You are on page 1of 82

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 magnoc@dls-

csb.edu.ph, 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 Chinese-

Filipino 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, bayani-

oriented, 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 non-

government 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 & Ilada-

Andres, 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 19

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).
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 empathy-

altruism 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 self-

sacrificing 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 sub-

factor 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 Filipino Points


Strongly Agree Lubos na Sumasang-Ayon 4
Agree Sumasang-ayong 3
Disagree Di-Sumasang-Ayon 2
Strongly Disagree Lubos na Di-Sumasang-Ayon 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 No. of Item No.


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


Items
Pagkabayani 25 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
Pakikiramdam 21 2, 8, 20, 33, 44, 45, 47, 49, 54, 59, 63, 65, 69,
72, 76, 77, 81, 89, 95, 97, 109
Pagiging Maka-pamilya 22 3 10 15 16 32 39 40 46 55 56 67 68 74 78 82 92
96 101 102 110 111
Pagtanaw ng Utang-na- 22 4, 6, 11, 12, 17, 21, 23, 24, 28, 29, 31, 38, 42,
loob 71, 83, 85, 87, 90, 99, 100, 103, 107
Pagtugon sa Pananagutan 21 5, 7, 13, 14, 22, 30, 37, 41, 43, 50, 51, 57, 58,
64, 73, 75, 84, 86, 91, 98, 106
Total 111

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

Percentage total Cumulative Cumulative


Eigenvalue Variance Eigenvalue Percentage
Factor 1 17.72 15.96 17.72 15.96
Factor 2 8.03 7.23 25.75 23.19
Factor 3 5.85 5.27 31.60 28.47
Factor 4 3.67 3.31 35.27 31.77
Factor 5 3.37 3.03 38.63 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

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5


Explained
Variance 12.60 8.84 4.92 5.36 6.92
Predisposition to Help 39

Prp.Totl 0.11 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.06


Note: Marked loadings are > .30

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 Total no. of Item Numbers New Factor Name


Items
Factor 1 29 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 21, Pagtugon sa Pananagutan
24, 27, 31, 33, 35, 37, 42, 43, 45,
48, 49, 53, 56, 59, 61, 65, 66, 70,
71
Factor 2 13 3, 5, 16, 25, 41, 52, 54, 55, 57, Pagkabayani
62, 64, 67, 69
Factor 3 12 14, 19, 23, 26, 34, 38, 39, 40, 47, Pagtanaw sa Utang-na-loob
51, 58, 60
Factor 4 6 17, 29, 32, 44, 46, 50 Pakikiramdam
Factor 5 12 2, 9, 11, 12, 20, 22, 28, 30, 36, Pagiging Maka-pamilya
63, 68
Total 71

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 M SD CI
Pagka-bayani 44.60 8.52 36.08-53.12
Pakikiramdam 23.93 3.49 20.44-33.42
Pagiging Maka-pamilya 41.4 4.99 36.41-46.43
Pagtanaw ng utang-ng-loob 39.93 4.68 34.65-44.01
Pagtugon sa pananagutan 109.64 14.96 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 t value df p-value


Pagkabayani 2.94 198 0.004*
Pakikiramdam 1.06 198 0.291
Pagiging Makapamilya 1.89 198 0.060
Pagtanaw ng utang-na-loob 0.66 198 0.508
Pagtugon sa pananagutan -0.22 198 0.825
* Significant at .05

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 pagka-

bayani 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 2 3 4 5
(1) pagkabayani 1.00
(2) pakikiramdam 0.61* 1.00
(3) makapamilya 0.18* 0.33* 1.00
(4) utang-na-loob 0.18* 0.27* 0.16* 1.00
(5) pananagutan 0.72* 0.73* 0.39* 0.28* 1.00
* Significant at .05

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

Eigenvalue % Total Cumulative Cumulative


Factor 1 17.35 24.44 17.35 24.44
Factor 2 4.93 6.95 22.29 31.39
Factor 3 3.81 5.36 26.09 36.75
Factor 4 2.83 3.99 28.93 40.74
Factor 5 2.43 3.42 31.36 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

Plot of Eigenvalues
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
Value

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

Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5


Expl.Var 10.87 4.09 9.56 3.85 2.99
Prp.Totl 0.15 0.058 0.13 0.05 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 No. of items Items No.


