Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Investigation of the Relationship Between Leisure Time Satisfaction Levels and Dispositional Flow States of Recreational Sports’ Participants

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1, 10 - 19, 06.03.2021
https://doi.org/10.17644/sbd.702867

Öz

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between leisure time satisfaction and dispositional flow stated of individuals participating in recreational sports. In addition, it was to examine the participants’ leisure time satisfaction and disporsitional flow states in terms of gender and reasons for participation. The sample of the study consists of 261 female (Xage=22.49 ±5.64) and 293 male (Xage=22.63 ±5.37). Demographic information form, Leisure Time Satisfaction Scale short form and Dispositional Flow Scale were used to data collection. The obtained data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, independent groups t test and ANOVA. According to the results of the correlation analysis, a positive and significant relationship was found between participants’ leisure time satisfaction and dispositional flow state scores (r=.600, p<.01). While the leisure time satisfaction scores of the participants did not differ significantly with regard to the gender variable (t=-1.776, p=.078), there was a significant difference between the dispositional flow states of the female and male participants (t=-2.554, p=.011). Furthermore, it was observed that the participants leisure time satisfaction (F(2-551)=1.173, p>.05) and dispositional flow states scores (F(2-551)=1.816, p>.05) did not differ with regard to participants’ participation reasons. Identifying the relationship between leisure time satisfaction and dispositional flow state of individuals’ participating in recreational sports, supports that experience of positive emotional states is closely related to satisfaction in individuals' which they get in their leisure time.

