Spontaneous volunteering during the corona crisis in the Netherlands

Spontaneous volunteering during the corona crisis in the Netherlands

Overview of the activities and initiatives of Dutch civilians during the corona crisis and understanding the motives behind volunteering in this crisis.

Liset Visscher

Master Thesis ‘Crisis and Security Management’ Leiden University

Supervisor: Dr. L.D. Cabane Second Reader: Dr. J.J. Wolbers Date: 6 June 2020

2 Abstract

This thesis carried out explorative research of volunteering activities in the Netherlands during the corona crisis that resulted from the COVID-19 pandemic. It has the goal to understand what explains spontaneous volunteering during this crisis. First, it performs a literature review to establish what factors are important in explaining spontaneous volunteering during disasters in the past. Thereafter, an online survey asks over 200 respondents for their activities, contributions, and motivations behind their volunteer work. Besides, a media analysis searches for additional information regarding volunteering during the corona crisis. This research found many similarities with previous disaster research, including the emergence of many volunteering activities and initiatives due to the crisis. Moreover, motivations for volunteering and positive contributions by volunteers were also similar to those found in previous disaster research. However, this research found no evidence for negative contributions of volunteers and it found new volunteering activities with the goal to raise people’s spirits during the crisis, which is not similar to previous research. To conclude, several motivations led to spontaneous volunteering during the crisis, ranging from people feeling the need to help, people seeing that official organizations need help, and people that volunteered because of changes in their daily activities due to the crisis. Besides, the internet and social media helped volunteer work by linking people who need help to volunteers, and by enabling the collecting and sharing of information, tips, and advice.

3

Content

Chapter 1 – Introducing the thesis ... 5

1.1 Societal and academic relevance ... 7

1.3 Reading guide ... 8

Chapter 2 – Spontaneous volunteering in disaster research ... 9

2.1 The Dutch context of crisis management and volunteering ... 9

2.2 The literature review ... 10

2.2.1 Volunteer work outside crisis situations ... 10

2.2.2 Spontaneous volunteering in crisis and disasters ... 10

2.2.3 Activities of spontaneous volunteers ... 12

2.2.4 Motivations behind spontaneous volunteering ... 13

2.2.5 Contributions of spontaneous volunteering ... 14

2.2.6 Disaster behavior ... 14

2.2.7 Social media and online volunteering ... 15

2.3 Theoretical framework – expectations of this thesis ... 17

Chapter 3 – Explaining the Online Survey ... 20

3.1 The research method ... 20

3.1.1 The value of an online survey ... 20

3.1.2 Pilot study ... 21

3.1.3 Structure of the online survey ... 21

3.1.4 Spreading around the survey ... 28

3.1.5 Analysis methods ... 29

3.1.6 Limitations ... 29

3.2 Results of the survey ... 31

3.2.1 Introduction to the results ... 31

3.2.2 Demographic characteristics of the respondents ... 31

3.2.3 Volunteering activities... 35 3.2.4 Forms of volunteering ... 36 3.2.5 Motivations ... 39 3.2.6 Contributions of volunteering ... 41 3.2.7 Disaster behavior ... 43 3.2.8 Social media ... 45

Chapter 4 – Explaining the media analysis ... 48

4.1 The research method ... 48

4.1.1 The value of a media analysis ... 48

4

4.1.3 Limitations ... 51

4.2 Results of the media analysis ... 51

4.2.1 Volunteering activities... 51 4.2.2 Forms of volunteering ... 52 4.2.3 Motivations ... 53 4.2.4 Contributions of volunteering ... 55 4.2.5 Disaster behavior ... 55 4.2.6 Social media ... 56

Chapter 5 – What explains the spontaneous activities and initiatives during the corona crisis in the Netherlands? ... 57

5.1 ‘The corona crisis results in different volunteering than in previous disasters.’ ... 57

5.2 ‘The corona crisis shows emergent, extending and digital volunteering’ ... 59

5.3 ‘During the corona crisis, several motivations for volunteering are important.’ ... 60

5.4 ‘During the crisis volunteers contribute both positively and negatively.’ ... 62

5.5 ‘The corona crisis shows disaster resilience and the refutations of disaster myths.’ ... 63

5.6 ‘During the corona crisis, social media and the internet are important tools for volunteers.’ ... 64

5.7 Answering the research question ... 65

Chapter 6 – Concluding this thesis ... 68

Bibliography ... 70

Academic Literature ... 70

Newspaper articles ... 73

Websites ... 79

Appendix 1 – News articles in the media analysis ... 80

5

Chapter 1 – Introducing the thesis

In 1953, 1836 people lost their lives in one of the largest disasters in the history of the Netherlands, the North Sea Flood. It took the authorities almost two days to organize the rescue operations within the flooded areas before the military took control over the official rescue operations (NOS, 2018; Zeeuws Archief, 2019). However, by then several local initiatives were already established. People living in higher areas offered shelter and clothes for the people who fled from the water (Andere Tijden, 2019). Fishermen and volunteers with boats entered the flooded areas trying to help people and they also had an informing position towards the authorities by letting them know the intensity of the flood (NOS, 2018). Moreover, several civilians volunteered to help to close the breached dikes (NOS, 2018). Many others contributed during the disaster as well, among which scouts, the female aid corps, students, doctors, nurses, social workers, and other individuals. When the news shared the enormous impact of the storm with the rest of the country and the world, many volunteers rushed to the South-West of the Netherlands to help (NOS, 2018). Finally, when the water left the villages after the disaster, volunteers united in cleaning plows to clean the houses and streets from the dirt and destruction left by the water. This disaster was the start of water management becoming indispensable in the Dutch culture, and the country now has a leading position in this field (New York Times, 2017).

This short illustration gives insight into the presence of spontaneous volunteering during a disaster in the Netherlands and the gigantic proportions this can take. Spontaneous volunteers are helpful and even indispensable in times of crisis because official organizations are often overcharged in crises. Moreover, spontaneous volunteering is an important phenomenon when victims and citizens are the first people present and able to help at a scene where immediate disaster response is needed. Furthermore, the presence of spontaneous volunteers is beneficial on both financial and political levels (Paciarotti & Cesaroni, 2020). Besides, Starmans and Oberije (2006) describe that the government in the Netherlands is increasingly in favor of spontaneous volunteering in incidents and disasters because the official services have limited resources and manpower in these situations.