Factor 1 18 3, 5, 17, 18, 24, 25, 33, 41, 48, 52, 54,
55, 57, 59, 62, 66, 67, 69
Factor 2 6 9, 11, 12, 20, 47, 68
Factor 3 21 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 13, 21, 22, 29, 30,
31, 35, 42, 43, 44, 46, 50, 51, 53, 63
Factor 4 5 14, 19, 38, 39, 40
Factor 5 3 34, 58, 60
Total 43

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 Item Proportion logit initial item


Group index item name score f Correct incorrect incorrect f X logit f X logit^2 calibration
1 24,27 26 2 0.96 0.04 -3.26 -6.52 42.46 -1.59
19,36,46,50,
2 59,61,63,65 25 8 0.93 0.07 -2.53 -20.21 408.28 -0.86
3,5,11,52,53,
3 70 24 6 0.89 0.11 -2.08 -12.48 155.67 -0.41
13,28,41,49,58,
4 62 23 6 0.85 0.15 -1.75 -10.50 110.15 -0.08
6,19,25,26,38,54
5 ,55,68 22 8 0.81 0.19 -1.48 -11.85 140.49 0.19
6 39,45 21 2 0.78 0.22 -1.25 -2.51 6.28 0.42
7 40,42,48,60 20 4 0.74 0.26 -1.05 -4.20 17.63 0.62
8 10,20,23 19 3 0.70 0.30 -0.86 -2.59 6.73 0.80
9 18 18 1 0.67 0.33 -0.69 -0.69 0.48 0.98
10 51 11 1 0.41 0.59 0.37 0.37 0.14 2.04
11 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 Nr Proportion correct logit correct F X logit F x logit^2


1 3 0.02 -3.71 -11.14 124.12
2 2 0.05 -3.00 -5.99 35.90
3 1 0.07 -2.56 -2.56 6.58
4 1 0.10 -2.25 -2.25 5.07
5 0 0.12 -2.00 0.00 0.00
6 2 0.14 -1.79 -3.58 12.84
7 0 0.17 -1.61 0.00 0.00
8 2 0.19 -1.45 -2.89 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

corrected
Item score initial item sample spread item
Group index item name calibration expansion factor calibration Item score calibration SE
1 24,27 -1.59 0.08 -0.12 26 0.28
19,36,46,50,59,
2 61,63,65 -0.86 0.08 -0.06 25 0.40
3 3,5,11,52,53,70 -0.41 0.08 -0.03 24 0.50
13,28,41,49,58,
4 62 -0.08 0.08 -0.01 23 0.60
6,19,25,26,38,54,
5 55,68 0.19 0.08 0.01 22 0.68
6 39,45 0.42 0.08 0.03 21 0.76
7 40,42,48,60 0.62 0.08 0.05 20 0.84
8 10,20,23 0.80 0.08 0.06 19 0.93
Predisposition to Help 49

9 18 0.98 0.08 0.07 18 1.01


10 51 2.04 0.08 0.15 11 1.72
11 14 2.72 0.08 0.21 7 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 width corrected Measure


Test Score Initial measure expansion factor measure standard error
1 -3.71357 1 -3.71357 1.012122
2 -2.99573 1 -2.99573 0.724569
3 -2.56495 1 -2.56495 0.599145
4 -2.25129 1 -2.25129 0.525657
5 -2.00148 1 -2.00148 0.476474
6 -1.79176 1 -1.79176 0.440959
7 -1.60944 1 -1.60944 0.414039
8 -1.44692 1 -1.44692 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. Pagka-

bayani, 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 2, 2005 From


http://drs.yahoo.com/s=2766679/k=%22social+psychology

Altruism: Helping others. (2001, August). Retrieved July 2 from


http://www.sage.edu/divisions/psych/courses/p301ch12.htm

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 Manila-


tradition 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, 135-
138.

