Adventure recreation and subjective well-being: a conceptual framework
By S. Houge Mackenzie, K. Hodge. Leisure Studies, 2020
114 citations recorded by the source corpus.
ABSTRACT Despite the documented positive outcomes of adventure experiences, subjective well-being (SWB) frameworks have been largely absent from discourse and analyses in adventure studies. This conceptual paper proposes a framework for understanding how adventure recreation experiences promote eudaemonic SWB. In our framework, we propose that adventure recreation fosters eudaemonic aspects of SWB by supporting the satisfaction of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness and beneficence. The framework also integrates ‘contact with nature’ as an important mechanism through which adventure recreation fosters eudaemonic SWB. Analysis of research and practice across diverse aspects of adventure recreation (leisure, tourism, and education contexts) is used to support the proposed framework and to critically evaluate how psychological models, such as self-determination theory (SDT) and SWB, can advance theory and practice in adventure recreation. We conclude by offering a number of suggestions for future research directions and practical implications.
Subfields: Social Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a15705e54253d5d527b5665058607fd6391a4827
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Social Psychology
- Maarten Vansteenkiste
- Bart Soenens
- Richard M. Ryan
- Edward L. Deci
- J. Reeve
- W. Lens
- Marylène Gagné
- Robert J. Vallerand
Citations in the corpus
- Building a science of motivated persons: Self-determination theory’s empirical approach to human experience and the regulation of behavior. (2021, background): “When free to do so, they seek out intrinsically motivated activities, as evidenced in the way people spend leisure time pursuing such activities as games, travel, sport, or reading (e.g., see Mackenzie & Hodge, 2019).”