Currently, the Netherlands is dealing with a different kind of disaster, the COVID-19 or corona crisis. The disease started in China, but the globalized world we live in today led to the fast spread of the virus all over the world. In the Netherlands, the virus first hospitalized a corona patient on February 26th in Tilburg (NOS, 27 February 2020). Thereafter, the Dutch government implemented several measures in March 2020 to decrease the spread of the virus

6

in the country (NOS, 31 March 2020). The government closed schools, catering companies, and sports facilities, and forbade the execution of professions with human contact (except for health care). They asked citizens to keep a 1.5-meter distance from each other and to stay home as much as possible, especially when someone has illness symptoms. They canceled all events and gatherings, except for weddings, funerals, and religious gatherings, which only allowed a maximum of 30 people. As can be expected, this crisis leads to several problems within Dutch society. Mental health experts expect an increase in loneliness and psychological issues (Volkskrant, 27 March 2020). Besides, businesses around the world experience financial losses and people fear a global recession (BBC, 3 April 2020; The New York Times, 1 April 2020).

However, this disaster also seems to show positive effects, such as people participating in activities and initiatives to help each other. Online Facebook pages or Twitter hashtags show that many people want to help others, for example by doing the groceries, walking the dog, or by cooking a meal for someone else (Omroep Gelderland, 14 March 2020). For example, a student in Groningen started a Facebook page that serves as a connection between people who need help and people who offer help (Dagblad van het Noorden, 20 March 2020). She arranges that people can write cards or draw paintings that are then delivered to people who can use an uplifting message. Besides, she posts tips on the Facebook page about working at home, homeschooling, and entertaining children at home. Several other examples showed up as well. A shop owner started free deliveries, a therapist offered online help against fear symptoms, an entrepreneur offered his workspace, a lawyer offered to advise over the phone, a yoga teacher offered free lessons online, a freelancer delivered home-cooked meals, an artist performed in front of care homes, and a mother sent out the drawings of her two-year-old son (Trouw, 18 March 2020).

Similar to what happened during the North Sea Flood, people step up and help others during the corona crisis. However, these activities and initiatives are not the same as during a natural disaster. Therefore, it is interesting to look at spontaneous volunteering and citizen initiatives during the corona crisis and compare this with existing disaster research. What are the spontaneous volunteering activities during the corona crisis? What are the motivations of citizens to start these activities? What is the role of social media? To get insight into disaster behavior and voluntary activities during the corona crisis in the Netherlands, this research tries to answer the following research question: What explains the spontaneous activities and

initiatives during the corona crisis in the Netherlands?

7

1.1 Societal and academic relevance

The coronavirus has serious effects on people’s health. As a consequence of the virus, over 10 percent of the infected people will need a ventilator to help them breathe and people spent a relatively long time on the intensive care unit (BBC, 14 March 2020). Therefore, the Dutch government implemented measures to decrease the spread of the virus and to prevent overcharging the health care system (NOS op 3, 14 March 2020). These measures have a large impact on most Dutch citizens because people need to stay at home and keep their distance from each other, and catering and other contact professions cannot perform their work (NOS, 17 March 2020-b). However, past research showed that disaster consequences might not always be considered negatively. Dynes (1970) mentioned that communities are sometimes longing back to the disaster because that was the time when people helped each other and when differences among people did not matter. Thus, it is interesting to find out what the current corona crisis means in terms of solidarity and how people experience the crisis. The impact of the crisis on Dutch citizens is severe, but there might also be positive aspects. It is valuable to evaluate the negative consequences of the crisis, together with the positive consequences, to sketch a complete image of the impact of this crisis on the Netherlands. Socially, it is interesting to understand how people cope with a crisis which is the result of a global pandemic because the current way of living might result in more global crises in the future. Moreover, Starmans and Oberije (2006) describe that the Dutch government is increasingly in favor of spontaneous volunteering in incidents and disasters because the official services are limited in their resources in these situations. Therefore, it is interesting to understand what citizen initiatives and activities arise during a crisis that the country never experienced before. As a consequence, future disaster planning is then able to consider the experiences that this ongoing crisis is teaching us.

Besides the social relevance of this research, this research is of academic value as well. In the Netherlands, there is only limited research on spontaneous volunteering in incidents (Boersma et al., 2019; Groenewegen-ter Morsche & Oberije, 2010; Starmans & Oberije, 2006; Schmidt et al., 2018). Tonnaer (2008) is the only researcher who looked at spontaneous volunteers in disasters in general in the Netherlands but did this 12 years ago. This research, therefore, contributes to the field of disaster research related to the Netherlands. Furthermore, current society has never experienced the consequences of a pandemic before and this research makes it possible to understand the contributions of citizens during the current corona crisis. Again, this will help to increase both disaster literature concerning the Netherlands and to help understand the influence of a global health crisis on the behavior of Dutch citizens.

8

1.3 Reading guide

This research uses a literature review, online survey research, and a media analysis to answer the research question. The literature review serves as the basis for the expectations of this research and therefore is the basis for this entire thesis. The online survey methodology used in this thesis makes it possible to collect data on an understudied subject, while the corona crisis is still ongoing. However, the survey results in limited data on certain subjects of this thesis, which is the reason to also include a media analysis in this thesis. Chapters 3 and 4 elaborate on this.

The thesis builds up as follows. Chapter 2 exists off the literature review and the expectations of this research. First, it explores previous research regarding disaster behavior, spontaneous volunteering, and the role of social media. Thereafter, this chapter presents the expectations of this research. Chapter 3 consists of the methodology and results of the online survey research. This chapter explains the use of online survey research, the analysis method, and the limitations of survey research. Thereafter, this chapter presents the results of the online survey, including some statistical analysis. Chapter 4 focuses on the media analysis, explaining its methods and results. It first shows the methodology, including the use of a codebook. Thereafter, it explains the data and the results from the media analysis Chapter 5 is the discussion of this thesis and combines the results from the online survey and the media analysis to find out what expectations from chapter 2 turn out to be true. This chapter is divided per expectation, as the subtitles show, and every section includes a summary of what data came from which of the two research methods. Finally, chapter 8 finalizes this thesis, arguing how this thesis contributes socially and academically.

9

Chapter 2 – Spontaneous volunteering in disaster research

Chapter 2 consists of the literature review that serves as the basis for this research. This literature review results in several expectations for disaster behavior and spontaneous volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic that leads to a crisis in the Netherlands in 2020. Before diving into the literature related to volunteering in crisis and disasters, this chapter explores volunteer work in the Netherlands in normal times. Then, the focus turns towards volunteering in disasters and disaster behavior. Section 2.3 describes the expectations that form the basis for this research.

