Diverse Stories: Understanding Recreation and Leisure in Older LGB Lives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research shows that recreation and leisure can encourage health-promoting behaviours and positive outcomes for older adults (Massie & Meisner, 2019). However, studies report that older LGB adults have unique experiences of recreation and leisure and experience different constraints to their participation, often influenced by experiences of marginalization and prejudice (Fredriksen-Goldsen et al., 2017c). Though research suggests that recreation, leisure, and community support are key to positive health outcomes, the reality is that older LGB adults may fear the service systems that have historically discriminated against them (Brennan-Ing et al., 2014). Therefore, this study sought to answer the following questions: (1) How do older LGB adults continue their recreation and leisure participation throughout their life course?, and (2) What role does community-based recreation services play in supporting recreation participation among older LGB adults? Narrative inquiry methodology was used to explore these questions, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with older LGB adults and practitioners to collect data. Thematic narrative analysis and thematic analysis were used to create a coherent story of participants experiences, to identity patterns and relationships within and across stories (Kim, 2019) and illustrate how older LGB participants storied, lived experiences integrated with perspectives of the practitioners who serve the population. Continuity Theory and the Model of Leisure Constraints were used to understand how the older LGB adults’ recreation and leisure participation continued throughout their life course and the constraints that influenced the continuity of such. The analysis identified three key themes: Adaptation of leisure engagement, Social network augmentation, and Consolidation of interests, values, and leisure. This research highlights how older LGB adults’ leisure engagement is influenced by various constraints related to their identity, both as a sexual minority and as an older adult. Moreover, the findings of this study point to the importance of considering how these needs change and evolve throughout their life course, in order to achieve inclusivity for older LGB adults. Further, this research draws attention to how recreation service providers can intentionally foster opportunities to fulfill identified needs, such as socialization and sense of belonging, while helping to achieve continuity in activities, relationships, and/or environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".