Investigation of The Relationship Between Leisure Involvement and Flow Experience in Extreme Sports Activities

Abstract

In recent years, sedentary lifestyles have been increasing, and the low levels of physical activity reported for leisure use appear to be alarming. On the other hand, it is known that there is a remarkable increase in participation in extreme sports activities, contrary to the decreasing trend reported for participation in traditional physical activities around the world. Considering the mentioned situations, it is important to determine and investigate the factors that direct individuals to participate in extreme sports events. In this context, the aim of the study was to analyze the relative importance of the dimensions effective in leisure involvement of extreme sports participants and their flow experiences and to examine the relationship between leisure involvement and flow experience levels. The relational survey model, one of the quantitative research methods, was used in the study. The study group consists of 279 participants (62.7% male, 37.5% female) determined by convenience sampling method among individuals who reside in Sakarya province and participate in active extreme sports activities aged 18 and over ((¯Xage=35.66±10.21). In addition to descriptive statistics, structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data. Findings reveal that extreme sports participants with higher levels of leisure involvement tend to experience higher flow levels. While hedonic value was the leisure involvement factor with the most potent effect on flow experience, it was determined that symbolic value and centrality factors did not significantly impact flow experience. The results of this study provide references to extreme sports industries and relevant units regarding the leisure behavior, involvement levels and experiences of extreme sports participants.

Keywords

• Extreme sports
• leisure ınvolvement
• flow experience

Ekstrem Spor Aktivitelerinde Serbest Zaman İlgilenimi İle Akış Deneyimi Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Son yıllarda, hareketsiz yaşam tarzı giderek artmakta ve serbest zamanın değerlendirilmesinde raporlanan düşük fiziksel aktivite seviyelerinin endişe verici seviyelerde olduğu görülmektedir. Diğer yandan dünya genelinde geleneksel fiziksel aktivitelere katılım için bildirilen azalış eğiliminin aksine, ekstrem spor aktivitelerine katılımda dikkate değer bir artış olduğu bilinmektedir. Belirtilen durumlar dikkate alındığında, bireyleri ekstrem spor etkinliklerine katılıma yönlendiren faktörlerin belirlenmesi ve araştırılması önem arz etmektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışmanın amacı ekstrem spor katılımcılarının serbest zaman ilgileniminde etkili olan boyutların görece önemi ile akış deneyimlerini analiz etmek ve serbest zaman ilgilenimi ile akış deneyimi düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Çalışmada nicel araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan ilişkisel tarama modelinden yararlanılmıştır. Çalışma grubu, Sakarya ilinde ikamet eden, 18 yaş ve üzeri (¯Xyaş=35.66±10.21) aktif ekstrem spor aktivitelerine katılım sağlayan bireyler arasından, kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle belirlenen toplam 279 (62.7’si erkek, %37.5’i kadın) katılımcıdan oluşmaktadır. Verilerin analizinde betimsel istatistiklerin yanı sıra yapısal eşitlik modelinden yararlanılmıştır. Bulgular daha yüksek düzeyde serbest zaman ilgilenimine sahip ekstrem spor katılımcılarının daha yüksek düzeyde, akış deneyimleme eğiliminde olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Hedonik değer, akış deneyimi üzerinde en güçlü etkiye sahip serbest zaman ilgilenimi faktörüyken, sembolik değer ve merkezilik faktörlerinin, akış deneyimi üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkisi olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçları, ekstrem spor katılımcılarının serbest zaman davranışı, ilgilenim düzeyleri ve deneyimleri ile ilgili olarak ekstrem spor endüstrilerine ve ilgili birimlere referanslar sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

• Ekstrem sporlar
• serbest zaman ilgilenimi
• akış deneyimi

References

1. Okely AD, Kontsevaya A, Ng J, Abdeta C. 2020 WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behavior. Sports Medicine and Health Science. 2021;3:115–8.
2. Pólus-Thiry É, Rédei C. The Influence of Age and Gender on the Value Orientation of Extreme Sports Participants. Phys Cult Sport Stud Res. 2013;56(1):51–8.
3. Zhou L, Chlebosz K, Tower J, Morris T. An exploratory study of motives for participation in extreme sports and physical activity. J Leis Res. 2020;51(1):56–76.
4. Trost SG, Owen N, Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Brown W. Correlates of adults’ participation in physical activity: review and update. Med Sci Sport Exerc. 2002;34(12):1996–2001.
5. Chang HH. Gender differences in leisure involvement and flow experience in professional extreme sport activities. World Leis J. 2017;59(2):124–39.
6. John M, Melis AP, Read D, Rossano F, Tomasello M. The preference for scarcity: A developmental and comparative perspective. Psychol Mark. 2018;35(8):603–15.
7. Willig C. A phenomenological investigation of the experience of taking part in “extreme sports.” J Health Psychol. 2008;13(5):690–702.
8. Laurendeau J. “Gendered risk regimes”: A theoretical consideration of edgework and gender. Sociol Sport J. 2008;25:293–309.