2.1 The Dutch context of crisis management and volunteering

In the Netherlands, several organizations work on the operational security level (Zanders, 2008). The fire department has a central position in disaster management. The ambulance services are responsible for minor incidents with victims that need medical assistance. In the case of major incidents and disasters, the organization for medical assistance in the event of accidents and disasters (GHOR) oversees coordinating the ambulance services. The police department is active in crisis and disaster management, often in a regulatory role. The population care service is responsible for crisis communication, victim support, and recovery care. Finally, there are several other partners relevant in crisis and disaster management, such as the military, the regional water authorities, the prosecution authority, specific experts, and private partners. Important overarching organizations within crisis management in the Netherlands are the 25 Safety Regions. During the corona crisis, these Safety Regions were responsible for health care facilities, the coordination between concerned parties, decision making, and informing the municipalities (Van Duin et al., 2020). For example, they had the authority to oblige people to stay in quarantine and they could close buildings during the crisis.

Besides the formal structure of crisis management in the Netherlands, Dutch culture is influential as well. The Netherlands has a rich culture of consensus-seeking and consultancy between official government organizations, other organizations, and civilians. Different parties consulting and discussing with each other is normal in a country where there is not one group with an absolute majority, socially or politically (Jagt, 2018). The Dutch are not only used to a culture of coordination between several parties, but they also know a culture where many participate in one way or another in doing volunteer work. Approximately 50 percent of the Dutch citizens act as a volunteer for at least one day a year, of whom most are active in schools, sports clubs, churches, and nursing facilities (Arends & Schmeets, 2018). Other organizations

10

where Dutch volunteers are active are youth organizations, community houses, cultural organizations, hobby organizations, labor unions, legal aid organizations, political parties, and tenants’ associations. Moreover, several communities in the Netherlands have initiatives where citizens are closely connected to the police and the municipality concerning the safety of a community, community management activities, and budget plans (Land & Stokkum, 2015).

2.2 The literature review

2.2.1 Volunteer work outside crisis situations

The term ‘volunteering’ is one with many different definitions and explanations. Hardill & Baines (2001, p. 33) define it as ‘an activity that people freely choose to do, without

remuneration, to help or benefit non-household members’. Musick & Wilson (2007) describe

that volunteer work might also include activities where people try to achieve a common goal, activities to maintain an organization, and organizing campaigns and events. Just like the labor market, volunteer work can be divided into several areas. Moreover, there is a wide variety of volunteer roles and volunteers themselves, ranging from managerial roles to caretaking (Hardill & Baines, 2011). Volunteering can even differ between countries. For example, Levine et al. (2001) describe that helping others is less important in countries with a higher income level, among which the Netherlands because they focus more on personal needs and goals. On the individual level, Vliert, Huang & Levine (2004) describe that both egoistic and altruistic motives lead to volunteering. Moreover, Hardill & Baines (2011) describe that popular motivations for volunteer work are to increase an individual’s chances to find a job, to overcome the difficulties that result from worklessness and the impulse of philanthropy and mutual aid. For example, Prouteau & Wolff (2007) emphasize that people volunteer so they can make new friends and meet new people. Moreover, people want to feel that they are a part of a community, they want to help others, or they want to learn and experience personal growth (Hardill & Baines, 2011). Musick & Wilson (2007, p. 27) found that more women volunteer than man, but that man volunteer longer. Besides, ‘middle-aged people, college graduates, frequent church

attenders, parents, and homeowners are more likely to volunteer’.

2.2.2 Spontaneous volunteering in crisis and disasters

Civilian participation in this research includes spontaneous volunteering and citizen initiatives. Spontaneous volunteering is a term known in disaster research because spontaneous or emergent behavior is almost always present in disasters and therefore intensively researched

11

(Dynes, 1970). The second element of civilian participation in this research, citizen initiatives, is not described in disaster research often. These initiatives include long-term initiatives organized by citizens. Soares da Silva, Horlings and Figueiredo (2018, p.2) define citizen initiatives as ‘self-organized, citizen-led collective actions in which citizens themselves define

the goals and how to achieve them, independent from governmental or other external organizations’. Haaland & Welevik (2019) explain how the influx of people that wanted to help

refugees in Greece was part of citizen initiatives for global solidarity.

The essential of volunteering is that someone gives time, without expecting financial or other allowances, to a person, group, or organization (Boersma et al., 2019). Volunteering happens spontaneously following a disaster, which includes many different activities of people, in many different contexts. Spontaneous volunteers are “those who seek to contribute on

impulse—people who offer assistance following a disaster and who are not previously affiliated with recognized volunteer agencies and may or may not have relevant training, skills or experience” (Cottrell, 2010, p. 3). Whittaker (2015) defines three types of spontaneous

volunteerism – emerging, extending, or digital. Emergent volunteers perform activities that are new in the disaster situation to address the needs of the situation. ‘Emergent volunteers often

have ‘real-time’, ‘on-the-ground’ views of the issues and problems people face and can configure themselves and their responses to meet local needs’ (Whittaker et al., 2015, p. 362).

Besides, improvisation and innovation are important characteristics of emergent volunteers. Often, groups that emerge in a disaster only last for hours or days, but sometimes these groups turn into official organizations long-term. Extending volunteers were active in emergency or disaster functions before and extended their activities to tasks in a disaster. These people are often part of groups in the community that already existed before the disaster. Besides, corporate involvement is increasingly seen in disaster, with many employees participating when tasks are similar to their normal work situation. Finally, digital volunteers use social media and software to produce and/or share information related to the disaster. Digital volunteerism is a consequence of the new possibilities that arose from new technology and increased use of the internet and social media platforms. This research includes all three types of volunteering.

Finally, Ludwig et al. (2017) describe that three groups of people are important in a disaster. The first group consists of the official government organizations that have ‘security

responsibilities, emergency services, and private aid organizations with a “we care” attitude and acknowledged responsibility for most of the tasks during the response and recovery work’

(Ludwig et al., 2017, p. 104). When a disaster occurs, some organizations can increase their manpower if needed by calling in all employees and volunteers (Dynes, 1970). The second

12

group involves emergency and aid organizations that already existed before the crisis and that work professionally. The last group entails the citizens that are active in disaster management and are often seen as spontaneous volunteers or emergent groups.

