Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 734 739

ERPA 2014

A case study on defining leisure time motivation of recreation

students
Safak Arana*
a

Trakya University, Edirne, 22000,Turkey

Abstract
The aim of this study is to reveal if the recreation students of a state university participating leisure time activities and to examine
this via different demographic variants. It has been expected that recreation students should have high motivation on leisure time
especially because of the education they receive.The survey which is used in the investigation part of the study consists of two
parts. In the first part, there were demographic questions, in the second part Leisure Time Motivation Scale, which was
developed by Pelletier and his friends in 1991, was translated into Turkish and these were used in the survey. In the recreation
department there are 70 students and 55 of them participated into the survey.In conclusion, the co-efficient (croncbach alpha) of
the scale reliability was 0,77. Additionally, there were some statistical differences among the various demographic variants when
0,05 was searched on significance level in respect of leisure time motivation points of recreation students.

Authors.
Published
by This
Elsevier
2014
2014 The
Published
by Elsevier
Ltd.
is anLtd.
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Selection
and peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
Keywords:leisure time; leisure time motivaiton; recreation

1. Introduction
Playing, rest, entertainment oriented leisure time activities is important in every part of life. Thus, it is important
to put forward how people spend their leisure time. Leisure time has found place not only in sports but also in many
science ilke sociology, psychology and economics. According to French SociologDumazedier, the description of
leisure time is an activity which an individual prompts his own creative capacity to relax and to increase his
knowledge and his participation into the community out of work, family and social obligations (Tel veKksalan,

Corresponding author.
E-mail address:safakvatansever@hotmail.com

1877-0428 2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the ERPA Congress 2014.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.312

Safak Aran / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 734 739

735

2008). At the same time, it is stated that recreative activities which is brought by leisure time provides economical
benefit ( Karakk, 2005). Nevertheless, leisure time is known as a notion which is used for the activities related to
recreation, culture, sport and rest (Kooijman, 2002). Along with the raising technology, individuals have more
leisure time, participating into the leisure time activities more depending on their income level and more leisure time
activities in the sense of socialising has become an important element.
On the other hand, leisure time is important in respect of individuals satisfaction. Since, with the leisure time
activities which has influence on peoples development as socially, psychologically, culturally it will be possible that
people contribute to the community as economically and socially (Erkal, 1998). According to Argan, to manage our
daily life is the most dramatic problem of the modern man is included and has to be solved ( Argan, 2007).
Especially spending their leisure time in a better and more fruitful way is important for the adolescents so that they
can act in a mature way against social and psychological troubles. Otherwise, they will pass the adulthood in a more
difficult way if they dont spend this period in an appropriate way and they can drop out of community by
participating into the marginal and illegal groups. For the individual to adapt this new environment it is necessary to
give importance to recreation education (Belli, Grbz, 2012). In this sense, education on recreation is important for
the university students spending their leisure time in the right way. It is crucial for the individuals and especially for
the young to spend their leisure time by participating sporty activities. Since a healty and dynamic organism depends
on being active, participating into sporty activities is a must for the young physical, mental development and
VRFLDOLVLQJRIWKHPDQGLVDPXVWIRUDGXOWVDQGROGSHRSOHWROLYHLQDJRRGKHDOWKdDPO\HU)RUWKLVUHDVRQ
it has been considered that the young need satisfying entertainment experiences. Literature states that, individuals
capability of having a satisfying leisure time has correlation with the motivation of participating into the leisure time
activities (Beggs, Elkins, & Powers, 2005). The study of leisure time motivation has been included in the literature
both in respect of its having global features and on the basis of activity. Beard and Ragheb, with a global approach,
has developed an effective leisure time scale as a joint method to understand the invidiuals leisure time motivation
(Beard veRagheb, 1983). In foreign literature it has been seen that there are many studies to understand leisure time
motivation. Among these; there are studies of Kantersve Forrester (1997) with Beggs Elkins veStitt (2004) to
determine the students leisure time motivation of participating sporty recreational activities ,there are studies which
searched for the effect of leisure time motivation on leisure time satisfaction (Beggsve Elkins, 2010); there are
studies which examine the effect of leisure time motivation on leisure time participaiton and and leisure time
satisfaction (Chen ve ark., 2013), there are studies which show the correlation among frequency of participation to
leisure time activities ,leisure time experience and motivation together with leisure time satisfaction (Kao, 1992). As
to national literature we cannot see many studies since these studies are new but again it seems that the subject is
EHFRPLQJLPSRUWDQW7KHVWXGLHVRI<HUOLVX/DSD$\DUDQG%DKDGULVLQYHVWLJDWLQJWKHOLIHVDWLVIDFWLRQIUHH
time motivation and free time participation of physical education teachers who live in Kayseri. Once more, in an
LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI .U  D VWXG\ KDYH EHHQ FRQGXFWHG RQ OHLVXUH WLPH DFWYLWLHV RI KLJK VFKRRO \RXQJ  $OVR
Gungormus and his friends (2005) made a research on academicians of Ankara University of Physical Education
department to determine their leisure time. Demir and Demir (2006) has investigated the various reasons of why
people participate in the leisure time activities. In another study which leisure time motivation was investigated
according to demographic variants it was seen that the students of Physical Education department was also included
into the research. Lastly, it was seen that (Mutlu, 2008) leisure time motivation was being assessed by using Leisure
Time Motivation Scale which Pelletier and his friends (1991) brought it to the literature and which was adapted into
Turkish by Mutlu (2008) to be used in postgraduate thesis. So, it can be said that the studies mostly concentrate on
the students. Thus, in this study it has been aimed to assess leisure time motivation of the students who attend
university to receive education on recreation. For this reason, by giving total points of leisure time motivation survey
of recreation students it was put forward if it varied in respect of various demographic elements which students have.
2. Method
In this study, survey method was used as data collection tool and as research tool case study was applied. In the
survey Leisure Time Motivation Scale which was developed by Pelletier and his friends in 1991 was adapted into
Turkish and the survey was applied to the students of recreation department at Trakya University Physical Education
High School. There are 70 students in this department and 55 out of this was valid. Some part of the students