9. Stebbins R. New directions in the theory and research of serious leisure. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press; 2001.
10. Tao H, Zhou Q, Tian D, Zhu L. The Effect of Leisure Involvement on Place Attachment: Flow Experience as Mediating Role. Land. 2022;11(2).
11. Csikszentmihalyi M. Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. BasicBooks; 1997.
12. Cheng TM, Hung SH, Chen MT. The Influence of Leisure Involvement on Flow Experience During Hiking Activity: Using Psychological Commitment as a Mediate Variable. Asia Pacific J Tour Res. 2016;21(1):1–19.
13. Havitz ME, Mannell RC. Enduring involvement, situational involvement, and flow in leisure and non-leisure activities. J Leis Res. 2005;37(2):152–77.
14. Havitz ME, Howard DR. How Enduring Is Enduring Involvement? A Seasonal Examination of Three Recreational Activities. J Consum Psychol. 1995;4(3):255–76.
15. Eskiler E, Karakaş G. Sakarya Üniversitesi Öğrencilerinin Serbest Zaman İlgilenimleri ile Davranışsal Niyetleri Arasındaki İlişkilerinin İncelenmesi. İÜ Spor Bilim Derg. 2017;7(3):10–24.
16. Havitz ME, Dimanche F. Leisure involvement revisited: Conceptual conundrums and measurement advances. J Leis Res. 1997;29(3):245–78.
17. Selin SW, Howard DR. Ego Involvement and Leisure Behavior: A Conceptual Specification. J Leis Res. 1988;20(3):237–44.
18. Kyle GT, Mowen AJ. An examination of the leisure involvement-agency commitment relationship. J Leis Res. 2005;37(3):342–63.
19. Mcintyre N, Pigram JJ. Recreation specialization reexamined: The case of vehicle-based campers. Leis Sci. 1992;14(1):3–15.
20. Beaton AA, Funk DC, Ridinger L, Jordan J. Sport involvement: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Sport Manag Rev. 2011;14(2):126–40.
21. Eskiler E. Physically Active Leisure Participants Segmentation: PCM Stage-Based Investigation. Int J Progress Educ. 2019;15(3):169–79.
22. Csikszentmihalyi M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety: The Experience of Play in Work and Games. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2000.
23. Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper & Row; 1990.
24. Stein GL, Kimiecik JC, Daniels J, Jackson SA. Psychological antecedents of flow in recreational sport. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Socirty Personal Soc Pscycology, Inc. 1995;21(2):125–35.
25. Heo J, Lee Y, McCormick BP, Pedersen PM. Daily experience of serious leisure, flow and subjective well-being of older adults. Leis Stud. 2010;29(2):207–25.
26. Decloe MD, Kaczynski AT, Havitz ME. Social participation, flow and situational involvement in recreational physical activity. J Leis Res. 2009;41(1):73–90.
27. Novak TP, Hoffman DL, Yung YF. Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Mark Sci. 2000;19(1):22–42.
28. Ayhan C, Eskiler E, Soyer F. Measuring flow experience in recreational participants: Scale development and validation. Int J Hum Sci. 2020;17(4):1297–311.
29. Fraenkel JR, Wallen NE. How To Desaign Evaluate Research In Education. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2009.
30. Coşkun R, Altunışık R, Yıldırım E. Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri: SPSS Uygulamalı. 9th ed. Sakarya: Sakarya Yayıncılık; 2017.
31. Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı: İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve Yorum. 22nd ed. Ankara: Pegem Akademi; 2016.
32. Brown TA. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. New York: The Guilford Press; 2006.
33. Hair JF, Black W, Babin B, Anderson R. Multivariate Data Analysis. Vectors. New Jersey: Pearson Education; 2010.
34. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York. New York: The Guilford Press; 2005.
35. George, D., & Mallery P. IBM SPSS statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide and reference. Routledge. 14th ed. New York: Routledge; 2016.
36. Hoffman DL, Novak TP. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. J Mark. 1996;60(3):50–68.
37. Monteiro DMT, Nunes G, Marinho DA, Couto N, Antunes R, Moutão J, et al. Tradução e adaptação do physical activity enjoyment scale (PACES) numa amostra de atletas portuguesas, invariância entre géneros, desporto de natureza e natação. Rev Bras Cineantropometria e Desempenho Hum. 2017;19(6):631–43.
38. Robert A. Stebbins. Serbest Zaman Fikri: Temel İlkeler. Anka: Spor Yayınevi; 2016.
39. Wiley CGE, Shaw SM, Havitz ME. Men’s and women’s involvement in sports: An examination of the gendered aspects of leisure involvement. Leis Sci. 2000;22(1):19–31.
40. Mackenzie SH, Hodge K, Boyes M. Expanding the flow model in adventure activities: A reversal theory perspective. J Leis Res. 2011;43(4):519–44.