2.2.3 Activities of spontaneous volunteers

As illustrated in the introduction of this research, spontaneous volunteers become active in several stages and several ways during a crisis. ‘The main activities seem to be search and

rescue; collecting, transporting, and distributing relief supplies and clothing; and providing food and drink to victims and emergency workers’ (Twigg & Mosel, 2017, p. 446). After

hurricane Katrina hit the United States, many forms of emergent behavior occurred, among which hotels helping stranded guests, hospitals providing minimum healthcare while regular procedures where not possible, local neighbors gathering together and performing search and rescue missions, and religious groups providing food and other help (Rodriguez, Trainor & Quarantelli, 2006). After the floods in Germany in 2013, many spontaneous volunteers helped with the following activities: filling sandbags, donation camps/campaigns, carrying out bulk waste, re-painting, cleaning up, psychological help, driving forklifts/trucks, and restoring electricity in houses (Ludwig et al., 2017). In disasters in Italy, Paciarotti and Cesaroni (2020) found that volunteers delivered food and supplies to victims, rescued victims, organized fundraisings, helped cleaning and shoveling mud, offered shelter, offered psychological support, and even participated in operational meetings. Finally, Groenewegen-ter Morsche and Oberije (2010) studied ten disasters that happened in the Netherlands and divided the actions of volunteers into five categories: Fire Department processes, GHOR processes, Police processes, Municipality processes, and Multidisciplinary processes. They found several volunteering activities in every disaster, related to the different processes as shown in table 1 below.

Category Activities by spontaneous volunteers

Fire Department processes

Fighting Fire and hazardous substances, rescue operations and

technical assistance, disinfection of people and animals, disinfection of vehicles and infrastructure, and observing and measuring.

GHOR processes Physical assistance, psychological assistance, and prevention.

Police processes Shielding and blocking off areas, traffic control, law enforcement, victim identification, guiding (into areas), and criminal investigation.

Municipality processes Funeral care, registration of damage, registration of victims

Multidisciplinary processes

Warning citizens, making areas accessible and clean, evacuation, informing, offering care and shelter, and primary necessities of life. Table 1 – spontaneous volunteering (Groenewegen-ter Morsche & Oberije, 2010)

13 2.2.4 Motivations behind spontaneous volunteering

Spontaneous volunteering in major incidents and disasters might take place for several reasons. Motivations shift between being self-oriented, other-oriented, or a mixture (Starmans & Oberije, 2006). This research found some specific motivations for spontaneous volunteering in disaster research, namely that citizens are the actual first responders, that they feel the need to help, that official organizations cannot manage the situation by themselves, the change of daily life makes it possible for citizens to include volunteer work, and citizens are driven by cultural aspects.

First, immediately after the impact of a disaster, before official first responders arrive at the scene, spontaneous volunteers emerge. Family members, friends, and neighbors are likely to help in the first response to the situation (Twigg & Mosel, 2017). Second, in major incidents and disasters, people often feel a need to do something (Kendra & Wachtendorf, 2016). When a disaster occurs, people tend to change their daily activities, focusing on disaster response, because they want to contribute to the situation (Twigg and Mosel, 2017). Moreover, people volunteer because they feel empathy for the victims (Harris et al., 2017). Furthermore, citizens might become spontaneous volunteers in disaster because they want to feel useful or because they want to overcome the negative attitude of the disaster effects (Starmans & Oberije, 2006). Besides, Boersma et al. (2019, p. 730) describe that past research showed that spontaneous volunteering can lead to positive social and psychological influences on a person, like ‘feelings

of social solidarity, personal empowerment, and satisfaction with intrinsic and extrinsic rewards’. Third, spontaneous volunteering in disasters emerges when official organizations

cannot manage the situation or when their responses are inadequate (Harris et al., 2017). For example, during the Refugee Crisis of 2015 in the Netherlands, one of the main reasons for volunteering was the prevailing idea that the formal organizations were failing in their response to the crisis (Boersma et al., 2019). Fourth, during a disaster, people are forced to stop or change their daily activities. Therefore, it is logical that during a disaster, new roles and responsibilities emerge (Twigg & Mosel, 2017: Rodriquez, Trainor & Quarantelli, 2006). Finally, cultural aspects are important. Dutch citizens are increasingly active in local policy shaping and they are given a certain level of responsibility concerning safety issues in their surroundings (Land & Stokkum, 2015). Moreover, there are several citizen projects in local communities to increase safety and to improve the quality of life. Furthermore, ‘the strongest predictor of post-disaster

neighborhood activity is disaster neighborhood activity: people who described their pre-disaster activity as high were 37 times more likely to maintain high post-pre-disaster activity’

14 2.2.5 Contributions of spontaneous volunteering

One of the most important aspects of spontaneous volunteering in disaster management is the fact that they bring social capital or relationships that could lead to extra supplies, resources, and access to certain areas (Day et al., 2012; Haney, 2018). Moreover, Twigg & Mosel (2017) emphasize that spontaneous volunteers are valuable to official emergency responders when they carry out simple activities because it gives these responders time to focus on more urgent matters. Furthermore, Johansson et al. (2018) argue that volunteers can offer knowledge, skills, and resources. Waldman et al. (2018) argue that nowadays disasters occur more frequently and more intense, which adds to the positive value of using volunteers in disasters.

However, spontaneous volunteers also contributed negatively to disasters. Lopez-Ibor et al. (2005) describe that spontaneous volunteers can create a second disaster because their attempts to help can be counterproductive and delay disaster recovery. For example, convergence is the phenomenon of people rushing towards a disaster area, instead of leaving it, and this can be problematic. When large numbers of people, information, and material enter a disaster area, coordination and communication efforts are needed (Knowles, 2012; Waldman et al., 2018; Day et al., 2012). Moreover, large numbers of spontaneous volunteers and resources can lead to obstructions and official responders are pulled away from their duties when they need to instruct volunteers (Twig & Mosel, 2017). Furthermore, volunteers tend to act independently and figure problems out when they encounter them because they are not used to the methods of the official services. This unpredictable behavior can be troubling for official organizations (Waldman et al., 2018; Tonnaer, 2008; Twigg & Mosel, 2017). Besides this, risk and accountability are important issues, since volunteers might be unskilled, at risk for injury, and working without insurance (Waldman et al., 2018; Twigg & Mosel, 2017).

2.2.6 Disaster behavior

The next section explores disaster behavior found in previous disaster studies. Disaster behavior is important to study and understand in the context of volunteering because positive behavior such as people adjusting to a crisis increases the chances of them helping others, whereas negative behavior such as panicking can lead to people needing help themselves during a crisis. When a disaster occurs, people go through a process of understanding what is happening and figuring out how to react to the disaster (Liu et al., 2016). First, people try to understand what is happening. Second, people start believing that what is happening is real. Third, people start to understand that a disaster is happening in their personal life. And fourth, people start reacting by deciding what actions must be taken.

15

In a disaster, the emergent activity often benefits the community, instead of personal interests (Twigg & Mosel, 2017). Lumieux (2014) found that people are less focused on themselves when they are in the company of people they know. Furthermore, disaster resilience means the “ability of countries, communities, and households to manage change, by

maintaining or transforming living standards in the face of shocks or stress – such as earthquakes, drought or violent conflict – without compromising their long-term prospects”

(Department for International Development, 2011 in Ludwig et al., 2017). For some people, the disaster is a time they long back for after the disaster situation ended, because of the very fact that people help each other and differences between people faded away (Dynes, 1970).

