Social Indicators Research

, Volume 102, Issue 1, pp 81–91 | Cite as

Quality of Life and Leisure Activities: How do Leisure Activities Contribute to Subjective Well-Being?

  • Andreja Brajša-Žganec
  • Marina Merkaš
  • Iva Šverko
Article

Abstract

The quality of life is determined with objective factors and also with subjective perception of factors which influence human life. Leisure activities play a very important role in subjective well-being because they provide opportunities to meet life values and needs. Through participation in leisure activities people build social relationships, feel positive emotions, acquire additional skills and knowledge, and therefore improve their quality of life. In this report we will explore how leisure activities improve subjective well-being. We will try to distinguish among different types of leisure activities and find those which contribute more to the subjective well-being. Particularly, we will explore which leisure activities contribute to the subjective well-being of women and men of different age. Our study is based on data from a representative sample of Croatian citizens (N = 4,000), who estimated their subjective well-being and participation in various leisure activities. First, we will describe the subjective well-being of various groups of people who differ by gender and age. Afterward, we will identify important leisure activities which determine subjective well-being across age and gender groups. Overall, our results show that engagement in leisure activities contributes to subjective well being, while the pattern of important leisure activities somewhat varies across different age and gender groups.

Keywords

Leisure activities Subjective well-being Quality of life Age Gender 

References

  1. Auld, C., & Case, A. (1997). Social exchange processes in leisure and non-leisure settings: A review and exploratory investigation. Journal of Leisure Research, 29, 183–200.Google Scholar
  2. Bejaković, P., & Kaliterna Lipovčan, L. J. (2007). Quality of life in Croatia: Key findings from national research. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.Google Scholar
  3. Cummins, R. A. (2002). International wellbeing index, version 2. Retrived May 8, 2008, from http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/inter_wellbeing/Index-CoreItemsDraft2.doc.
  4. Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., Pallant, J., Van Vugt, J., & Misajon, R. (2003). Developing a national index of subjective wellbeing: The Australian unity wellbeing index. Social Indicators Research, 64, 159–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2000). Explaining differences in societal levels of happiness: Relative standards need fulfilment, culture, and evaluation theory. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 41–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annul Review of Psychology, 54, 403–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40, 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eurostat. (2009). Youth in Europe. A statistical portrait. Luxembourg: European Communities.Google Scholar
  11. Fukumoto, N., & Yamaguchi, Y. (2002). A study of relationship between leisure and life satisfaction of the elderly. Bulletin of the Faculty of Human Development, 9(2), 419–425.Google Scholar
  12. Henderson, K. A., Hodges, S., & Kivel, B. D. (2002). Context and dialogue in research on women and leisure. Journal of Leisure Research, 34(3), 253–271.Google Scholar
  13. Iwasaki, Y. (2007). Leisure and quality of life in an international and multicultural context: What are major pathways linking leisure to quality of life? Social Indicators Research, 82, 233–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaliterna Lipovčan, L. J., & Prizmić-Larsen, Z. (2006). Kvaliteta življenja, životno zadovoljstvo i osjećaj sreće u Hrvatskoj i europskim zemljama. [Quality of life, life satisfaction and happiness in Croatia in comparison to European countries]. In K. Ott (Ed.), Pridruživanje Hrvatske Europskoj uniji. Izazovi sudjelovanja (pp. 181–198). Zagreb: Institut za javne financije & Zaklada Friedrich Ebert.Google Scholar
  15. Kemperman, A. D. A. M., & Timmermans, H. J. P. (2008). Influence of socio-demographic and residential environment on leisure activity participation. Leisure Sciences, 30, 306–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lemon, B. W., Bengtson, V. L., & Peterson, J. A. (1972). An exploration of the activity theory of aging: Activity types and life satisfaction among in-movers to a retirement community. Journal of Gerontology, 27, 511–523.Google Scholar
  17. Leung, L., & Lee, P. S. N. (2005). Multiple determinants of life quality: the roles of Internet activities use of new media, social support, and leisure activities. Telematics and Informatics, 22, 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lloyd, K. M., & Auld, C. J. (2002). The role of leisure in determining quality of life: issues of content and measurement. Social Indicators Research, 57, 43–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McCormick, B., & McGuire, F. (1996). Leisure in community life of older rural residents. Leisure Sciences, 18, 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6(1), 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nimrod, G., & Adoni, H. (2006). Leisure-style and life satisfaction among recent retirees in Israel. Aging & Society, 26, 607–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Oishi, S., Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(8), 980–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Passmore, A., & French, D. (2001). Development and administration of a measure to assess adolescents’ participation in leisure activities. Adolescence, 36(141), 67–75.Google Scholar
  24. Raboteg-Šarić, Z., Sakoman, S., & Brajša-Žganec, A. (2002). Stilovi roditeljskog odgoja, slobodno vrijeme i rizično ponašanje mladih. [Parental child-rearing styles, leisure time activities and adolescent risk behaviour]. Društvena istraživanja, 58–59, 239–263.Google Scholar
  25. Robinson, J. P., & Martin, S. (2008). What do happy people do? Social Indicators Research, 89, 565–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rodríguez, A., Látková, P., & Sun, Y.-Y. (2008). The relationship between leisure and life satisfaction: application of activity and need theory. Social Indicators Research, 86, 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Scott, D., & Willits, F. K. (1998). Adolescent and adult leisure patterns: A Reassessment. Journal of Leisure Research, 30(3), 319–330.Google Scholar
  29. Shinew, K. J., Floyd, M. F., McGuire, F. A., & Noe, F. P. (1996). Class polarization and leisure activity preferences of African Americans: Intragroup comparison. Journal of Leisure Research, 28(4), 219–232.Google Scholar
  30. Silverstein, M., & Parker, M. G. (2002). Leisure activities and quality of life among the oldest in Sweden. Research on Aging, 24, 528–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sylvia-Bobiak, S., & Caldwell, L. L. (2006). Factors related to physically active leisure among college students. Leisure Sciences, 28(1), 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tinsley, H. E. A., & Eldredge, B. D. (1995). Psychological benefits of leisure participation: A taxonomy of leisure activities based on their need-gratification properties. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42(2), 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tinsley, H. A., Tinsley, D. J., & Croskeys, C. E. (2002). Park usage, social milieu, and psychosocial benefits of park use reported by older urban park users from four ethnic groups. Leisure Sciences, 24, 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Trenberth, L., & Dewe, P. (2002). The importance of leisure as a means of coping with work related stress: An exploratory study. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 15(1), 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Veenhoven, R. (2000). The four qualities of life: Ordering concepts and measures of the good life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wachter, C., & Kelly, J. (1998). Exploring VCR use as a leisure activity. Leisure Sciences, 20, 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wendel-Vos, G. C. W., Schuit, A. J., Tijhuis, M. A. R., & Kromhout, D. (2004). Leisure time physical activity and health-related quality of life: Cross-sectional and longitudinal associations. Quality of Life Research, 13, 667–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreja Brajša-Žganec
    • 1
  • Marina Merkaš
    • 1
  • Iva Šverko
    • 1
  1. 1.The Ivo Pilar Institute of Social SciencesZagrebCroatia

Personalised recommendations