for better or worse? a structural model of the beneﬁts and ...people.tamu.edu/~dscott/601/musings...

Leisure Sciences, 28: 17–38, 2006Copyright C© Taylor & Francis Inc.ISSN: 0149-0400 print / 1521-0588 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01490400590962461

For Better or Worse? A Structural Model of theBenefits and Costs Associated with

Recreational Specialization

JIN-HYUNG LEE

Department of Tourism ManagementHonam UniversityGwangju, South Korea

DAVID SCOTT

Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism SciencesTexas A & M UniversityCollege Station, Texas, USA

This research developed and tested a theoretical model on the benefits and costs of recre-ational specialization. The model proposed that as people specialize in terms of behavior,skill and knowledge, and commitment, they experience enduring benefits. The model alsoproposed that specialization entails taking on leadership roles that lead to benefits andthe perception of diminished self-determination. Diminished self-determination was alsothought to be a function of the behavioral commitment people acquire as they special-ize. Finally, the model proposed diminished self-determination would undermine theacquisition of enduring benefits. We tested the model using data collected from a sampleof American birdwatchers. Results provided partial support for the theoretical model.Our results suggest that as birders become increasingly specialized, the benefits theyexperience far outweigh any costs they might incur along the way.

Keywords recreational specialization, serious leisure, benefits, costs, structural equa-tion modeling

Introduction

Recreation specialization is a development process that entails a progression in how peopleparticipate in and view a leisure activity over time (Scott & Shafer, 2001a, 2001b). Stebbins’(2001) notion of serious leisure has a similar connotation. He defined serious leisure asthe “systematic pursuit of . . . activity that participants find so substantial and interestingthat . . . they launch themselves on a career centered on acquiring and expressing its specialskills, knowledge, and experience” (p. 3). As people progress in leisure activities, their moti-vations, resource preferences, friendship choices, and attitudes about management practicesmay change as well. In some cases, progression to an advanced stage of involvement may

Received 3 July 2003; accepted 31 January 2005.This research is funded by the Renewable Resource Extension Act. We would like to thank the Associate

Editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on previous drafts of this manuscript.Address correspondence to David Scott, Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, Texas

A & M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2261. Phone: 979-845-5334. Fax: 979-845-0446. E-mail: [email protected].

17

18 J.-H. Lee and D. Scott

FIGURE 1 Hypothetical model of the benefits and costs of recreational specialization.

result in people organizing their lives and identities around their chosen pursuits (Bryan,1979; Ditton, Loomis, & Choi, 1992). Researchers have noted that both benefits and costsare associated with progression (Bryan, 2000; Stebbins, 1992, 2000). Researchers, how-ever, are not clear about whether or not the costs of progression offset long-term benefits.Simultaneously, little is known about how the mechanisms of progression lead to enduringbenefits and costs.

The purpose of this study was to test a theoretical model of the benefits and costs ofrecreational specialization. Figure 1 diagrams the theoretical model used to guide the study.Scott and Shafer (2001a) conceived recreational specialization in terms of a progressionin behavior, skill, and behavioral and personal commitment. Our model proposed thatthese dimensions are directly and positively related to enduring benefits. We also proposedthat behavioral commitment will result in costs, defined in terms of the perception ofdiminished self-determination, while personal commitment will heighten one’s perceptionof self-determination. These relationships are likely to be influenced by the leadership rolespeople take on in a leisure social world. We hypothesized that each of the dimensions ofspecialization will be positively related to taking on leadership roles and these roles willproduce both enduring benefits and the perception of diminished self-determination. Lastly,the model proposed that low perceived self-determination will undermine the attainment ofenduring benefits.

The study of recreational specialization and serious leisure provide insight into howpeople in modern societies strive to find meaning, identity, and social solidarity apart frommore traditional venues including family, work, church, and neighborhood associations(Rojek, 2001). This study built on this literature by providing insight into the tensionsthat arise as people confront costs when they participate in an intense form of leisure.Stebbins (1992) described in detail the comparative costs and rewards people experiencein serious leisure pursuits. He stopped short, however, of examining systematically theprocess by which people weigh costs and benefits of progression. This study seeks to fill thisvoid by linking costs and rewards to specific dimensions of specializations (i.e., behavior,skills and knowledge, and behavioral and personal commitment) and the leadership rolespeople take on within leisure social worlds. Beyond theory development, this study mayprovide researchers and practitioners with a greater appreciation of the factors related to therecruitment, retention, and burnout of leaders and other participants within leisure socialworlds. Better understanding the relative benefits and costs of progression and serious

For Better or Worse? 19

leisure may provide leisure service providers new insights regarding how to retain thoseindividuals who might otherwise stop participating.

Review of Literature

Hobson Bryan (1977) defined recreational specialization as “a continuum of behavior fromthe general to the particular, reflected by equipment and skills used in the sport, and ac-tivity setting preferences” (p. 175). He theorized that along the specialization continuum,characteristic styles of participation reflect typical stages of involvement through whichpeople progress the longer they participate in an activity. Anglers, for example, “typi-cally start with simple, easily mastered techniques which maximize chances of a catch,then move to more involved and demanding methods the longer they engage in the sport”(p. 182). Bryan regarded recreational specialization as a potentially useful managementtool because it provided insight into how people’s involvement in leisure activities changedover time. In the last 25 years, researchers have shown that recreationists along the contin-uum vary significantly in terms of environmental attitudes (Dyck, Schneider, Thompson, &Virden, 2003), place attachment (Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000), motivations (McFarlane,1994), attitudes toward depreciative behaviors (Kuentzel & Heberlein, 1992), resourceconditions (Shafer & Hammitt, 1995), setting preferences (Scott & Thigpen, 2003), per-ceptions about crowding (Kuentzel & McDonald, 1992), choice of destinations (McFarlane,Boxall, & Watson, 1998), use of information when planning trips (Martin, 1997), and otheraspects of participation.

The recreation specialization framework is comparable to the social world perspective.Borrowing from Unruh (1979), Ditton et al. (1992) observed that the specialization contin-uum reflects an ordered arrangement of recreation subworlds. According to Ditton et al.,one end of the continuum included “the least specialized subworld and its members” whilethe high end included “the most specialized subworld and its members” (p. 39). Individualsat the high end of the continuum, people described by Unruh as insiders, have intimate anddetailed knowledge of social world activity and are highly focused on organizing experi-ences for others. They are also more likely than people who are less specialized to regardthe activity as a central life interest.

Little agreement exists among researchers about how best to measure recreationalspecialization. Studies have varied markedly in terms of their inclusion of affective and be-havioral measures. Scott and Shafer (2001a) argued that specialization should be understoodas a developmental process that entails progression in terms of (a) a focusing of behavior,(b) the acquisition of skills and knowledge, and (c) personal and behavioral commitment.However, they theorized that people are unlikely to progress in all three domains in the samefashion over time: Some people are likely to “continue to participate in activities on a regularbasis and accrue commitments but exhibit little evidence of skill development . . . [while]other individuals may participate in leisure activities infrequently but demonstrate a highlevel of skill development and personal commitment” (p. 338). Kuentzel and McDonald(1992) made the same observation in their study of canoeists and kayakers. They foundvirtually no relationship among level of experience, commitment and a lifestyle dimensionamong experienced paddlers. The implication here is that different measures of recreationalspecialization are potentially likely to vary in their relationship to motivations, benefits, andother facets of participation. Simultaneously, Scott and Shafer questioned whether or notpeople desire to progress to an elite status within a social world.