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, 613-
623.

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 July 2, 2005 from


http://www.pittsbughlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinions

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 56

A toolkit for volunteer leaders. Retrieved June 16, 2005


http://4h.unl.edu/volunarelen/motivati.htm

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. Sa iyong palagay ay may pagkakaiba ba ang isang boluntaryong bumbero na Fil-Chi at Filipino?
Anu-ano ang mga ito?
2. Kung pag-uusapan ang tungkol sa mga nabanggit na konsepto, may pinag-kaiba ba ang dalawa
(Fil-Chi at Chi) sa mga ito?
3. Sa Pagiging isang bumbero, importante ba ang pagiging isang Fil-Chi o Filipino? Bakit?
4. Sa pangkalahatan, mayroon pa rin bang pagkakaiba ang mga Fil-Chi at Filipino pagdating sa
pagtulong sa ibang tao?
5. 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 59

4. Alam kong sumasaya ang biktima kapag napapatay agad ang sunog kaya mas nagiging motivated
akong tumulong.(utang na loob)
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Nauunawaan ko ang nararamdaman ng mga taong nasusunugan kaya mas namomotivate akong
tumulong sa kanila tuwing may sunog.
10. Hindi ko na iniintindi kung ano man ang maaaring nararamdaman ng mga taong nasusunugan,
basta’t mapigil ko lang ang sunog. (negative item)
11. Gumagaan ang aking loob pag nakatulong ako sa mga nabibiktima ng sunog dahil alam kong
nasisiyahan sila kapag napigil namin ang sunog.
12. 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.
13. Kung mayroon isang nakulong sa apoy, mag-volunteer akong tulungan siya dahil alam kong
mahirap ang kalagayan niya.
14. 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)
15. Dahil nauunawaan kong napakahirap ang pakiramdam ng hindi makalabas sa apoy, ako na mismo
ang tuutulong.
16. Kapag may nakita akong nasugatan dahil sa sunog, dinadala ko siya agad sa ospital.
17. Kapag nakakita ako ng matandang bumababa ng hagdanan na nahihirapan sa nasusunog na gusali
ay nangunguna akong lumapit para matulungan siya.
18. 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)
19. 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.
20. 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 self-
worth” 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 60

8. Kapag nakita kong nasunugan ang kaaway ko ay tutulungan ko pa rin siya kahit gaano pa ang galit
ko.
9. Kapag humingi ng tulong ang isang taong napinsalaan ay hindi ko na tinitimbang kung tama ba o
mali ang tulungan siya.
10. Kapag may lumapit sa akin at humingi ng tulong na siraan ang isang tao ay hindi ko iyon gagawin.
(remove – not related)
11. Hindi ako namimili kung sino ang dapat kong tulungan tuwing sunog, basta’t ang alam ko tama
ang ginagawa kong pagtulong.
12. 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.
13. Kapag may sumisigaw at kailangang tulungan, agad akong tutulong ng walang atubili dahil ito ay
nararapat.
14. 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)
15. Kung mayroon akong nakitang aksidente at nasugatan, hindi na ako magdadalawang isip na
tulungan siya.
16. 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.
17. Tutulungan ko lamang ang isang taong gumawa ng kasalanan kapag inamin na niya sa akin ang
kanyang kamalian. (Negative item)
18. Aalamin ko muna kung sino ang may kagagawan ng isang sunog na naganap bago ko
pagdidisisyunan kung sino ang aking tutulungan. (negative item)
19. Kapag alam kong mali na ang ginagawa ng isang tao ay hindi ko na talaga siya tutulungan.
20. 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 ka-
headquarter.
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 & Ilada-
Andres, 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-na-
loob 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 63

Appendix C

Pilot Test Items (111 items)


Predisposition to Help 64
Predisposition to Help 65
Predisposition to Help 66
Predisposition to Help 67
Predisposition to Help 68