736

Safak Aran / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 734 739

werenot willing to participate into the survey and some part of the survey results couldnt be used. The lecturers
were asked for help to gather the scales and the data was collected in the classroom environment within 10 minutes
in March, 2014.
The scale which was used in the study was adapted into Turkish by Mutlu (2008) and by Gungormus (2012). In
this study the scale which was adapted by Mutlu (2008) was used. Thus, reliability and validity practice which was
done for the Turkish adaptation of the study the scale decreased to 22 items which was comparatively different from
the original scale and decreased to 5 sub-factors like amotivational, knowing and achieving, stimulant living,
identification/ introjection, and exterior arrangement. The expressions in the survey like I disagree-1- or I
wholly agree-5- were evaluated according to quinarylikert scale. Discretely, in this study it was adhered to the
original scale and septet likert scale was used. The results were evaluated and presented according to septet likert
scale. The total internal consistency coefficient of the scale was found as 0.77. As a result of the analysis of the data
which was gathered for this research, as a whole the internal consistency coefficient of the scale was 0.78, and
concerning the sub-categories; the internal consistency coefficient was in order of 0,69;0,77;0,76;0,65; and 0,52. In
the anaysis of the data for personal information descriptive statistic methods frequency (n) ,percentage
(%),arithmetic mean and standard deviation were used and to test the participants leisure time motivation
differences according to demographic variants t- test and oneway variance analysis (ANOVA) were used. The
results were evaluated on 0,05 significance level. For the analysis of the data SPSS 21 statistical analysis programme
was used.
3. Results
In this part, the data gathered from sample group was shown as tables by grouping after statistical process. First
of all; as a result of frequency and percentage analysis which were done to see the general features of the 55
participants; it was seen 46% of the participants were female, 54% of them were male, 88.5% were between the
ages 17-20, 9.7 % 21-24 ages, 1.8% 25-28 ages. According to the responses of the participants relating to their
leisure time it was seen that 7.3 % of them had 1-2 hours , 38% 3-4 hours, 36% 5-6 hours , 18.7% 7 hours and above
leisure time. The responses of how often they participate in the leisure time activities were 49% 1-2 times, 33% 3-4
times, 11% 5-6 times, 7% 7 times and above. And the money which the students spent for leisure time activites
were; 53% less than 100 TL , 25% 102-200 TL, 7% 201-300 TL, 5% 301-400 TL, 10 % more than 401 TL.
Point average and standard deviation which the participants gathered from the sub-categories of leisure time scale
was shown in Table 1.
Table1. Leisure motivation level of the participants
Leisure Motivation Scale

Mean

Standard Deviation

Amotivation

2.70

1.57

Knowing and Achieving

5.14

1.27

Stimulant Living

5.36

1.55

Identification/ Introjection

5.05

1.20

External Arrangement

3.39

1.25

According to the analysis results which were done to test if the participantsleisure time motivation points varies
according to their genders; while a significant difference was found between male and female participants in terms
of amotivational, knowing and achieving, stimulant living, identification (p<0.05),in terms of external arrangement
no difference was found (p>0.05). According to this; Amotivation sub-factor points of males was higher than
females; Knowing and Achieving, Stimulant Living and Identification sub-factor points of females was higher
than males (Table 2).

