Engelli Sporcularda Psikolojik İyi Oluş ve Serbest Zaman Doyumu Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi

Yıl 2021, , 73 - 83, 15.06.2021

Rıfat Kerem Gürkan , Funda Koçak , Aral Başar

https://doi.org/10.18826/useeabd.890800

Cited By: 8

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, engelli sporcularda serbest zaman doyumu ve psikolojik iyi oluş arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir.

Materyal ve Metot: Çalışmada, kolayda örnekleme yöntemi ile seçilmiş 48 kadın (Ortyaş=20.77±4.30), 153 erkek (Ortyaş=22.82±6.65) olmak üzere toplamda 201 (Ortya ş=22.33±6.22) görme, bedensel ve işitme engelli sporcu katılım göstermiştir. Çalışma verileri “Psikolojik İyi Oluş Ölçeği (PİOÖ)” ile “Serbest Zaman Doyum Ölçeği” (SZDÖ) aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Çalışmada, MANOVA ve tek yönlü ANOVA ile her iki ölçekte Bağımsız Örneklemlerde t-Testi kullanılmıştır. Bağımsız örneklemler için t-Testi, tek yönlü ANOVA, MANOVA ve Pearson momentler çarpımı korelasyonu katsayısı testleri kullanılmıştır.

Bulgular: Katılımcıların serbest zaman doyumları ve psikolojik iyi oluşlarında cinsiyet değişkenine göre anlamlı farklılık göstermemektedir. Katılımcıların engel durumlarına göre ise serbest zaman doyumlarının “eğitim” alt boyutu haricindeki tüm alt boyutlarında anlamlı istatistiksel bir ilişki olduğu görülmektedir. İşitme engelli katılımcıların puanlarının genel olarak diğer engel grubundaki katılımcılara göre daha yüksektir. Psikolojik iyi oluş puan ortalamalarında da engel durumuna göre anlamlı ilişki olduğu görülmektedir. Bireysel ve grup etkinliklerine katılma durumuna göre, katılımcıların serbest zaman doyumunun serbest zaman etkinliklerine “grup” olarak katılanların lehine tüm alt boyutlarında anlamlı farklılık bulunmuştur. Psikolojik iyi oluş açısından etkinlik türüne göre ortalama puanlarda ise anlamlı bir farklılık bulunamamıştır.

Sonuç: Engelli sporcularda serbest zaman doyumunun artması ile psikolojik iyi oluşa ait puanların da arttığı görülmektedir. Grup dahilinde yapılan etkinliklerin serbest zaman doyumunu artırmadaki önemi dikkat çekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

psikolojik iyi oluş, serbest zaman doyumu, engelli sporcular

Investigation on the Relationship Between the Leisure Satisfaction and Psychological Well-being in Disabled Athletes

Öz

Aim: The aim of this study is to examine the psychological well-being and leisure satisfaction relations in athletes with disabilities.

Methods: In this study convenience sampling method used. Based on convenience sampling method 153 male (Avage=22.82±6.65), 48 female (Avage=20.77±4.30) totally 201 (Avage=22.33±6.22) visually-impaired, physically impaired and deaf athlete were participated in. To collect the data, "Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS)" and "Leisure Satisfaction Scale" (T-LSS) are used. Independent sample t-test, MANOVA and one-way ANOVA tests for both paragraphs are used. For independent samples, t-Test, one-way ANOVA, MANOVA and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient tests were used.

Results: In the research, any significant difference in the T-LSS and PWBS of the participants according to the gender variable found. According to the disability of the participants, it is seen that there is a statistically significant relationship with all sub-dimensions of T-LSS except for the "education" sub-dimension. The scores of the deaf participants are generally higher than the participants in the other disability groups. It is seen that there is a significant correlation in PWBS score averages according to disability status. Additionally, a significant difference was found According to the status of participating in individual and group activities, in all sub-dimensions of the participants' T-LSS in favor of those participating in leisure time activities as "groups". In terms of psychological well-being, there is any significant difference in the average scores according to the activity type.

