Leisure Concepts Journal - Essay Example

Student Name: Tutor: Title: Leisure concepts-Personal Critique (Graded) Course: Week 6 Constraints to leisure Leisure has been described to us as an activity that is intrinsically motivating, enjoyable and freely chosen. Despite leisure being an activity that is freely chosen, there are external constraints that affect the enjoyment of leisure. In this paper I will argue the impact of family as a major constraint on leisure activity and explore any drive in the family, contrarily, that can lead to development of leisure activities. Research dwelling on the impact of leisure participation constraints has intensified immensely in the past twenty years. The driving force under these studies is a belief that participation or visitation would increase through removing or alleviating these perceived constraints. The assumption that prevailed in the early constraint studies that perceived constraints resulted into insurmountable obstacles to participation. It was assumed that people who took part in an activity were unconstrained in respect to that activity (Crawford, Jackson & Godbey, 1991). This simplistic view of constraints was forgotten in the 1990s and 1980s. In its place came conceptualization of constraints that was insightful that employed sophisticated and diverse methods. Hierarchical model suggest that leisure constraints can be found at three levels which include: interpersonal, intrapersonal, and structural. These constraints have to be overcome in order for participation in leisure activities to take place. Crawford and Godbey (1987) explain that the distinctiveness of the three categories of constraints still continues to elicit strong debates among researchers. One study challenged the identification of intrapersonal constraints in the individual since many of the constraints were influenced by society or had a definite source. In another perspective, it has been suggested that women prioritized care-related activities as opposed to leisure. This developed into absence of time for leisure activities which is categorized as a structural constraint. Researchers have also argued that there is an intertwining relationship among the three dimensions which breaks to doubt the hierarchical proposition that is associated with the model (Orrange, 2007). Intrapersonal constraints entailed individual attributes and states which come into interaction with leisure preferences as opposed to intervening between participation and preferences. Such constraints examples include religiosity, stress, and depression; perceive skills, anxiety, and prior socialization and familiarity into particular leisure activities. Interpersonal constraints resulted from relationship between individuals’ characteristics. One of these constraints is the inability of a person to find a partner who is suitable to engage in a specific activity. Structural constraints refer to intervening factors that exist between participation and preference. The hierarchical model crafted suggests that leisure participants go through a sequential process of having to overcome intrapersonal constraints, then interpersonal constraints and then structural constraints (Jackson & Henderson, 1995). Having looked at these constraints I may say that family will fall under interpersonal constraint. A person my desire to go and sand bath on the beach but his spouse has a low self esteem and does not want to be seen strutting in a bikini. I may want to go swimming but my partner is not comfortable having me interact with members of the opposite sex at the slightest opportunity. Consequently I deduce that the intrapersonal constraints of your spouse like stress, anxiety, and depression may affect your choice of leisure activities. You will want as much as possible to avoid any of altercations with your spouse. Her fear and anxiety may make her prohibit you from taking the children to the beach for fear of drowning. It is interesting to not that leisure has been described as freely chosen while at the same time the choices constrained and restricted by various barriers. Can we then categorize family as one of these barriers as we look at transition into family as a life changing stage? Of course we cannot ignore the challenge and demands that comes with family and the dictates that comes with coping with your wife and children. Just like society discourages or encourages accepted behavior that it considers leisure, so do family (Lynch & Veal, 2006). The environment and interaction that is within the family unit will impact on leisure participation. A bickering and fighting couples will fight leisure activities as unattractive. They may separately engage in some leisure activities like gambling not as leisure but a form of escapism just to forget the reality existing at home. Freedom of choice is very critical to leisure and other non-obligated activities. The theory of planned behavior was advanced by Fishbein and Azjen as they came up with social cognitive framework to explain motivational behaviors’ antecedents that are under volitional control. These behaviors are as a result of our on choice as agreed by Crompton and Kim (2004). This theory was originated from Theory of Reasoned Action. This theory explains behavior in interactive context. The model has the assumption that human being are rational and use the information available to the systematically. It also assumes that people often consider the consequences of their actions before deciding to engage or to avoid certain behaviors. What is expected of us really affect what we engage in (Alexandris, Tsorbatzoudis & Grouios, 