737

Safak Aran / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 734 739
Table 2.Comparison of leisure time motivation points according to gender
Female
Male
Amotivation
Knowing
Achieving

and

Mean

Sd

Mean

Sd

2.08

1.23

3.22

1.66

-2.92

0.005*

5.65

1.12

4.71

1.24

2.92

0.005*

Stimulant Living

5.90

1.37

4.92

1.57

2.47

0.017*

Identification

5,46

0.91

4.66

1.03

3.03

0.004*

External
Arrangement

3.41

1.37

3.38

1.16

0.077

0.939

* p<0.05

According to anaysis results (Table 3) to test if the participants leisure time motivation points varies according to
how many hours leisure time they have in a day; in respect of Amotivation points there were differences between
the participants who have 1-2 hours leisure time and who have 5-6 hours leisure time; besides it was seen that there
were significant differences between the participants who have 1-2 hours leisure time and who have 7 hours and
above leisure time (p<0.05). There was seen no significant difference according to other sub-factor points (p>0,05).
Table 3. Comparison of leisure time motivation points in respect of daily leisure time hours
Leisure Time
N
Mean
sd
F
P
Amotivation

KnowingandAchieving

StimulantLiving

Identification

ExternalArrangement

1-2 hours

5.00

1.41

3-4 hours

21

2.70

1.52

5-6 hours

20

2.50

1.50

7andabove

10

1.90

1.14

Total

55

2.70

1.57

1-2 hours

3.70

1.36

3-4 hours

21

5.31

1.17

5-6 hours

20

5.12

1.20

7 andabove

10

5.38

1.37

Total

55

5.14

1.27

1-2 hours

3.58

1.70

3-4 hours

21

5.58

1.47

5-6 hours

20

5.30

1.50

7 andabove

10

5.76

1.45

Total

55

5.36

1.55

1-2 hours

4.00

1.51

3-4 hours

21

4.95

1.14

5-6 hours

20

5.17

0.84

7 andabove

10

5.28

0.92

Total

55

5.02

1.05

1-2 hours

3.81

1.39

3-4 hours

21

3.20

0.99

5-6 hours

20

3.30

1.56

7 andabove

10

3.82

1.00

Total

55

3.39

1.25

Scheffe
1-3

4.24

0.009

2.06

0.116

2.282

0.090

1.696

0.179

0.733

0.537

1-4

738

Safak Aran / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 734 739
* p<0.05