Disaster researchers found that citizens are not as panicked in a disaster as authorities often think (Knowles, 2012). The so-called ‘myths of disaster behavior’ are important factors to consider here. These myths describe behavior that often does not occur at all in disasters, while many still believe it does. Tonnaer (2008, p. 44) describes that these myths consist of citizens who tend to panic, are apathetic, are dependent on others, and citizens that start looting during disasters. These myths of citizen behavior in disasters are maintained through (social) media framing and because civilians in disasters describe their behavior as such (Starmans & Oberije, 2006). Dynes (1970) also states that official organizations are worried that citizens will start looting when a disaster takes place, but that this phenomenon hardly occurs. Twigg and Mosel (2017) add to this, arguing that neither looting, panic, or other forms of antisocial or exploitative activity are likely to occur during a disaster. However, they also argue that sometimes people take actions or use resources to protect their private interests, instead of providing the community with their help. Moreover, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, there were also incidents of people stealing in the aftermath of the hurricane (Rodriquez, Trainor & Quarantelli, 2006).

2.2.7 Social media and online volunteering

Past research showed that the role of social media has increased over time. Communities are already connected through social media, which makes it an easy tool to use during a disaster (Waldman et al., 2018). Moreover, social media creates an easy way for citizens to share disaster-related information online, and online activities can compensate official authorities’ failures in managing a disaster (Dailey & Starbird, 2014). Online activities during disasters are aimed at information gathering and exchange, such as information concerning the supply and demand of resources and manpower, and the creation of platforms that can transform large amounts of information into a readable and well-arranged whole (Twigg & Mosel, 2017).

16

(Social) media use during a disaster can be helpful as an information source when reporting immediately begins at the start of a disaster and continues throughout it (Starmans & Oberije, 2006). Moreover, social media can be an important tool in ‘crowdsourcing’, which means that problems are solved with the online help of many people (Dailey & Starbird, 2014). ‘A key strength of the crowdsourcing approach is that volunteers do not necessarily have to

invest long periods of time to participate, nor do they need to be near the emergency or disaster-affected area’ (Whittaker et al., 2015, p. 364). Furthermore, using social media and online tools,

citizens can create maps with information that is helpful for citizens and official organizations in a natural disaster (Dailey & Starbird, 2014). Besides, Waldman et al. (2018) argue that social media use during a disaster response can lead to positive emotions, such as feelings of purpose and connection, but also lead to practical solutions when online platforms are used as the bridge between online citizens and networks. Finally, official response organizations make use of online information to fill their information gaps (Dailey & Starbird, 2014). ‘The sheer

pervasiveness of modern technology has extended not only the types of communication possible but also the coordination activities and tasks available to all individuals prior to, during and following a disaster’ (Ludwig et al., 2017, p. 103). However, online volunteering has

disadvantages as well. Fast information sharing leads to mistakes when information is not verified correctly (Starmans & Oberije, 2006). Schmidt et al. (2018) argue that it is hard for online volunteers to connect to official organizations online, information management challenges arise, and information overload results in time-consuming efforts to filter out useful information.

There are several examples of social media or internet use for spontaneous volunteering. The Red Cross in the Netherlands created an online platform called Ready2Help, to connect official emergency services to volunteers (Schmidt et al., 2018). During the Refugee Crisis in 2015, Dutch volunteers also used Facebook as one of the communication tools and for recruiting new volunteers. After the Alberta flood in 2013, Canadian citizens used the hashtag #YYCHelps on Facebook, Twitter, and websites, for information and to offer and ask for supplies and help (Waldman et al., 2018). Furthermore, the missing of Anne Faber in the Netherlands is a case that eminently shows the power of social media in a crisis. When Anne Faber went missing, her boyfriend posted a message online to ask for help. Over 130.000 people shared this message, which resulted in many volunteers offering their help in searching for the girl (Lam & Kop, 2020).

17

2.3 Theoretical framework – expectations of this thesis

This section specifies the theoretical framework used as the basis for the online survey and the media analysis. Several expectations create a framework to use for the online survey and media analysis, regarding the following themes: forms of spontaneous volunteering, disaster behavior, activities by volunteers, motivations for volunteering, contributions of volunteers, and the role that social media plays in volunteering. The literature review forms the basic elements for these expectations.

In helping each other, this research expects to find different volunteering activities than found in previous disaster research, due to the nature of the disaster. To study this, this expectation is linked to the subdivision of volunteering activities in disaster by Groenewegen-ter Morsche & Oberije (2010), who divide activities among several processes – police, GHOR, fire department, municipality, and multidisciplinary processes.

This research expects to find all three forms of spontaneous volunteering that Whittaker et al. (2015) described. First, emergent volunteers are the people that volunteer for people or organizations that they were not involved with before. Moreover, emergent volunteerism during the Corona crisis in the Netherlands includes all activities that emerged due to this crisis. Second, extending volunteers are the people that volunteer for organizations that they were already connected to. Finally, digital volunteerism includes all activities of volunteers that are somehow related to the digital world. Or in other words, digital volunteerism uses social media, the internet, or other forms of technology for their volunteer work.

Concerning the motivations of volunteers, this research expects to find that people are active as spontaneous volunteers during the COVID-19 crisis due to different motivations. First, volunteers in this crisis are the first responders when they help people that they already know. Thus, people help others in their network, because they know them and their needs. Second, during disasters, people feel a need to help (Kendra & Wachtendorf, 2016), which has several manifestations in this crisis, such as people wanting to contribute or feel useful, or feeling better by helping others. Third, Harris et al. (2017) argue that spontaneous volunteers emerge when official organizations cannot manage the situation. Fourth, during the corona crisis, daily life in the Netherlands changed due to the closure of schools, office buildings, sports facilities, restaurants, and so on. This research expects that people volunteer due to new roles and responsibilities of this situation, among which people having more free time, people seeing others volunteer, and the feeling that volunteering is important in this crisis (Twigg & Mosel, 2017; Rodriquez et al., 2006). Fifth, cultural aspects are important motivations for volunteering. Haney (2018) argues that pre-disaster activities are important forecasters of post-disaster

18

activities, and Land & Stokkum (2015) describe how Dutch citizens are normally involved in local policies and safety issues. This research thus expects that volunteers in this crisis volunteered before and are used to helping other people in normal times.