Kaynakça

  • 1. Ardahan F, Yerlisu Lapa T. (2010). Üniversite öğrencilerinin serbest zaman tatmin düzeylerinin cinsiyete ve gelire göre incelenmesi. Hacettepe Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 21 (4), 129-136. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sbd/issue/16387/171397
  • 2. Aşçı FH, Çağlar E, Eklund RC, Altıntaş A, Jackson S. (2007). Durumluk ve sürekli optimal performans duygu durum-2 ölçeklerinin uyarlama çalışması, Hacettepe Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 18 (4), 182-196.
  • 3. Beard JG, Ragheb MG. (1980). Measuring leisure satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 12 (1), 20-33.
  • 4. Berg E, Trost M, Schneider IE, Allison MT. (2001). Dyadic exploration of the relationship of leisure satisfaction, leisure time, and gender to relationship satisfaction. Leisure Sciences, 23, 35-46.
  • 5. Chang HH. (2017) Gender differences in leisure involvement and flow experience in professional extreme sport activities, World Leisure Journal, 59: 2, 124-139, DOI: 10.1080/16078055.2016.1166152
  • 6. Chen LH, Ye YC, Chen MY, Tung IW. (2010). Alegrı´a! Flow in leisure and life satisfaction: The mediating role of event satisfaction using data from an acrobatics show. Social Indicators Research, 99(2), 301-313. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9581-z
  • 7. Csíkszentmihályi M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • 8. Csíkszentmihályi M, Csíkszentmihályi SI. (1988). Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 3-36.
  • 9. Csíkszentmihályi M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Collins.
  • 10. Csíkszentmihályi M. (1997). Finding Flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. Basic Books, HarperCollins Publishers, New York.
  • 11. Çakır VO. (2017). Üniversite Öğrencilerin Serbest Zaman Doyum Düzeyleri İle Serbest Zaman Yönetimleri Arasındaki İlişki. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 2 (3), 17-27.
  • 12. Elkington S. (2011). What it is to take the flow of leisure seriously, Leisure/Loisir, 35:3, 253-282, doi: 10.1080/14927713.2011.614838.
  • 13. Gökçe H. (2008). Serbest Zaman Doyumunun Yaşam Doyumu ve Sosyo-Demografik Değişkenlerle İlişkisinin İncelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
  • 14. Gökçe H, Orhan K. (2011). Serbest Zaman Doyum Ölçeğinin Türkçe Geçerlilik Güvenirlik Çalışması, Hacettepe Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 22 (4), 139-145.
  • 15. Han S. (1992). The relationship between life satisfaction and flow in elderly Korean immigrants. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.) Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. (pp. 138-149). New York: Cambridge University.
  • 16. Havitz ME, Mannell RC. (2005). Enduring involvement, situational involvement, and flow in leisure and non-leisure activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 37 (2), 152-177.
  • 17. Jackson, SA, Eklund RC. (2004). The Flow Scales Manual. Morgantown, WV, USA: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.
  • 18. Kang HK. (2012). Psychological benefits of leisure experiences, using enduring involvement. AAHPERD March 13–17 2012, National Convention & Exposition, Boston, MA.
  • 19. Kovacs A. (2007). The Leisure Personality: Relationships between Personality, Leisure Satisfaction, and Life Satisfaction. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Indiana University the School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, Indiana.
  • 20. Lu L, Hu CH. (2005). Personality, leisure experiences and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies. 6, 325-342.
  • 21. Murcia J, Gimeno E, Coll D. (2008). Relationships among Goal Orientations, Motivational Climate and Flow in Adolescent Athletes: Differences by Gender. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 181-191. doi:10.1017/S1138741600004224
  • 22. Pinquart M, Silbereisen RK. (2010). Patterns of fulfillment in the domains of work, intimate relationship, and leisure. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5, 145–164, doi.org/10.1007/s11482-010-9099-1
  • 23. Russell WD. (2001). An exaniation of flow state occurrence in college athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24 (1), 83-107.
  • 24. Seigenthaler K. (1997). Health benefits of leisure. Reseach Update, Parks and Recreation, 32(1), 24-31.
  • 25. Seligman MEP, Csíkszentmihályi M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5-14.
  • 26. Serdar E, Mungan Ay S. (2016). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Katıldıkları Serbest Zaman Etkinliklerinden Tatmin Olma ve Algılanan Özgürlük Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi. Research in Sport Sciences, 6(2): 1303-1414.
  • 27. Sharp EH, Coastsworth JD, Darling N, Cumsille P, Ranieri S. (2007). Gender differences in the self-defining activities and identity experiences of adolescents and emerging adults. Journal of Adolescence, 30(2), 251-269.
  • 28. Stavrou NA, Zervas Y, Karteroliotis K, Jackson S.A. (2007). Flow experience and athletes’ performance with reference to the orthogonal model of flow. The Sport Psychologist, 21, 438-457.
  • 29. Stebbins RA. (2001). New directions in the theory and research of serious leisure. New York, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.
  • 30. Stebbins RA. (2005). Challenging mountain nature: Risk, motive, and lifestyle in three hobbyist sports. Calgary, AB: Detselig.
  • 31. Vong Tze N. (2005). Leisure satisfaction and quality of life in Macao, China. Leisure Studies, 24(2), 195-207.
  • 32. Wöran B, Arnberger A. (2012). Exploring relationships between recreation specialization, restorative environments and mountain hikers’ flow experience. Leisure Sciences, 34(2), 95-114.
  • 33. Wu HJ, Liang RD. (2011). The relationship between white-water rafting experience formation and customer reaction: A flow theory perspective. Tourism Management, 32(2), 317-325.
  • 34. Yerlisu Lapa T. (2013). Life satisfaction, leisure satisfaction and perceived freedom of park recreation participants, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1985-1993, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.153

Sportif Rekreatif Aktiviteye Katılan Bireylerin Serbest Zaman Doyum Düzeyleri ve Optimal Performans Duygu Durumlarının Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1, 10 - 19, 06.03.2021
https://doi.org/10.17644/sbd.702867