No statistical difference was found according to anaysis results to test if the participants leisure time motivation
points varies according to how many times in a week they participate in leisure time activities (p>0,05). In other
words, it can be said there were no difference between the points of leisure time motivation of the participants and
points of weekly participation of leisure time activities. Similarly, no statistical difference was seen in expense
amount which the participants spend for leisure time activities in respect of leisure time motivation points (p>0,05).
4. Discussion and conclusion
When the points of the students under research was examined , it was seen that the highest average was in
Stimulant Living and the lowest point was in Amotivation. And these results were identical with the results of
the research which Mutlu and ark.(2011) conducted on the people who participated in health and wellness
programme in sport centre in Kayseri and it was also identical with the research which Yerlisu and ark. (2012)
conducted on Physical Education teachers in Kayseri.
When it was examined according to gender; it was seen that for males Amotivation point was higher and for
females Knowing and Achieving, Stimulant Living and Identification points were higher. This finding again
overlaps with the study of Mutluveark., (2011). And again in the research of Yerlisuve ark.(2012) it was seen that
Amotivation points were higher in males and knowing and achieving points were higher in females. Besides, in
another study it was seen that amotivation and external arrangements sub-factors varied according to gender and it
was seen that for both factors males had higher points. When the leisure time points of the students were examined it
was seen that students who have 1-2 hours leisure time differed in respect of Amotivationvariable from the ones
who have 5-6 hours and 7 hours and above leisure time. On the other hand, it was concluded that students
participation in weekly activities and students expense amount for leisure time activities didnt differ according to
leisure time motivation. It was seen that the studies in the literature didnt mention about these subjects ;namely
there were no research in the literature about the expense amounts or the leisure time hours. Thus, in this study it is
important to examine if there is a relationship between all these elements and leisure time motivation. But , since the
research was done only on the students of recreation department of a university, it is not possible to generalize the
research results. Even so, it is important in respect of leading the future studies and in respect of being a beginning
study.
References
Argan, M. (2007).(OHQFH3D]DUODPDV$QNDUD'HWD\<D\QFON
Beard, J. G. &Ragheb, M. G. (1983). Measuring leisure motivation, Journal of Leisure Research, 15 (3), 219-228.
Beggs, B. A., Elkins, D. J. (2010). The Influence of Leisure Motivation on Leisure Satisfaction, LARNet; The Cyber Journal of Applied Leisure
and Recreation Research.
Beggs, B. A., Elkins, D. J., &Stitt, J. E. ( 2004). Motivation for participation in recreational sports, Recreational Sports Journal, 28 (1), 65-77.
Beggs, B.A., Elkins, D.J., Powers, S. (2005). Overcoming barriers to participation in campus recreational sports, Recreational Sports Journal, 29
(2), 143-155.
%HOOL ( *UE] $  0LPDU6LQDQ*]HO6DQDWODU hQLYHUVLWHVL $NDGHPLN3HUVRQHOLQLQ5HNUHDV\RQ)DDOL\HWOHULQLQQFHOHQPHVL I.
5HNUHDV\RQ$UDWUPDODU.RQJUHsi, 168-176.
Chen, Y.C., Li, R.H., Chen, S.H. (2013). Relationships among adolescents leisure motivation, leisure involvement and leisure satisfaction: A
structural equation model, Social Indicators Research, 110, 1187-1199.
dDPO\HU+Sporve6HUEHVW=DPDQ(WNLQOLL$QNDUD0LOOL(LWLP%DVP(YLS
'HPLU & 'HPLU '  %LUH\OHULQ%R=DPDQ)DDOL\HWOHULQH.DWOPDODUQ(WNLOH\HQ)DNW|UOHU OH &LQVL\HW$UDVQGDNLOLNL
/LVDQVgUHQFLOHULQH<|QHOLN%LU8\JXODPD(JH$NDGHPLN%DN'HUJLVL, 6(1), 36-48.
Erkal, M. , (1998).6RV\RORMLN$oGDQ6SRUVWDQEXO'HU<D\QODU
Gungormus, H.A., The Study of Validity and Reliability of Turkish Version of Leisure Motivation Scale, Energy Education Science and
Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(3), p.p. 1209-1216, 2012.
+DFROX1*|NGHQL]$'LQo<%R=DPDQYH5HNUHDV\RQ<|QHWLPL$QNDUD'HWD\<D\QFON
Kanters, M.A. & Forrester, S. (1997). The motivations and self-esteem of intramural sports participants, NIRSA Journal, 21, 3-7.
Kao, C. (1992). A model of leisure satisfaction, Indiana University, School of Health, Physical, Education and Recreation, DoktoraTezi.
Karakk, S.(2005). Rekreasyon, Ankara: GaziKitapevi.
.U<NVHN|UHWLP*HQoOLLQLQ%R=DPDQ(WNLQOLNOHUL .6hgUQHL)UDWhQLYHUVLWHVL6RV\DO%LOLPOHU'HUJLVL, 17 (2), 307-328.

Safak Aran / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 (2014) 734 739
Kooijman, D. (2002). A third revolution in retail? The Dutch approach to leisure and urban entertainment, Journal of Retail & Leisure Property,
2 (3): 214-229.
/DSD <HUOLVX 7 $\DU ( %DKDGU = <DDP7DWPLQL 6HUEHVW=DPDQ0RWLYDV\RQX 6HUEHVW=DPDQ.DWOP
%HGHQ(LWLPLYH6SRUgUHWPHQOHULh]HULQH%LUQFHOHPH.D\VHULOLgUQHL63250(75(%HGHQ(LWLPLYH6SRU%LOLPOHUL'HUJLVL, (2), 53-59.
0XWOX  (J]HUVL]<DSDQ.LLOHULQ%R=DPDQODUQD<|QHOLN7XWXPODUh]HULQHELU$UDWUPD .D\VHUL OL gUQHL 1LGH hQLYHUVLWHVL
SosyalBilimlerEnstits<D\PODQPDP<NVHN/LVDQV7H]L1LGH
0XWOX  <OPD] % *QJ|UP +$ 6HYLQGL 7 *UE] % %LUH\OHUL5HNUHDV\RQHO$PDoO(J]HUVL]H 0RWLYH (GHQ
)DNW|UOHULQdHLWOL'HLNHQOHUH*|UH.DUODWUOPDV6HOoXNhQLYHUVLWHVL%HGHQ(LWLPLYH6SRU%LOLP'HUJLVL, 13(1), p.p. 54-61, 2011.
Pelletier,
L.G.,
Vallerand,
R.J.,
Blais,
M.R.,
Brire,
N.M.,
Leisure
Motivation
Scale
(LMS28),
http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r26710/LRCS/echelles_en.htm, 1991.
7HO 0 .|NVDODQ % gUHWLPh\HOHULQLQ6SRU(WNLQOLNOHULQLQ6RV\RORMLN2ODUDNQFHOHQPHVL 'RX$QDGROXgUQHL )UDW hQLYHUVLWHVL
SosyalBilimlerDergisi, 18, 261-278.

739