IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v19y1984i8p873-878.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

'Barefoot doctors' in rural Georgia: The effect of peer selection on the performance of trained volunteers

Author

Listed:
  • Kay, Bonnie J.

Abstract

Does volunteer selection by peers have a measurable effect on volunteer performance? This paper examines this question in the context of a field experiment which used community organizations as a means to select people to serve as Emergency Medical Coordinators (EMCs). Field sites were 36 rural Georgia communities with populations ranging from 150 to 1850. EMCs were trained in a 40 hour program as first responders to emergency incidents and as organizers of an emergency response system within their communities. Their performance in each of these roles was assessed by composite measures (a first aid performance index and an activity index) developed as part of the study. Each sponsor organization conducted the selection of EMCs for their respective communities. The process was monitored and assessed as either comprehensive, including the evaluation and elimination of candidates, or as unstructured where interested individuals self-volunteered. Performance scores were regressed on the selection process variable as well as a set of structural, predisposing and enabling variables. Peer selection was a statistically significant predictor of EMC performance as a first responder but not as a response system organizer. Implications of this result as well as the influence of other independent variables are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kay, Bonnie J., 1984. "'Barefoot doctors' in rural Georgia: The effect of peer selection on the performance of trained volunteers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 19(8), pages 873-878, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:8:p:873-878
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(84)90405-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:8:p:873-878. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.