This research expects several benefits and disadvantages of spontaneous volunteering. It expects that volunteers can contribute because of their social capital, resources, knowledge, skills, and them performing simple activities (Day et al., 2012; Haney, 2018; Twigg & Mosel, 2017). On the other hand, this research expects to find disadvantages as well, among which volunteering attempts to be counterproductive in this crisis, problems as convergence, and risk and accountability issues (Lopez-Ibor et al., 2015; Knowles, 2012; Waldman et al., 2018; Day et al., 2012; Whittaker et al., 2015).

Regarding disaster behavior, this research expects to find disaster resilience and refutation of the disaster myths. Disaster resilience during the corona crisis expresses itself when people manage to cope with the government measures relating to the crisis. On the other hand, this research expects to refute disaster myths, such as apathetic behavior, people panicking, and people becoming dependent on others (Tonnear, 2008). Instead, people can cope with the crisis and become socially more connected by helping each other (Whittaker et al., 2015).

Relating to the nature of this crisis, globalization, and new technologies, this research expects to find that the internet and social media platforms play a sufficient role in volunteering efforts during the corona crisis. Volunteers use the internet and social media to find and share information related to the crisis, but also for crisis mapping and/or crowdsourcing.

In short, this section summarizes the expectations as follows. During the corona crisis in the Netherlands:

1. spontaneous volunteers carried out different activities then volunteers in previously researched disasters, due to the nature of the disaster.

2. emergent, extending, and digital volunteering occurred. 3. people acted as spontaneous volunteers because:

a. they were the actual first responders. b. they felt the need to help others.

c. official organizations could not manage the situation by themselves. d. daily life changed, and therefore volunteering fits in the new daily pattern. e. cultural aspects led to volunteering.

19

4. spontaneous volunteer contributions in the crisis led to both benefits and disadvantages.

5. there is evidence for both disaster resilience and the refutation of the disaster myths. 6. the internet and social media platforms play a sufficient role in volunteering efforts.

The next chapter explains the first method that tests these expectations, the online survey. Over 200 respondents answered questions related to all six expectations, which created the data analyzed in chapter 3. Before that, the next chapter first explains the creation of the online survey.

20

Chapter 3 – Explaining the Online Survey

This chapter explains the first research method of this thesis, the online survey, and chapter 4 explains the methodology and results of the second method, the media analysis. The first method is the development, distribution, and analysis of an online survey. This chapter first describes the value and details of doing an online survey. Thereafter, the first section describes the creating of the final questions used. Finally, this chapter describes the results of the survey in section 3.2. In this section, the results explain the general information the data, and the results of performing the extra analysis.

3.1 The research method

3.1.1 The value of an online survey

Using an online survey in this research is eligible because it has the potential to receive much data on several subjects (Bardaa, 2015). This research needs data on the activities of people during the corona crisis, but also on the reasons behind performing these activities, to answer the research question. Online survey research is a capable research method to gather information about people’s attitudes or opinions about certain matters, or in this case, about volunteering activities (Bardaa, 2015). As discussed above, disaster researchers never looked at spontaneous volunteering during epidemics or pandemics, thus an online survey will help to receive the data needed for this understudied subject. Furthermore, this research took place during the corona crisis, therefore certain safety measures were active. It was difficult for a researcher to meet respondents in person or to visit places where certain citizen initiatives take place. Using online surveys makes it possible to gather information about spontaneous volunteering activities during the crisis, without taking safety risks.

This research focuses on people who were active somehow in citizen volunteering or citizen initiatives in the Netherlands during the corona crisis. Citizens who have not been active in this way are not asked to fill out the survey and are therefore excluded from this research. The reason for this is that past research on civilian participation never focused on the difference between the people that do and the people that do not volunteer in disasters.

The designed survey contains short and clear questions in such a way that the survey is easy to fill out, and the literature review serves as the basis for these questions. The survey uses rating questions when information is asked about feelings or the reasons behind volunteering, multiple-choice questions for questions with clear answer options, and open questions to decrease the chance that people only think about the options given in the survey. There is only

21

one open question in this research because Bardaa (2015) explains that survey results are better when people can click on answer types instead of typing an answer. The multiple-choice and rating questions are formatted in matrixes because this decreases the time to fill out the survey. The questions in the matrixes are not ordered structurally, to avoid that respondents answer all questions the same simply because they follow each other. Finally, the questions are structured in a way that every new page of the online survey is about a specific subject.

Finally, the research uses the survey program Surveymonkey to develop a survey that can be spread around easily. The questions are in Dutch because the focus of this research is on Dutch citizens. Furthermore, the survey shows every question matrix on a different page. Also, the two open questions are both asked on a separate page to avoid people using the other questions or answering options to answer those. The survey shows the progress of the respondent on every page, so he or she knows when the survey is finished.

3.1.2 Pilot study

Before spreading around the survey, the researcher performed a small pilot study to find problems with the survey. Three persons filled out the draft survey and commented on this. The first pilot resulted in changes in the length of the survey, meaning that this research cut out several questions from the survey. The erased questions were recurrences from earlier questions. Moreover, the survey limited the number of answer options to a maximum of three to keep the survey structure clear and simple. The reason for this was that the first pilot indicated that the survey was too extensive and would lead to many respondents skipping questions or not filling out the survey at all. The second pilot resulted in changes in the structure of the survey, namely the change of the order of the questions to increase the number of people filling out the survey completely. The final pilot led to added categories in the questions related to education and job situation, to involve all categories. Finally, the final pilot solved some grammar issues, readability of certain questions, and a clearer explanation of ‘volunteering’ in this survey.

3.1.3 Structure of the online survey

In the next part, the structure of the online survey shows the theoretical basis of all questions and the final questions that the suvery asks. The background information that is showed before the questions is not included in the final survey.

22 General background questions

The first questions in the survey ask the respondents for background information. Bekkers (2013) named several factors that are influential for volunteering in non-disaster times, such as gender, education, work, and living situation, having a partner and/or children, social pressure, and altruistic values. His research resulted in the following background questions in this survey, as shown in table 2.

Question Answer option

Date of filling out the survey (automatic) _ _ - _ _ - _ _

What is your gender? Male/Female/Other

In what year were you born? _ _ _ _

Where do you live? In what province

What is your highest received education? o No (finished) education o Primary school o High school o MBO education o Higher/Scientific education o MBO student o HBO/WO student o Other, namely … What was your work situation directly before the

crisis?

o Paid work

o Non-paid or volunteer work o No work

o Other, namely … Did your work situation change because of the crisis? o No

o Yes, I lost my job

o Yes, I currently don’t work, because I am at risk for the virus.

o Yes, I temporarily don’t work because I can’t carry out my job. o Yes, I work from home

o Yes, I work more hours at my job o Yes, I temporarily help in my old job o Other, namely …

Have you been active in volunteering work in 2019 (before the crisis)?

o No

o Yes, monthly o Yes, weekly

o Yes, but not on a structural basis o Yes, …

If yes, in what type of volunteering work were you active before the crisis.

