Sport Participation, Life Satisfaction and Domains of Satisfaction among People with Disabilities

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between sport participation and the life satisfaction scores reported by people without and with disabilities, wherein overall life satisfaction is seen as an aggregate of satisfaction levels regarding various domains of life (and consistent with the bottom-up spillover theory). Using longitudinal data taken from the German Socio-Economic Panel for the period 1984–2013, this study presents estimates from a two-layer model that allows life satisfaction to be explained by the satisfaction scores reported by individuals with respect to six different domains of life satisfaction (i.e. job, health, housework, household income, dwelling, and leisure). We found that sport participation has a positive and significant correlation with the levels of satisfaction with health, housework, and leisure reported by people with disabilities. Furthermore, the domains of satisfaction with health, housework and household income are the main contributors to the enhancement of their levels of overall life satisfaction. However, the interrelations of these domains of life satisfaction with overall life satisfaction are mainly transitory. From a public policy perspective, it is necessary to undertake the design and implementation of inclusive public and private sport programs for people with disabilities that contribute to increasing not only their levels of overall life satisfaction but also other facets of life satisfaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although we can find different instruments to measure subjective well-being (e.g. single versus multiple-item measures), the use of single-item measures (Gurin et al. 1960) has been very popular because of its high face validity and the widespread use of life-satisfaction ratings in the wellbeing literature (Scimmack 2008). According to Veenhoven (1995) this single-item measure is generally as reliable and valid as multi-item measures. In addition, well-known international datasets (e.g. the International Social Survey Programme, the European Social Survey, the European Community Household Panel, the British Household Panel Study, and the German Socio-Economic Panel Study) have included in its main questionnaire this single-item measure of well-being. See, for example, Fujita and Diener (2005) and Kroh (2006) for additional information on the single-item used in the GSOEP and its validity and proprieties.

  2. 2.

    Once again, we have used a single-item instrument to measure our key variable “sport participation” which has been previously employed within the existing literature on sport participation in Germany (e.g. Becchetti et al. 2008; Lechner 2009; Pagan 2015; Schmiedeberg and Schröder 2016; Schüttoff et al. 2018 and medical literature (e.g. Becker et al. 2006).

  3. 3.

    Although disability and health can be potentially correlated, Pagan (2010) demonstrates they do not share exactly the same information. For example, if we take the example of blindness, when it is generated by a chronic illness (such as diabetes), it is probably linked to poor health status; but when blindness is related to a congenital problem of the eyes, this disability and the health status of the individual will probably be orthogonal. In our case, 28% of people with disabilities have “very good” or “good” health status, whereas 40% have “poor” health. In addition, Grimby et al. (1988) conclude that the domain of disability extends far beyond health-related concerns to encompass the person’s well-being, definition of self and social position.

  4. 4.

    The inclusion of the additional variable Z in Eq. [1] is similar to the Heckman correction term (lambda).

  5. 5.

    This test is based on the inclusion of three additional variables in our model: (1) the number of waves in which the ith individual participates in the panel; (2) a binary variable taking the value 1 if and only if the ith individual is observed over the entire sample and 0 otherwise; and (3) a binary variable indicating whether the individual was observed in the previous period.

  6. 6.

    We have also calculated the level effects when we include job satisfaction in our LS Eq. [1]. Once again, satisfaction with health and household income are the domains with the highest contribution to LS. The contribution of satisfaction with job is 0.177 for the non-disabled sample (fourth place), whereas for the disabled one it is in third place (0.153).