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı; sportif rekreatif aktivitelere katılan bireylerin serbest zaman doyum düzeyleriyle optimal performans duygu durumları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Ayrıca katılımcıların serbest zaman doyum düzeyleri ve optimal performans duygu durumlarını cinsiyet ve katılma sebepleri açısından incelemektir. Çalışmanın örneklemi seçkisiz olmayan örnekleme yöntemlerinden uygun örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak belirlenmiş ve 261 kadın (Ortyaş=22.49 ±5.64) ve 293 erkek (Ortyaş=22.63 ±5.37) bireyden oluşmaktadır. Araştırmada veri toplamak amacıyla kişisel veri formu, Serbest Zaman Doyum Ölçeğinin kısa versiyonu ve Sürekli Optimal Performans Duygu Durum Ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler, tanımlayıcı istatistik, korelasyon analizi, bağımsız gruplar t testi ve ANOVA kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre katılımcıların optimal performans duygu durumları ve serbest zaman doyumları arasında pozitif yönde anlamlı ve yüksek derecede bir ilişki olduğu görülmüştür (r=.600, p<.01). Katılımcıların serbest zaman doyum puanlarının cinsiyet değişkenine göre anlamlı olarak farklılaşmadığı görülürken (t=-1.776, p=.078), kadın ve erkek katılımcıların optimal performans duygu durumu puanları arasında anlamlı farklılık olduğu görülmüştür (t=-2.554, p=.011). Ayrıca, katılımcıların serbest zaman doyumlarının (F(2-551)=1.173, p>.05) ve optimal performans duygu durumu (F(2-551)=1.816, p>.05) puanlarının sportif rekreatif aktivitelere katılım sebeplerine göre farklılaşmadığı görülmüştür. Serbest zaman doyumu ile optimal performans duygu durumu arasında ilişkinin ortaya konması, pozitif duygu durumlarının deneyimlenmesinin bireylerin serbest zamanlarından elde ettikleri doyumla yakından ilişkili olduğunu desteklemektedir.