Conclusion: It can be said that if the leisure time satisfaction of disabled athletes’ increases, their psychological well-being scores will also increase. The importance of group activities should be highlighted in order to increase leisure time satisfaction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

psychologically well-being, leisure satisfaction, disabled athletes

Kaynakça

• Aitchison, C. (2003). From leisure and disability to disability leisure: Developing data, definitions and discourses. Disability and Society, 18, 955–969.
• Badia, M., Orgaz, B. M., Verdugo, M. A., Ullán, A. M., & Martínez, M. M. (2011). Personal factors and perceived barriers to participation in leisure activities for young and adults with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(6), 2055-2063.
• Beard J. G., Ragheb M. G. (1980). Measuring leisure satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 12, 20-33.
• Bergstad, C. J., Gamble, A., Gärling, T., Hagman, O., Polk, M., Ettema, D., ... & Olsson, L. E. (2011). Subjective well-being related to satisfaction with daily travel. Transportation, 38(1), 1-15.
• Bishop, P. A. (2017). Measurement and Evaluation in Physical Activity Applications: Exercise Science, Physical Education, Coaching, Athletic Training & Health. Taylor & Francis.
• Bult, M. K., Verschuren, O., Lindeman, E., Jongmans, M. J., & Ketelaar, M. (2014). Do children participate in the activities they prefer? A comparison of children and youth with and without physical disabilities. Clinical Rehabilitation, 28(4), 388-396.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (2. Basım). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822-848.
• Choi, S. H., & Yoo, Y. J. (2017). Leisure attitude and satisfaction with leisure and life: proposing leisure prioritization and justification. World Leisure Journal, 59(2), 140-155.
• Dattilo, J., Hoge, G., & Malley, S.M. (1996). Interviewing people with mental retardation: Validity and reliability strategies. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 30, 163–178.
• Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575.
• Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.
• Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1-2), 189-216.
• Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156.
• Dodge, R., Daly, A. P., Huyton, J., & Sanders, L. D. (2012). The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 2(3), 222-235.
• Edwards, S. D., Palavar, K., Ngcobo, H. S., & Edwards, D. J. (2005). Exploring the relationship between physical activity, psychological well-being and physical self-perception in different exercise groups. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, 27(1), 59-74.
• Gale, C. R., Booth, T., Mõttus, R., Kuh, D., & Deary, I. J. (2013). Neuroticism and Extraversion in youth predict mental wellbeing and life satisfaction 40 years later. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(6), 687-697.
• Gordon, W. R., & Caltabiano, M. L. (1996). Urban-rural differences in adolescent self-esteem, leisure boredom, and sensation-seeking as predictors of leisure-time usage and satisfaction. Adolescence, 31(124), 883-901.
• Gökçe, H., & Orhan, K. (2011). Serbest Zaman Doyum Ölçeğinin Türkçe Geçerlilik Güvenirlik Çalışması. Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 22(4), 139-145.
• Gürbüz, B., & Henderson, K. A. (2014). Leisure activity preferences and constraints: Perspectives from Turkey. World Leisure Journal, 56(4), 300-316.
• Gürbüz, B., & Öncü, E. (2014). Meanings of leisure to adults with physical disabilities. In 7th International Scientific Conference On Kinesiology (p. 367).
• Gürkan R. K. & Koçak F. (2020). Perceived constraints and facilitators of participation in physical activity by individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Physical Activity Review, 8(1), 51-63.
• Han, A., Kim, J., & Kim, J. (2019). Coping Strategies, Social Support, Leisure Activities, and Physical Disabilities. American Journal of Health Behavior, 43(5), 937-949.
• Ingrassia, M., Mazza, F., Totaro, P., & Benedetto, L. (2020). Perceived Well-Being and Quality of Life in People with Typical and Atypical Development: The Role of Sports Practice. Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology, 5(1), 12.
• Judge TA, Locke E, Durham C, Kluger A (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1):17-34.
• Karasar, N. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: kavramlar-ilkeler-teknikler. Nobel Yayın Dağitim.
• Kearns, R., and Andrews, G. (2010). Geographies of wellbeing, The handbook of social geographies, SAGE, London, 309-328.
• Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002) Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022.
• Kim, S., Sung, J., Park, J., & Dittmore, S. W. (2015). The relationship among leisure attitude, satisfaction, and psychological well-being for college students. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 15(1), 70-76.
• Kim, J., Chun, S., Heo, J., Lee, S., & Han, A. (2016). Contribution of leisure-time physical activity on psychological benefits among elderly immigrants. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 11(2), 461-470.
• King, G., Lawm, M., King, S., Rosenbaum, P., Kertoy, M. K., & Young, N. L. (2003). A conceptual model of the factors affecting the recreation and leisure participation of children with disabilities. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 23(1), 63-90.
