Locus of control and volunteering among older individuals in Europe

Volunteering plays a central role in promoting active and healthy ageing, yet the psychological factors driving older adults' engagement remain poorly understood. While socioeconomic and demographic determinants of volunteering have been widely studied, little is known about how perceptions of personal control, captured by the concept of locus of control, shape volunteering decisions. This article examines whether older individuals who believe they can influence life outcomes (internal locus) are more likely to engage in volunteering activities than those who feel outcomes depend on external forces (external locus).

This question is particularly relevant in Europe, where population ageing poses social and economic challenges. The share of people aged 65 and over has risen to 20.3% in 2019 and is projected to reach 30.3% by 2070 (Age Platform Europe, 2023). As the demand for social support and community participation grows, volunteering offers a pathway for older adults to remain active, maintain social connections and enhance well-being (Morrow-Howell, 2010; Baumbach, 2022).

This relationship is particularly important because older adults form a major share of the volunteer workforce. People aged 65 and over contribute more volunteer hours than any other age group in Europe (Ehlers et al., 2011; Zhu, 2021). Similar patterns appear in Ireland and the United States (Eibich et al., 2022). Volunteering provides one of the few structured roles that keep older adults active and socially connected (Morrow-Howell, 2010). As ageing often reduces perceived control and physical capacity (Lachman, 1986), volunteering becomes a valuable avenue to sustain purpose, well-being and social inclusion.

Locus of control (Rotter, 1966) reflects the extent to which individuals attribute outcomes to their own actions (internal) or to external forces such as fate or luck. Those with a stronger internal locus may view volunteering as a meaningful and effective contribution, while people with a more external locus of control may perceive it as having little impact. Integrating this psychological dimension provides a behavioural foundation for understanding prosocial and health-promoting activities in later life.

Using six waves (2010–2022) of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) that cover 12 European countries, we estimate FE and OLS models for volunteering participation and frequency. The results indicate that an internal locus of control significantly increases both volunteering participation and frequency, with a stronger relationship among women and those in Southern Europe.

This article makes several novel contributions to the economics of volunteering and behavioural ageing. First, existing research has largely focused on socio-demographic or institutional determinants of volunteering (Zhu, 2021), while studies linking psychological traits to prosocial behaviour have remained rare in economics (Andor et al., 2022). We extend this literature by integrating locus of control into the analysis of volunteering decisions among older adults. Second, it provides the first cross-country panel evidence on the relationship between locus of control and volunteering behaviour. Third, this article goes beyond the binary view of volunteering by distinguishing between participation (whether an individual volunteers) and frequency (how often they volunteer), offering a richer understanding of engagement intensity.

The rest of this article is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the literature review. Section 3 provides the data and Section 4 describes the empirical approach. Results are presented and discussed in Section 5. Section 6 concludes the article.

Volunteering plays an important role in promoting health and well-being in later life. It has been linked to higher life satisfaction, enhanced self-esteem, and a renewed sense of purpose following retirement (Marchesano and Musella, 2020). Studies show that volunteering can reduce depression, increase cognitive performance, and foster community engagement among older adults (Morrow-Howell et al., 2003). The effects, however, vary across countries. In Northern Europe, volunteering is widely institutionalised and seen as a civic duty, while in Southern Europe it is often family- or church-based (Ehlers et al., 2011). These regional differences may also influence how volunteering relates to other aspects of well-being. For example, Nappo et al. (2025) investigate whether volunteering reduces workers' perceptions of labour market insecurity in the European Union.

Older adults often engage in volunteering not only to help others but to maintain meaningful relationships, develop new friendships and sustain a sense of belonging (Musick and Wilson, 2007). Such relational motives are particularly salient in later life when social networks contract due to retirement or widowhood. Social environments in shaping individual well-being and long-run outcomes are also documented in other contexts (Almomani and Al-Masaeid, 2025a, b). Volunteering thus serves as both a form of social participation and a protective factor against loneliness. Despite this, many economic studies on volunteering focus narrowly on human-capital or income effects, overlooking these social-connection dimensions that may influence older adults' engagement decisions (Morrow-Howell et al., 2019).