In this study we are interested in the extent to which recreational specialization isrelated to enduring benefits and costs. Although researchers have noted that an intense formof leisure can result in both benefits and costs (Bryan, 2000; Scott & Shafer, 2001a; Stebbins,


1992), these relationships have not been examined in concert. Our model (Figure 1) theorizesthat the relationship between specialization and enduring benefits and costs are likely to beinfluenced by the extent to which people take on leadership roles. During the course of aleisure career, recreationists may find themselves participating in a range of social worldactivities. Birdwatchers, for example, may attend birding festivals and attend walks andprograms sponsored by local Audubon groups. As they progress, they may be asked totake on leadership roles because of their advanced skills and knowledge and commitmentto the activity. Evidence for this assertion come from at least two studies. In their studyof birdwatchers in Alberta, Canada, McFarlane and Boxall (1996) reported that advancedbirders were far more likely than casual, novice, and intermediate birders to lead bird walksand presentations, and volunteer time to conservation organizations. Likewise, Scott andGodbey (1994) reported that advanced bridge players engaged in activities that encouragedthe infusion of new members. These findings parallel Unruh’s (1979) observation thatinsiders within social worlds “control, direct, and create social world experiences for others”(p. 121). These findings led to the first study hypothesis:

H1: Behavior, level of skill and knowledge, and behavioral and personal com-mitment positively influence the likelihood of taking on leadership roles ina leisure social world.

Figure 1 also theorizes that specialization is associated with enduring benefits or re-wards. Driver (1990) defined a leisure benefit as “a change that is viewed to be advantageous,an improvement in condition, or a gain to an individual, to a group, to society, or even toanother entity” (p. 94). More recently, Driver and Bruns (1999) defined individual leisurebenefits as those positive psychological outcomes people obtain from having participatedin leisure activities. Driver and his colleagues (e.g., Driver & Knopf, 1977; Driver, Nash, &Haas, 1987; Driver, Tinsley, & Manfredo, 1991; Tinsley, Driver, Ray, & Manfredo, 1986)demonstrated that recreationists experience a variety of benefits as a result of participatingin leisure activities including the enjoyment of nature, physical fitness, reduction of tension,escaping physical stressors, independence, family bonding, achievement and stimulation,risk taking, and creativity.

Driver and others also recognized that some benefits are linked to other benefits withinwhat they refer to as a “chain of causality” (Driver & Bruns, 1999; Driver et al., 1991;Tinsley & Tinsley, 1986). For example, relaxing may contribute to life satisfaction, whichmay lead to personal growth. How this process operates remains unclear. Some researchershave argued that only serious leisure participants or specialized recreationists can experi-ence benefits that are enduring in nature. The most influential contribution to this line ofinquiry has been made by Stebbins (1992). In his seminal study on amateurs, hobbyists andvolunteers, Stebbins reported that eight durable benefits or rewards (e.g., self-actualization,self-enrichment, self-expression, renewal of self, feeling of accomplishment, and enhance-ment of self image) could be found among serious leisure participants. He emphasized thateven though people can experience pure fun in casual leisure pursuits, durable benefits canonly be experienced through serious leisure participation.

These ideas were developed further by Iso-Ahola (1999) who proposed that the moreserious people become about their leisure, the more they are able to acquire intrinsic re-wards. Similarly, Shamir (1988) noted that rewards like enjoyment and pleasure can bereadily experienced in everyday leisure activities but only “committed leisure” can fos-ter a heightened self-image and lead to “deep” satisfaction. Others have argued that highinvestment activities (i.e., activities that have been developed over a period of time) aremost likely to yield outcomes of enhanced sense of competence, worth, and personalexpression because they require recreationists to continually develop and hone their skills


over time (Csikszentmihalyi & Kleiber, 1991; Kelly & Ross, 1989; Kelly, Steinkamp, &Kelly, 1987).

A more comprehensive review on the benefits of specialization can be found inMannell’s (1993) study on the relationship between high investment activities and life satis-faction among older adults. In the course of his research on high investment activities, he dis-cussed several related constructs including specialization, serious leisure, and commitment.He proposed that competence and deep involvement are common elements that underliespecialization, commitment and serious leisure. Mannell noted, “Activities that require aninvestment of effort are seen to provide opportunities to maintain and further develop thesense of competence and allow people to frequently experience enjoyment and develop pos-itive feelings about themselves” (p. 134). These insights led to the second study hypothesis:

H2: Behavior, level of skill and knowledge, and behavioral and personal com-mitment are positively related to the acquisition of enduring benefits.

Researchers have also noted that progression can have a “dark side” (Bryan, 2000) to theextent that participants experience various costs or negative outcomes. Stebbins (1992) notedthat serious leisure participants sometimes incur injuries, experience poor performances, en-counter cliques and disagreeable co-participants, and are subjected to the drudgery of prac-tice and rehearsals. Other researchers have argued that progression can result in family andwork conflicts (Gillespie, Leffler, & Lerner, 2002; Goff, Fick, & Oppliger, 1997), eating dis-orders (Blaydon & Lindner, 2002), and addictive tendencies (Morgan, 1979). In this study,we are interested in one specific type of cost, namely, diminished self-determination. Self-determination refers to the perceived control a person has to initiate activity (Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993). Others have equated self-determination as the freedom of choice (Mannell &Kleiber, 1997).

Our model postulates that commitment has variable effects on one’s perception of self-determination. By commitment, we mean those personal and behavioral investments thatpeople make over time. Personal commitments may include a strong affective attachmentand “inner conviction that the activity is worth doing for its own sake” (Scott & Shafer,2001a, p. 329). Personal commitment is likely to contribute to perceived self-determinationbecause of the intrinsic rewards people accrue over time. People will experience a highlevel of perceived self-determination when they participate in a leisure activity regarded aspersonally pleasing and intuitively worthwhile.

In contrast, behavioral commitments are those expectations and costs that make with-drawal problematic (Buchanan, 1985; Ditton et al., 1992; Scott, Baker, & Kim, 1999). (Thisform of commitment is also referred to as side bets [Becker, 1960] and external commitments[Shamir, 1988]). Behavioral commitments, rather than personal commitments, are likely tocontribute to a perception of diminished self-determination. In his theoretical work on com-mitment and leisure, Shamir pointed out that external commitment entails an “obligation”to continue an activity, a role, or a relationship. During the beginning stages of participa-tion, recreationists may freely choose to participate or withdraw from an activity withoutloss. However, once they have invested significant amounts of time, money, and energy,cessation may result in severe “penalties.” According to Stebbins (1992), these penaltiesmay include disapproval, loss of friends, and loss of a strongly held identity. Behavioralcommitments, thus, may undermine the perception of self-determination or freedom of ac-tion as individuals feel duty-bound to engage in activities they might not otherwise pursueor enjoy (Montemurro, 2002). This led to the following hypothesis:

H3: Behavioral commitment undermines recreationists’ perception of self-determination, while personal commitment is positively associated withself-determination


According to the model, taking on leadership roles within a leisure social world caninfluence recreationists in different ways. On the one hand, it can undermine perceivedself-determination. This assertion is counter intuitive as leaders are often in an excellentposition to dictate and control action. Simultaneously, volunteer leaders find enjoyment inwhat they do and are often motivated by altruism and a desire to give back to the com-munity (Henderson, 1981; Nichols & King, 1999; Stebbins, 2001). However, research alsosuggests that people in volunteer and leadership positions, including parents and coaches,organize leisure activities for others out of a sense of obligation or duty (Henderson &Allen, 1991; Stebbins, 2000). Kelly and Freysinger (2000) were emphatic in their asser-tion that role expectations “limit and direct what we do in leisure, how we do it, and withwhom we do it” (p. 21). When people accept responsibilities, Kelly and Freysinger added,“we are not free to do whatever we like unless we are willing to pay some price” (p. 22).Responsibility to others is a major leisure constraint and can potentially undermine en-joyment of leisure (Harrington, Dawson, & Bolla, 1992) and lead to “burnout” (Sharpe,2003).