2002). As a father and as a wife, there certain leisure activity that we will not dare engage in. I wife may be worry about a husband who decides to go for scuba diving. At the same time a spouse can influence the choice of leisure activity positively. In the first place, there is variety when two people come together in matrimony owing to their diverse backgrounds, experiences and exposure. You may be able to learn a new leisure activity from your spouse that is interesting. According to Auster (2001), we can see that behavioral and attitude controls are the most notable predictors of intention. In this respect we can also deduce that attitude is influenced by components of intrapersonal constraints. Subjective norm is as a result of interpersonal constraints as viewed in the family while behavioral control is by structural constraints. The Theory of Planned human behavior is very important in understanding individual choice. Before a husband decides to enroll at a golf club he will have to look at the impact of the financial strain on his family and the reaction by his spouse. The children and the spouse can either enhance participation in leisure activities or discourage any involvement. We all have some constraints that interfere with out participation in leisure activities (Backman, 2001). Spouses and children want time to spend with each other more often than not. Absence of time to participate in leisure activities is a common constraint. Work and family chores can bog someone down hence causing stress and depression. There some people who become self conscious once they are married and shy away from participating in leisure activities. It is upon the spouses to prioritize and set aside time for leisure activities. Negotiating constraints to leisure requires the support of your partner. When the partner becomes too fatigued to engage in leisure activities, the other person is negatively influenced by having his moral wane (Godbey, Crawford & Shen, 2010). I cannot engage in something that makes my partner uncomfortable. I will have to take part in a leisure activity that is comfortable for both us. However, is not good to allow your partner to affect your leisure time simply because she has a different activity that he engages in. A family that has a common leisure activity is likely to bond more that a family that has members engaging in different leisure activities. Interpersonal constraints on leisure are huge determinants on the type of leisure activity that we choose to participate in. Inasmuch as leisure entails free choice of intrinsically motivating and enjoyable activity, the constraints that exist within the family affect the choices and the options available (Wright, Rodgers & Backman, 2001). The moral obligation of an individual and his interaction with the members of the family with either decrease or increase chances of participating in leisure activities. The theory of planned behavior confirms that family can contribute to the choice of leisure activities. In contemporary society income is King and the choice of a leisure activity has to have the approval of the other partner. Henderson & Allen (1991) observe that the context of the family can deprive or encourage participation in leisure activities. It is the objective of spouses to support each other while focusing of making their relationship stronger and better. In every situation, constraints to leisure can be negotiated if the available options are critically examined to determine their pros and cons. Intrapersonal constraints affect the ability of the individual to socialize and reach out to a suitable partner and hence inability to overcome interpersonal constraints. Availability, acceptability, and affordability affect our choices for leisure activities. As we try to negotiate the leisure constraint we realize that family is important in our decisions and cannot be ignored. References Crawford, DW. & Godbey, G, 1987, Re-conceptualizing barriers to family leisure, Leisure science, 9: 119-127. Henderson, K.A. & Allen, K.1991, The ethics of care: Leisure possibilities and constraints for women, Society and Leisure, 14: 97-113. Wright, BA, Rodgers, EBD & Backman, KF 2001, Assessing the temporal stability of hunting participation and intensity of constraints: A panel study. Journal of Leisure Research, 33: 450-469. Crompton, J.I. & Kim, S 2004, Temporal changes in perceived constraints to visiting state parks, Journal of Leisure Research, 36 (2): 160-182. Godbey, G. , Crawford, W.D, & Shen, S.X 2010, Assessing Hierarchical Leisure Constraints Theory after two Decades, Journal of Leisure Research, 42 (1): 111-134. Alexandris, K, Tsorbatzoudis, C. & Grouios, G 2002, Perceived constraints on recreational sport participation: Investigating their relationship with intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and a motivation, Journal of Leisure Research, 34 (3): 233-252. Auster, CJ 2001, Transcending potential antecedent leisure constraints: The case of women motorcycle operators, Journal of Leisure Research, 33 (3): 272-298. Backman, CJ 2001, An investigation of the relationship between activity loyalty and perceived constraints, Journal of Leisure Research, 23: 232-344. Crawford, DW, Jackson, EL. & Godbey, G 1991, A hierarchical model of leisure constraints, Leisure sciences, 13: 309-320. Jackson, E., & Henderson, K 1995, Gender-based analysis of leisure constraints, Leisure Sciences, 17: 31-51. Lynch, R. & Veal, AJ 2006, Australian Leisure, 3rd, Longman, Australia. Orrange, RM 2007, Work, family, and leisure: uncertainty in a risk society, Rowman & Littlefield, Melbourne. Read More