Kaynakça

  • 1. Ardahan F, Yerlisu Lapa T. (2010). Üniversite öğrencilerinin serbest zaman tatmin düzeylerinin cinsiyete ve gelire göre incelenmesi. Hacettepe Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 21 (4), 129-136. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sbd/issue/16387/171397
  • 2. Aşçı FH, Çağlar E, Eklund RC, Altıntaş A, Jackson S. (2007). Durumluk ve sürekli optimal performans duygu durum-2 ölçeklerinin uyarlama çalışması, Hacettepe Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 18 (4), 182-196.
  • 3. Beard JG, Ragheb MG. (1980). Measuring leisure satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 12 (1), 20-33.
  • 4. Berg E, Trost M, Schneider IE, Allison MT. (2001). Dyadic exploration of the relationship of leisure satisfaction, leisure time, and gender to relationship satisfaction. Leisure Sciences, 23, 35-46.
  • 5. Chang HH. (2017) Gender differences in leisure involvement and flow experience in professional extreme sport activities, World Leisure Journal, 59: 2, 124-139, DOI: 10.1080/16078055.2016.1166152
  • 6. Chen LH, Ye YC, Chen MY, Tung IW. (2010). Alegrı´a! Flow in leisure and life satisfaction: The mediating role of event satisfaction using data from an acrobatics show. Social Indicators Research, 99(2), 301-313. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9581-z
  • 7. Csíkszentmihályi M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • 8. Csíkszentmihályi M, Csíkszentmihályi SI. (1988). Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 3-36.
  • 9. Csíkszentmihályi M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Collins.
  • 10. Csíkszentmihályi M. (1997). Finding Flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. Basic Books, HarperCollins Publishers, New York.
  • 11. Çakır VO. (2017). Üniversite Öğrencilerin Serbest Zaman Doyum Düzeyleri İle Serbest Zaman Yönetimleri Arasındaki İlişki. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 2 (3), 17-27.
  • 12. Elkington S. (2011). What it is to take the flow of leisure seriously, Leisure/Loisir, 35:3, 253-282, doi: 10.1080/14927713.2011.614838.
  • 13. Gökçe H. (2008). Serbest Zaman Doyumunun Yaşam Doyumu ve Sosyo-Demografik Değişkenlerle İlişkisinin İncelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
  • 14. Gökçe H, Orhan K. (2011). Serbest Zaman Doyum Ölçeğinin Türkçe Geçerlilik Güvenirlik Çalışması, Hacettepe Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 22 (4), 139-145.
  • 15. Han S. (1992). The relationship between life satisfaction and flow in elderly Korean immigrants. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.) Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. (pp. 138-149). New York: Cambridge University.
  • 16. Havitz ME, Mannell RC. (2005). Enduring involvement, situational involvement, and flow in leisure and non-leisure activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 37 (2), 152-177.
  • 17. Jackson, SA, Eklund RC. (2004). The Flow Scales Manual. Morgantown, WV, USA: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.
  • 18. Kang HK. (2012). Psychological benefits of leisure experiences, using enduring involvement. AAHPERD March 13–17 2012, National Convention & Exposition, Boston, MA.
  • 19. Kovacs A. (2007). The Leisure Personality: Relationships between Personality, Leisure Satisfaction, and Life Satisfaction. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Indiana University the School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, Indiana.
  • 20. Lu L, Hu CH. (2005). Personality, leisure experiences and happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies. 6, 325-342.
  • 21. Murcia J, Gimeno E, Coll D. (2008). Relationships among Goal Orientations, Motivational Climate and Flow in Adolescent Athletes: Differences by Gender. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11(1), 181-191. doi:10.1017/S1138741600004224
  • 22. Pinquart M, Silbereisen RK. (2010). Patterns of fulfillment in the domains of work, intimate relationship, and leisure. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5, 145–164, doi.org/10.1007/s11482-010-9099-1
  • 23. Russell WD. (2001). An exaniation of flow state occurrence in college athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24 (1), 83-107.
  • 24. Seigenthaler K. (1997). Health benefits of leisure. Reseach Update, Parks and Recreation, 32(1), 24-31.
  • 25. Seligman MEP, Csíkszentmihályi M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5-14.
  • 26. Serdar E, Mungan Ay S. (2016). Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Katıldıkları Serbest Zaman Etkinliklerinden Tatmin Olma ve Algılanan Özgürlük Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi. Research in Sport Sciences, 6(2): 1303-1414.
  • 27. Sharp EH, Coastsworth JD, Darling N, Cumsille P, Ranieri S. (2007). Gender differences in the self-defining activities and identity experiences of adolescents and emerging adults. Journal of Adolescence, 30(2), 251-269.
  • 28. Stavrou NA, Zervas Y, Karteroliotis K, Jackson S.A. (2007). Flow experience and athletes’ performance with reference to the orthogonal model of flow. The Sport Psychologist, 21, 438-457.
  • 29. Stebbins RA. (2001). New directions in the theory and research of serious leisure. New York, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.
  • 30. Stebbins RA. (2005). Challenging mountain nature: Risk, motive, and lifestyle in three hobbyist sports. Calgary, AB: Detselig.
  • 31. Vong Tze N. (2005). Leisure satisfaction and quality of life in Macao, China. Leisure Studies, 24(2), 195-207.
  • 32. Wöran B, Arnberger A. (2012). Exploring relationships between recreation specialization, restorative environments and mountain hikers’ flow experience. Leisure Sciences, 34(2), 95-114.
  • 33. Wu HJ, Liang RD. (2011). The relationship between white-water rafting experience formation and customer reaction: A flow theory perspective. Tourism Management, 32(2), 317-325.
  • 34. Yerlisu Lapa T. (2013). Life satisfaction, leisure satisfaction and perceived freedom of park recreation participants, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1985-1993, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.153
Toplam 34 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Spor Hekimliği
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Gaye Hadi 0000-0003-4129-3236

Büşra Erdem 0000-0002-4370-7669

Erhan Duman Bu kişi benim 0000-0002-6681-0036

Yayımlanma Tarihi 6 Mart 2021
Gönderilme Tarihi 12 Mart 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021 Cilt: 32 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Hadi, G., Erdem, B., & Duman, E. (2021). Sportif Rekreatif Aktiviteye Katılan Bireylerin Serbest Zaman Doyum Düzeyleri ve Optimal Performans Duygu Durumlarının Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 32(1), 10-19. https://doi.org/10.17644/sbd.702867

9551


SPOR BİLİMLERİ DERGİSİ


Yayın hakkı © Hacettepe Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Fakültesi