Newcomers and novices typically are free from leadership responsibilities, and theirparticipation is oriented toward acquiring skills, enjoyment, and developing relationships.In these stages of involvement, recreationists are not expected to work on behalf of othersand are unlikely to experience low self-determination. However, the situation can changedramatically as people progress. As noted, advanced recreationists may be expected to takeon leadership positions and create experiences for others (Unruh, 1979). In their study ofCanadian birders, McFarlane and Boxall (1996) reported that 55% of advanced birdersconducted bird walks and presentations. This figure was twice the rate reported by inter-mediate birders (27%). These leadership roles may diminish perceived self-determinationas individuals increasingly engage in behaviors for others and because others expect themto perform these behaviors. This led us to hypothesize:

H4: Leadership roles contribute to the perception of diminished self-determination.

On the other hand, assuming leadership roles in a leisure social world may also facilitatethe acquisition of enduring benefits. Leadership roles often provide opportunities for dis-playing knowledge and abilities. By sharing their knowledge and abilities with novices, ad-vanced participants are likely to increase their self-image, experience self-actualization, andfacilitate the development of relationships (Stebbins, 1992). We hypothesized the following:

H5: Leadership roles are positively related to enduring benefits.

Finally, the model proposes that low perceived self-determination may undermine theacquisition of enduring benefits. Even though researchers have not examined this relation-ship, perceived self-determination or freedom seems to be an important determinant ofleisure satisfaction. For example, in their study on fishing trip satisfaction Holland andDitton (1992) reported that a sense of freedom was one of the two most important dimen-sions of fishing satisfaction. Ellis and Witt (1994) also argued that perceived freedom wasan important determinant of leisure satisfaction.

Other researchers in contrast have proposed that low perceived self-determination doesnot necessarily decrease the experience of enduring benefits. In her conceptualization ofleisure, Samdahl (1988) suggested that people could enjoy an activity despite role con-straints. She showed that people can feel good about what they do when they perform obli-gated tasks. Other researchers have shown that people can experience satisfaction and flowunder conditions of external control or when self-determination is low (Mannell, Zuzanek, &Larson, 1988; Neulinger, 1974; Stebbins, 2000). Thus, previous studies suggest perceived


diminished self-determination may or may not undermine recreationists’ enduring benefits.For the purpose of the current study, we hypothesized,

H6: Perception of diminished self-determination undermines the acquisition ofenduring benefits.

Methods

The Sample

To test the hypotheses of this study, we collected data from members of the AmericanBirding Association (ABA), which has more than 22,000 members. In 1997 Scott, Stewartand Cole conducted a survey in which 556 randomly selected ABA members respondedto questions about their behavior, level of birding skills and knowledge, commitment tobirding, and preferred characteristics of a birding destination. In this study, the sampleframe included ABA members who Scott et al. surveyed in 1997. A goal of the researchwas to examine continuity and change over time. In addition, 500 additional members whowere not selected for the first wave survey were randomly selected from the 2002 ABAmembership list. This study includes only data collected in 2002.

ABA members comprise a rather “advanced” group of birders. Hence, a limitation ofthis study is that our sample frame failed to include a full range of birdwatchers along thespecialization continuum. In general, sampling birdwatchers is quite problematic. Thosebirders who are casual or occupy the lower end of the specialization continuum probablydo not ever join birdwatching clubs or organizations. Moreover, unlike fishing and hunting,birders are not required to buy a license to pursue their avocation. Finally, birding events anddestinations rarely attract a full range of birders along the specialization continuum (Scott &Thigpen, 2003). It is not overly problematic that our sample includes birders who occupythe higher end of the specialization continuum. Because our sample includes birders whooccupy the higher end of specialization continuum is not fatal. ABA members vary widelyin terms of years of experience.1 More importantly, enough variability existed in scoresamong the different measures (see section on Measurement of the Constructs) to provideus a means to test the theoretical model.

A four-step modified Dillman (2000) method of survey data collection was adminis-tered from early March through late April 2002. Of the initial 1,056 surveys mailed, 101were undeliverable because of address changes and respondents who were deceased, whichresulted in an effective sample size of 955. A total of 642 useable surveys were returned,representing a 67.2% response rate.

Eighty-four percent of the birders had either a college degree or graduate or advanceddegree. Thirty-one percent said their annual household income was $100,000 or more, and34% reported an annual household income between $60,000 and $99,999. Seventy percentwere married, and 64% were male. Just over half (52%) were between the ages of 46 and65, and 32% were 66 years of age or older.

Measurement of the Constructs

To measure ABA members’ level of specialization, we employed Scott and Shafer’s (2001a)conceptualization of recreational specialization. They proposed that recreational specializa-tion could be defined and measured in terms of behavior, skill and knowledge, and behavioraland personal commitment. Behavior was measured using two items (i.e., numbers of birding

1On average, ABA members have been birdwatching 23 years (SD = 16). Twenty-six percenthave been birding 10 years or less, 27% between 11 and 20 years, 20% between 21 and 30 years, and27% for more than 30 years.


trips taken and number of days spent on birding trips) that were open-ended. In the question-naire, a birding trip was defined as “outings at least one mile from home in which birdingis one of the activities.” Three items were used to measure level of skill and knowledge.Two of these were open-ended and had respondents indicate how many birds they wereable to identify by sight without a field guide and by sound. The third item had respondentsrate their ability to observe and identify birds along a seven-point scale. Seven responsecategories were provided and ranged from novice (1) to expert (7). We used two items tomeasure behavioral commitment (i.e., “If I couldn’t go birding, I am not sure what I woulddo,” and “If I stopped birding, I would lose though with a lot of my friend”) and two itemsto measure personal commitment (i.e., “Other leisure activities don’t interest me as muchas birding,” and “I would rather go birding than do most anything else”). Respondents werepresented seven response categories along a continuum of strongly disagree (1) to stronglyagree (7). The items used to measure recreational specialization have been used in otherstudies of birdwatchers (e.g., Cole & Scott, 1999; Kim, Scott, & Crompton, 1997).

The leadership construct was defined as a cluster of roles or expectations indicating a setof duties to be performed by a person occupying a leadership role (Michener & DeLamater,1999). We used two questionnaire items (i.e., “Led or organized bird walks or field trips,”and “Gave presentations about birds or birdwatching”), previously used by McFarlane andBoxall (1996) to measure the construct. Respondents were asked to simply make a checkin an appropriate box on the questionnaire if they had engaged in the behavior over the lastfive years.

We used four Likert items to measure enduring benefits. These were created in light ofStebbins’ (1992) work on serious leisure. Stebbins defined enduring benefits as those durablerewards that “attract and hold its practitioners” over time (p. 94). The four questionnaireitems had respondents indicate the extent to which they achieved the following rewards frombirdwatching over the last five years: “Allowed you to develop your talent,” “Improved howyou think about yourself,” “Helped you reflect on what is important in life,” and “Helpedyou develop relationships with others.” Seven response categories were presented and werecoded from (1) strongly disagree to (7) strongly agree. Although these scales were not ascomprehensive as the Recreation Experience Preference (REP) scales developed by Driveret al. (1991), they were grounded in theory and were reliable (Table 1).

Finally, to measure self-determination, two questionnaire items were borrowed fromJuniu, Tedrick, and Boyd’s (1996) perception of choice scale. These Likert items havebeen used previously to measure self-determination or perception of choice among seriousmusicians. Respondents were asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with thesetwo statements: “Sometimes I go birding because I have to do it,” and “Sometimes I gobirding because others expect me to do it.” Seven response categories were coded from(1) strongly agree to (7) to strongly disagree. In this study, a high score reflected highself-determination.