In economics, volunteering is modelled as time allocation yielding utility through multiple channels: contributions to a public good, warm glow (Andreoni, 1990), social recognition and future returns such as human capital. Classic work analyses volunteer labour supply and its responsiveness to opportunity cost and policy incentives (Menchik and Weisbrod, 1987; Brown and Lankford, 1992). A key development emphasises relational goods: volunteering can generate utility directly through social relationships and network ties (Prouteau and Wolff, 2004, 2008). Locus of control maps naturally onto these motivations. Individuals with a more internal locus of control believe outcomes are contingent on their own actions (Rotter, 1966), raising the perceived effectiveness, and therefore expected marginal return, of volunteering effort. Recent economic work formalises this as a belief parameter scaling the perceived payoff from prosocial contribution, predicting higher engagement when control beliefs are more internal (Andor et al., 2022). This mechanism extends to the relational motive: stronger perceived agency increases the expected probability that volunteering time translates into friendship and social ties. Internal control beliefs may also strengthen image and self-signalling benefits in models with reputational and self-esteem concerns (Bénabou and Tirole, 2006), implying a positive association between internal locus of control and both volunteering participation and frequency.

Sociological accounts highlight volunteering as a form of civic engagement embedded in social capital, organisational recruitment, norms and network structures, focusing on who volunteers and how social context shapes participation (Wilson, 2000). Psychological approaches emphasise functional and self-regulatory motives (e.g. values, understanding, enhancement, social, protective motives), commonly operationalised using functional inventories, and more broadly link volunteering to needs for competence and relatedness.

Scholars from different disciplines have provided complementary explanations of volunteering behaviour. From an economic perspective, volunteering has been modelled as a rational choice driven by consumption and investment motives, where individuals allocate time to maximise utility (Sauer, 2015). The sociology literature highlights social capital and civic norms: individuals volunteer because they are embedded in supportive networks and communities that reinforce reciprocal behaviour (Wilson, 2012). The psychology approach focuses on personal traits, values, and internal beliefs that shape prosocial behaviour (Penner, 2002). Within this strand, locus of control has emerged as a key non-cognitive factor influencing behaviour.

Numerous studies have found that individuals with a stronger internal locus of control tend to experience better health and behavioural outcomes. Individuals with stronger internal control tend to engage in healthier lifestyles, exhibit better physical functioning and use healthcare services more effectively (Kesavayuth et al., 2020). Cobb-Clark et al. (2014) show that older adults with internal control beliefs are more likely to exercise and maintain healthy diets, while Clark and Zhu (2024) find that retirement can strengthen internal locus of control, illustrating its dynamic nature. Handy and Katz (2008) reveal that individuals with greater personal agency are more likely to donate time rather than money, implying that locus of control may shape how people express prosocial preferences. Similarly, Andor et al. (2022) demonstrate that internal control beliefs increase prosocial behaviour such as charitable giving, voting and environmental action.

Analysing regional differences in Europe is essential because volunteering behaviour is deeply shaped by welfare regime structures, cultural norms and institutional contexts. The Nordic countries represent social-democratic welfare regimes characterised by strong civic institutions, universal welfare provision, and a high level of organisational volunteering, where participation is often seen as a civic duty (Erlinghagen and Hank, 2006). In contrast, Central European countries exhibit conservative-corporatist systems where family and state jointly support welfare provision, leading to moderate levels of formal volunteering mediated by associations and local communities (Wahrendorf et al., 2016). Southern Europe, on the other hand, follows a familialist welfare model, where informal and family-based help dominates, and volunteering tends to occur within religious or kinship networks (Salamon et al., 2017; Almomani and Al-Masaeid, 2025a, b, c).

