Content area
Full text
(Accepted 14 September 2001)
ABSTRACT. Traditional approaches to the measurement of leisure's relationship to quality of life have emphasised place-centred indicators (e.g., the frequency of leisure facility usage) and tended to ignore person-centred criteria (e.g., satisfaction with leisure experiences). Moreover, the underlying assumption in subsequent policy outcomes has been that increasing the number of facilities and services will automatically enhance people's QOL. This paper focuses on both the content and measurement of leisure and its relationship to quality of life. It reports the results of a study that examined the relative importance of selected place and person-centred leisure attributes in predicting quality of life. The study tested a set of objective and subjective indicators that people are most concerned with in their leisure lives. Overall, it was found that the person-centred leisure attribute, leisure satisfaction, was the best predictor of quality of life. Placecentred attributes failed to influence quality of life. Further analysis revealed that people who engage in social activities more frequently and who are more satisfied with the psychological benefits they derive from leisure, experience higher levels of perceived quality of life. The results suggest that there is a need to reconcile objective knowledge with subjective perceptions of leisure in order to achieve greater understanding and comprehensive measurement of this complex domain and its relationship to quality of life.
INTRODUCTION
The search for quality of life (QOL) has become a growing concern for individuals, communities and governments seeking to find and sustain satisfaction, happiness and a belief in the future in a rapidly changing world (Compton, 1997; Eckersley, 1999; Mercer, 1994). Therefore, researchers have increasingly concerned themselves with the identification and measurement of key indicators that might enhance QOL. Many studies have included selected leisure attributes such as, 'amount of nonwork time', 'spare time activities' and 'access to leisure facilities' in assessments of life quality (Kernan and Unger, 1987; Moller, 1992). However, the results vary and while several reports suggest a positive relationship between leisure and QOL, others do not (Alien, 1991).
It seems that the clarification of this relationship requires the resolution of two issues. The first is the nature or content of leisure as it relates to QOL. For example, Osborne (1992) reported that life quality has been shown to...