Appendix D

Rotated Factor Loadings


Predisposition to Help 69
Predisposition to Help 70
Predisposition to Help 71
Predisposition to Help 72

Appendix E

Communalities: Principal Factor Analysis


Predisposition to Help 73
Predisposition to Help 74

Appendix F

Items for the Final Form (71 items)


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
Obj. No. Obj. No. Obj. No. Obj. No. Obj. No.
Distance
93.41841 makapamilya utang-na-loob
135.9743 pagkabayani makapamilya utang-na-loob
229.0720 pagkabayani makapamilya utang-na-loob pakikiramdam
931.9694 pagkabayani makapamilya utang-na-loob pakikiramdam pananagutan
Predisposition to Help 79

Appendix I

EFA Varimax Rotated Loadings

Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor


ITEM1 0.26936 0.131475 0.489281 -0.014678 -0.108014
ITEM2 -0.11429 0.344247 0.236115 -0.353720 -0.031482
ITEM3 0.53735 0.005381 0.348509 -0.054892 -0.310472
ITEM4 0.24284 0.098735 0.443119 -0.041925 -0.196248
ITEM5 0.45971 0.218681 0.146930 0.137978 -0.219342
ITEM6 0.12999 0.271909 0.555313 0.004330 -0.325922
ITEM7 0.26240 0.240875 0.458561 -0.012085 -0.254440
ITEM8 0.28203 0.082669 0.533346 0.137785 0.093543
ITEM9 -0.13431 0.631903 -0.015588 -0.162160 -0.059014
ITEM10 0.16474 0.236126 0.432969 -0.115371 0.108309
ITEM11 0.05495 0.730947 0.236042 -0.048930 0.072883
ITEM12 0.06562 0.580069 0.079058 -0.201694 0.036936
ITEM13 0.25076 0.188356 0.529229 -0.144636 -0.091227
ITEM14 -0.07243 0.260778 -0.085647 -0.465907 0.045016
ITEM15 0.28575 -0.022739 0.371267 0.293935 0.082143
ITEM16 0.28012 0.069613 0.313661 -0.201155 0.073366
ITEM17 0.45682 0.022953 0.322601 0.111096 0.099811
ITEM18 0.50060 0.304030 0.260858 0.085778 -0.056215
ITEM19 0.15424 -0.305999 0.284432 0.556550 0.021608
ITEM20 -0.05839 0.664676 -0.202726 0.027314 0.083683
ITEM21 0.32797 -0.139509 0.437507 0.158450 0.128545
ITEM22 -0.23370 -0.066031 0.476290 0.163036 0.093199
ITEM23 0.30276 -0.040670 -0.051563 0.194764 0.249239
ITEM24 0.58422 -0.106245 0.164543 0.128667 0.205506
ITEM25 0.69410 -0.084266 0.046124 0.175929 -0.077751
ITEM26 -0.08513 -0.228078 0.444747 0.423655 -0.012203
ITEM27 0.43194 0.029024 0.534244 0.213726 0.020847
ITEM28 -0.14005 0.005094 0.384487 -0.282142 0.235494
ITEM29 0.13781 -0.196946 0.476380 -0.103451 0.215764
ITEM30 0.15075 0.278555 0.414915 0.244560 0.187279
ITEM31 0.19136 -0.049837 0.582710 0.001328 -0.075838
ITEM32 0.40554 -0.004923 0.159409 0.427115 0.182414
ITEM33 0.45387 0.307005 0.183680 0.042717 0.290892
ITEM34 -0.03587 -0.083656 0.071760 0.145402 0.604864
ITEM35 0.32185 0.237299 0.461913 -0.037695 0.096970
ITEM36 0.34217 0.114348 0.319334 0.109272 0.079002
ITEM37 0.47874 0.039786 0.498826 0.208843 0.116998
ITEM38 0.15708 0.034955 -0.158383 0.740074 -0.040762
ITEM39 -0.16239 -0.019029 0.123986 0.479717 -0.033009
ITEM40 0.13113 -0.089892 0.287948 0.748678 -0.076664
ITEM41 0.48826 -0.125961 0.106387 -0.116935 0.226695
ITEM42 0.39030 0.090723 0.439337 0.162372 0.096838
Predisposition to Help 80

