Academic journal article Journal of Leisure Research

The Impact of Constraints on Motivation, Activity Attachment, and Skier Intentions to Continue

Academic journal article Journal of Leisure Research

The Impact of Constraints on Motivation, Activity Attachment, and Skier Intentions to Continue

Article excerpt

An important development in leisure constraints research has been the incorporation of leisure constraints data within decision-making models of leisure participation (Mannell & Iwasaki, 2005; Marmeli & Loucks-Atkinson, 2005). The hierarchical model of leisure constraints (Crawford, Jackson, & Godbey, 1991) was developed based on the idea of constraints negotiation (Scott, 1991), which was formalized as "the negotiation proposition" by Jackson, Crawford, and Godbey (1993). According to this proposition, the outcome of an individual's negotiation of leisure constraints might be determined by the relative strength of motivation and its interaction with constraints. This negotiation proposition opened new directions for research and discussion among academics (Alexandris, Kouthouris, & Girgolas, 2007; Hubbard & Mannell, 2001; Son, Kerstetter, & Mowen, 2008; Son, Mowen, & Kerstetter 2008; Stalp, 2006; White, 2008). Negotiation has been particularly important because it addressed the limitations of simplified decisionmaking models that aimed to test bivariate relationships between constraints and behavioural outcomes of participation (Carroll & Alexandris, 1997).

This body of work created discussion on the role other psychological variables, such as attitudes and motivation, have with leisure constraints. Jackson et al. (1993) proposed that individuals with high levels of motivation and/or positive attitudes toward a leisure activity might successfully negotiate leisure constraints. Attitudes and motivation have been consistently shown in the literature to be important factors in an individual's decision making for leisure participation (Alexandris & Stodolska, 2004; Armitage & Conner, 1999; Bansal & Eiselt, 2004; Iso-Ahola, 1989; Kirn & Chalip, 2004; KyIe, Absher, Hammitt, & Cavin, 2006). Although the role of motivation and its relationship with leisure constraints has been empirically supported in the literature (Alexandris, Tsorbatzoudis, & Grouios, 2002; Carroll & Alexandris, 1997; White, 2008), there has been very limited research on the role of attitudes towards leisure participation and their relationship with leisure constraints (Alexandris & Stodolska, 2004).

The current research introduces the construct of "activity attachment" (Funk & James, 2006) to the leisure constraints literature. As an attitudinal strength construct, activity attachment represents the functional, emotional, and symbolic meaning of a recreational activity that guides future behavior (Filo, Funk, & O'Brien, 2008). This study explores the influence that activity attachment has on the relationship between constraints and behavioral intentions. In proposing the hierarchical model of leisure constraints, Jackson et al. (1993) suggested that the interaction between and among motivation, attitudes, and constraints determines actual participation and subsequent aspects, such as loyalty, enjoyment, and commitment. In the current study, behavioral intentions are used as one of the variables of participants' loyalty (Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman, 1996).

This exploration is warranted based on Jackson et al.'s (1993) discussion, regarding the proposed role of attitudes in constraints research. In addition, the weak direct relationships between constraints and behavioral outcomes of participation have been consistently reported in a majority of previous studies (e.g., Carroll & Alexandris, 1997; Kay & Jackson, 1991; Shaw, Bonen, & McCabe, 1991). To date, the relationships among constraints, activity attachment and behavioral intentions have not been empirically investigated.

Following Jackson et al. 's (1993) proposition, the role of motivation is also considered. Previous studies have provided empirical evidence for the relationships among motivation, constraints and participation (e.g., Alexandris et al., 2004; Son et al., 2008a, b; White, 2008; Wilhelm, Stanis, Schneider, & Russell, 2009). …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.