Satisfaction experienced during leisure activity plays an important role in continued leisure participation. Leisure participation is also affected by leisure constraints. In recent years, the idea of negotiating leisure constraints has emerged as an important area of research. The concept of constraint negotiation suggests that individuals use various methods to overcome constraints and participate in leisure activities. Although research has been done examining the leisure satisfaction of college students, as well as constraint negotiation strategies used by college students, little research has examined the role of negotiation in creating satisfying leisure experiences. The purpose of this study was to examine which type of constraint negotiation strategies contributed to satisfying leisure experiences for college students. The sample of this study consisted of college students at two midwestern universities (N = 363). Results from this study indicate that college students commonly use interpersonal relations, physical fitness, and skill acquisition negotiation strategies in order to participate in leisure activities. Additional results from multiple regression analyses suggest that the strongest predictors of leisure satisfaction are negotiation strategies that involve a social component, the practicing of a skill in order to improve, and a sense of accomplishment during participation. The findings of this study indicate that leisure satisfaction for college students may be associated with the negotiation strategies used to participate in leisure activities.
AshbyJ.S., KottmanT., & DeGraafD. (1999). Leisure satisfaction and attitudes of perfectionists: Implications for therapeutic recreation professionals. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 2, 142–151.
2.
AstinA.W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
AbrahamowiczD. (1988). College involvement, perception and satisfaction: A study of membership in student organizations. Journal of College Student Development, 29, 233–238.
BeggsB.A., ElkinsD.J., & PowersS. (2005). Overcoming barriers to participation in campus recreational sports. Recreational Sports Journal, 29(2), 143–155.
6.
BuchananT. (1983). Toward an understanding of variability in satisfactions within activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 15(1), 39–51.
7.
CrawfordD.W., JacksonE.L., & GodbeyG. (1991). A hierarchal model of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences, 13, 309–320.
8.
CsikszentmihalyiM. (1991). The psychology of the optimal experience.New York: Harper Collins.
9.
DeciE.L., & RyanR.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.New York: Plenum.
10.
ElkinsD.J. (2004). Level of perceived constraints: A comparative analysis of negotiation strategies in campus recreation. Abstract from: Proquest File: Dissertation Abstracts International, (UMI No. 3152800).
11.
ForresterS., ArterberryC., & BarcelonaB. (2006). Student attitudes toward sports and fitness activities after graduation. Recreational Sports Journal, 30(1), 87–99.
12.
FungL., & TsaiE. (2006). Structural validity of leisure satisfaction scale for Hong Kong adults. Journal of Physical Education and Recreation, 11(2), 8–13.
13.
HawesD.K. (1979). Satisfactions derived from leisure-time pursuits: An exploratory nationwide survey. Journal of Leisure Research, 10, 247–264.
14.
HazelK.L., LangenauE.E.Jr., & LevineR.L. (1990). Dimensions of hunting satisfaction: Multiple-satisfactions of wild turkey hunting. Leisure Sciences, 12, 383–393.
15.
HuangC.Y., & CarletonB. (2003). The relationships among leisure participation, leisure satisfaction, and life satisfaction of college students in Taiwan. Journal of Exercise Science and Fitness, 1(2), 129–132.
16.
HubbardJ., & MannellR.C. (2001). Testing competing models of the leisure constraint negotiation process in a corporate employee recreation setting. Leisure Sciences, 23, 145–163.
17.
Iso-AholaS.E., AllenJ.R., & ButtimerK.J. (1982). Experience-related factors as determinants of leisure satisfaction. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 23, 141–146.
JacksonE.L., & RucksV.C. (1995). Negotiation of leisure constraints by junior-high and high-school students: An exploratory study. Journal of Leisure, 27, 85–105.
20.
KaoJ.C. (1992). A model of leisure satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
21.
KaufmanJ.E. (1984). A study of leisure satisfaction, leisure participation, and patterns of leisure activity in relationship to anxiety levels in retirees. [CD-ROM]. Abstract from Proquest File, Dissertation Abstracts International, (UMI No. 8419822).
22.
KiblerA.M., & SmithR.W. (2000). Leisure needs and leisure satisfaction levels of adult males with HIV and AIDS. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 2, 120–131.
23.
KuhG. (1995). The other curriculum: Out of class experiences associated with student learning and personal development. Journal of Higher Education, 66(2), 123–155.
24.
KyleG., & ChickG. (2002). The social nature of leisure involvement. Journal of Leisure Research, 34(4), 426–448.
25.
LewisJ.B., BarcelonaR.B., & JonesT. (2001). Leisure satisfaction and quality of life: Issues for the justification of campus recreation. NIRSA Journal, 25(2), 57–63.
26.
LloydC., KingR., LampeJ., & McDougallS. (2001). The leisure satisfaction of people with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(2), 107–113.
27.
LounseburyJ.W., & HoopesL.L. (1985). An investigation of factors associated with vacation satisfaction. Journal of Leisure Research, 7(1), 1–13.
28.
MajorW.F. (2001). Positive addiction and running: The views of serious runners. KAPHERD Journal, 37(2), 10–13.
29.
MakJ.Y., ParkerS.D., & BoleyB.J. (2003). The effect of sociodemographic variables on the leisure satisfaction and leisure participation of older adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75(1), A23.
30.
MannellR.C. (1989). Leisure satisfaction. In JacksonE.L., & BurtonT.L. (Eds.), Understanding leisure and recreation: Mapping the past, charting the future (pp. 281–301). State College, PA: Venture.
31.
MannellR.C., & KleiberD.A. (1997). A social psychology of leisure.State College, PA: Venture.
32.
OsmanR.W., ColeS.T., & VessellC.R. (2006). Examining the role of perceived service quality in predicting user satisfaction and behavioral intentions in a campus recreational setting. Recreational Sports Journal, 30(1), 20–29.
33.
PedersonD.M. (2002). Intrinsic-extrinsic factors in sport motivation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95(2), 459–476.
34.
PelletierL.G., FortierM.S., VallerandR.J., TusonK.M., BriereN.M., & BlaisM.R. (1995). Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation in sports: The Sports Motivation Scale (SMS). Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 35–53.
35.
RaghebM.G., & TateR.L. (1993). A behavioral model of leisure participation, based on leisure attitude, motivation and satisfaction. Leisure Studies, 12, 61–70.
RussellR.V. (1984). Correlates of life satisfaction in retirement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
38.
RyanR.M., & DeciE.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
39.
SearleM.S., MactavishJ.B., & BrayleyR.E. (1993). Integrating ceasing participation with other aspects of leisure behavior: A replication and extension. Journal of Leisure Research, 25(4), 389–404.
40.
SiegenthalerK.L., & O'DellI. (2000). Leisure attitude, leisure satisfaction, and perceived freedom in leisure within family dyads. Leisure Sciences, 22(4), 281–296.
41.
TabachnickB.G., & FidellL.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics.Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
42.
TurmanJ.C., & HendelD.D. (2004). Changes in students' recreation activities, satisfaction and perceived benefits following the construction of a new recreation facility. Recreational Sports Journal, 28(2), 42–59.
43.
YoungS.J., RossC.M., & BarcelonaR.J. (2003). Perceived constraints by college students to participation in campus recreational sports programs. Recreational Sports Journal, 27(2), 47–62.