While locus of control has been associated with a wide range of behaviours, including self-control, risk-taking, religiosity and entrepreneurship (Tran and Tran, 2025), its role in shaping volunteering decisions in later life remains underexplored. Moreover, existing evidence suggests strong regional variation in Europe's volunteering patterns, reflecting differences in welfare regimes, civic institutions and cultural norms (Lakomý, 2021). Nordic countries, for instance, encourage volunteering through inclusive welfare systems, while Southern Europe relies more on family-based support networks. Understanding how psychological traits such as locus of control interact with these institutional contexts is therefore crucial.

This study contributes to filling this gap by integrating the psychological construct of locus of control into an economic framework of volunteering behaviour. It extends prior work by examining how perceived control influences both volunteering participation and frequency among older Europeans, and by exploring heterogeneity across gender and welfare regimes. Through this approach, the article bridges insights from economics, sociology and psychology, offering new evidence on how individual agency and institutional context jointly shape prosocial engagement in later life.

This article utilises data from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), which examines several aspects of ageing and well-being in Europe (Börsch-Supan et al., 2013). It spans 28 European countries and Israel across nine waves for individuals aged 50 and older. The first wave was conducted in 2004–2005, and the latest one in 2022–2023. It comprises a compilation of data about health, economic circumstances, social networks, and other essential aspects of ageing. In this article, we use waves 4 (2010), 5 (2013), 6 (2015), 7 (2017), 8 (2019) and 9 (2022) to analyse the relationship between locus of control and volunteering participation and frequency among adults in 12 European countries ^[1] (Austria, Germany, Sweden, Spain, Italy, France, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, Czech Republic, Slovenia and Estonia).

This article uses the locus of control index, created by Becchetti and Bellucci (2021), to measure the degree to which people view themselves as having control over their life circumstances. The index is calculated based on questions assessing feelings of control over different aspects of people's lives. Respondents were asked to rate their agreement using a four-point scale, where 1 = Often, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Rarely, and 4 = Never, with the following 11 statements:

External control statements:

1. Age prevents you from doing things you would like to do.

2. What happens to you is out of your control.

3. Feel left out of things.

4. Family responsibilities prevent you from doing what you want to do.

5. Shortage of money stops you from doing the things you want to do.

Internal control statements:

1. You can do the things that you want to do.

2. Look forward to each day.

3. Look back on life with a sense of happiness.

4. Feel full of energy these days.

5. Life is full of opportunities.

6. Future looks good for you.

The locus of control index was computed by aggregating the scores obtained from participants' replies to the first five questions about external control, then subtracting this sum from the total scores obtained from the last six questions related to internal control. Subsequently, a fixed numerical value of 30 was added to each respondent's score, which produced an index ranging from 11 to 44. A stronger internal locus of control orientation, which signifies a better sense of human agency and power over life events, is reflected by higher index scores. The addition of 30 ensures that the index falls within a specific, interpretable range, facilitating clearer analysis and comparison of the data. This adjustment helps to highlight variations in personal agency and control over life events, making the results more meaningful and easier to understand. We standardised the locus of control index to have a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one for ease of interpretation and comparability across individuals.

We use two dependent variables to reflect volunteering. First, volunteering participation is defined as answering the question, “which of the activities listed on this card have you done in the last twelve months?” Respondents who answered “yes” to the volunteering participation question were then asked about the frequency of their voluntary or charity work during the last 12 months. They indicated their participation frequency using a 4-point Likert scale: 1 = “less often,” 2 = “almost every month,” 3 = “almost every week” and 4 = “almost every day.” To reduce potential bias from scale variation, we constructed binary indicators distinguishing regular volunteers from occasional ones. Specifically, respondents who reported volunteering “almost every week” or “almost every day” were coded as 1, while those who volunteered “less often” or “almost every month” were coded as 0. This binary classification captures meaningful engagement while minimising subjective frequency differences. Informal volunteering, such as providing unpaid help to friends, neighbours or family members, was not considered. SHARE includes separate questions for these activities, and a detailed discussion of measurement issues in volunteering is provided by Salamon et al. (2017). We also controlled for key covariates: age, gender, education, marital status, household size, natural logarithm of income, chronic diseases, body weight, cognitive function, activity of daily living (ADL), instrumental activity of daily living (IADL), and country and language dummies. The variables are summarised in Appendix A3.