Open question

23 Activities during COVID-19 crisis

In the next part of the survey, questions relate to the type of volunteering of people during the COVID-19 crisis in the Netherlands. Previous research serves as the basis for the question, as shown in section 2.2.3 of the literature review. Furthermore, the answering options in the question matrix ask someone if he or she was active in certain activities and if the volunteer helped someone that he or she already knew. This is because Lumieux (2014) describes that people are less self-centered when they are near people they know and because pre-disaster behavior explains post-disaster behavior (Haney, 2018).

Besides academic literature, this part of the survey also uses secondary sources as a basis for the questions, such as news items and articles. The reason for this is that previous research did not focus on epidemics or pandemics, thus types of volunteering in the COVID-19 crisis probably differ from the classic cases studied in disaster research. News items and articles give insight into all sorts of initiatives and volunteering activities during this crisis. For example, many restaurant owners donated their food to food banks that experienced shortages, students offer babysitting services to health care personnel, and citizens are passing out notes asking if someone needs help (NOS, 16 March 2020). Moreover, people from the floriculture handed out flowers to health care institutions (NOS, 17 March 2020). Furthermore, prisoners started to develop mouth masks and citizens visit and help vulnerable people (AD, 17 March 2020; De Correspondent, 13 March 2020; The Guardian, 12 March 2020). Besides, a shop owner started free deliveries, a therapist offers online help against fear symptoms, an entrepreneur offers his workspace, a lawyer offers to advise over the phone, a yoga teacher offers free lessons online, a freelancer delivers home-cooked meals, an artist performs in front of care homes, and a mother sends out the drawings of her two-year-old son (Trouw, 18 March 2020). These activities, and previous disaster literature, led to the questions as shown in table 3.

24 Check the boxes of the

activities that you carried out for others during the corona crisis so far. Write

the activities that are not present in the list in the category ‘other, namely…’.

o Sending a card or drawing o Sending or handing out flowers o Cooking food

o Doing groceries o Babysitting

o Collecting and/or donating personal protective clothing o Creating mouth masks

o Donating money o Handing out food

o Providing tips and/or advice

o Providing online lessons (Sport/school/music/etc.) o Performing in front of flats or elderly homes o Offering help by the phone

o Offering help through social media o Offering help by letters and/or posters o Other, namely

To what extent did you know the persons or organization that you did activities for?

Multiple options possible.

o I help persons in my surroundings that I already knew

before the crisis.

o I help an organization that I was already involved with

before the crisis.

o I did not know the persons I help before the crisis. o I was not involved with the organization I help before the

crisis.

Table 3 - volunteering activities

Individual volunteering and emergent groups

As described in sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, volunteering has different manifestations. In this part of the survey, questions ask about the type of volunteering, and if this relates to the previous life of a respondent. Moreover, questions try to get information on the level of volunteering by Whittaker et al. (2015), spontaneous, emergent, or digital.

During the corona crisis, I volunteered… Yes Occasionally No

Individually and on my initiative. Together with other people. Online and/or via social media. Together with friends/family Together with colleagues.

By performing tasks that I was already familiar with in daily life. Together with a group of people that I did not know before the crisis. Table 4 - categories

25 Motivations for volunteering during COVID-19 crisis

In the next part, the survey asks questions about what motivations people have for volunteering during the COVID-19 crisis. In this part, just as in the other parts, previous academic research together with secondary sources form the basis for the questions. The related research is reported in section 2.2.4 of the literature review.

News articles about volunteering and citizen initiatives show the following motivations behind these actions. Actions of solidarity, such as spreading the message ‘everything will be alright’ in Italy, occur to help adults and children to deal with the crisis (The Guardian, 12 March 2020). Others offer help because they have more free time in a crisis where people need to stay home and activities have been canceled (De Gelderlander, 14 March 2020). Moreover, for some students, their programs are canceled or postponed, they want to help during the crisis because they cannot ‘watch Netflix for three weeks’ (NOS, 16 March 2020). Furthermore, restaurant owners donated their left-over food to food banks, because they had no use for it anymore and the food banks had shortages (NOS, 16 March 2020). Besides, someone else stated that offering help shows that people can overcome the downsides of the crisis with actions of solidarity (NOS, 13 March 2020). Finally, people also offer help, simply because they like to help others, and because some people need help (Dagblad van het Noorden, 10 March 2020; NOS, 13 March 2020). These examples, together with disaster literature, led to the following questions, as shown in table 5.

I volunteer(ed) because… Yes Neutral No

I have more free time now. I want to contribute to the crisis. I already helped others before the crisis. It makes me feel better to help others. I see others volunteering as well.

I think that official organizations cannot do their job on their own. I live in an environment where people always help each other. I want to help the people I know

I want to feel useful.

I feel that volunteering is important in a crisis. Table 5 – motivations

Contributions

The next part of the survey asks questions about the contributions of volunteers. The literature review (section 2.2.5) showed that in past disasters, these contributions can be both positive and negative. The next question asks specific questions related to the findings of previous literature. A scan of the media did not add extra information to be of use here.

26

Yes Sometimes No Not applicable

I can contribute because I have certain knowledge or skills that I can use. I can contribute because I have personal contacts with whom I can reach out for help.

I can relieve others in their activities in this crisis.

During the activities that I do, I sometimes get in the way of others. When I cooperate with others, communication, and/or coordination with each other is difficult.

Table 7 - contributions Behavior

As described in section 2.2.6, disaster behavior is an important factor, because this indicates whether citizens are capable of volunteering or not. Moreover, several myths regarding disaster behavior still exist among disaster managers. These influence decisions by official organizations, for example, whether to include volunteers or not, while previous research found that panicking and looting often is a fear which does not come true during a disaster.

During the corona crisis in the Netherlands, there are no signs of a nation-wide panic problem amongst citizens or looting problems. However, news items showed that new problems and illegal behavior related to the corona crisis emerged. For example, there are reports that the scarcity of mouth masks during the corona crisis provokes fraud (Volkskrant, 9 April 2020). Moreover, the police wrote fines for ‘corona parties’ in several communities (AD, 9 April 2020). Furthermore, several incidents occurred of people coughing on security guards or the police while stating they have the coronavirus, which resulted in jail sentences (Gelderlander, 26 March 2020). Moreover, people started buying many more products in supermarkets when the corona crisis started in the Netherlands, even after politicians and supermarkets asked not to hoard because it was not necessary and it led to problems (Nederlands Dagblad, 11 April 2020). These media contributions, together with the literature review, led to the following questions in table 8.