• Kinney, W. B., & Coyle, C. P. (1992). Predicting life satisfaction among adults with physical disabilities. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 73(9), 863-869.
• Kitis, A., Eraslan, U., Koc, V., Giresun, F., & Usta, H. (2017). Investigation of disability level, leisure satisfaction, and quality of life in disabled employees. Social work in public health, 32(2), 94-101.
• Koçak, F. (2017). Leisure constraints and facilitators: Perspectives from Turkey. European Journal of Physical Education and Sport Science, 3(10), 32-47.
• Krops, L. A., Folkertsma, N., Hols, D. H., Geertzen, J. H., Dijkstra, P. U., & Dekker, R. (2019). Target population’s requirements on a community-based intervention for stimulating physical activity in hard-to-reach physically disabled people: an interview study. Disability and Rehabilitation, 41(19), 2272-2279.
• Kuykendall, L., Tay, L., & Ng, V. (2015). Leisure engagement and subjective well-being: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 364-403.
• Lee, E. Y., Yi, K. J., Walker, G. J., & Spence, J. C. (2017). Preferred leisure type, value orientations, and psychological well-being among East Asian youth. Leisure Sciences, 39(4), 355-375.
• Lieberman, L., & Stuart, M. (2002). Self-determined recreational and leisure choices of individuals with deaf-blindness. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 96(10), 724-735.
• Lu, L., & Argyle, M. (1994). Leisure satisfaction and happiness as a function of leisure activity. Gaoxiong yi xue ke xue za zhi. The Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, 10(2), 89-96.
• Martin, J. J. (2013). Benefits and barriers to physical activity for individuals with disabilities: a social-relational model of disability perspective. Disability and Rehabilitation, 35(24), 2030-2037.
• Ponde, M. P., & Santana, V. S. (2000). Participation in leisure activities: Is it a protective factor for women's mental health? Journal of Leisure Research, 32(4), 457-472.
• Powrie, B., Copley, J., Turpin, M., Ziviani, J., & Kolehmainen, N. (2020). The meaning of leisure to children and young people with significant physical disabilities: Implications for optimising participation. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 83(2), 67-77.
• Reedman, S. E., Boyd, R. N., Ziviani, J., Elliott, C., Ware, R. S., & Sakzewski, L. (2021). Participation predictors for leisure‐time physical activity intervention in children with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 63(5), 566-575.
• Roothman, B., Kirsten, D. K., & Wissing, M. P. (2003). Gender differences in aspects of psychological well-being. South African Journal of Psychology, 33(4), 212-218.
• Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069-1081.
• Sarol, H., & Çimen, Z. (2015). The effects of adapted recreational physical activity on the life quality of individuals with autism. The Anthropologist, 21(3), 522-527.
• Sarol, H. (2017). Examination of the constraints and facilitators to physical activity participation of individuals. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(4), 4354-4364.
• Schreuer, N., Sachs, D., & Rosenblum, S. (2014). Participation in leisure activities: Differences between children with and without physical disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(1), 223-233.
• Shinn, M., & Toohey, S. M. (2003). Community contexts of human welfare. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 427-459.
• Siegenthaler, K. L. (1997). Health Benefits of Leisure. Research Update. Parks and Recreation, 32(1), 24-28.
• Sirgy, M. J., Uysal, M., & Kruger, S. (2017). Towards a benefits theory of leisure well-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 12(1), 205-228.
• Sonnentag, S. (2001). Work, recovery activities, and individual well-being: a diary study. Journal of occupational health psychology, 6(3), 196-210.
• Spor Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü, 2018. Erişim: [https://shgm.gsb.gov.tr/] Erişim Tarihi: 10.12.2018
• Steinhardt, F., Ullenhag, A., Jahnsen, R., & Dolva, A. S. (2021). Perceived facilitators and barriers for participation in leisure activities in children with disabilities: perspectives of children, parents and professionals. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 28(2), 121-135.
• Telef, B. B. (2013). Psikolojik iyi oluş ölçeği: Türkçeye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(28-3), 374-384.
• Ugwueze, F. C., Agbaje, O. S., Umoke, P. C. I., & Ozoemena, E. L. (2021). Relationship Between Physical Activity Levels and Psychological Well-Being Among Male University Students in South East, Nigeria: A Cross-Sectional Study. American Journal of Men's Health, 15(2), 1-17.
• Van Naarden Braun, K., Yeargin-Allsopp, M., & Lollar, D. (2006). Factors associated with leisure activity among young adults with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 27(5), 567–583.
• Yang, S., Xiao, H., & Tse, C. (2011). Leisure in an urban environment: A perspective of university students. Journal of China Tourism Research, 7(2), 168–183.
• Wang, E. S. T., Chen, L. S. L., Lin, J. Y. C., & Wang, M. C. H. (2008). The relationship between leisure satisfaction and life satisfaction of adolescents concerning online games. Adolescence, 43(169), 177-184.
• Western, M., & Tomaszewski, W. (2016). Subjective wellbeing, objective wellbeing and inequality in Australia. PloS One, 11(10), 1-20.