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for volunteering participation and frequency, reported separately for volunteers and non-volunteers, and for high- vs low-frequency volunteers. In the final sample, women slightly outnumber men (54%), with most respondents holding medium education levels, being married or partnered, and retired. The average locus of control is approximately 36 among volunteers, with no significant difference between high- and low-frequency volunteers; however, non-volunteers show a lower average. A similar pattern holds for cognitive function, where non-volunteers score lower on average than volunteers.

We use the following model to examine the relationship between locus of control and volunteering:

Vol_it refers to volunteer participation and volunteering frequency among older adults of individual i at time t. LoC_it denotes internal locus of control, representing an individual's belief in control over life circumstances. The introduction of $µi$ resolves problems resulting from a correlation between locus of control and unobserved individual heterogeneity. X_it denotes control variables. ε_it represents unobserved factors and random variability that affect volunteering participation and volunteering frequency but are not explicitly captured in the model.

FE method accounts for unobserved, time-invariant heterogeneity across individuals that may bias OLS results. This is appropriate because traits such as optimism, upbringing or cultural values, linked to both locus of control and volunteering, are constant within individuals. FE models exploit within-person variation across SHARE waves, allowing us to identify how changes in perceived control relate to changes in volunteering over time (Wooldridge, 2010). Given the binary nature of the dependent variables, our baseline specification uses a linear probability model with FE for transparency and to retain within-person variation. As a robustness check, in section 4.4.4 we also estimate nonlinear probability models (probit) and report marginal effects (Greene, 2018).

Volunteering frequency is observed only for respondents who report volunteering. Therefore, the frequency equation is estimated on the volunteer subsample and interpreted as conditional on participation. To limit bias from item nonresponse and panel attrition, we focus on respondents with complete information for the variables used and include a rich set of socio-demographic and health controls.

The fixed-effects framework removes time-invariant unobserved heterogeneity, such as stable personality traits or long-run preferences, that could jointly influence locus of control and volunteering. However, the analysis remains observational. A causal interpretation would require exogenous variation in locus of control, such as random assignment or a credible instrument, neither of which is available in SHARE. Additionally, locus of control may be affected by time-varying shocks, health changes, bereavement or income shocks, which also influence volunteering, and reverse causality cannot be ruled out if volunteering itself shapes perceived control. Estimates should therefore be interpreted as within-person associations consistent with the proposed mechanisms, not causal effects.

Table 2 shows the findings obtained from the OLS and FE estimates of Equation (1). In panel A, the dependent variable is the volunteering participation. In panel B, the dependent variable is volunteering frequency.

Table 2 shows the results from the OLS and FE estimations. In the OLS model, an increase in internal locus of control by one standard deviation is associated with a 3.6-percentage-point increase in volunteering participation. In contrast, the FE model shows a smaller effect of 1.2% points. This means that adults with higher levels of internal locus of control are more likely to participate in volunteering compared to those with lower levels of control.

For volunteering frequency, the OLS results indicate that increasing the locus of control by one standard deviation is associated with a 2.3% point increase in volunteering frequency, while the FE estimate is 3.6% points. This suggests that adults with a stronger sense of control tend to volunteer more frequently than those with a weaker sense of control.

These findings are consistent with Son and Wilson (2017), who used panel data from the National Survey of Midlife in the United States. Their study also found that individuals with an internal locus of control are more likely to volunteer.

In this section, we investigate the influence of locus of control on volunteering participation and frequency among older males and females separately. We use the FE model only.

Table 3 shows that the internal locus of control significantly increases volunteering participation for both older men and women. However, for volunteering frequency, this relationship holds only for older women; no significant correlation is found for older men.

Several factors may explain this gender difference. Older women tend to have stronger social networks ^[2] and family ties conducive to frequent volunteering, and their motivation is more closely tied to personal beliefs and sense of purpose. Men's volunteering, by contrast, is more influenced by external factors (Wilson, 2000). Simmons and Emanuele (2007) further show that women volunteer significantly more hours than men, partly attributable to women's higher perceived personal efficacy. This suggests that noncognitive traits shape not only the likelihood of volunteering but also its intensity.

