Travel, leisure, and aging: leisure for older adults visiting immigrant children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite its prevalence and potential impact, visiting friends and relatives (VFR) travel is remarkably understudied. Aging visiting parents of Persian immigrants are especially marginalized in scholarship and practice. This lack of attention is noteworthy, given the increase in immigrants to Canada and the rapidly aging population. This study aimed to understand the lived experience of 'visiting' immigrant relatives and the role of leisure (including leisure boredom and leisure constraints) during their visit. Specifically, this study explored whether leisure could help aging Persian parents visiting children in Canada with the cultural, familial, and economic challenges associated with their visit, including potential culture shock. Guided by a social constructivist paradigm and phenomenological approach, semi-structured, open-ended interviews were conducted with a purposive, non-probability sample of 14 visiting parents of Persian immigrants from Tri-Cities, BC, Canada. Interviews were analyzed using Braun and Clarke's Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA). Overall, Persian parents' lived experiences were characterized by three major themes:(a) visiting parents' experiences encountering Canadian culture, (b) visiting parents' leisure constraints, and (c) visiting parents' leisure activities in Canada. Eight sub-themes were developed to elaborate upon these overarching themes. The first sub-themes distinguish between parents who experienced culture shock and those for whom no culture shock was experienced. Language barriers were considered a common source of shock in this scenario, despite some unexpected findings (e.g., being able to connect with others despite the language barrier). The second set of sub-themes identified three recurring leisure constraints: (a) the exchange rate, (b) the host's busy lifestyle, and (c) leisure boredom. These constraints impacted and shaped the nature of participants' desired leisure activities. The third set of subthemes captured adults' leisure experience while visiting relatives, including (a) desired leisure activities, (b) leisure opportunities, and (c) autonomy, competence, and relatedness experienced within leisure activities. These themes, supported by data, are discussed, and the existing literature is extended. In addition, practical implications for hosts/host communities are also discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".