On average, respondents took 35 birding trips and spent 47 days on these trips duringthe previous 12 months. ABA members reported they could identify approximately 444species on average by sight without a field guide and 143 species on average by sound. ABAmembers also tended to see themselves as being relatively skilled (M = 4.9) compared toothers. ABA members agreed somewhat with the statements: “Other leisure activities don’tinterest me as much as birding” (M = 4.6), and “I would rather go birding than do mostanything else” (M = 4.6). In contrast, they tended to disagree with the statements: “If Icouldn’t go birding, I am not sure what I would do” (M = 2.5) and “If I stopped birding, Iwould probably lose touch with a lot of my friends” (M = 2.9).

Results showed that about half of the ABA members (48.6%) led organized bird walks orbirding trips, and about 40% have given presentations about birds and birdwatching. Results


TABLE 1 Standardized Factor Loadings and Reliabilities of the Measurement Scales

Latent Variable Factor R Compositefactors symbols Variable labels loadings squared reliability

Behavior V1 How many trips have you takenthat included birdwatching asan activity?

.82 .67 .81

V2 How many days have you spenton birding trips?

.84 .70

Skill andKnowledge

V3 How many birds can you identifyby sight without a field guide?

.87 .75 .87

V4 How many birds can you identifyby sound?

.83 .68

V5 Subjective level of skill atidentifying birds

.79 .63

BehavioralCommitment

V6 If I couldn’t go birding, I am notsure what I would do.

.64 .41 .60

V7 If I stopped birding, I wouldprobably lose touch with a lotof my friends.

.67 .45

PersonalCommitment

V8 Other leisure activities don’tinterest me as much as birding

.72 .51 .78

V9 I would rather go birding than domost anything else

.88 .77

Leadership Roles V10 Led organized bird walks or fieldtrips

.81 .66 .68

V11 Given presentations about birds orbirdwatching

.63 .40

Self-Determination V12 Sometimes I go birding becauseothers expect me to do it

.71 .50 .67

V13 Sometimes I go birding because Ihave to do it

.71 .50

Enduring Benefits V14 Allowed you to develop yourtalents

.63 .40 .76

V15 Improved how you think aboutyourself

.75 .57

V16 Helped you reflect on what isimportant in life

.66 .43

V17 Helped you develop relationshipswith others

.60 .35

V1 thru V4 had open-ended response categories.V5 had respondents rate their ability to identify birds along a seven point scale that ranged from novice (1) to

expert (7).V6 thru V9 and V14 thru V17 were Likert scales. Response categories fell along a continuum that ranged from

strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7).V12 and V13 were Likert scales. Response categories fell along a continuum that ranged from strongly agree

(1) to strongly disagree (7).V10 and V11 had respondents simply check whether or not they performed one of the leadership roles.R squared = Square of factor loading = indicator variable reliabilityComposite Reliability = (

∑Li)2/(

∑Li)2 + ∑

Var(Ei )Where Li = the standardized factor loadings for that factorVar(Ei ) = the error variance associated with the individual indicator variables = 1-R squared (Hatcher,

1994).


also indicated that most ABA members experienced enduring benefits. They agreed withstatements that birdwatching: “Allowed you to develop your talents” (M = 5.7), “Improvedhow you think about yourself” (M = 4.9), “Helped you reflect on what is important in life”(M = 5.7), and “Helped you develop relationships with others” (M = 5.2). In contrast,few members of ABA experienced low self-determination. They overwhelmingly disagreedwith the statements: “Sometimes I go birding because others expect me to do it” (M = 5.6)and “Sometimes I go birding because I have to do it” (M = 6.0).

Results

We followed a two-step procedure to test the structural model of this study (Hatcher, 1994;Tian-Cole, Crompton, & Willson, 2002). We first ran confirmatory factor analysis to developan acceptable measurement model. Next, we modified the measurement model so that itcame to represent the theoretical model (i.e., causal relationship among the latent factors).

The Measurement Model

All of the manifest variables used in the measurement model are listed in Table 1. In ameasurement model, no unidirectional paths among latent variables are posited. Rather,a covariance is estimated to connect each latent variable with every other latent variable(Hatcher, 1994; Tian-Cole et al., 2002).

We used scores from the original scales to measure most variables. However, natural logtransformations were performed for the two behavior items and two of the skill/knowledgeitems because the scores for these open-ended variables were substantially positivelyskewed. This procedure did not change the characteristics of respondents’ scores, whichcould increase the difficulty of interpretation. Instead, the procedure improved the analysisby reducing the impact of outliers on the covariance structures (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996).

We used AMOS (Version 4.0) to estimate the measurement model. Table 2 providesthe covariance matrix we analyzed to test measurement model. The matrix was based onthe 442 complete cases. (Among the 624 usable cases, we eliminated 180 cases becauseone or more had missing values.)

There are three different type of goodness of fit measures: absolute fit measure, incre-mental fit measure, and parsimonious fit measure (Reisinger & Turner, 1999). We chose threeabsolute fit measures (i.e., chi-square statistics, GF1, RMR), two incremental fit measures(i.e., NFI, NNFI), and a parsimonious fit measure (i.e., AGF1) to evaluate the measurementmodel: The chi-square statistics offers the most basic fit measure reflecting the sample sizeand the value of the maximum likelihood fitting function. Kline (1998) proposed that X2/dfratio values of less than 3 are considered favorable for a large sample (i.e., sample sizes of200 or more). More liberally, Marsh and Hocevar (1983) suggested that an acceptable fit ina SEM mode is denoted by a ratio ranging from 2 to 5. GFI indicates the relative amount ofvariances and covariances jointly explained by the model. AGFI adjusts GFI for the degreeof freedom. NFI compares the improvement of the overall fit of the researcher’s model toa null model, while the NNFI is an index that adjusts the overall portion of explained vari-ance for model complexity. In contrast, RMR gives the summary of the difference betweenthe observed and model-implied covariance. Values over .9 in GFI, AGFI, NFI and NNFItypically provide evidence of an acceptable fit, while an RMR of less than .10 indicates anacceptable fit (Hu & Bentler, 1998; Kline).

Overall, the measurement model had a reasonable fit. Although the chi-square value(X2= 216.24, df=98) for the measurement model was statistically significant, the X2/dfratio value was less than 3, indicating acceptable reliability. GFI(.95), AGFI(.92), NFI(.92)

TA

BL

E2

Cov

aria

nce

Mat

rix

ofth

eO

bser

ved

Var

iabl

es(N

=44

2)

V1

V2

V3

V4

V5

V6

V7

V8

V9

V10

V11

V12

V13

V14

V15

V16

V17

V1

.312

V2

.194

.255

V3

.066

.066

.138

V4

.097

.083

.143

.286

V5

.197

.174

.268

.369

1.12

7V

6.0

78.0

95.0

70.1

48.3

003.

289

V7

.235

.164

.146

.213

.359

1.48

13.

649

V8

.091

.122

.123

.166

.291

1.41

01.

034

3.35

7V

9.2

21.1

86.1

58.2

13.4

02.0

681.

518

1.30

53.

220

V10

.096

.082

.085

.111

.235

.102

.096

.313

.217

.250

V11

.058

.053

.058

.083

.202

.134

.186

.159

.196

.125

.239

V12

−.12

5−.

077

−.13

2−.

185

−.46

8−.

486

−1.2

16−.

391

−.36

9−.

263

−.21

62.

868

V13

−.14

2−.

100

−.08

4−.

121

−.24

2−.

871

−1.1

18−.

573

−.53

1−.

212

−.20

61.