References

  1. Becchetti, L., Pelloni, A., & Rossetti, F. (2008). Relational goods, sociability and happiness. Kyklos, 61(3), 343–363.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Becchetti, L., Ricca, E., & Pelloni, A. (2012). The relationship between social leisure and life satisfaction: Causality and policy implications. Social Indicators Research, 108, 453–490.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Becker, S., Klein, T., & Schneider, S. (2006). Sportaktivität in Deutschland im 10-Jahres Vergleich. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Sportmedizin, 57, 226–232.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bouchard, C., Shephard, J., & Stephens, T. (1994). Physical Activity, Fitness, and Health. In Physical activity, fitness, and health: International proceedings and consensus statement. Champaign, IL: Hum. Kinet.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Burkhauser, R., & Schroeder, M. (2007). A method for comparing the economic outcomes of the working-age population with disabilities in Germany and the United States. Journal of Applied Social Science Studies, 127(2), 227–258.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chafetz, L., White, M., Collins-Bride, G., Cooper, B., & Nickens, J. (2008). Clinical trial of wellness training: Health promotion for severely mentally ill adults. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196, 475–483.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Darcy, S., & Dowse, L. (2013). In search of a level playing field- the constraints and benefits of sport participation for people with intellectual disability. Disability & Society, 28(3), 393–407.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Devine, M., & Lashua, B. (2002). Constructing social acceptance in inclusive leisure contexts: The role of individuals with disabilities. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 36, 65–83.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Diener, E., Suh, M., Lucas, R., & Smith, H. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of Progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dimeo, F., Bauer, M., Varahram, I., & Halter, U. (2001). Benefits from aerobic exercise in patients with major depression: A pilot study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 35(2), 114–117.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dong, X., Li, Y., & Simon, M. A. (2014). Social engagement among us Chinese older adults-findings from the PINE study. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 69, s82–S89.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Downward, P., & Rasciute, S. (2011). Does sport make you happy? An analysis of the well-being derived from sports participation. International Review of Applied Economics, 25(3), 331–348.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dupuis, S., Whyte, C., Carson, J., Genoe, R., Meshino, L., & Sadler, L. (2012). Just dance with me: An authentic partnership approach to understanding leisure in the dementia context. World Leisure Journal, 54(3), 240–254.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Friedman, M. (1957). A theory of the consumption function. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fujita, F., & Diener, E. (2005). Life satisfaction set point: Stability and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 158–164.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gatward, R., & Burrell, T. (2002). Adults with a disability and sport. National survey 2000–2001. London: Sport England.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gauvin, L., & Spence, J. (1996). Physical activity and psychological well-being: Knowledge base, current issues, and caveats. Nutrition Review, 54(4), S53–S65.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Grimby, G., Finnstram, J., & Jette, A. (1988). On application of the WHO handicap classification in rehabilitation. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 20, 93–98.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gurin, G., Veroff, J., & Feld, S. (1960). Americans view of their mental health. New York: Basic.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Huang, H., & Humphreys, B. (2012). Sports participation and happiness: Evidence from U.S. micro data. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33, 776–793.

    Google Scholar 

  23. International Sport and Culture Association (2015). The economic cost of physical inactivity in Europe. Available at: http://inactivity-time-bomb.nowwemove.com/download-report/The%20Economic%20Costs%20of%20Physical%20Inactivity%20in%20Europe%20(June%202015).pdf.

  24. Kim, J., Lee, S., Chun, S., Han, A., & Heo, J. (2016). The effects of leisure-time physical activity for optimism, life satisfaction, psychological well-being, and positive affect among older adults with loneliness. Annals of Leisure Research, 20, 406–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/11745398.2016.1238308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kroh, M. (2006). An experimental evaluation of popular well-being measure. IW Discussion Papers, No. 546, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), Berlin.

  26. Kuykendall, L., Tay, L., & Ng, V. (2015). Leisure engagement and subjective well-being: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 364–403.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lapointe, M. C., & Perreault, S. (2013). Motivation: understanding leisure engagement and disengagement. Society and Leisure, 36, 136–144.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lechner, M. (2009). Long-run labour market and health effects of individual sports activities. Journal of Health Economics, 28(4), 839–854.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lee, Y., & Park, I. (2010). Happiness and physical activity in special populations: Evidence from Korean survey data. Journal of Sports Economics, 11, 136–156.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lucas, R. (2007). Long-term disability is associated with lasting changes in subjective well-being: Evidence from two national representative longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(4), 717–780.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lundberg, N. (2010). Quality of life and mood state outcomes through participation in adaptive sports for individuals with physical disabilities: A preexperimental examination. Annual in Therapeitic Recreation, 19, 104–112.

