), 1–5.
Roemer, M.K., 2007. Ritual participation and social support in a major Japanese
festival. J. Sci. Stud. Rel. 46 (2), 185–200.
Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L., 2000a. Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivations: classic definitions
and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25 (1), 54–67.
Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L., 2000b. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 55 (1),
68–78.
Scott, J., 1994. The measurement of information systems effectiveness: evaluating a
measuring instrument. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference
on Information Systems, Vancouver, BC, pp. 111–128.
Sin, H.L., 2009. Volunteer tourism—involve me and I will learn? Ann. Tourism Res.
36 (3), 480–501.
Smith, K.A., Holmes, K., 2012. Visitor centre staffing: involving volunteers. Tourism
Manage. 33 (3), 562–568.
Stebbins, R., 1982. Serious leisure: a conceptual association. Pacific Sociol. Rev. 25
(2), 251–272.
Stebbins, R., 1992. Amateurs, Professionals, and Serious Leisure. McGill-Queen’s
University Press, Montreal.
Strigas, A.D., Jackson, E.N., 2003. Motivating volunteers to serve and succeed: design
and results of a pilot study that explores demographics and motivational factors
in sport volunteerism. Int. Sports J. 7 (1), 111–123.
Thibaut, J., Kelley, H., 1959. The Psychology of Groups. Wiley, New York.
Unger, L.S., 1991. Altruism as a motivation to volunteer. J. Econ. Psychol. 12 (1),
71–100.
Warner, S., Newland, B.L., Green, B.C., 2011. More than motivation: reconsidering
volunteer management tools. J. Sport Manage. 25 (5), 391–407.
Wearing, S., 2001. Volunteer Tourism: Experiences that Make a Difference. CABI,
Wallingford, UK.
Wilson, J., 2000. Volunteering. Annu. Rev. Soc. 26 (1), 215–240.
Wong, L.P., Chui, W.H., Kwok, Y.Y., 2011. The volunteer satisfaction index: a vali-
dation study in the Chinese cultural context. Soc. Indicators Res. 104 (1),
19–32.
Yang, Y., Chen, M., Chen, W., Ying, X., Wang, B., Wang, J., Kolstad, A., 2010. Effects of
boundary-permeated self and patriotism on social participation in the Beijing
Olympic Games. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 13 (2), 109–117.