437

2.82

1V

14.0

89.1

07.0

29.0

50.1

45.3

23.3

54.4

11.5

68.0

97.0

67−.

192

−.26

41.

345

V15

.056

.078

.006

.039

.069

.344

.467

.563

.509

.074

.058

−.28

3−.

309

.734

1.67

3V

16.0

37.0

36.0

11.0

43.0

51.2

70.1

14.5

41.6

81.0

35.0

23.0

69−.

181

.571

.875

1.72

1V

17.0

94.1

26.0

23.0

34.1

21.2

74.8

10.4

31.5

21.1

39.1

15−.

390

−.32

6.5

68.7

49.7

341.

833

27


and NNFI(.94) were also larger than .90, and RMR(.08) was smaller than .10. Therefore,we tentatively concluded that the measurement model was acceptable.

Hatcher (1994) noted that for a measurement model to have an ideal fit, the (a) com-posite reliability for the latent factors should, at the very least, be .60, (b) factor loadings ofindicators of each scale should be statistically significant (convergent validity), and (c) dis-criminant validity should be demonstrated. For composite reliability (internal consistency),four of the latent factors had scores of .70 or higher (Table 2). The behavioral commitment,leadership roles and lack of self-determination factors had the lowest composite reliabilities(.60, .68 and .67 respectively). Composite reliability scores at this level have been defended(Hatcher, 2004; Schmitt, 1996).

Next, the convergent validity of each scale was assessed. Convergent validity can bedefined as the agreement among indicators of a scale (Bagozzi, Yi, & Phillips, 1991). It wasassessed by inspecting whether or not the factor loadings of the indicators of each scale werestatistically significant (Hatcher, 1994). All factors loadings for each scale were statisticallysignificant at .001, indicating that convergent validity of the scales was achieved.

Lastly, the discriminant validity of each scale was assessed. Discriminant validity refersto the degree to which measures of different constructs are unique (Campbell & Fiske, 1959).The discriminant validity of each scale was assessed by testing whether or not the squareroot of the average variance extracted for each of the factors was greater than the squareof the correlations of the constructs (Hatcher, 1994, Petrick, 2002). Overall, latent factorsused in this study achieved discriminant validity because they met this criterion. In Table 3,the bold diagonal elements are the square root of the variance shared between the latentfactors and their manifest variables in this study (average variance extracted). Off diagonalare the squares of the correlations between the latent factors. For discriminant validity, thediagonal elements should be larger than any other corresponding row or column entry.

Table 3 shows that all the average variances extracted of the latent factors, except forbehavioral commitment, were larger than the squares of the correlation between the latentfactors. This finding suggested that all the latent factors except for behavioral and per-sonal commitment were mutually distinctive. The average variance extracted for behavioralcommitment was slightly smaller than the correlation between behavioral commitment andpersonal commitment. We concluded this was less a function of the two commitment in-dicators being conceptually similar than it was that the behavioral commitment factor hadrelatively low reliability. Overall, we judged the measurement model in this study to havean acceptable goodness of fit and level of reliability and validity to proceed to the structuralmodel.

TABLE 3 Discriminant Validity of the Latent Factors

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Behavior .692 Skill and Knowledge .22 .693 Behavioral Commitment .07 .09 .434 Personal Commitment .07 .09 .54 .645 Leadership Roles .22 .42 .18 .10 .536 Self-determination .04 .09 .41 .06 .26 .507 Enduring Rewards .04 .00 .12 .18 .06 .05 .44

Average variance extracted = ∑Li

2/∑

Li2 + ∑

Var(Ei) (Hatcher, 1994)Note: The formula for average variance extracted differs from composite

reliability in that∑

Li term is no longer within parentheses.


FIGURE 2 Structural model with parameters to be estimated.

The Structural Model

The structural model that was developed and tested in this study is shown in Figure 2. Itsuggests that the birders’ behavior (F1), skills and knowledge (F2), behavioral commitment(F3) and personal commitment (F4) to the activity positively influence their tendency totake on leadership roles (F5) in the social world of birding. It proposes that the different di-mensions of birding specialization positively impact enduring benefits (F7). It also indicatesthat the birders’ level of behavioral commitment (F3) is negatively related to perceived self-determination (F6), while their level of personal commitment (F4) is positively associatedwith perceived self-determination (F6). Furthermore, it proposes that taking on leadershiproles in the social world of birding (F5) can result in diminished self-determination (F6). Themodel indicates that taking leadership roles also positively impacts their level of enduringbenefits (F7). Finally, it suggests that diminished self-determination (F6) can underminethe attainment of enduring benefits (F7).

In Figure 2, the letter “L” indicates the standardized coefficient between the manifestvariables and latent factors, the letter “E” represents errors for each manifest variable, andthe letter “C” represents correlations between the latent factors (Bentler, 1995). The let-ter “B” represents coefficients of the path from exogenous latent factors to endogenouslatent factors, while the letter “D” indicates errors of endogenous latent factors. The co-variance matrix to be analyzed for testing the structural model is the same as was shown inTable 2.

Overall, as can be seen in Table 4, the goodness of fit indices supported the structuralmodel. GF1, AGFI, CFI and NNFI were larger than .90 and RMR was smaller than .10.Even though the probability value for the chi-square statistic was less than .001, the valueof X2/df was less than 3, indicating a higher than minimally acceptable fit (Kline, 1998).This finding suggests that most parts of the structural model were supported. Although thegoodness of fit indices supported the structural model, we needed to look at the standardizedcoefficients for each path to test the study hypotheses.


TABLE 4 Goodness of Fit Indices of the Structural Model

X2 df p GFI AGF1 RMR CFI NNFI

216.67 100 .001 .95 .92 .08 .95 .94

Hypotheses Tests

Figure 3 reports the standardized coefficient for each path in the model. First, the datapartially supported Hypothesis 1: specialization positively influences the tendency to takeon leadership roles. The path coefficients from three dimensions of specialization (i.e., be-havior, skill/knowledge and behavioral commitment) to leadership roles were statisticallysignificant. However, personal commitment was not significantly associated with the ten-dency to take on leadership roles. Results also demonstrated that skill/knowledge was thestrongest of the specialization dimensions in predicting ABA members assuming leadershiproles.

Figure 3 also shows that the data partially supported Hypothesis 2, which stated thatspecialization positively impacts enduring benefits. As expected, the path coefficient fromF4 (personal commitment) to F7 (enduring benefits) was positive and statistically signifi-cant (p < .05). In contrast, the relationship between F2 (skill/knowledge) and F7 (enduringbenefits), while statistically significant (p < .05), was actually negative. Finally, the pathcoefficient from F1 (behavior) and F3 (behavioral commitment) to F7 (enduring bene-fits) was not statistically significant (p < .05). These results suggest that level of personal

FIGURE 3 The structural model and standardized parameter estimates.


commitment, at least among this sample of birdwatchers, was the best measure of special-ization when predicting the extent to which people experience enduring benefits.

The path coefficients from F3 (behavioral commitment) and F4 (personal commitment)to F6 (self-determination) showed that the data supported Hypothesis 3: behavioral commit-ment is negatively related to self-determination, while personal commitment is positivelyassociated with self-determination. In addition, Figure 3 shows that the data supportedHypothesis 4, which posited that leadership roles would contribute to diminished self-determination. This finding suggested that behavioral commitment and leadership rolesprimarily contributed to birders’ perception of diminished of self-determination, while thebirders’ level of personal commitment boosted their perception of self-determination

Furthermore, the path coefficient from F5 (leadership roles) to F7 (enduring benefits)was not statistically significant (p < .05), indicating that Hypothesis 5 was not supported.Finally, the non-significant (p > .05) path coefficient from F6 to F7 suggested that thedata did not support Hypothesis 6, which stated that self-determination is associated withenduring benefits.