Cultural differences play an important role in shaping volunteering behaviours. Cultural values, norms and social behaviour affect older adults' engagement in volunteering participation and frequency. Table 4 shows the relationship between locus of control and volunteering participation and frequency by regions in Europe.

Internal locus of control is positively and significantly associated with volunteering participation across all European regions. However, its effect on volunteering frequency is only statistically significant in Southern Europe. This suggests that in Southern countries, where volunteering rates and internal control are generally lower, personal agency plays a stronger role in motivating frequent volunteering. Cultural factors like family obligations and community orientation may amplify this effect (Hofstede, 2001).

In contrast, Northern and Central Europe show no significant link between locus of control and volunteering frequency. These regions benefit from stronger institutional support and established volunteering cultures, which may reduce the influence of personal psychological traits (Assmann and Ehrl, 2021). More individualistic societies may also prioritise self-oriented activities over community engagement, even among those with high internal control.

Table 5 extends the analysis by jointly examining gender and regional heterogeneity. Across all welfare regimes, internal locus of control is positively associated with both volunteering participation and frequency, but the effect is consistently stronger and statistically significant for women. The difference is most pronounced in Southern and Central Europe, where female welfare models and weaker volunteering infrastructures make personal agency a key driver of civic engagement, particularly among older women. In contrast, in Northern Europe, where civic institutions are stronger and gender equality is higher, the gender gap in the effect of locus of control is narrower, suggesting that institutional environments partly offset psychological barriers to participation.

A similar pattern emerges for volunteering frequency. The positive association between internal locus of control and volunteering frequency is again stronger for women, especially in Southern and Central Europe, while in Northern Europe the difference between men and women is less pronounced. These findings confirm that the interplay between individual agency and structural context systematically differs across Europe's welfare regimes.

So far, the main results suggest that locus of control is positively associated with both volunteering participation and frequency. This section explores the sensitivity of our results to changes in the econometric specification, the sample and alternative measures of variables.

Section 4.1. employed a binary variable for volunteering frequency. In this section, we use an alternative measure of volunteering frequency, specifically the 4-scale volunteering frequency of 1 (less often), 2 (almost every month), 3 (almost every week) and 4 (almost every day). We apply Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Fixed Effects (FE) and Ordinal Logistic Regression models.

Appendix A.4 shows that the results suggest a positive and significant relationship between the locus of control and volunteering frequency. In the FE model, increasing the internal locus of control by one standard deviation increases volunteering work frequency by 0.078 points. The ordinal logistic regression results show that a one-unit increase in the locus of control score increases the log odds of being in a higher category of volunteering frequency by 0.109. These findings are consistent with our baseline results in Appendix A.4.

The literature highlighted the importance of retirement on locus of control (Clark and Zhu, 2024). However, our main regressions did not specifically isolate the effect of retirement. In this sensitivity analysis, we exclude the employed and self-employed older adults from our sample. The FE results, reported in Appendix A.5, are similar to those presented in Table 4. We continue to find a positive relationship between locus of control and both volunteering participation and frequency.

To address potential sample selection bias in the volunteering frequency analysis, given that frequency is observed only among individuals who volunteer, we estimate a Heckman selection model and report the corresponding selection diagnostics in Appendix A.6. The LR test rejects the null hypothesis of independent equations, indicating that selection into volunteering is statistically relevant for the intensity outcome. We treat the Heckman specification as an appropriate robustness check for the intensive margin estimates and interpret the frequency results conditional on volunteering participation (Heckman, 1979). The key intensive-margin result is robust: the coefficient on locus of control remains positive and statistically significant in the selection-corrected model, and its magnitude is comparable to our main results in Table 4. Overall, accounting for non-random selection into volunteering does not materially alter our substantive conclusions regarding the association between locus of control and volunteering frequency among volunteers.