ITEM43 0.13371 0.005347 0.687386 -0.021845 0.066721


ITEM44 0.17023 -0.031153 0.663011 0.126550 0.111413
ITEM45 0.32015 0.011036 0.111827 -0.377264 0.292493
ITEM46 0.27114 0.215172 0.575050 0.148774 0.224130
ITEM47 0.05302 0.532528 0.109914 -0.191422 0.534057
ITEM48 0.47301 0.196954 0.385350 0.055457 0.202235
ITEM49 0.49422 -0.010727 0.535820 0.023047 0.096583
ITEM50 0.38008 -0.111038 0.433170 -0.250521 0.276652
ITEM51 -0.17603 0.146832 -0.435698 0.104125 -0.218000
ITEM52 0.66808 -0.171887 0.313546 -0.032008 -0.076420
ITEM53 0.21293 0.019893 0.681001 0.081768 0.041967
ITEM54 0.78464 -0.143735 0.191007 0.036061 -0.096117
ITEM55 0.76434 -0.094728 0.149296 -0.037106 -0.123130
ITEM56 0.45140 0.120257 0.446356 0.330045 0.116700
ITEM57 0.49832 -0.079785 0.241445 0.131317 0.150193
ITEM58 0.27832 0.240581 0.073898 -0.030530 0.618131
ITEM59 0.59271 0.161454 0.171299 0.117747 0.099760
ITEM60 -0.08186 0.320888 0.166788 -0.242482 0.611935
ITEM61 0.41995 -0.057481 0.567497 0.184204 0.022954
ITEM62 0.71912 0.130178 -0.100420 -0.076835 0.085732
ITEM63 0.09070 0.253642 0.509576 -0.083933 0.187107
ITEM64 0.78281 0.176205 0.033877 0.067968 0.118386
ITEM65 0.51423 0.061853 0.444938 0.078782 0.224257
ITEM66 0.51777 0.097090 0.308286 0.108713 0.122437
ITEM67 0.67951 0.076610 0.265246 -0.026140 -0.011207
ITEM68 0.20251 0.630956 0.035354 0.088452 0.158570
ITEM69 0.66816 0.158579 0.159668 0.144212 0.130561
ITEM70 0.54126 0.167708 0.433955 0.041499 0.151075
ITEM71 0.32236 -0.142450 0.285736 -0.382996 0.229004
Expl.Var 10.86779 4.094403 9.555513 3.851388 2.988465
Prp.Totl 0.15307 0.057668 0.134585 0.054245 0.042091
Predisposition to Help 81

Appendix J

Accepted Items for the EFA

Factor 1 • Kapag may nangyayaring landslide, kahit na alam kong delikado ang sitwasyon ay
Pagkabayani 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
Factor 2 • Kapag mayroong luymapit sa akon na dalawang tao at nagpapatulong sa isang gawain,
Makapamily uunahin kong tulungan ang kakilala ko.
a • Mas malaki ang tulong na aking ibinibigay sa mga taong malapit sa akin.
Kindred • Inuuna kong tulungan ang mkga kaibigan at kamag-anak ko tuwing sila ay may
relationship 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
tinutulungaang mga taong kakilala ko.
• Ang taong malapit sa aking puso ang una kong tutulungankapag mayroong pabor na
hihingin sa akin.
Factor 3 • 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
Pananagutan • 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 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.
Factor 4 • Tinutungan ko lamang ang mga taong nakatulong na sa akin dati
Utang na • Sa aking palagay ay hindi ko obligasyon ang tumulong sa mga tao lalo na kung
loob 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.
Factor 5 • Mahalaga sa akin ang pagtanaw ng utang na loob sa mga taong tumutulong sa akin.
Utang na • Kailangan kong tulungan ang mga taong tumulong sa akin dati.
loob • Tinutulungan ko agad ang mga taong pinagkakautangan ko ng pabor