In summary, results of the hypothesis tests provide us enough support to conclude thatthe data supported most parts of the structural model.

Analysis of Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects of Exogenous and Endogenous Factors

Table 5 reports the direct, indirect, and total effects of all exogenous factors on endogenousfactors of this study’s theoretical model. Overall, it indicates the endogenous factors ofthis study are mostly influenced by the direct effects of the exogenous factors. There wereonly minor indirect effects of exogenous factors on endogenous factors. For example, skilland knowledge had negative indirect effect on self-determination through leadership roles(indirect effects of −.15 = .50 × −.29). Behavior (.19 × −.29 = .05) and behavioralcommitment (.29 × −.29 = .08) also had negative direct effect on self-determinationthrough leadership roles. These results suggested that specialization may indirectly influenceperceived self-determination through leadership roles. In terms of total effect, however,these indirect effects were minor compared with the negative direct effects of behavioralcommitment and leadership roles on self-determination (−.88 and −.29, respectively).Perception of self-determination was mostly influenced by birders’ level of behavioralcommitment and tendency to take on leadership roles. In addition, although four dimensionsof specialization and leadership roles had minor indirect effects on enduring benefits (.03,.08, .18, −.08, .05 respectively), in terms of total effects, these indirect effects were minorcompared to the direct effects of personal commitment (.44).

In summary, the birders’ enduring benefits and cost, defined in terms of diminishedself-determination, tended to be directly influenced by their level of personal and behavioral

TABLE 5 Standardized Direct, Indirect, and Total Effects of Exogenous on EndogenousFactors

F5 F6 F7Direct Indirect Total Direct Indirect Total Direct Indirect Total

F1 .19 — .19 — −.05 −.05 .10 .03 .13F2 .50 — .50 — −.15 −.15 −.19 .08 −.11F3 .29 — .29 −.88 −.08 −.96 −.10 .18 .08F4 −.09 — −.09 .49 .03 .52 .44 −.08 .36F5 −.29 — −.29 .13 .05 .18F6 −.15 — −.15


commitment and tendency to taking on leadership roles rather than by their level of behaviorand skill and knowledge.

Discussion

Research on specialization provides insight into how people’s involvement in leisure activi-ties change over time. Researchers have found that individuals who invest time and effort inrecreational activities tend to experience long-lasting benefits (Stebbins, 1992). Enduringbenefits are fostered as individuals are required to continually develop and hone their skillsover time (Csikszentmihalyi & Kleiber, 1991; Mannell, 1993). Progression, however, canhave a “dark side” and exact costs to participants (Bryan, 2000). Advanced participationcan result in family and work conflicts, injuries, disappointments, and other problems. Itcan also become work-like as individuals may be expected to take on leadership positionsand facilitate involvement for others (Unruh, 1979). Accepting leadership positions, thus,may actually undermine self-determination and realizing benefits. Although progression inleisure activities can promote long-lasting benefits, it can also create costs borne by theindividual and his/her significant others.

This study fills a void in the literature by examining the relative costs, defined herein terms of diminished self-determination, and benefits of progression and linking theseto leadership roles that people assume. Results provided partial support for the theoreti-cal model. Results showed that three different dimensions of specialization (i.e., behavior,skill/knowledge, and behavioral commitment) were predictive of whether or not people tookon leadership roles in the social world of birding. However, people’s skills and knowledgewere more strongly related to taking on leadership roles than behavioral commitment andbehavior. Results also showed that only personal commitment and the skills/knowledge di-mensions were significantly related to the acquisition of enduring benefits. As predicted, theresults showed that both behavioral commitment and taking on leadership roles diminishedself-determination. The results did not support the hypothesis that taking on leadershiproles leads to enduring benefits. In addition, our measure of self-determination was notsignificantly related to enduring benefits. Importantly, this last result means that benefitsoutweighed the costs of specialization.

The results of this study support findings reported elsewhere that different dimensionsof specialization are more or less related to different facets of leisure behavior (Kuentzel &McDonald, 1992). Although the skill and knowledge and personal commitment dimensionsof specialization were directly related to the acquisition of enduring benefits, behavior(i.e., frequency of participation) and behavioral commitment were not. Furthermore, andunexpectedly, the skill/knowledge dimension was negatively related to the achievement ofenduring benefits. These findings suggest that a strong personal commitment is essentialif birders, at least among ABA members, are to acquire enduring benefits. Thus, evenbirders who have intermediate skills and knowledge and who go birding sporadically canachieve enduring benefits as long as they have developed a strong affective attachment.This finding is consistent with Scott and Godbey (1994), who discovered that many socialbridge players enjoyed the activity and acquired long-term benefits from participation overtime even though they lacked advanced skills in the game. Our findings, however, appear tobe at odds with Mannell’s (1993) assertion that competence is necessary for experiencingrewards. It could be that without possessing a strong personal commitment, having advancedskills may actually undermine birders’ ability to acquire enduring benefits. Alternatively,having advanced skills may result in a narrowing of opportunities to experience enjoymentand enduring benefits. Some advanced and skilled birdwatchers, for example, have turnedto butterfly and dragonfly watching because they have exhausted opportunities to see new


and rare birds in North America. Collectively, these findings suggest that future researchmust explore the distinctive impact of different dimensions of specialization on leisureparticipants’ attainment of enduring benefits.

The results also allow us to speculate about the sources of leadership in leisure socialworlds. Results suggested that skill and knowledge were more important than behavioralinvolvement and commitment in determining whether or not birders assumed leadershiproles. Being called on to lead birding walks or field trips requires individuals to have athorough knowledge of local birds and their behavior and habitat. Frequency of participationand commitment may count little if the individual has poor identification skills. Until a birderprovides evidence of skills and knowledge about birds, she/he may lack the credentials tobecome a leader in the social world. This finding is consistent with Donnelly’s (1994) workon trust in birding. He pointed out that an individual’s claim of having seen a rare bird isjudged largely on his/her previous achievements, acuity of vision, and knowledge. Thus,trustworthiness and reliability, requisites of being a leader in the birding community, arebased on the individual’s verified skill and knowledge (Cocker, 2002).

The results revealed that personal commitment and behavioral commitment were re-lated to perceived self-determination in different ways. On the one hand, personal commit-ment was positively related to a feeling of self-determination. Individuals acquire mean-ing from leisure activities that are personally compelling and provide a basis for faith(Godbey, 2003). On the other hand, behavioral commitment undermined perceived self-determination. As birders acquire side-bets, participation is likely to become externallycompelling, and withdrawal could result in harsh penalties (e.g., loss of friends and iden-tity). People who attain side bets over time may have the most to lose should opportunitiesfor participation become curtailed. Thus, specialization may have the potential to bothfacilitate and inhibit recreationists’ perception of self-determination.

We expected that the leadership roles birders took on would undermine their senseof self-determination. This hypothesis was supported. In a leisure social world, specialistsand advanced participants are expected to assume leadership positions and, from time totime, may be obligated to engage in the activity primarily for the benefit of others (Unruh,1979). Elite birders are often expected to lead or organize bird walks and trips for new-comers or intermediate birders. These activities can be mundane and require birders tosubordinate their own desires (e.g., chase rarities) for the good of others. We also pre-dicted leadership roles that people assumed would contribute to enduring benefits. Thishypothesis was not supported. Together, these results suggest that the leadership rolespeople assume in the social world of birding can exact costs without providing addedbenefits.