27

During the corona crisis Yes Sometimes Often No

I do more groceries than usual.

I avoid public places, such as parks, forests, and beaches.

I don’t see anyone, except for the people I live with. I work at home as much as possible.

I wash my hands more than I did before the crisis. I always keep a 1.5-meter distance to others. I meet the family.

I meet friends.

I go to the shops on my own. I cough and sneeze in my elbow.

I find it difficult to adjust to the new measures concerning the corona crisis.

Table 8 – behavior Social media

The next part of the survey focuses on the role of the internet and (social) media in this crisis. The corona crisis resulted in Dutch citizens staying at home more often than normal. Therefore, this research assumes that social media is an important factor in spontaneous volunteering during the crisis because people have more time for it. Moreover, past disasters and crises also showed the effective use of (social) media, as described in section 2.2.7 of the literature review.

Social media platforms are influential media during the corona crisis in the Netherlands. The NOS reports that people use the hashtag ‘coronahulp’ online to offer and ask for help (NOS, 13 March 2020). Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube actively refer their users to government information regarding the coronavirus to fight fake messages (NRC, 20 March 2020). Moreover, the social media platform Twitter experienced a large increase in users during the corona crisis (RTL, 24 March 2020). The platform is also concerned about information management and checks over a thousand user accounts of experts to verify if the account belongs to a real expert (NU, 3 April 2020). Facebook also experiences an increase in its use, mostly an increase in messages regarding the virus (New York Times, 23 March 2020). This information, together with previous literature led to the questions in tables 9 and 10.

Which of the following social media platforms do you use? (you can tick multiple boxes)

o Facebook o Twitter o Instagram o Snapchat o LinkedIn

o I don’t use social media

o Other: …

28

Agree Neutral Do not agree Not applicable

I spent more time on social media than before the crisis.

I use social media platforms to inform myself about the corona crisis.

I use social media platforms to communicate with others about the corona crisis.

I can find useful information on social media platforms.

I share useful information on social media platforms.

I take information from social media platforms about the corona crisis seriously. I spent more time on the internet than before the corona crisis.

I gather online information about the crisis and shared this with official organizations. Table 10 – social media and internet

3.1.4 Spreading around the survey

This research distributed the survey on Twitter and Facebook pages that relate to helping others during the corona crisis. The pages, include one of the following words: ‘coronahulp’, ‘coronahulpNL’, ‘hulpcorona’. The response rate is important to follow after this research shares the questionnaires online and, therefore, it shared the link to the survey on three moments in time. In total, this research shared the link on Twitter and on 8 Facebook pages on April 24th, on 10 Facebook pages and Twitter on April 27th, and on 24 Facebook pages and Twitter on April 30th. On the first two moments, this study posted the link in relatively large Facebook communities, including the pages of several large cities and regional areas, such as the pages of Amsterdam, Groningen, Maastricht, and the province Zeeland. The third time that this research shared the link, it did so on more, but smaller Facebook communities, including pages of small cities, villages, and smaller regional areas, such as Assen, Apeldoorn, Borculo, and Veenendaal. As shown in chart 1, the first and third moment that the link was posted online, resulted in the more respondents than the second day. The 27th of April is a public holiday in the Netherlands, and even though it was not celebrated, as usual, it could explain why fewer people filled out the survey after a new post. Furthermore, chart 1 shows peaks on the days when this research spread the link to the survey and a decrease in the days following these peaks. In the end, the survey collected 250 responses from people that volunteered during the crisis so far in the Netherlands

29 Chart 1 - responses volume

3.1.5 Analysis methods

The survey questions ask for information on the nominal and ordinal level of measurements, except for ‘age’, which is a ratio level of measurement. By introducing numbered values, the program SPSS performed certain statistical analyses. SPSS also included codes for missing values, which are assigned when answer categories are not filled out or values are impossible Checking the survey data for missing values happens manually after the data is entered into SPSS. Thereafter, the data is transformed into usable values for the analysis.

Since this is descriptive research, descriptive statistics help to analyze the data. Frequency distributions and summary statistics – mean, median, mode, range, and standard deviation - help to interpret the data. Furthermore, the chi-square test and contingency tables are used to compare and interpret the nominal variables in this research (Toepoel, 2015, p. 24).

3.1.6 Limitations

Online survey research for this thesis has several limitations. Musick & Wilson (2007) argue that there is a validity issue when studying volunteering because people have different opinions about what volunteering includes and what not. This research includes all forms of helping others during the corona crisis, as explained at the beginning of the online survey, and it therefore does not expect problems.

Furthermore, Bardaa (2015) argues that there are certain limitations when research uses online surveys. First, the result might not be trustworthy, due to a person’s limited knowledge about him or herself, memory problems, social desirability, and the fact that people often fill out a survey as fast as possible. Since this research collects data when the crisis is ongoing, memory problems are not considered to be a problem. However, social desirability might play a role because discussions and topics related to the crisis are still ongoing, and because ‘helping

others is honored and esteemed’ ( Musick & Wilson, 2007, p. 31). Besides, it might also be the

0 20 40 60 80

Responses volume

30

case that people fill out the survey too fast, and therefore the results are worthless. However, because this survey is short and the questions are short and clearly described, problems are not foreseen. Finally, Toepoel (2015) argues that survey research often leads to a limited amount of response, which can lead to a nonresponse bias (Davern, 2013). This research tries to avoid this problem by sharing the link to the survey in online social media platforms that are focused on the crisis.

Moreover, Toepoel (2015) describes that using the chi-square test for analysis is limiting because it only gives information about whether a relationship between two variables exists but does not provide more in-depth information. Therefore, this research cannot provide information about the direction of relationships or causality. Moreover, this research is observational, and therefore it is not possible to intervene within the research group. This also leads to the fact that this research does not make statements about relationship directions or causality (Bijleveld, 2013). Finally, it is not possible to make statements about changes in behavior over time, because this research shared the link to the survey in a closed time-span of 10 days, whereas the entire corona crisis lasted for multiple months and is continuing. Therefore, it is not possible to see whether spontaneous volunteer work changed during the crisis (Bijleveld, 2013).

Finally, this research has a problem regarding external validity, because the results do not apply to a broader population (Howard, 2017). The fact that the survey is shared online, makes it inevitable that a certain category of volunteers is not addressed, namely the volunteers that are not active on social media. Therefore, the result of this method cannot produce information about the entire research population. Moreover, regarding internal validity, there might be a history effect, because this research collected responses while the crisis was ongoing. The survey collected its data within ten days, while the corona crisis is a fast-changing situation. Therefore, the results might have been different when this research shared the survey on a different moment (Bijleveld, 2013).