    Google Scholar 

  32. McDevitt, J., Snyder, M., Miller, A., & Wilbur, J. (2006). Perceptions of barriers and benefits to physical activity among outpatients in psychiatric rehabilitation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 38(1), 50–55.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Newman, D., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2014). Leisure and subjective well-being: A model of psychological mechanisms as mediating factors. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 555–578.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Oswald, A., & Powdthavee, N. (2008). Does happiness adapt? A longitudinal study of disability with implications for economists and judges. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1061–1077.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pagan, R. (2010). Onset of disability and life satisfaction: Evidence from the German socio-economic panel. European Journal of Health Economics, 11, 471–485.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pagan, R. (2012). Longitudinal analysis of the domains of satisfaction before and after disability: Evidence from the German socio-economic panel. Social Indicators Research, 108, 365–385.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Pagan, R. (2015). How do leisure activities impact on life satisfaction: Evidence for German people with disabilities? Applied Research in Quality of Life, 10(4), 557–572.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Phillips, S., Wójicki, T., & McAuley, E. (2013). Physical activity and quality of life in older adults: An 18-month panel analysis. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1647–1654.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rasciute, S., & Downward, P. (2010). Health or happiness? What is the impact of physical activity on the individual? Kyklos, 63(2), 256–270.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rimmer, J., Riley, B., Wang, E., Rauworth, A., & Jurkowski, J. (2004). Physical activity participation among persons with disabilities: Barriers and facilitators. American Journal Preventive Medicine, 26(5), 419–425.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ruseski, J., Humphreys, B., Hallman, K., Wicker, P., & Breuer, C. (2014). Sport participation and subjective well-being: Instrumental variable results from German survey data. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 11, 396–403.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Scelza, W., Kalpakjian, C., Zemper, E., & Tate, D. (2005). Perceived barriers to exercise in people with spinal cord injury. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 84, 576–583.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Schmiedeberg, C., & Schröder, J. (2016). Leisure activities and life satisfaction: An analysis with German panel data. Applied Research of Quality of Life., 12, 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-016-9458-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Schüttoff, U., Pawlowski, T., Downward, P., & Lechner, M. (2018). Sports participation and social capital formation during adolescence. Social Science Quarterly, 99, 683–698.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Scimmack, U. (2008). Measuring wellbeing in the SOEP. SOEP papers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research, n°, 145.

  47. Sherwood, N., & Jeffery, R. (2000). The behavioral determinants of exercise: Implications for physical activity interventions. Annual Review of Nutrition, 20(1), 21–44.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sirgy, M., Uysal, M., & Kruger, S. (2017). Towards a benefits theory of leisure well-being. Applied Research of Quality of Life, 12, 205–228.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Sotiriadou, P., & Wicker, P. (2014). Examining the participation patterns of an ageing population with disabilities in Australia. Sport Management Review, 7, 35–48.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Stevenson, P. (2009). The pedagogy of inclusive youth sport: Working towards real solutions. In H. Fitzgerald (Ed.), Disability and youth sport. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Terza, J. (1987). Estimating linear models with ordinal qualitative regressors. Journal of Econometrics, 34, 275–291.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Toepoel, V. (2013). Ageing, leisure and social connectedness: How could leisure help reduce social isolation of older people? Social Indicators Research, 113, 355–372.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Van Praag, B., Frijters, P., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2003). The anatomy of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 51, 29–49.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Veenhoven, R. (1995). The cross-national pattern of happiness: Test of predictions implied in three theories of happiness. Social Indicators Research, 34, 33–68.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Verbeek, M., & Nijman, T. (1992). Non-response in panel data: The impact on estimates of a life cycle consumption function. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 7(3), 243–257.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wang, M., & Wong, M. (2014). Happiness and leisure across countries: Evidence from international survey data. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 85–118.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Wilhite, B., & Shank, J. (2009). In praise of sport: Promoting sport participation as a mechanism of health among persons with a disability. Disability and Health Journal, 2, 116–127.

    Google Scholar 

  58. World Health Organization (2014a). Global Status Report on Non-communicable Diseases 2014. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available at (retrieved 11/12/2017): http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/148114/1/9789241564854_ eng.pdf?ua =1.

  59. World Health Organization (2014b). Draft WHO global disability action plan 2014–2021: Better health for all people with disability. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available at (retrieved 11/12/2017): http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA67/A67_16-en.pdf.

  60. World Health Organization. (2017). Draft WHO global action plan on physical activity 2018-2030. Geneva: World Health Organization. In Available at (retrieved 11/12/2017) http://www.who.int/ncds/governance/gappa_version_4August2017.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Yazicioglu, K., Yavuz, F., Goktepe, A., & Tan, A. (2012). Influence of adapted sports on quality of life and life satisfaction in sport participants and non-sport participants with physical disabilities. Disability and Health Journal, 5, 249–253.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ricardo Pagan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Overall life satisfaction (POLS individual random effects) including satisfaction with job for people without and with disabilities

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pagan, R. Sport Participation, Life Satisfaction and Domains of Satisfaction among People with Disabilities. Applied Research Quality Life 15, 893–911 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-019-9711-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Sports
  • Disability
  • Life satisfaction
  • Domains of life satisfaction
  • Germany