MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905413723 · doi:10.1080/02614367.2018.1555674

Empirical investigation of the relationship between serious leisure and meaning in life among Japanese and Euro-Canadians

2018· article· en· W2905413723 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shintaro Kono, Eiji Ito, Jingjing Gui

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignGreat Britain Sasakawa FoundationSasakawa Sports Foundation
KeywordsEudaimoniaPsychologySocial psychologyPositive psychologyMeaning (existential)FeelingStructural equation modelingMediationEthosPersonal developmentInterpersonal relationshipSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Serious leisure (SL) is a specific leisure experience characterised by perseverance, leisure career, personal effort, durable benefits, unique ethos, and identification with the activity. As it results in self-actualisation and self-expression, Robert Stebbins has proposed that SL does not only increase participants’ hedonic well-being (e.g. pleasant feelings), but also enhance their eudaimonic well-being [e.g. meaning in life (MIL), self-expressiveness, virtue]. Although this argument makes logical sense, it has not been empirically tested. The purpose of this research is to empirically examine the relationship between SL and eudaimonic well-being focusing on MIL. We used data from 207 Japanese and 202 Euro-Canadian middle-aged and older adults collected through a cross-sectional online survey. After multi-group confirmatory factor analysis, multiple mediation analyses were conducted to test whether SL core characteristics impacted MIL or its sub-dimensions (i.e. purpose, coherence, and significance) both directly and indirectly via personal and interpersonal rewards of SL. Results suggested that among Japanese, SL was positively related to MIL both directly and indirectly via SL’s personal rewards. Among Euro-Canadians, the direct link was limited to only a few MIL sub-dimensions, and indirect effects were not significant. These mixed results were discussed in relation to SL, eudaimonic well-being, and culture.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure StudiesSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207