Our dependent variables are dummies (volunteering participation and volunteering frequency). Thus, we estimate a probit fixed effect model to check the accuracy of our earlier findings. We include the same control variables that we used in the main regressions. Appendix A.7 reports both the coefficients and the marginal effects for the probit model. Overall, the findings are similar to those in our baseline regression, presented in Table 3. We continue to observe that locus of control positively influences volunteering participation and frequency.

We examine mechanisms linking locus of control to volunteering using fixed effects models. As potential mechanisms, we focus on physical health, cognitive function, and mental health. Results show that an internal locus of control is positively correlated with physical health (self-assessed health), cognitive function and mental health. Self-assessed health, rated on a 5-point scale, improves with internal control, suggesting healthier individuals are more likely to volunteer. Cognitive function, assessed via memory, numeracy and verbal fluency tests, also improves, supporting the idea that mental sharpness is positively associated with volunteering. Mental health, measured by the Euro-D scale (EURO-D = low depressive symptoms), shows reduced depression with higher internal control, aligning with Khumalo and Platter (2019), and promoting social engagement through volunteering.

Appendix A.8 shows that an internal locus of control is strongly and positively associated with physical health, cognitive function and mental health. Specifically, a one-unit increase in internal locus of control is associated with a 0.165 point improvement in self-assessed health, a 0.254 point improvement in cognitive function and a 0.677 point improvement in mental health.

This article investigates the relationship between locus of control and volunteering among older adults using SHARE data from 12 European countries, examining both participation and frequency via OLS and FE models. Results show a positive and significant relationship between locus of control and both outcomes. While no gender difference emerges for participation, the association with volunteering frequency is stronger for older women, suggesting that internal agency is particularly important in sustaining regular engagement among women, who may view volunteering as an extension of caregiving roles. Men's volunteering appears more responsive to external or institutional motivators.

Across welfare regimes, we observe distinct patterns consistent with Europe's cultural and policy diversity. In Northern and Central Europe, where welfare institutions are universal and volunteering infrastructures are well established, the influence of psychological traits such as locus of control is smaller, reflecting a more institutionalised volunteering culture. In contrast, in Southern Europe, where volunteering is less formalised and more family- or community-based, internal control exerts a stronger influence. This suggests that in less structured welfare regimes, volunteering depends more on personal motivation and internal beliefs than on institutional opportunities.

These results yield several policy implications. First, since internal locus of control enhances civic participation, policies that strengthen perceived control among older adults could promote both individual well-being and social cohesion. Training programs that build self-efficacy, such as skill-based volunteering, leadership workshops and intergenerational mentoring, can help older individuals translate their sense of agency into social contribution. Second, local governments and NGOs should tailor interventions to welfare-regime contexts: in Southern Europe, for instance, programs could focus on empowering individuals and communities, while in Northern Europe, efforts could emphasise maintaining engagement after retirement transitions. Third, given the stronger association for older women, gender-sensitive volunteering programs, such as flexible scheduling or social-support volunteering, may help sustain regular involvement among both genders.

Although locus of control is often considered a relatively stable psychological trait, evidence indicates that it can be influenced through life transitions, education and targeted interventions (Clark and Zhu, 2024). Retirement, in particular, represents a window of opportunity to foster greater internal control through structured guidance, volunteer matching and post-retirement training. Policymakers should therefore recognise the potential of civic engagement initiatives not only as social participation tools but also as mechanisms to reinforce older adults' agency and mental well-being.

Several limitations should be noted. Although fixed effects control for time-invariant heterogeneity, the analysis remains observational: SHARE provides no exogenous variation in locus of control, and locus of control may shift in response to time-varying shocks correlated with volunteering. Estimates should therefore be interpreted as within-person associations rather than causal effects. Second, both key variables are self-reported, introducing potential measurement error and cross-country differences in interpretation. Third, SHARE captures formal volunteering only, missing informal helping and caregiving activities relevant in later life, and volunteering items are only available from wave 4 onwards. Finally, some potentially relevant controls, such as detailed social-network measures, are unavailable across all waves, limiting the full-panel specification.

The supplementary material for this article can be found online.