One key question remains: Do costs in the form of diminished self-determinationoutweigh enduring benefits? Although some researchers have argued that perceived self-determination is an important determinant of leisure satisfaction (Ellis & Witt, 1994;Holland & Ditton, 1992), others have made the case that obligations do not necessarilylead to decreased enjoyment of an activity (Samdahl, 1988). Our results showed that self-determination and enduring benefits were unrelated. This means that people still experiencedurable benefits even when they experience role constraints. Stebbins (2000) argued that theobligations people incur in serious leisure pursuits are relatively minor and rarely outweighthe benefits of participation. He used the term agreeable obligations to refer to those routineduties serious participants find themselves compelled to perform as they pursue their avo-cations. Thus, any perceived loss of self-determination that birders reported was probablysmall and independent of the benefits they experienced. This conclusion suggests our initialmodel (Figure 1) requires one important modification: Diminished self-determination doesnot undermine the acquisition of enduring benefits.


Several limitations of this study need to be discussed. Although the results gener-ally supported the theoretical model and study hypotheses, the measures we used to op-erationalize costs, benefits, and leadership roles did not cover all aspects of these ideas.For example, we did not examine a broad array of costs of progression. Some of thesecosts include family discord, work conflicts, injuries, poor performances, and cliques(Gillespie et al., 2002; Morgan, 1979; Stebbins, 2001). The inclusion of these and otherdisappointments would provide a more complete picture of the costs associated withspecialization.

The benefits construct was also operationalized rather narrowly. In this study, benefitsof recreational specialization were primarily measured in terms of enduring benefits as weassumed that only specialized recreationists can experience enduring benefits (Stebbins,1992). With some modification, we could readily have used the Recreation ExperiencePreference scales as developed by Driver and his colleagues (Driver et al., 1991). Futureresearch may need to measure benefits associated with specialization using a broader arrayof items and measures.

Likewise, leadership roles were measured narrowly. We simply asked whether or notrespondents had participated in activities that help beginners improve birding skills andknowledge (i.e., leading bird walks and giving presentations about birds and birding). Lead-ership roles constitute more than helping novices learn, grow, and improve their knowledgeand skills. According to Ford and Blanchard (1993), roles of a leader in outdoor recreationalso include motivating the participants to carry out plans, energizing them, encouragingthem, demonstrating behavior conducive to goal attainment, and organizing an event ac-cording to participants’ abilities. Future research may need to develop a scale that measuresa greater range of leadership roles in leisure activity systems.

Finally, it is important to note that our sample frame was drawn from a group of birders(members of the ABA) that was relatively advanced and highly oriented to listing birds.The social world of birding is quite diverse and includes millions of individuals who are notpreoccupied with listing. According to the 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting andWildlife-Associated Recreation, only 40% of those people who said they watched birds doso away from home, only 8% could identify more than 40 birds by sight or sound, and only5% keep life lists of all the birds they have identified (U.S. Department of Interior, Fish andWildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). Moreover,some birdwatchers are interested in specific bird species (e.g., hummingbirds, bluebirds,and purple martins) and their participation tends to be limited to these groups of birds. Thus,it would have been preferable to test the theoretical model on a more heterogeneous sampleof birders including people not oriented to listing.

Conclusions

This study makes two significant contributions to the literature. First, it fills a void in theliterature by linking benefits and costs to specific dimensions of specializations (i.e., be-havior, skills and knowledge, and commitment) and the leadership roles people assumewithin leisure social worlds. Second, the study may provide insight into the relative bene-fits and costs of progression. Our results are consistent with Stebbins (2000) and suggestthat the benefits people experience as a result of specialization outweigh the costs theyencounter. This area of inquiry may provide researchers and practitioners a better under-standing of issues related to the recruitment, retention, and burnout of leaders and otherparticipants within different leisure activity systems. Future research will determine the util-ity of the theoretical model in predicting benefits and costs of specialization in other leisureactivities.


References

Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Assessing construct validity in organizational research.Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 421–458.

Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of Sociology, 66 (July),32–40.

Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS structural equations programs manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.Bricker, K. & Kerstetter, D. L. (2000). Level of specialization and place attachment: An exploratory

study of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences, 22, 233–257.Blaydon, M. J. & Lindner, K. J. (2002). Eating disorders and exercise dependence in triathletes. Eating

Disorders, 10, 49–60.Bryan, H. (1977). Leisure value systems and recreational specialization: The case of trout fishermen.

Journal of Leisure Research, 9, 174-187.Bryan, H. (1979). Conflict in the great outdoors. Birmingham, AL: The Birmingham Publishing

Co.Bryan, H. (2000). Recreation specialization revisited. Journal of Leisure Research, 32, 18–21.Buchanan, T. (1985). Commitment and leisure behavior: A theoretical perspective. Leisure Sciences,

7, 401–420.Campbell, D. & Fiske, D. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validity by the multitrait-

multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 54, 81–105.Cocker, M. (2002). Birders: Tales of a tribe. Berkeley, CA: Grove/Atlantic, Inc.Cole, J. & Scott, D. (1999). Segmenting participation in wildlife watching: A comparison of casual

wildlife watchers and serious birders. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 4(4), 44–61.Coleman, D. & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1993). Leisure and health: The role of social support and self-

determination. Journal of Leisure Research, 25, 111–129.Csikszentmihalyi, H. & Kleiber, D. A. (1991). Leisure and self-actualization. In B. L. Driver, P. J.

Brown, & G. L. Peterson (eds.), Benefits of leisure (pp. 91–102). State College, PA: VenturePublishing, Inc.

Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. New York: John Wiley& Sons.

Ditton, R. B., Loomis, D. K., & Choi, S. (1992). Recreation specialization: Re-conceptualization froma social world perspective. Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 33–51.

Donnelly, P. (1994). Take my word for it: Trust in the context of birding and mountaineering. Quali-tative Sociology, 17, 215–241.

Driver, B. L. (1990). Focusing research on the benefits of leisure: Special issue introduction. Journalof Leisure Research, 22, 93–98.

Driver, B. L. & Bruns, D. H. (1999). Concepts and uses of the benefits approach to leisure. In E. L.Jackson and T. L. Burton (eds.), Leisure studies: Prospects for the twenty-first century (pp. 349–369). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.

Driver, B. & Knopf, R. C. (1977). Personality, outdoor recreation, and expected consequences. Envi-ronment and Behavior, 9, 169–193.

Driver, B. L., Nash, R., & Haas, G. E. (1987). Wilderness benefits: A state-of-knowledge review.In R. C. Lucas (ed.), National wilderness research conference: Issues, state of knowledge, andfuture directions (General Technical Report INT-220, pp. 294–319). Ogden, UT: USDA ForestService, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Driver, B. L., Tinsley, H. E. A., & Manfredo, M. J. (1991). The paragraphs about leisure and recreationexperience preference scales: Results from two inventories designed to assess the breadth of theperceived psychological benefits of leisure. In B. L. Driver, P. J. Brown, & G. L. Peterson (eds.),Benefits of leisure (pp. 263–286). State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.

Dyck, C., Schneider, I., Thompson, M., & Virden, T. (2003). Specialization among mountaineersand its relationship to environmental attitudes. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration,21(2), 44–62.

Ellis, G. D. & Witt, P. A. (1994). Perceived freedom in leisure and satisfaction: Exploring the fac-tor structure of the perceived freedom components of the Leisure Diagnostic Battery. LeisureSciences, 16, 259–270.


Ford, P. & Blanchard, J. (1993). Leadership and administration of outdoor pursuits (2nd edition).State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.

Gillespie, D. L., Leffler, A., & Lerner, E. (2002). If it weren’t for my hobby, I’d have a life. Dogsports, serious leisure, and boundary negotiations. Leisure Studies, 21, 285–304.

Godbey, G. (2003). Leisure in your life (6th edition). State College, PA: Venture Publishing.Goff, S. J., Fick, D. S., & Oppliger, R. A. (1997). The moderating effect of spouse support on the

relation between serious leisure and spouses’ perceived leisure—family conflict. Journal ofLeisure Research, 29, 47–60.

Harrington, M., Dawson, D., & Bolla, P. (1992). Objective and subjective constraints on women’senjoyment of leisure. Society and Leisure, 15, 203–222.

Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using the SAS system for factor analysis and structuralequation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.

Henderson, K. A. (1981). Motivations and perceptions of volunteerism as a leisure activity. Journalof Leisure Research, 13, 208–218.

Henderson, K. A. & Allen, K. R. (1991). The ethic of care: Leisure possibilities and constraints forwomen. Society and Leisure, 14, 97–113.

Holland, S. M. & Ditton, R. B. (1992). Fishing trip satisfaction: A typology of anglers. North AmericanJournal of Fisheries Management, 12, 28–33.

Hu, L. & Bentler, P. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparam-eterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.

Iso-Ahola. S. (1999). Motivational foundations for leisure. In E. L. Jackson & T. L. Burton (eds.),Leisure studies: Prospects for the twenty-first century. (pp. 35–51). State College, PA: VenturePublishing, Inc.

Juniu, S., Tedrick, T., & Boyd, R. (1996). Leisure or work: Amateur and professional musicians’perception of rehearsal and performance. Journal of Leisure Research, 28, 44–56.

Kelly, J. R. & Freysinger, V. J. (2000). 21st century leisure: Current issues. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Kelly, J. R. & Ross, J-E. (1989). Later-life leisure: Begging a new agenda. Leisure Sciences, 11,

47–59.Kelly, J. R., Steinkamp, M., & Kelly, J. R. (1987). Later-life satisfaction: Does leisure contribute?

Leisure Sciences, 9, 189–200.Kim, S-S., Scott, D., & Crompton, J. (1997). An exploration of the relationships among social psycho-

logical involvement, behavioral involvement, commitment and future intentions in the contextof birdwatching. Journal of Leisure Research, 29, 320–341.

Kline, R. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The GuilfordPress.

Kuentzel, W. F. & Heberlein, T. (1992). Does specialization affect behavioral choices and qualityjudgments among hunters? Leisure Sciences, 14, 211–226.

Kuentzel, W. F. & McDonald, G. (1992). Differential effects of past experience, commitment, andlifestyle dimensions on river use specialization, Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 269–287.

Mannell, R. C. (1993). High-investment activity and life satisfaction among older adults: Committed,serious leisure, and flow activities. In J. R. Kelly (ed.), Activity and aging: Staying involved inlater life (pp. 125–145). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication.

Mannell, R. C. & Kleiber, D. A. (1997). A social psychology of leisure. State College, PA.: VenturePublishing, Inc.

Mannell, R. C., Zuzanek, J., & Larson, R. (1988). Leisure states and “flow” experience: Testingperceived freedom and intrinsic motivation hypotheses. Journal of Leisure Research, 20, 289–304.

Marsh, H. W. & Hocevar, D. (1983). Confirmatory factor analysis of multitrait-multi method matrices.Journal of Educational Measurement, 20, 231–248.

Martin, S. R. (1997). Specialization and differences in setting preferences among wildlife viewers.Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2(1), 1–18.

McFarlane, B. L. (1994). Specialization and motivations of birdwatchers. Wildlife Society Bulletin,22, 361–370.


McFarlane, B. L. & Boxall, P. C. (1996). Participation in wildlife conservation by birdwatchers.Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(3), 1–14.

McFarlane, B. L., Boxall, P. G., & Watson, D. (1998). Past experience and behavioral choice amongwilderness users. Journal of Leisure Research, 30, 195–213.

Michener, H. A. & DeLamater, J. D. (1999). Social psychology (4th ed.). New York: Harcourt BraceCollege Publishers.

Montemurro, B. (2002). “You go ‘cause you have to”: The bridal shower as a ritual of obligation.Symbolic Interaction, 25, 67–92.

Morgan, W. P. (1979). Negative addiction in runners. The Physician and Sportsmedicine, 7, 57–70.

Neulinger, J. (1974). The psychology of leisure. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas Publisher.Nichols, G. & King, L. (1999). Redefining the recruitment niche for the Guide Association in the

United Kingdom. Leisure Sciences, 21, 307–320.Petrick, J. (2002). Development of a multi-dimensional scale for measuring the perceived value of a

service. Journal of Leisure Research, 34, 119–134.Reisinger, Y. & Turner, L. (1999). Structural equation modeling with Lisrel: Application in tourism.

Tourism Management, 20, 71–88.Rojek, C. (2001). Preface. In R. A. Stebbins, New directions in the theory and research of serious

leisure (i–iv). Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press.Samdahl, D. M. (1988). A symbolic interactionist model of leisure: Theory and empirical support.

Leisure Sciences, 10, 27–93.Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8, 350–

353.Scott, D., Baker, S. M., & Kim, C. (1999). Motivations and commitments among participants in the

Great Texas Birding Classic. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 4(1), 50–67.Scott, D. & Godbey, G. (1994). Recreational specialization in the social world of contract bridge.

Journal of Leisure Research, 26, 275–295.Scott, D. & Shafer, C. S. (2001a). Recreational specialization: A critical look at the construct. Journal

of Leisure Research, 33, 319–343.Scott, D. & Shafer, C. S. (2001b). A rejoinder to reviewers’ comments. Journal of Leisure Research,

33, 357–361.Scott, D., Stewart, W., & Cole, J. (1997). An examination of activity preferences and orientations

among serious birders. Unpublished report.Scott, D. & Thigpen, J. (2003). Understanding the birder as tourist: Segmenting visitors to the Texas

Hummer/Bird Celebration. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8, 199–218.Shafer, S. C. & Hammitt, W. E. (1995). Purism revisited: Specifying recreational conditions of concern

according to resource intent. Leisure Sciences, 17, 15–30.Shamir, B. (1988). Commitment and leisure. Sociological Perspectives, 31, 238–258.Sharpe, E. K. (2003). “It’s not fun any more”: A case study of organizing a contemporary grassroots

recreation association. Society and Leisure, 26, 431–452.Stebbins, R. A. (1992). Amateurs, professionals, and serious leisure. Montreal, Canada: McGill-

Queen’s University Press.Stebbins, R. A. (2000). Obligation as an aspect of serious leisure. Journal of Leisure Research, 32,

152–155.Stebbins, R. A. (2001). New directions in the theory and research of serious leisure. Lewiston, NY:

The Edwin Mellen Press.Tabachnick, B. & Fidell, L. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins

College Publishers.Tian-Cole, S., Crompton, J. L., & Willson, V. L.(2002). An empirical investigation of the relationship

between service quality, satisfaction, and behavioral intentions among visitors to a wildliferefuge. Journal of Leisure Research, 34, 1–24.

Tinsley, H. E., Driver, B. L., Ray, S. B., & Manfredo, M. J. (1986). Stability of recreation experiencepreference (REP) rating for samples and individuals across three measurement periods. Journalof Education and Psychological Measurement, 46, 1105–1111.


Tinsley, H. E. A. & Tinsley, D. J. (1986). A theory of the attributes, benefits, and causes of leisureexperience. Leisure Sciences, 8, 1–45.

Unruh, D. R. (1979). Characteristics and types of participation in social worlds. Symbolic Interaction,2(2), 115–127.

U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Cen-sus Bureau. (2002). 2001 National survey of fishing, hunting and wildlife-associated recreation.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

for better or worse? a structural model of the beneﬁts and ...people.tamu.edu/~dscott/601/musings...

Documents